I’m sure by now you’ve all read about the young model chosen for the Gold Coast Fashion Week, how could you miss the headlines? Yep, just about everyone was out there trying to save the young lady from a life of salad leaves, ciggies, coke, rock and roll boyfriends, Karl Lagerfeld and Ian Thorpe.
Even John Howard and Kevin Rudd were asked to opine on this great matter of state.
But the Prime Minister, John Howard, told Melbourne radio: “I think that is way too young and I don’t think it should happen.” Mr Howard said introducing a ban on models younger than 16 in fashion shows, as some European countries have done, “would make a lot of sense”, adding: “There should be age limits … We do have to preserve some notion of innocence in our society, surely. Catapulting girls as young as 12 into something like that is quite outrageous and I am totally opposed to it.”
Yes for a week poor Maddison became the sum of everyones fears and Howard and Rudd were happy to oblige a few quotes in this climate of moral panic. But now the parents have struck back with a veiled threat and a great punch line.
“Without knowing us, how dare they make those comments,” Mrs Gabriel said. “I would suggest both of them contact my family before they make any more defamatory remarks about us. We as a family deserve an apology from both of them.
“As politicians, you would expect that they would know how things would be misrepresented and maybe they should have known what our side of the story is before they made those types of comments.
“I believe the Prime Minister is getting very doddery. He does not know exactly what 13- and 14-year-old girls are like. I used to vote for him.”
Boom Tish! Anyway, Maddison did a turn on the catwalk last night, that of course is as it should be given the obvious parental involvement and supervision.
Opposition leader Kevin Rudd has added his voice to the concerns.
Mr Rudd says he does not think it is appropriate.
“I think every child has a right to their own childhood, and I have real concerns about littlies that young, being out there doing that sort of thing,” he said.
“I have a daughter, she’s no longer 12, but if I think back to what she was like at 12 I don’t think it’s the right place to be.”
think of the littlies , the poor poor littlies.
I wouldnt be setting my daughter up for a life of being judged on appearences if I were her oldies. Its fairly widely known the shows attract a lot of wealthy, sexual predators.
Read nearly any ex-models biography and it will run as a constant undercurrent though the book.
SBS had a fantastic show on a couple of years back where a bloke went in with a hidden camera/microphone and “became” on of the predators in these groups. Anyone else here seen that or remember its name?
While I completely agree that the PM is using this for cheap populist points, the parents seem to be, yeah, lacking in boundaries. There are age limits for most adult occupations, and throwing a tanty and saying that it should not apply to YOU is just being, as the Americans say, an entitled jerk.
I reckon it would appear more seemly if this pretty, pretty fetus waited until she had at least fully developed her limbs and was well into the safety of the third trimester before she launched a career as an international super model no? Just sayin….
Maddison? With two ‘d’s?
The real moral panic here is the moniker her parents saddled her with. Moral decline and anarchy can’t be far away…
Notifiable name, Leinad?
I think Casey’s referring to the passage in AbFab when the wonderful cockney fashion industry woman - can’t remember her name - complains that with current trends, “they’ll be slingin’ fe’uses dahn the catwalk”.
yeah, Helen, you spotted, you sister you. I realised long ago that Abfab had said it all. And now, what else is there left to do, but to wait for life to give you its moments and then repeat that show’s withering truths?….forget the pollies - slinging fetus’s down the catwalk - its sheer beauty innit?
That old John Howard he just don’t like young people striking out on their own. Look what he’s done to Peter Costello.
And as for Krudd. Well Howard said something so he had to say something too.
Quite frankly, I’m utterly fed up with JWH making public comments on anything that moves, from models to Beaconsfield to God know what else. He’s usually very ill-informed, and just wants to use every possible opportunity to self-promote himself. Maybe once he’s gone pollies will stick to talking about politics, instead of glory-hunting with national tragedies, national farces (like Maddison) and everything in between.
Guys, I’m as politically incorrect as the next person, but I have to say that the idea of someone who is 12 years old strutting her stuff like this makes me uncomfortable. I guess thats because It seems to me that any time someone is photographed or viewed in this way there is a degree of implied sexualisation - whether we like it or admit to it or not.
Mind you, its impossible to see Howards stance as anything other than populism - but of course I would say that…
Why would you choose to have a 12yo as your marketing focus other than to attract publicity through controversy?
1. It’s just creepy. Which is all anyone needs to say against it.
2.
Bingo.
I’m disturbed by this twelve year old modelling thing from the opposite direction: what does it say about our society when our “ideal” woman is in fact a twelve year old girl? By putting a twleve year old up as the face of an adult fashion week, it’s basically saying “this child embodies everything we see as being physically ideal for an adult woman”.
That’s not to say that the girl herself isn’t being harmed either, but I prefer not to comment on that, not knowing the specific details of the situation. It may be that she’s being exploited, or it may be that she’s a remarkably mature twelve year old whose parents have talked openly and honestly with her about what’s involved in this modelling stint. (Well, okay, I do believe that, in it’s current form, the whole modelling industry is exploitative, but until we know the specifics of the situation, we can’t judge that this girl is being any more exploited than anyone else).
When are we going to hear a politician complaining about the way that this infantalizes all women?
So because the parents criticised John Howard, that must mean they are right after all, eh Phil? Never mind Rudd criticised it too. Never mind that parental supervision at the show can’t stop crusty old men looking at her in an adult fashion show and thinking they’d like a peice of it. It’s the sexualisation of pre-teens, and it is disgusting.
It’s disgusting and the parents are deluding themselves.
SPOT ON Beppie. And you said this:
Yes, and it may even perhaps be a very positive experience for the girl - heaven knows lots of kids think they’re ugly - but again, this isn’t significant for me,the real problem is the message that ideal femininity has an unusually tall pubescent body.
I don’t think we can assume that the fashion models are promoted as the ideal feminine body.
The fashion industry believes that tall skinny bodies are better bodies for showing off the clothes, with getting in the way of the clothes. Kind of like a stick to put the clothes on.
Male stars in thrillers or soaps always have very square jaws, but often in other roles they look for curvier jaws. It’s just different types are viewed as ideal for different contexts.
Quite frankly, I’m utterly fed up with JWH making public comments on anything that moves, from models to Beaconsfield to God know what else.
I’m fed up with journalists asking his opinion on everything that moves.
David then why don’t they just put the clothes on a stick?
Because people like people more than they like sticks.
I’m with you there Suz. But sometimes you have to wonder if it’s not a case of “go ahead, ask me”…….always looking for an issue to wedge no matter how small.
My little theory is slightly different on the body shape/age thing.
Most people agree that the body shapes preferred by designers appears to be that of a pubecent boy. No boobs, curves or particularly feminine traits. Many of the designers and owners of fashion houses seem to be gay or have a gay dominated workforce.
It may be simplistic but I think the girls body shapes are the most aesthetically pleasing the designers can get while still presenting “women” to the market.
Its slipped off the news page i was looking for but there was an article which was about black models complaining they were being given less work due to their skin colour.
Its a bit weird having people who make money on how they look complaining that those looks make them discriminated against?
I hate the whole concept of a fashion “industry”, its a sinkhole of inanity.
Extending on what I said Laura, people are more likely to be attracted to/buy from another human than an inanimate object. So models who best combine humanity with stickness are naturally the ones who will be most preferred. I do think they look the best on the catwalks, but it certainly is not what I (or I think the vast majority of men) think is the ideal female figure. It’s quite a specific contextual norm, not an attempt to construct a universally ideal femininity.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=296320
Found the link to the “supermodel” story.
Phil says:
Fashion models are sex symbols ie purveyors and portrayors of commercial articles designed to incite male sexual attention.
Maddison is a fashion model. She is also 12 years old.
I guess its expected that post-modern liberals will give such things a free pass.
But they should not be dismayed when the populus turns their nose up in polite disgust.
Doe eyes full lips long hair pelvic walk and look ..clothes.
Somebody should pass a law against this. There is never a lawmaker around when you need one.
It does have a bit of cheap populism about it, but I think lots of us bookish types on the left are pretty horrified by the way corporations pressuring younger and younger kids to be ridiculously fashion-conscious and to dress like adults.
It’s a yuck way to make a buck and we on the left should be judgemental about it.
“Pelvic walk”?
Do you mean that crotch-thrusting sway-backed round-shouldered heavy-footed stomping currently in catwalk vogue? Pfft. They’ll all have arthritis in their knees by the time they’re 35.
What part of “stage mother” does she think people don’t understand?
It’s creepy what some parents do with their unfulfilled ambitions and egos. I expect we’ll see poor Maddy, or more prabably an interview with her mother, in Semi-Semi-Celebrity Eating Disorder magazine within a year.
The worst manifestation I’ve seen is Munchausens by Proxy. I remember reading one paper where the mother brought in a starved daughter, saying she was worried about her (the daughter) overeating.
There’s a classics story for every situation, what’s the one for mothers leading lives through daughters by proxy, like Salome asking for John the Baptist’s head to please her mother? Closest I’ve got is Chrysothemis, sister of Electra.
“Chrysothemis is the younger daughter of Clytemnestra and Agamemnon. Although she recognizes her mother’s corruption and although she understands the injustice of her father’s murder, she refuses to mourn in the way that her sister, Electra, does. She realizes that she will gain the greatest benefits by siding with those in control. Unlike Electra, who adheres to the principles of justice, Chrysothemis clings to the principle of expediency in the hopes of maximizing her own comfort and profit.”
You gotta hand it to them greek mythmakers, they’re the master’s of soap.
I’ve been looking for a word to describe an aspect of current political maneuverings- “expediency in the hopes of maximizing own comfort and profit”… hmmm, chrysothemic… One of those insults you can get away with, with the insultee thinking they might have been praised, like ultracrepidarian?.
Surprise surprise, nikki webster changed her name to her mother’s… freudian slipper? Show business is cruel. Ask Judy Gumm.
They are designed to sell clothes to a female audience.
Oh… see what you are saying.. the clothes themselves. So female fashion is designed merely to get male sexual attention?
David on 16 September 2007 at 6:50 pm
Yes David. The female fashion industry is an arms race funded by attractive females seeking to acquire a wealthy/sexy male mate by means of ostentatious display. Or it is funded by wealthy/sexy male mates seeking to show off their attractive female mates to male rivals.
The envy and admiration excited in other females is simply a beneficial side-effect. Well-established society matrons tend to dress traditionally and conservatively because they have already reached the top of the pecking order and are no longer in competition for mates.
Call me old-fashioned but I tend to agree with the PM that we should create space for childhood innocence. The proliferation and commercilisation of Lolitas will just coarsen and vulgarise youth.
Can we go a bit easy on the mother bashing? These young women have fathers as well. Why don’t they attract a share of the criticism?
I guess its expected that Jack would seize on one point out of a spectrum of views to add another twig to the pomo strawmodel that tauntingly struts the catwalk of his mind.
In fact Jack, the populus does not seem to have expressed much of an opinion so far while the “post-modern liberals” here seem to have mainly ambivelant to negative opinions about the moral, ethical and cultural validity of tweeny fashion models. But for you, the terms ‘qualitive’ and ‘quantitive’ have always been just items of apperal to don and discard depending on the pose you want to strike.
My take on the thing is that what from what I’ve seen of young Maddison so far, she makes an excellent clotheshorse and is generating contraversy - two attributes the fashion world lives for. Also I think it’s a bit premature to judge how her parents are handling her life so far. It’s only really just started for one thing.
An interesting point here is that if you hadn’t been told her age, how old would you think she was going by her photos?
But yes, I feel a bit queasy too about using such an implicit manifestion of the Lolita syndrome within a setting that is ruthlessly irony and consequence-free once the units have been shifted.
Jeez Jack, ever heard a bunch of women (or men) talking about clothes? No of course not, yer too busy talking to listen to anyone else.
Whether you like it or not, and whether it fits with your impractical and heavily corserted ballgown of a theory, lotsa people out there like a bit of fashion. Not everyone like you lives for the drab boilersuit of dull and numbing theoretical rectitude.
Don’t get out much at the fat end of town do you? Too busy hanging with your beautiful losers right? You might want to reread some of the Tom Wolfe you like to reference. Start with Bonfire of the Vanities.
I’ve seen these stunts pulled by the fashion industry when the Brisbane Winter Racing Carnival was on in the past too. It generates a lot of hype and gets people to attend events they wouldn’t even know was on without the drama being created.
Is that one of those Presybterian boilersuits that Greenfield is always claiming are favoured by “luvvies”, Nabs?
“Well-established society matrons tend to dress traditionally and conservatively because they have already reached the top of the pecking order and are no longer in competition for mates.”
Is that so? Paul Hogan, Rupert Murdoch, Luciano Pavarotti and Peter Brock are just a few successful men who spring readily to mind who dumped their “matrons” for sweet young things.
Yup Steve, yet another example of how Strocchi’s elaborate ballgown needs to be protected from the common clay en route to a preening turn in the Hall of Mirrors.
We’re talking about the Gold Coast here aren’t we - whaddya ’spect? Most shit-struck place in Oz.
Does this mean we are still a couple of seasons behind the fashions in europe?!
jack, rather than reading bonfire of the vanities, just leg it over to double bay for morning tea..or better still hang around an A-list event. you’ll have never seen so much cosmetic surgery, so much real bling, so many tanned legs and french pedicured toes in thousand dollar+ stilettos, strappy $5000+ gowns and fur coats…on every female under 75 in one room. (and i dont mean A-list celebrity - i mean the real A-list….)
you are very much mistaken, if you think jeanette howard represents the wives (1st, 2nd or 3rd) of the men who mostly own this country.
The day this story broke, I saw Howard on the news talking about “innocence” and Anna Bligh on the same subject saying children should be allowed to have “a childhood”. I think that’s an interesting difference. “Innocence” is an idealised concept. Whereas to say that pre-teens should be allowed to have a childhood to me means that they shouldn’t be pushed into the world of commerce - including the commercialisation of their own bodies. Of course there are child models and actors but this girl is being used in an older context - she’s not modelling children’s clothes.
But if we’re worried about exploitation, we’d do as well to think about the use of 14 year olds in fast food outlets all over the country, often under considerable pressure.
Don’t agree, at least not as a simple reduction.
If you are going to go to the uber-Darwinist final analysis you could pretty much say “life” is a display to attract a mate.
Very strange news.
I thought there would be no demand for a 12 year old model who poses in adult cloth. She is kind of a disaster in the modelling industry.
I think she should stick to teen modelling, before she gets into the big dirty business.
Yours Sincerely.