Read the article (though the bit about not wearing ‘attractive’ clothing doesn’t mesh with her available bikini pics)
Should I even be surprised? I know model agents who balk when I tell themn they shouldn’t take on anyone younger than 16 (and even then). They stop listening when I explain puberty to them. As in, if she’s thin and ‘hot’ now, it doesn’t mean she went through puberty, it means she’s starting puberty, and will gain much more weight before she gets to 21. Not that they have any problem dropping them once they’re done getting their 15 %…
Then don’t check out this one (Taxi driver much?). Not that there have never been 12-year-old runway models in the U.S. before. I remember one girl doing runway in California a few years back. She still played with Barbies.
That’s the thing–she looks like a woman in every way except that you can see her in that skimpy picture someone linked to above, and not be turned on. There must be some visual cue we only recognize subconsciously (it helps, of course, that she hasn’t, um, “bloomed” much). “Pretty, but not sexy” is exactly right–it’s hard to figure out how she would be tittilating to the over-13 crowd.
Something tells me she’s beating boys away with a stick at her school, though.
True, true. And designers can finally admit their clothing is made to fit 12-year-olds. Best of all, 9-year-olds with eating disorders will have someone closer to their age to look up to. Everyone wins!
I think so too, and I think that cue is more complex than just some boobs. More of a waist? More of a knowing look in the eyes? I’m not sure. I was just surprised following the link because I was expecting one of those creepy situations where you can’t tell the model is a kid, and there is an element of sexuality.
Not to turn this into an AOC debate, but if a man looks at that bikini picture and doesn’t get turned on, he must be gay or something. She doesn’t look a day under 20 in that photo. (And I like small boobs!)
People keep forgetting that children physically mature much, much faster these days. And since the human eye has evolved to be naturally attracted by youth (i.e. a healthy, long-lifespan female was preferred because they’re less likely to die from disease or old age @30) – well, that’s the disconnect fueling this sort of outrage. Frankly, I don’t think a pedophile would look twice at those photos – she’s way too old for them.
My daughter plays U-12 soccer, so I’m subjected to lots of girls this age. The girl in the photo looks plain to me. I wouldn’t have been attracted to her at 12-14 and am not attracted to her now. Of course that means squat about whether she’s able to model clothes. Aren’t most fashion models being looked at by women and mostly gay men? As an adult male I’d have probably never been exposed to her picture if it weren’t for the Dope.
So many things seem wrongheaded about this choice, besides the obvious “she’s too damn young” angle. Are the Gold Coast Fashion Week organizers insane? I can’t believe that a) a 12-year-old has better charisma and looks than any other more experienced model who applied for the job and b) the “official ambassador” for a fashion event in the Gold Coast isn’t going to have to wear swimwear. Um, isn’t Australia’s Gold Coast one of the surf capitals of the world? It’s not that they’re choosing this girl to be in one or two shows, they’re choosing her to represent the whole event. That strikes me as a couple of degrees below barmy. Mothers on the whole might be offended, but models in Australia* must be feeling downright insulted.
(*Not that these categories are mutually exclusive.)