Elle Fanning for Marie Claire

I don’t know, guys. I think the minute you put Bridget Bardot hairstyles, heavy eye makeup, short shorts and high heels on a 13-year old, you’ve sexualized her.  The pictures are pretty, and she’s good at this, and in a couple of them she really does look like a kid. But I feel a little squirmy. Maybe the difference with using 13-year old models is that models are made up to not look like themselves, to be anonymous mannequins. When you know who the model is and know how old she is, it feels little different.

I’m getting a Lolita vibe from some of these…

Sorry TLO  I was totally with you until I saw that Bridget Bardot sexy secretary look with her whole leg showing and glittery high heels. They are definitely flirting with that line. 

But they (her handlers, the mags, her brand) are doing that on purpose. They WANT you talking about this. Everybody knows as wrong as it is that if you sexualize an almost child that child will be a star. Ask Brooke Shields. Ask Jodie Foster. Ask Jon Benet Ramsey. The fact is there are 13 year old girls having sex right now. Coerced and of their own free will. There have been for centuries girls married off at 13. If she can have a period, she can have a child. 

Our culture will always be fascinated by sexualized just barely teens because it is taboo for us AND somewhere inside us we know there’s something TRUE about it. 

I’ve gotta go with a no on this one–I agreed on the one photo from the other day but here it’s her facial expressions throughout–very doe eyed and too innocent (does that make sense?). She’s a very pretty girl and here (except for the Stella McCartney jumping shot) she is looking more pretty baby. Love the Stella McCartney shot, however. And the gold shorts–uh uh!
And who are these spreads targeting, anyway? Not 13 year old girls–for that she needs be modeling in Seventeen. Do love the jump shot–I’ll say it again.

I love the Mary Tyler Moore jump. 

If acting does not work out for her, she can just be a model. Because, my goodness, Elle…Ms. Fanning, if you’re nasty, knows how to give face. WORK IT! 

““What fashion-oriented 13-year-old wouldn’t want to spend the day
wearing gorgeous designer clothes?”” 

except I think about my 13 to 17 year old nieces and think  – um – just no. 

Elle looks great – but I hate the fact that designers and fashion people prefer dressing and advertising little girls and their disgust at WOMEN with womanly faces and bodies. 

I agree with Ceejaytee – this is an editorial in a fashion magazine for WOMEN.  Not prepubescent girls.  And BrooklynBomber is correct – the whole Bardo stuff makes these images sexualized.  Ugh.  How can anyone ever say we are “post-feminist” when this kind of stuff is still the norm? Sisters and Brothers still need to call the fashion industry on these types of images.  

the shots look fine on their own, but as a collection i’m getting majorly weirded out by her deadface.

She looks adorable, and I can afford those cute gloves In the second photo.

Talk about putting unrealistic body images into our brains.

I just don’t get the need to use girls to sell clothes to adult women.I never have and it just annoys me.And yes, the pictures are nice, she is very lovely, but she is not an adult and there is no reason on earthto use a girl who is 13 or 15 to advertise clothing for women.

T&Lo said…
“Now look. Don’t get pissed at us for Fanning overload; that’s just how the celebrity world works. People who have projects coming out dominate the entertainment and fashion media in the months leading up to it and while the project is still selling tickets. So don’t blame us for Elle-ing out.

I hope it is clear from my posts that I respect and admire you guys a great deal. I learn tons from reading your take on the world, and I am truly humbled that other commenters seem to enjoy mine.

That said: I think your statement is disingenuous. You’re scapegoating the industry for your choices. This is your blog. You choose what goes here. The bottom line is that you think this young lady is pretty and interesting. Unfortunately she is also a minor being used to market clothing to women. Few girls can pay $6,000 plus dollars for the first outfit.  In my opinion it’s exploitive. If this were Willow Smith, the commentariat would be up in arms. But as you’ve said in previous posts about females of color in general: that’s not likely to happen because she is not white, not considered “pretty” by enough of the buying public, and probably wouldn’t be as interesting to fabulous bitchy bloggers.

I’ve gotten used to the fact that I’m not often going to see the kind of material on this blog that I would like. This is your house, and I hope that for the most part I am a respectful and honorable guest. I keep my feet off of the furniture, and I light a match after using the bathroom. But please, don’t diminish your wonderful, classy irreverence by putting your posting choices on the industry that you so consistently and brilliantly hold a mirror up to. 

She has only begun her career and yet I think I am already officially over her. (She is certainly a beautiful child though.)

Total dead eyes in all the pictures except the jumping one.   Like the gloves, but otherwise not feeling it.

i love you guys, i really do, but i have to take issue with this: “Done up like grown women, yes; done up to look sexually available; rarely (and there’s usually outcry when they do it).”  … what is the difference?  generally speaking, grown women ARE sexually available.  and that’s where i have a problem with this kind of thing.  as a woman whose body began developing very early — i was a 34C bra size at 11 — i KNOW what message girls who look older than they actually are get.  men never asked me my age; they just tried talking me up.  other girls called and spat out words like, “whore!” at me before i’d ever even been kissed. 

if we dress our children up like women, they’ll be treated like women.  that’s hard enough on grown-ups.  do we want to model this to other kids her age?  “but MOOOOOM, elle FANNING does it!”  for every mother who says, “well, she might, but YOU won’t,” two or three others, tired, overwhelmed, or just indifferent — or worse, those who think it’s cute — will shrug and say, “all right.”

You know, it’s such a weird topic to discuss. There are two very strong sides to the argument. Every time you guys throw up a picture of a young celebrity, I make a bet with myself about how many “creepy” comments there are going to be. Some people just see sexualization and inappropriateness everywhere. I keep looking at these pictures and I just can’t see it, yet some here are really weirded out by them.
On the other hand, with all the sickos and perverts out there, you can’t help but be concerned for the welfare of any child and it’s likely that these crazies are the first in line to pick up a magazine featuring a lovely young celeb like Elle. But they would anyway; it’s not because she has some eye makeup on or a pair of high heels.
I understand freaking out when you see those pageant kids with all the makeup because they’re like 5 years old. Some younger. But 13? I don’t know about anyone else here, but I started wearing eye makeup at age 13 and so did all my classmates. This was 1983. We all wore makeup. Heels too.
I guess I can see both sides of the argument, but I do think some people tend to overreact. I really can’t see anything wrong with this set of photos. I think she looks beautiful and age-appropriate. I mean, should she cover herself from head to toe or make herself unattractive because there are perverts out there?

I have to differ on the purple wooly coat image – she looks like she’s doing the walk of shame, having lost her dress somewhere the ight before. Otherwise, all very pretty – she certainly is the “it” girl of the moment. 

She’s TOO young for some of these shots. Reminds me of the toddler tiara show, not right! There’s plenty of time for this later as I”m sure she’ll have a big career. She was incredibly good in Super 8.

I like everything in this editorial too.  Except for the Les Copains — if she had a skirt or pants instead of those “shorts” then I probably wouldn’t mind so much.  Pretty clothes.

I was with you right up ’til the gold granny panties.  Make it stop!

The last shot is a bit strange, but she looks beautiful in all the shots.

I really don’t have any problem with these pictures.  She’s not showing cleavage or a bare back.  She’s not laying on a bed or licking a lollipop or anything suggestive.  If the issue that she has Bardot eye make-up and hair, well, that’s just a look that a lot of women like.  Cat-eye eyeliner isn’t sexually suggestive…Taylor Swift does her eyes that way all the time and there’s never an issue there. 

As for the granny-panty shorts…they may be short, but they are shorts.  And she’s not bending over and looking over her should at the camera.  Weekly circulars for Target and JC Penney expose more tween skin with ads for swimsuits.

I think she’s cute and I like some of the clothes, even though I can’t afford them nor fit into them.

But she’s 13.  That means she’s pre-pubescent.  Pretty and pricey as those clothes are, that’s about as much as I can take of the whole sneaky, “under the radar” sexy-baby trend.

I liked it up until the hot pants paired with sparkly heels. She looks great … but she’s only 13. A little icky.

I really like it. I don’t think it’s trying to sexualize her, I think it gives off a vibe of a young girl playing dress-up.

See, here’s the issue I have with it.  Yes, she looks beautiful, and there’s nothing “pervy” about it, technically – she’s covered, and she’s not sitting on some 40 year old guy’s lap, loosening his tie. But she looks like she’s 20, and there’s my problem with it – she’s not 20. There are plenty of 20 year old models out there.  I know, she has the celeb cred, but there you have it.  

I remember the very first time I ever saw pictures of Brooke Shields, and it was from “Pretty Baby.”  I honestly thought that she was about 25 – when I saw her actual age was 12, I was shocked that I was 2 years older than she was.  To my eyes, Brooke never ever looked her age to me till she *was* about 20.

With the exception of the pussy-bow top and shorts outfit, I don’t think that these clothes are inappropriate in *inherent style* for a thirteen year old (designer label and prices notwithstanding).  It is a very fresh and youthful look.  The thing is, though, that ever since the ’60s grown women have co-opted “youth” style and looks, and even children’s style in many cases.  That leaves precious little that hasn’t been “adultified” for young girls to wear.

For example, mini-skirts.  Today most people of taste would say that it’s inappropriate for a young girl, and certainly for a six or seven year old, to wear a very short skirt.  But children in the 20′s through the 50s wore very short skirts, because the garment itself was a marker of childhood, not “sex”.  (See Shirley Temple, etc.)  We can piss and moan about girls adopting the tropes of womanhood too soon, but women’s fashion can be just as bad about keeping the “adolescent” look.

Question: Has Elle been in Elle yet? If so, what the hell are they waiting for?

Ack. I was all over it until the Les Copains, “Let me just kick these shoes off and I’ll join you in the bedroom since I’m half undressed already” shot. The clothes aren’t particularly mature or womanly, but the styling most certainly is. It’s like the kid who spend thousands on their prom dress: what do you have to look forward to? That said, I need those Carolina Amato gloves.

she is HOW old?

She is adorable but she seems to not understand the concept of “dead eyes” and she is often also slack jawed. She is super cute and of course like 14, but yeah I don’t think modeling is her strong suit.  

She looks her age in the Stella McCartney.  Coincidentally (not really), it’s the only one I like.  The second-to-last picture makes my head explode.  This child is barely older than my baby, so I feel completely comfortable saying SMILE!  STAND UP STRAIGHT!  GET YOUR HAIR OUT OF YOUR EYES!  WHERE’S YOUR MOTHER!

she is adorable.  Please lord, give me the strength, I want those mint green shoes!

Pardon if anyone has said this before, but there’s a real Jean Shrimpton quality to these photos. The shots are very pretty but I still remain ambivalent about the whole age thing. She still looks a bit too sexualized in some of the pix.

I love that first photo- it suits her age and makes her look the gorgeous young woman she is. The other ones still bother me. I’m just bothered by the child to adult, even if it is the current trend.