Topless 10-Year-Old Model Controversy |Ugly Gossip

Updated on Aug 04, 2011

31 votes

62 comments

2 favorites

In this week’s Ugly Gossip we’re going to discuss whether or not 10-year-old models should pose provocatively in high fashion. Continue to read some more tidbits of what else happened this week in the Ugly Gossip. Yes, we’re featuring the good, the bad, and the (really) UGLY!

10. Are You Ready for The Situation…Tuxedos?
Who would have thought that ‘The Situation’ would be a spokesperson for tuxedos, let alone clothes? Known for taking off his shirt and being on the Jersey Shore, ‘The Situation’ is reportedly going to get a 6-figure deal for launching his own tuxedos. What’s even more surprising is that he may even help design the tuxedos. Let’s just hope these tuxes have sleeves.
Verdict: Borderline Ugly

09. Zara Launches a US Online Store Because of FNO?
Yay for being able to shop for neon brights. On September 7th, we can finally celebrate the grand opening (at home) by browsing through Zara’s US online shop. Sounds like a peculiar date, but it seems strategically planned since Vogue’s Fashion Night Out will be on September 8th this year. At least we’ll be online instead of in line.
Verdict: Of course, Good!

08. Got $5? Then You Can Stalk Kanye West
For the entire duration of his upcoming tour, you’ll be able to see Kanye’s life – if you’re willing to shell out $4.99 per month. For 5 bucks, you’ll be able to watch videos of what Kanye eats, Kanye’s exercise regimen, and possibly of him sleeping (no guarantees on the sleeping, though). Sounds novel, but to really be able to stalk Kanye, why not convert those videos into 3D format?
Verdict: Eh?

07. Karl Lagerfeld’s Collection with Macy’s: EPIC
While we’re not sure how The Situation’s tuxedos will sell, but we’re extremely excited to get the first look on Karl Lagerfeld’s line with Macy’s! His 45 piece collection, including tweed coats and peter pan collared dresses, will range from $50 to $170 a piece. So for those who want a piece of Chanel in their wardrobe (well, sort of), get your money ready, the line will hit stores and Macys.com on August 31st.
Verdict: FAB!

06. Rare Photo of Karl Lagerfeld Without Glasses
Wonder if this is a publicity stunt for his upcoming collection launch? Nonetheless, it’s a rarity that designer Karl Lagerfeld is ever photographed sans sunglasses. (Just try googling him, then you’ll know what we mean). One lucky photographer shot a photo of Mr. Lagerfeld sans glasses during a trip to St. Tropaz the past weekend. Aw, and we thought he had baby blue eyes, too.
Verdict: Very Good!

05. Chanel Clothes Will Catch on Fire
If you recently purchased a few of the luxury items, don’t stand next to a stove cause your clothes may end up catching on fire. An announcement was made to recall the clothes while also advising customers to refund their silky Chanel clothing to the stores. We knew Chanel was hot, but we didn’t know it was this hot.
Verdict: Bad – Do we need to say more?

04. 57% of Women Will Happily Swap Their Boyfriends for Makeup
Sounds odd, but if you’re one of the women who can easily spend an average of $164,000 on makeup in her lifetime, then you may think the trade-in is worth it. A British study revealed that 57% of the female participants would be willing to leave their boyfriends than to leave the house sans makeup. Guess these girls just doesn’t want to ‘lose face.’
Verdict: Ugly

03. If Shoes Could Kill, Literally.
Not only would many women leave their boyfriends for makeup, but this one woman may have killed her boyfriend with a pair of heels. A woman reportedly attacked her boyfriend with her heeled shoe after a heated argument. Though it’s not sure whether or not the heeled shoe killed the guy, the girlfriend is now charged for murder anyway. Ouch.
Verdict: Very Ugly

02. For $1,300 Tweens Can Learn How to Blog at Summer Camp
The last time I remember, summer camp didn’t cost that much. But if you’re a tween and got $1,300 to spare, you can actually attend this summer camp to learn how to be successful buyers, stylists, and yes, bloggers. $1,300, though? That’s a tad too much especially when it’s only five days long and doesn’t include housing. Why not just spend your summer learning how to blog with Blogger instead? I mean, it is free.
Verdict: Borderline Good/Bad

01. Controversy over 10-Year-Old Model
If you thought tweens were too young to be learning insider tips of the fashion industry, how about being a 10-year-old model? While it’s refreshing to hear that Thylane Loubry Blondeau is making it big on Vogue, critics are slamming the industry for oversexualizing the 10-year-old. Her topless (yes, topless) and suggestive poses are very American Apparel-esque. If Miley Cyrus’s topless editorial in the 2008 Vanity Fair issue got slammed (she was 15 at the time), how could photographers get away for snapping photos of a topless 10-year-old girl?
Verdict: Speechless

______________________________________________________________________________

What are your thoughts? Does this pave the way for future children high fashion modeling?

Got a tip? Your tip may land on next week’s Ugly Gossip! Tweet us! (@EverybodyIsUgly)

Missed last week’s Ugly Gossip Post? We’ve got you covered! Check out how sour milk is made into clothing!

By Crystal (watermoolen)

Image via Vogue Paris January 2011

WRITE A COMMENT (62)

Create an account to add a comment. Or login here.

oscarinthecan on September 04

If this were part of a photojournalist's essay from a hippie compound, I wouldn't think anything of it. But the context of this photo is one, a portfolio that includes a couple of gross, fetishy images (see Jezebel article); two, a fashion shoot, which makes the absence of clothing notable; and three, an adult somewhere instructing a 10-year-old to take off her shirt and get her picture taken.

alinaceusan on September 04

they should model their own age

pashupati on September 03

What, people never see 10-years-old girls topless every summer? Also, in every holidays and in swimwear publicities? Plus, if a person is pedophile that person could be attracted even if she wore something. We also see lot of pictures of little boys like that in clothes catalogues, and nobody ever complain, even if really for someone attracted to little boys it'd be the same.

pashupati on September 03
By "it'd be the same", I mean following this logic, but if you want to avoid pedophile getting attracted and doing "things" while watching pictures, you should just not publish any picture featuring children anywhere. (sorry for answering myself, I thought I could type how many char. I needed, but then I couldn't write more)

1313 on September 02

NO! :( This is like Toddlers in Tiaras...sick & wrong

Karlasweet1 on September 01

Ay this 10 year old topless child makes me sick.... The photographer isn't to blame....WHERE ARE HER PARENTS???

ilovemypolaroid on August 30

wait, is that a girl topless?

ilovemypolaroid on August 30
holy crap, it is.

La_Mooey on August 30

Wrong, just wrong.

Sisseroland on August 27

This is so wrong and disturbing. Poor girl, she should be able to have a normal childhood.

roxy117 on August 27

this is so wrong. people especially photographers in general should always know the borderline and limits about photography as an art, doing what is the acceptable standard for all. scantily clad adult models for the sake of fashion is ok but 10 year old girls is such a big NO NO. they should at all times consider every aspect of their subject, concept, model and the viewers/public.

joliezolie on August 26

At 10 yrs old being naked and free is normal, it should be normal. Her look is androgyny in this photo, she could be a boy, who knows, who cares!?. Put a bikini top on her then the photo eludes to her having breasts, which IS sexual. Please people it's beyond embarrassing to read some of your overly puritan and twisted rants. Fashion photography is an art.

melimelon67 on August 23

I find this extremely distroubing, fashion or not, she's still a 10 year old girl.

clara4ever12 on August 23

wrong

staystitching on August 22

this is so wrong

thebedhairmaid on August 21

Things would be soooo different if this was an artistic photograph, but the fact that is fashion, is almost... grotesque It just doesn't feel right to make images like this available to pedophiles, through fashion... is shameful

clara4ever10 on August 21

she should just be having fun not doing that (from a 11 year old) me

ninnda on August 19

it kinda sad see 10 year old girl topless :( just let her grow and act by her ages. she will lose her lovely childhood!

sukavati on August 18

You see topless 10 year old girls at the beach all of the time,and I personally don't think the human body should be hidden or taboo. As long as the girl isn't wearing a G-string or posing with older men, I have no problem with this.

ValleyGirlMall on August 21
I think you are correct. The porn and sex trades flourish because because people do not see people nude in socially acceptable ways while bathing or sun bathing consequently people are repressed about how they feel about themselves. Unfortunately most people are not as enlightened as we are and it does not look like they will be anytime soon. This is probably why this photo of this young girl messes with people's minds.

jennyduonggg on August 13

What in turn happens in this system is other girls will begin to feel the pressures ofthe elites dictating precisely aha the "proper" body image size and styles should be and this will happen at earlier and earlier ages if children as young as 10 model like so. Humans have a tendency to emulate and children even more.Think of the effect on your 5 year old daughter or sister. Long post - sorry!

jennyduonggg on August 13

They govern what we buy and establish standards of beauty while Identifying the aborations- they establish normatively to which we must conform or risk ostracism. They play with our desires through ads and runways to encourage demand of their product so they can supply. So here we have a child whose body is being sexualized and objectified (by often the male gaze but also the female) to sell

jennyduonggg on August 13

In response to pinkaholic0405 below: Obviously you are right about the way counts is transformed into street wearable fashion. But one must understand the way the market system works - it's by supply and demand. The fashion designers (and their ads) are the elites in this system and we are subject to their rule. They dictate the standards of style and fashion and in turn govern our conduct

pinkkreen on August 13

I can't believe that any parents would let their daughter do this...shes only 10 and this is NOT right!! Put a shirt on her and if she wants to model at least make it age appropriate...who knows how many pedos are out there protect your kids not exploit them!!...

kimwillkill on August 13

she is so pretty but way too young! I LOVE your articles great job!(:

Walabean on August 13

It's this sort of thing that's killing childhood...it makes me very sad :(

pinkaholic0405 on August 10

you have to understand, things in high fashion and are super editorial are not made to be worn/done on the streets! this is why there is always a more toned down version of the couture. i see nothing wrong with her doing this because obviously she has enough sense to not walk around public topless and its editorial for god's sake.

melikey on August 09

Totally agree with 01honey on the stimilation of sexual perverts. This is sending out an inappropriate message and possible putting young girls at greater risk for sexual deviance

jennyduonggg on August 08

Where do you draw the line between what's art and what's socially acceptable? The effects of allowing girls like Thylane to model in this manner is that if there is more of it eventually viewers become numb to ethical questions we ask now, and this sort of child-sexualization is normalized and made socially acceptable. Consider toddler beauty pageants in the American south - its totally accepted

jennyduonggg on August 08

Another Vogue ad featured Thylane sitting seductively on a leopard print sofa, decked out in a chic bold gold blazer without a shirt underneath so that the blazer opens provocatively. She wears makeup and crazy heels. Sexualization of children is even more wrong than the objectification of women. Think of the consequences on body image for girls her age, and the stimulation of sexual perverts.

chicsarai on August 08

its nice that she can model at such a young age. more power to her but to have photoshoots that make her look grown up i personally think is a bit much. shes a kid. she should be treated as one

F4SHI0N on August 08

goodness she's just 10!thats terrible

pjp2496 on August 08

Well i dont have a problem with girls modeling because I've always wanted to model too but this is too far, theyre growing up too fast she should model for girls her age

HeadFirst on August 08

I think that it's really nice that she is able to model, but I think she should stick to modeling fashion for people her age. Just like adults who model clothes for other adults or teens, she should definitely be able to model fashion for younger teens or older kids. But she should definitely not be topless or wearing clothes that only older people wear, because that's not right.

angrycloud on August 08

So, excited about the new Macy's collection, but then when I read the article about the 10-year old........dear god why? She is a child and should be out enjoying her youth, not modeling as an adult. "It's her choice!" yes, but what she does also reflects on what other children will see and think appropriate, in the age where 4 year olds are wearing make-up, I think that this needs to stop >_<

thesimpletheory on August 08

it's great that she has a modeling career at such an age but i think it's the parents' job to draw the line of what is acceptable because she's still a minor

ramenhead on August 08

I think its okay for a 10 year old girl to model with clothing but her being topless isnt right.

floral on August 08

I argee with the pinciple of topless modelling in general, to express and compliment an interesting piece of jewellry or scalf etc. But why would a 10 year old be dressed like that anyway? my little sister is 10, she generlly spends her time in pretty dresses, but accesories are not really a priority of hers! 10 year old topless = not right!

boredstephanie on August 07

I think the 10 year old model definitely should not be modeling topless. If you found that on someone's computer, wouldn't you think he/she was a pedo? Calling it high fashion doesn't excuse you from photographing children without clothes.

blue_lego on August 07

In a family album this picture would be cute, even though 10 is getting old for a girl to be topless...However, since this is not just a little girl playing dress up, but rather some person telling her to wear this and then take pictures, totally inappropriate. Also as an underage model, this little girl should have been protected from doing this. That it causes controversy should say enough

LUVAct101 on August 07

UHH NO, They shouldn't! Period!

maryiangge on August 07

im excited to see karl collections in macys. scary on chanel clothes. too expensive for summer camp. the 10 yrs old model topless is sad news. very interesting crystal!

lechateaudesfleurs on August 07

This is sick. Get the pedophiles out of the Fashion industry.

EveyHoneysuckle on August 07

Aww Karl's eyes are quite lovely :) and I would never trade my boyfriend for makeup XP haha, that just sounds shallow. If you're that dependent on makeup, that's kind of sad. The only reasoning I can understand is if there's some facial deformity that requires cover up for the self esteem to be boosted. And I don't think the photo is that bad honestly. They don't have her in some sexual position..

EveyHoneysuckle on August 07
(cont.) and she's simply standing there with hair and necklaces covering up the top. Honestly, I don't see the suggestion at all. While the line is drawn when she's completely exposed and placed in a sexual situation. All I see here is a topless little girl in feathers and jeans.

essenceofrue on August 07

wow :-O

Mimi_Walker on August 07

I'm speechless ...

FatimaCarla on August 07

I don't agree with little girls modeling like that. When people think of topless normally they don't think of little girls modeling topless! If her and her family agree with this then there is nothing we can do. It's just a matter of common sense and how people wish to be represented to the world.

Smyles on August 07

Absolutely NOT! Let kids be kids for a while!!! We just went through this with the FLDS goofball! ;(

MiuSan on August 07

She is absolutely gorgeous and all, but for god's sake! put a shirt on her!

illq on August 06

She is too young to be modeling like that, I mean especially her parents for allowing them to sexualize their own daughter like that.

aribear22 on August 06

poor girl. Now everybody's going to go into a snit like they did with the topshop ad.

ScaryGodmother on August 06

Remember when Brooke Shields seductively told the camera that nothing came between her and her Calvins? Even if nobody agrees they keep doing it. Adds are meant to sell; beauty, sex, or image like being thin or tall. When you have a ten year old sell stuff, who is it aimed at? Personally I can't consider ads art, artsy sure. But not art. Remember, Person, Context and Perspective all go together

steaming_greentea on August 06

it's bordering on pedophilia. sick.

duhwinner on August 06
I agree. It's opened a door that can't be closed.

natalia_mar on August 06

i think is very very absurd, it's very low, as well said here they are sexualizing this 10. y.o girl! i think a part of our society is going too far but toward decadence!! Just let her be a girl!

j_fo on August 06

Well they did not take the picture against her will. Im not saying i support the topless pictures but at the same time the industry had to make an agreement with her parents/gaurdians in order for them to take it, therefore it was okay with her family. However i dnt see anything quite provacative about the picture above and looking at the other photos she is quite a beautiful 10 year old!

Dandelia on August 06

That´s really disturbing.. We all know that there are creeps out there, but what kind of parent would allow his/her child to be exposed like this? This isn´t a normal or comfortable situation for a 10yrs old child :-/ So sad!

AlexanderJames on August 06

It's not a photo of a topless little kid just being a kid. The photo is taken with the intent of sexualizing the girl with the purpose of selling the jeans. It just seems to be in very very poor taste.

ZiZi543 on August 05

the fact of the matter is that though this was meant for fashion, theyre are creepy people out there who unfortunately would take great pleasure out of exploiting children in such ways as these. the poor girl should not put herself out there in such a way as she is soo young

thekatpack on August 05

they're beautiful if not taken out of context. the photos that started the controversy (the ones where she's dressed up as an adult, not the topless, ballerina, etc) were sort of "toddlers in tiaras" inspired. it was to start a discussion about if kids should be wearing makeup, etc. and if they're growing up too quickly.

schestyle on August 05

This is the second time lately I've seen disturbingly provocative fashion shots of young girls. What are these people thinking?

canyoupasstheglitter on August 05

great article!!

lastcookieinthejar on August 05

The photo of her topless I find to be the least disturbing of the bunch. The ones where they dress her up, trying to make her look older and sexy are absolutely not ok. With that said, I do think 10 is a little to old to be shown topless...

CuddlyCacti on August 05

OK, she is 10. She has no boobs. I find it perfectly acceptable that she is topless in the picture above and actually find it cute because she looks like a natural, normal 10 year old playing dress up. She doesn't seem sexified here, like she is in two of the top pictures in the jezebel link, where she is fully clothed, but being made to look sexy, which is NOT ok for a 10 yr old in my opinion!

CuddlyCacti on August 06
Yes, it does depend on a girl's development in my opinion.Why should little boys be able to run around topless and not girls if their chests are virtually identical (the reason why we cover up now right?The problem is when they are have her in sexy/provocative poses,which is not ok to do to any child.I don't see that in this photo but I did in others in the link, but certainly up to interpretation

natalia_mar on August 06
only because she has not "boobs" ? pfff.

ravenouscreatures on August 05

Fantastic bits and I will have to peruse them more thoroughly. The killer heels is a must read. Tragic in its result.

HallieDaily on August 05

Oh, Crystal!!! So many useful information! my day just getting busier and busier,,lol...I love them...I have to check everything out!!! right now, I am so exciting about the Zara Only store....