What do y'all think about the Balenciaga SS23 & Adidas collab "teddy" controversy?

[Swanky]

Bears repeating!

We'd like to leave this thread open, but political conspiracy theories, among other comments need to stop. Discuss the topic only please, let's keep the discussion open and all responses to others need to remain respectful.

Also, let’s stick closely to topic, it really helps preventing tangents and drama.

 

[millivanilli]

oh my goodness. thank you for the education.

i never knew about this "ring of O" and had to look it up... but honest, sincere question.... the popular Hermes collier de chien design (ring and bracelet) - which i love coincidentally - is this viewed as a "ring of O"??? are people looking at me with these pieces of jewelry thinking i practice BDSM?

I actually thought longer about whether to write this post because Hermès is picking up on this symbolism in their ring and I was worried that someone would be concerned with this ring. My opinion is:

The question is whether this is intentional on H's part or if it's an unintentional design idea. I'm leaning towards design and not intentional because the look of the jewelry is intricate, which the O's classic ring is not. I've included one for you below. By the fact that the ring from Hermès (I have the same one) has two triangle shaped elements to the left and right of the ring, I would strongly lean toward:this breaks up the classic "ring of O " look. A classic ring of O is straight, unadorned and has the ring, (this loop) as a symbol relevant to recognition, so to say " that loop is the main attraction".

compared to the more refined artistic from Hermès: So in my opinion the collierde chien wouldn't be seen as " ring of O" but as a "normal" ring with a pretty design.

And, something I forgot: the ring of O is more common in continental Europe than in the US. In the USA, as far as I know, there are more the neck rings that make it most obvious.

 

[carlinha]

I actually thought longer about whether to write this post because Hermès is picking up on this symbolism in their ring and I was worried that someone would be concerned with this ring. My opinion is:

The question is whether this is intentional on H's part or if it's an unintentional design idea. I'm leaning towards design and not intentional because the look of the jewelry is intricate, which the O's classic ring is not. I've included one for you below. By the fact that the ring from Hermès (I have the same one) has two triangle shaped elements to the left and right of the ring, I would strongly lean toward:this breaks up the classic "ring of O " look. A classic ring of O is straight, unadorned and has the ring, (this loop) as a symbol relevant to recognition, so to say " that loop is the main attraction".

View attachment 5661651 compared to the more refined artistic from Hermès: View attachment 5661653 So in my opinion the collierde chien wouldn't be seen as " ring of O" but as a "normal" ring with a pretty design.

And, something I forgot: the ring of O is more common in continental Europe than in the US. In the USA, as far as I know, there are more the neck rings that make it most obvious.

thank you so much for the insight and education!

 

[aunaturale9]

This is a good question and I’m not sure there’s any “right” answer. I don’t have any Bal bags, but if this happened with Gucci, I’m not sure what I would do. I don’t love the idea that a generational brand should die for the sins of the current administration. If the bag (or other goods) is heavily logo’d, I personally would hold off on carrying it. IDK. This is all so crazy. I look forward to others thoughts and appreciate those who’ve already commented on their thoughts.

Yeah I mean it has the one B, but not a heavy logo! At one point I used to think folks in the suburbs wouldn't recognize these bags, but now I see them around so often that I don't know what is right either. Honestly, now I am getting a little weary..who knows whats happening in the inner workings of all of these major fashion houses..

 

[Allisonfaye]

Wow.

EXCLUSIVE: Angry Artist Vandalizes Balenciaga Store in London After Campaign Controversy - "More Stores will be Visited in Due Course"

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the high-end fashion brand Balenciaga has received internet backlash for a creepy ad that features two young girls holding stuffed animals dressed in what looks to be bondage gear. In one photo, a little girl with fiery red hair is shown wearing one of...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[ccbaggirl89]

Ah I came on here to ask-- I have one Balenciaga bag, but I am not sure if I should keep it now. I wouldn't feel comfortable wearing it now that all this is happening, but what is everyone else doing?

I feel the same as you, but we all have to decide individually what decision we'll ultimately make with Bal and the bags we own. I understand that the current "artistic" vision/direction of the company has nothing to do with my bags -- all of which are 'oldies', but personally I know I'll have a hard time disassociating them with what is currently happening and the direction the company seems to be leaning in for the past few years, actually. I'm just going to closet mine for a bit and perhaps decide later to sell/keep/donate. Make whatever choice you feel good about.

 

[Allisonfaye]

I feel the same as you, but we all have to decide individually what decision we'll ultimately make with Bal and the bags we own. I understand that the current "artistic" vision/direction of the company has nothing to do with my bags -- all of which are 'oldies', but personally I know I'll have a hard time disassociating them with what is currently happening and the direction the company seems to be leaning in for the past few years, actually. I'm just going to closet mine for a bit and perhaps decide later to sell/keep/donate. Make whatever choice you feel good about.

Agree. I will take the same approach I have taken to Michael Jackson. I can no longer listen to his music and enjoy it. I can't separate him from what I believe he did.

 

[jellyv]

The question is whether this is intentional on H's part or if it's an unintentional design idea. I'm leaning towards design and not intentional because the look of the jewelry is intricate,

The Hermes Collier de Chien form, with a circular ring and studs, is well known to have originated with intention in a dog collar design nearly a hundred years ago. For dogs.

 

[SpeedyJC]

not sure about that "over the line" I guess we have really serious BDSM fanatics going on... On the bright side: no children, no teddy bear.

View attachment 5661620

One does not need to be a "BDSM fanatic" to recognize BDSM. That photo you posted is of adults NOT children, huge difference.

Well stated. While some can reasonably conclude this is "punk" I find others are being purposely obtuse as to what this imagery is actually depicting/promoting - which is clearly the sexualization and masochistic abuse of children; to the extent that the law will let them get away with visualizing (as the court decision in Williams inferred). And then to further gaslight us who KNOW what the truth as super woke cancel culture vultures when we are simply enforcing the universally agreed upon boundary of not involving children in adult sexualized **** is quite infuriating. I am a black woman. If Balenciaga had an ad promoting white hoods or other KKK references I would not be calling for a universal boycott. To the contrary, I believe companies are permitted to be racist, sexist, etc. and the free market should dictate whether or not their company ethos is acceptable to the public and/or profitable to them. But when it comes to babies/toddlers/children - those who cannot reasonably give any consent - we as adults have the obligation and duty to protect them and their innocence until such time comes when they are adults and can freely consent to BDSM/kink imagery on their own accord. The fact that I even have to spell this out to adults who should know better is even more disgusting than the actual ad itself.

I think maybe its just easier for some people to be obtuse because they do not want to admit that there is something very sinister/pedophilic about a photoshoot of a brand they enjoy. Even if someone does not like Bal sometimes its just easier to deny the ugliness of the world and those who bring up the ugly get gas-lighted or called "conspiracy theorist" or whatever. Just my thoughts. I guess its much easier to think "oh its punk no biggie!"

Of course some people may just honestly think its punk because yes punk does have BDSM influences however this photoshoot is not punk. As someone who partakes in punk scene/culture I really wish people would leave punks out of it!

 

[SpeedyJC]

Ah I came on here to ask-- I have one Balenciaga bag, but I am not sure if I should keep it now. I wouldn't feel comfortable wearing it now that all this is happening, but what is everyone else doing?

Im done with Balenciaga. I have city bags but will not be using them and will get rid of them. That is just my choice. The topic of child abuse is too close of a topic for me to feel comfortable using my bags.

Do what you feel is best. If you do not want to wear them dont. If you do then go ahead, you already owned the bag prior to this.

 

[millivanilli]

One does not need to be a "BDSM fanatic" to recognize BDSM. That photo you posted is of adults NOT children, huge difference.

I think maybe its just easier for some people to be obtuse because they do not want to admit that there is something very sinister/pedophilic about a photoshoot of a brand they enjoy. Even if someone does not like Bal sometimes its just easier to deny the ugliness of the world and those who bring up the ugly get gas-lighted or called "conspiracy theorist" or whatever. Just my thoughts. I guess its much easier to think "oh its punk no biggie!"

Of course some people may just honestly think its punk because yes punk does have BDSM influences however this photoshoot is not punk. As someone who partakes in punk scene/culture I really wish people would leave punks out of it!

calm down, my dear. If you had read my - manifold! - posts here, you would have seen that the post you quoted was just a side comment to a long series of explanatory posts, why we find in the pictures with the teddy bears NO punk but Bdsm. I'm not the enemy.

 

[millivanilli]

The Hermes Collier de Chien form, with a circular ring and studs, is well known to have originated with intention in a dog collar design nearly a hundred years ago. For dogs.

no need to scream at me. Jeez.

 

[papertiger]

I can understand that when you look at the pictures you think of punk. If we look at pictures of punks and their clothes or symbols, it is noticeable that punks wear collars (see also the picture),
View attachment 5661587

but not collars that have the BDSM language in the form of a "collar". The classic BDSM collar has a ring that is supposed to be used to put on a leash or something similar. (see picture 2 of the ad on the bed, there is a leash - the yellow thingy on the bed)

View attachment 5661588The ring is an elementary part of the collars and is found in BDSM relevant jewelry, because it actually corresponds to the ring of the O,. By the ring of O, when worn, one recognizes an active member of the BDSm community, dominant people wear it as a ring on the left hand, submissive on the right. The collar is given to the submissive part by the dominant part and corresponds most closely to a wedding ring. A variation takes place such that either straight hoops are used as collars, or chains with a lock that can only be opened by the Dom. So it is a clear BDSM language. Long story, unimportant for here, but:

Punk does not have a ring of O in any form in its typical way
BDSM has the ring of O as a typical sign. THE typical sign. Either that or the triskele. These are the two main signs for BDSM.

If you look at the teddy bear, you see the ring of O pretty clearly, and as I mentioned, the setting is very clear. We also find a leash. We also find the classic handcuffs - also with the ring of O andthigh cuffs, also with an eyelet to tie them down. This is not punk, it's BDSM. The fact that punks borrow elements from BDSM and thus the boundaries are not very clear - sure, it happens all the time, it's not a bad thing. But the symbols in BOTH pictures are clear, I'm sorry to say. Believe me, I would also prefer it if BDSM would not end up in the dirty corner again. a-----------------gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaain.

Depends on the Punk. There were no rules in British punk except the mix and juxtapositioning of disparate elements. Punks highlighted the hypocrisy of British society, class systems and especially the po-faced middle classes. They mixed bourgeoise society uniforms like cardigans and twinsets (Jordan, Westwood) with BDSM, torn clothes and hairstyles that took hours and mocked it all. Some punks wore actual dog collars and others just studded leather. I wasn't old enough to be a punk but in the 90s my father was when I asked for a Hermes CDC cuff in Paris. My uncle laughed at my father and said "it's not what you think". I was only 15, but at least it was my idea. I still have it and another.




1970s British punk wearing a dog collar Pic CNN

Hermes CDCs, Cartier Love bracelets and JDC, VCA's Zip necklace, Nadine Ghosn's gold bike chains and others all use a surrealist language than entwine 'edgy' sexual narratives and power play artistically with high fashion and precious materials. Catier's Loves are based on slave shackles (I could never). They don't however (thank goodness) use children in their ads. It's a semiotic language for adults (only). For me there's nothing wrong with the bears as objects (if someone likes that kind of thing) it's the context of the campaign pictures that creates the story, and the story and meta-narrative is WRONG which ever way it's read and whoever is reading it (IMHO).

Anyway, walked past Balenciaga twice today, no one in there but staff. If this campaign (or 2) was/were done for controversy, it's probably working, but at the end of the day if it doesn't translate into sales, heads will roll regardless. Kering have poured millions into Derma's Balenciaga lately, including couture shows, collabs, and massive PR, all done to raise the profile of the brand, even if this 'stirring-up of feelings' is intentional, I think it's an own goal regards brand recognition and profits.

 

[Meta]

One wonders how they went from their commitment... to having children in their ads. (credit to @curiouslight on Twitter.)

Kering Group Bans Working With Models Under 18

Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent, Balenciaga and Alexander McQueen will ban underage models from 2020.

www.forbes.com

Kering Commits to Using Models Over 18: Will the Rest of the Fashion World Follow Suit?

The luxury group behind Gucci, Saint Laurent, and Balenciaga will no longer use underage talent in its collections or advertising.

www.vogue.com

The two images above were from @curiouslight's Twitter

Adding this taken from Kering's site:

Kering commits to working only with models aged over 18

Kering commits to working only with models aged over 18

www.kering.com

 

[Allisonfaye]

Depends on the Punk. There were no rules in British punk except the mix and juxtapositioning of disparate elements. Punks highlighted the hypocrisy of British society, class systems and especially the po-faced middle classes. They mixed bourgeoise society uniforms like cardigans and twinsets (Jordan, Westwood) with BDSM, torn clothes and hairstyles that took hours and mocked it all. Some punks wore actual dog collars and others just studded leather. I wasn't old enough to be a punk but in the 90s my father was when I asked for a Hermes CDC cuff in Paris. My uncle laughed at my father and said "it's not what you think". I was only 15, but at least it was my idea. I still have it and another.



View attachment 5661699
1970s British punk wearing a dog collar Pic CNN

Hermes CDCs, Cartier Love bracelets and JDC, VCA's Zip necklace, Nadine Ghosn's gold bike chains and others all use a surrealist language than entwine 'edgy' sexual narratives and power play artistically with high fashion and precious materials. Catier's Loves are based on slave shackles (I could never). They don't however (thank goodness) use children in their ads. It's a semiotic language for adults (only). For me there's nothing wrong with the bears as objects (if someone likes that kind of thing) it's the context of the campaign pictures that creates the story, and the story and meta-narrative is WRONG which ever way it's read and whoever is reading it (IMHO).

Anyway, walked past Balenciaga twice today, no one in there but staff. If this campaign (or 2) was/were done for controversy, it's probably working, but at the end of the day if it doesn't translate into sales, heads will roll regardless. Kering have poured millions into Derma's Balenciaga lately, including couture shows, collabs, and massive PR, all done to raise the profile of the brand, even if this 'stirring-up of feelings' is intentional, I think it's an own goal regards brand recognition and profits.

Interesting. Thanks. I never really knew much about punk. I know a bit more about BDSM. But I do wonder how this campaign impacts survivors and how THEY feel about it.

 

[millivanilli]

Depends on the Punk. There were no rules in British punk except the mix and juxtapositioning of disparate elements. Punks highlighted the hypocrisy of British society, class systems and especially the po-faced middle classes. They mixed bourgeoise society uniforms like cardigans and twinsets (Jordan, Westwood) with BDSM, torn clothes and hairstyles that took hours and mocked it all. Some punks wore actual dog collars and others just studded leather. I wasn't old enough to be a punk but in the 90s my father was when I asked for a Hermes CDC cuff in Paris. My uncle laughed at my father and said "it's not what you think". I was only 15, but at least it was my idea. I still have it and another.



View attachment 5661699
1970s British punk wearing a dog collar Pic CNN

Hermes CDCs, Cartier Love bracelets and JDC, VCA's Zip necklace, Nadine Ghosn's gold bike chains and others all use a surrealist language than entwine 'edgy' sexual narratives and power play artistically with high fashion and precious materials. Catier's Loves are based on slave shackles (I could never). They don't however (thank goodness) use children in their ads. It's a semiotic language for adults (only). For me there's nothing wrong with the bears as objects (if someone likes that kind of thing) it's the context of the campaign pictures that creates the story, and the story and meta-narrative is WRONG which ever way it's read and whoever is reading it (IMHO).

Anyway, walked past Balenciaga twice today, no one in there but staff. If this campaign (or 2) was/were done for controversy, it's probably working, but at the end of the day if it doesn't translate into sales, heads will roll regardless. Kering have poured millions into Derma's Balenciaga lately, including couture shows, collabs, and massive PR, all done to raise the profile of the brand, even if this 'stirring-up of feelings' is intentional, I think it's an own goal regards brand recognition and pr

Thanks, that was very interesting to read- I didn't know that about Cartier for example and am shocked.

I think we agree that "adult symbols" are not a problem (currently i am moderately enthusiastic, because the problem that BDSM is anchored in the dirty corner starts again), as long as children are not involved, because that is simply the last and unforgivable. Because of me, Balenciaga advertises with the wildest things that the colorful BDSM world has to offer. I () am not shocked by this - see my previous posts, I am an active member of the BDSM community, and have been for decades. To shock me, you need a bit more than some rings, bondage tapes (in the third picture very obvious, the kid with the two teddy bears in his rooms) or similar. The rest of the population survives this without any problems and I don't see any problem with advertising that tests the limits. But kids!! CHILDREN!!! in a context that is clearly sexualized with imagery that definitely can't be misunderstood, that's already violent and, in my view, unforgivable. That the BDSM world does not defend itself against such depictions, I do not understand, because one of our main credos " safe, sane and consensual" was massively broken with these images. Our code of honor stipulates that not even uninvolved adults should notice anything, and children are really so off limits that this should actually cause a storm of outrage -

honestly: i saw the teddy bear in the fashion show recording and found it quite adorable - according to my lifestyle - and thought about buying it. But i am an adult. As soon as children are put into a sexualized context, that's simply the end. It reminds me of the debate with the Palmers models, which escalated in Austria at the time, in which girls were placed in an inappropriate sujet. The public also found that highly unfunny at the time, because the imagery conveyed something similar.

edit: needed to fix the autocorrect that wanted to outsmart me.ha, not today, Siri!