>Well done on implying someone not agreeing with you on the moral value of carrying dolls in a fashion show
This is not fair. The original post was about the inappropriate use of children in a marketing campaign. Balenciaga claims they didn't know the nature of the photoshoot.
The video I linked provides context demonstrating that balenciaga continued the same theme in their fashion show. "Why is this fashion show bad" "because it is part of a larged set of behaviors which include and encourage child abuse".
You can disagree with me, but don't misstate what I am saying.
Your slippery slope logical fallacies has no merit.
There were no children being abused in the Balenciaga video you posted.
>These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons
This would imply you believe in demons, which are things that do not exist in the real world.
You might believe they exist due to your moral upbringing but just because you were brainwashed (abused) as a child, doesnt mean every one is a child abuser.
Lotta Volkova artwork is definitely sordid but so is a lot of art. You dont have to like it or even look.
If anyone abuses a child, partner or elder, they should be held accountable.
Let me know when there's a wiki list full child abuse incidents involving Drag shows while most godfearing people ignore institutional abuse and rape in the Church
> Lotta Volkova artwork is definitely sordid but so is a lot of art. You don't have to like it or even look.
Exactly. I feel like art and its purpose have been lost in recent years. Art is supposed to make people think or feel. Paintings of beheadings in museums don't make people think about beheading people, nor do they make people happy. They make people think about the atrociousness of history and hopefully about not wanting to repeat it.
My (non religious) dad recently argued that music that implies rape or child abuse shouldn't be broadcast on the radio, because it's wrong. I asked whether any movie showing violence, abuse and rape should also not be played on TV or in cinema. I also explained that both are art forms and aren't depictions of things the singers or actors want to do in real life, per se (we all know there are exceptions). He argued this, however, because he heard the argument from some radio DJs.
It'll be a sad day when we ban everything we don't like to see or hear, because that's when we forget those things exist and stop doing anything against it.
This is not fair. The original post was about the inappropriate use of children in a marketing campaign. Balenciaga claims they didn't know the nature of the photoshoot.
The video I linked provides context demonstrating that balenciaga continued the same theme in their fashion show. "Why is this fashion show bad" "because it is part of a larged set of behaviors which include and encourage child abuse".
You can disagree with me, but don't misstate what I am saying.