Sunday, August 14, 2011

Her name is Lola…

Nothing new under the sun here…  apparently most men prefer younger women to older ones—something about the first appearing more fertile and what not.  
That’s all fine and dandy as this article isn’t here to discuss the merits surrounding this notion.  Instead, I am wondering who decided that women also prefer younger women to older ones.  I'm certainly not speaking for our whole gender here, but as a woman, I aspire to the maturity and accomplishments of someone older and will more likely buy something that a mid 30s and up woman—or a twenty something dressed up to appear that age— is selling to me rather than something a teenager endorses.  

This seems to be a common sentiment amongst most women –well the women I spend my time with— so… why the current wave of teenage girls advertising for fashion houses that are suppose to cater to sexy, professionals that posses an amount of joie de vivre (i.e. women that have passed puberty, worked on a career and are willing and able to purchase items with multiple zeros as the starting price point)?*  

Perfect examples of this unfortunate trend of teenagers as the face of fashion powerhouses are...

1. Miu Miu's fall campaign featuring Hailee Steinfeld-- AGE 14

2) PRADA-- I'm guessing 15 or 16?

3) Marc Jacobs featuring Dakota Fanning-- Age 17 ( I do adore her though, just not as a face of something I am skipping meals in order to buy). 

Seriously, why the hell did we all rush to grow up and paint our faces during slumber parties if we wanted to at anytime actually look or act thirteen?  Just because some men prefer prepubescent  girls  rather than women in their own age brackets doesn't mean we women, the target market for these fashion houses, have any penchant for that sentiment.   

We clearly need more women serving as bosses and decision makers in the fashion world—  someone needs to stand up to the suits and quench such advertising ideas before they make it to print!

*Hollywood housewives currently stealing clothes from their teenage daughter and kids with trust funds  or jobs on the Disney channel are clearly an anomaly and will not fall under the assumptions of this articleJ

All these ads were in Vogue's Age issue (August 2011)-- the irony isn't lost here.

1 comment:

  1. I'm not impressed. I don't want to see a kid playing dress up in nice clothes like that. I get pissed when I see Suri with her Chanel and Burberry stuff. She is what 4 now? Too young to have nice things.