‘Sexualized a Child’: Great Britain Bans Dakota Fanning Perfume Ad
- Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:43pm by
Madeleine Morgenstern
- Print »
- Email »
A perfume advertisement featuring 17-year-old American actress Dakota Fanning has been pulled in Britain over complaints that it sexualizes a child.
The ad, promoting designer Marc Jacobs’ new “Oh, Lola!” fragrance, features Fanning sitting on the floor in a short skirt with an oversized perfume bottle between her thighs. The fragrance name is written below.
The United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority received four complaints about the ad and as a result it will not appear in British markets, the Telegraph reported. The regulatory agency said in a statement:
“We noted that the model was holding up the perfume bottle which rested in her lap between her legs and we considered that its position was sexually provocative. We understood the model was 17 years old but we considered she looked under the age of 16. We considered that the length of her dress, her leg and position of the perfume bottle drew attention to her sexuality. Because of that, along with her appearance, we considered the ad could be seen to sexualise a child.”
Coty, the maker of the fragrance, said it does not think the ad “inappropriately sexualized” Fanning because she is not underage — Britain’s age of consent is 16 — and it didn’t show any “private body parts or sexual activity.“ It called the large perfume bottle ”provoking, but not indecent,” according to the Telegraph.
Here’s the ad:
Fanning became the face of “Oh, Lola!” over the summer. Jacobs, known for his sometimes racy and provocative advertisements, told Women‘s Wear Daily he thought she would be perfect for the ad campaign after her role in last year’s “The Runaways,” about the 1970s all-female rock band.
“Dakota was in it, and I knew she could be this contemporary Lolita, seductive yet sweet,” he said.
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 584 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 374 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (101)
BannedByHuffpo
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:37pmCan‘t wait to see Marc Jacobs mens’ after-shave/cologne ads. Of course, he’ll need to run them by the athletic department at Penn State first.
Report Post »OniKaze
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:24pmNice!! Good eye on ya..
Report Post »theaveng
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 1:06am>>>sexualizes a child.
Ridiculous. A child, by biological definition, is a sterile member of the species. Clearly she is not sterile (she’s past puberty). The correct phrase is “sexualizes a teenaged minor”.
As for the picture itself, not only is there no sex but also no nudity. It isn’t obscene or pornographic. It‘s a photo of a young woman holding a bottle and yes it’s suggestive but so what? I‘m not a prude and I’m fully aware that 17 year olds have sex….. or at least the instinct to date the opposite sex.
It’s nonsense to be afraid of being human.
CENSAYS
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 10:22amtheaveng… it’s not fear. You’ve got it wrong. When co.s sexually exploit women in their ads / movies / what have you, the society that is being exposed to that becomes dangerous. As a female, who looks like one, i become a target of these sexually charged ads. Commonly, people dont put 2 and 2 together. In the 3 years i lived in Munich, i was molested hundreds of times (in the open, often in day light) . Once a man was starting at a nude poster, as the bus was driving away from that stop, his gaze came to me.. and fell on me for several stops til i got off the bus. I dont say “enough is enough” out of fear.. I say it because of my decency, my love of justice a for a hope for better for the next generation. Can you understand this?
Report Post »DavidZion
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:35pmOk give me a break, I see more overt sexuality from teens in the mall. I wouldn‘t let my kiddo do it but I’m not her parent and it does’t show anything indecent. Also bear in mind that in europe you will see far far far far worse than this on public broadcast.
Report Post »Quiata
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 6:47pm@DAVIDZION Really? So just because we already have to swim in cultural sludge means we need to add MORE waste product to our environment? Come on!
Report Post »Loki
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 8:18pm@Quiata
Report Post »Last time I checked, this is still a free nation. You can act all non whorish if you want, and the others that wish to act whorish, have the liberty to do so…
To push ones morality rules onto another tends to lean the nation into a theocracy. And as its going right now, the muslims are winning the baby lotto..
Islesfordian
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:18pmHaving lived in Britain recently I can say that I saw much worse billboard ads in London, one showing a woman completely naked and in some sort of orgasmic pose for a product called Extacy.
Report Post »Quiata
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:44pm@LOKI You misunderstand. Not supporting this tasteless advertisement =/= in favor of banning it. Get it? Secondly, this occurred in Britain (where, perhaps, even some Brits might find this genre tiresome after all). The bigger point is that many people responding to this story claim, “well, I’ve seen worse, so this is nothing big…” Well guess what, we ALL have seen worse….it’s just that some of us are willing to recognize it and call it for what it is. And the beauty of the free market is that I can choose to vote with my dollars elsewhere. Fin.
Report Post »Quiata
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:50pmP.S @LOKI And in England, statistically, yes, the Muslim community is filling both the morality vacuum and the maternity wards.
Report Post »califpatriot
Posted on November 11, 2011 at 2:25amAnd why do you think you see these kinds of teens in public? Gee, could it be lax parents, a overly sexualized society, a rush to be grown-up? Lolita was controversial in its day for a reason. Just note the increase in sexual activity of adults with young children & teens, rampant child porn, and generations that have lost an innocence way too soon. Anyone who does not see the inappropriateness of this has not reached adulthood.
Report Post »Cat
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:35pmThere have been provocative ads for years at LA’s American Apparel pushing the envelope (Google it)
Report Post »Nothing new here except pushing the younger envelope
Enough already, give kids a chance to be kids first
They’ll be PO’d enough at us when they grow up …
evilhatemonger
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:27pmSexualizing a child? She’s 17, the age of consent in the UK is 16. Opinions of how old she looks are simply opinions. Provocative? Yes. Appalling? No. Silly? Probably. Much ado about nothing? Absolutely.
Report Post »And they call Americans repressed.
thetreyman
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:40pmthey let 17 year olds pose topless in the page 3 tabloid.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:17pmI don’t think any woman can be arrested for showing her breasts here in the US anymore. A lot of mothers breast-feed their babies. I don’t think just showing breasts is sexually provocative, otherwise, National Geographic would be sold behind the counter :-)
Report Post »ShyLow
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:25pm16 should be legal…Women with other women and other races is the problem…not older men of the same race with younger women…Men have lost respect for women because of womens crap-smeared tatoos,drug use and sleeping with other women and other races…It’s way past time that white women get recognized for their part in the destruction of America for their rebelion against their own family and country…End food stamps for attractive white women and prepare the brothels for them…Time for them to reap what they have been sowing
Report Post »Viet Vet
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 5:01pm@Anonymous T. Irrelevant
“I don’t think any woman can be arrested for showing her breasts here in the US anymore.”
Let’s hope not anyway!
Report Post »YepImaConservative
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 8:35pm>SHYLOW. “Fondle” of little girls are you and other issues? Based on that statement if I interpreted it all correctly… you should be calling one of those couch Doctors for a little psychiatric help, eh?
Report Post »ShyLow
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 10:17pm@yep If you don’t find 16 year old women attractive,then they’re is something wrong with you…and if conserveing your own race isn’t a priority to you,then you should consider a different user-name
Report Post »smokie
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 5:09amAs long as she doesn’t start that screaming that she does in movies, I’m alright with it.
Report Post »At seventeen, she knows enough to know what the photog was doing.
Islesfordian
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 3:33pm“and if conserveing your own race isn’t a priority to you,then you should consider a different user-name”
Are you talking about the HUMAN race as opposed to chimpanzees, or are you one of the idiots who think there is such a thing as a white race and black race among humans?
Report Post »thegreatcarnac
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:27pmThe sexualizing of children, especially young girls, is the result of a concerted effort by perverted pedidphiles to slowly make people accept such perversion. The ‘perverted’ have perverted the air waves, the television screeens, and even academia with their questioning of what/who makes a marriage etc. It is one of the last vestiges of innocence and they are coming to destroy it. This is also made easier in a society that has smaller percentages of live-in fathers to protect their children from such filth.
Report Post »ADNIL
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 3:42pmHave you been to the grammer schools lately to see how mothers send their little ones to school? The hip hugging pants and short tops? Baby butt-cracks everywhere you look. It makes me so angry. A pedophiles dream come true.
Report Post »pamela kay
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 3:28amOh mighty Carnac, I see your point. The sad thing is exploiting women and children in like this is a money-maker. Sex sells and i there are no morals to controls greed. These people don’t care. I hate to even turn on my TV or open a magazine any more. Sex is everywhere and our children are exposed to it constantly. The internet is loaded with it, as are commercials, and there is no longer a family oreinted program to be seen. The music industry promotes sex.The xrated commercials for sex lines are on in the early evening hours. The porn industry is still thriving in spite of the economy.This would not be so if it were not in demand. I believe that it has harmed children and relationships. Sexual preditors don’t even have to hide any more. It’s out there for the taking. I do not agree with it, and yes ,I change the channel and no longer purchase the magazines, just so you know. I am not a prude but I think this is wrong. It makes parenting more difficult, and it has ruined allot of marriages.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:26pmYah… this is the Big Problem in the UK… as their Economy goes down the tube!
Report Post »JAMACAMECRAZYMAN
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:25pm@Banana Republic Capitalist
Perfect!
Report Post »elihu
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:20pmJust like the vast majority of ‘child stars’, she has debased herself and chose the path of corruption.
Report Post »kenXIII
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:21pmanyone else notice she looks like a junky
Report Post »darski
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:18pmJust a reminder that this “young woman” starred in a paedophile pic (Hound Dog) when she was 11 yrs old. her mother and the director were investigated for child abuse because the ‘body suit’ she wore looked too much like her skin. That is what she brings to this ad. it is filth and this world does not need any more filth.
Report Post »Atrocities
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:18pmI wonder how long it will be before she’s posing in smut mags? :( Talented actress taken advantage of by a system dedicated to exploitation. So damn sad.
Report Post »Banana Republic Capitalist
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:16pmForget about the sexualization part of this — someone please tell me how we can get this perfume so that we can spray down the Occupy protesters with it???
Report Post »Stoic one
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:29pmMacy’s probably carries it………………
Report Post »Robert-CA
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:33pmNothing will clean that , even if you release a skunk @ the park , the skunk will run away from their smell .
Report Post »Nolooters
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:13pmIt‘s not the most overtly sexual ad I’ve seen. For me, it is tasteless. But then there are so many tasteless ads these days so I am not certain what the fuss is all about. Why? Because there really is no standard of “taste” in society any more. And for that matter, what’s tasteless to me is “art” to someone else. Until we set standards again within ourselves, our family, our community and country, this is not worth dwelling on.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:05pmHey what’s up with the Nation-wide EBS test, because it wasn’t 3min, but only less than 60sec?
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:09pmThey want people to believe, “Radio personalities said it would be 3min, but it wasn’t that long, we can’t trust those radio people.”
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:10pmOr, “That was 3min, but it seemed more like 60sec, my how time flies.”
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:14pmOh people give me diarrhea. I‘m glad I’ve got God or I’d be all alone.
Report Post »darski
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:20pmIt was supposed to be 3 minutes but then they got so much flak over that they changed it to a 30 sec spot instead.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:32pmYes, but people were told for weeks that it would be 3min, and then only a short time before they changed it to 30 sec. How many people do you think heard it would be 3min versus those who heard of the change? It was a lot more. Come on, get up inside the mountain in your mind and do some looking around, you might find something you like.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:38pmPeople are supposed to be more than just spectators and announcers to life and the happenings thereof. Don’t you think that I know they announced the change a short time ago? I’m not one who needs a blow by blow announcement of happenings. I am one who needs people to delve into their mind to see what they will find.
Report Post »ScottyRawdy
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:05pmOoohhhh. I get it.. The flower between Dakotas’ legs is like the “FLOWER” between Dakotas’ legs..
I guess it’s in bad taste, but THIS is just more proof that Americans have freedoms that NO ONE else in the World has… Freedom Of Speech… Freedom of expression… … Just like Life…. WE MUST TAKE THE GOOD WITH THE BAD…. Up & Down.. Life & Death… Night & Day… Tasteful art.. & 17 year old ****** flower bad perfume ads :)
Report Post »UlyssesP
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:05pmHey, at least she’s not sitting on it using a rapid up and down motion.
Report Post »mike_trivisonno
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:03pmPlease.
The “banning” of the ad is part of the marketing campaign.
Report Post »NOTAMUSHROOM
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 10:06am@Mike
Oh you are so totally right on!
@Scotty
Report Post »You‘re the only one who said it and I believe that’s what makes the ad so sexually charged along with the come hither look on her face.
GhostOfLiberty
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:00pmSeriously? I mean, come on, seriously? I can see removing ads of 14 year old girls in their underwear and stuff, but a 17 year old in a dress holding a bottle? Honestly, it reminds me of the TV show I dream of Jeannie.
Freakin‘ Brits gettin’ their panties in a wad over an American girl violating Sharia law by showing her face and wearing a dress to promote something that may make women smell good…what next?
Report Post »TH30PH1LUS
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:59pmMARC JACOBS to 17 year-old girl:
“Hey, I’ll pay you to put my perfume-bottle in your crotch and take pictures. This will help me make millions!”
Once again, LIBERALS using children as pawns to suit their agenda.
Report Post »BernieKittyCat
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:56pmHow old was Fanning when she filmed “The Runaways” wherein she performs hetro and h0m0 sex acts? Did the UK ban that movie? Would be curious to know.
Report Post »rockstone
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:10pmThey should have. We should have arrested people here. Kiddy porn is kiddy porn
Report Post »godlovinmom
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 2:16pmExactly…and how old was she when she did the scene where she was raped at 10 years old…can’t remember the title of the movie…her parents should be “shot” for allowing their little actress to participate in this kind of stuff…just disgusting and for what…money thats what.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on November 10, 2011 at 2:23amMaking a movie with a story that acknowledges the reality that some kids do have sex or that some kids are abused by adults is not the same as making porn for people who want to have sex with kids.
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:54pmI disagree with Coty; this does give a sexual connotation. Perhaps their minds are so far in the gutter that they can’t relate to those who see otherwise. Sex in advertisement has become such a norm for some people that they have no clue that they could be alienating a potential market. If all you want to sell to are whores and pimps, then I guess you have that market with this advertisement.
You would think advertisers would become a little more pro-active in advertising when almost 80% of the country relates to Christians and Christian values, one wonders why they are only cow-towing to only 20% of the masses? Isn’t that poor marketing skills?
Report Post »Quiata
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 6:57pmWell said, COFEMALE. Of course it’s sexual in nature. People who poo-poo it are pretending to be cosmopolitan, when in fact they’re so steeped in pop-culture trash they are unwilling to recognize it for what it is: more garbage for the cultural refuse pile.
Report Post »CottonMPG
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:52pmI’m surprised they would care really. I thought Europeans and the British were much more sexual and open about nudity than us. I don‘t like the ad and see it as tasteless but I’ve seen worse.
Report Post »Skippy Toes
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:49pmInappropriate.
Report Post »rpp
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:48pmThat does seem to push some limits.
Report Post »stoptheliesbho
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:48pmother than the unfortunate placement of the bottle, i don’t see anything THAT bad about this ad. she’s not a little kid anymore, and it’s gonna get worse the longer she stays in Hollyweird. sorry to tell ya…this is tame compared to Britney and Ms. Aguilera when they were her age.
Report Post »the hawk
Posted on November 9, 2011 at 1:47pmtHIS IS WHAT WE’VE COME TO ?
Report Post »