Leave the kids out of the kink

Brands sometimes like to provoke and be controversial. When done well, this can lend a new perspective to an important matter, stimulate constructive conversation, and prompt people to be more progressive, inclusive, and mindful of any given issue.

But nothing is inspiring in glamorizing sexual exploitation—particularly involving children (even in the most subtle contexts).

Balenciaga’s holiday campaign did not intend to shock us so that we pay closer attention to the abuse many children go through. It was not meant to highlight the psychosocial factors associated with child abuse. It was not meant to expose any relevant vulnerabilities so that people would better understand the scope of child sexual abuse.

It was not meant to be taken too seriously.

It was solely meant to be: cool—this is why it is not.

No one in good conscience finds a child holding a bear wearing bondage gear sexy or appealing.

The irony (I feel) is not that Balenciaga went too far but that they did not go far enough with sound messaging. And they did not because an advocacy campaign was not their intention.

Had the campaign intended to sensitize us to how the holidays are a stressful time for children who are being abused, and how parties present opportunities for abusers to find their next victim, perhaps the campaign would have landed differently. Of course, they would have also had to link their campaign to a child abuse prevention organization, giving them a percentage of the sales proceeds.

But that campaign would have looked so different, and I do not see the relevance of Balenciaga running such a campaign. For this reason, Balenciaga should have stayed out of it altogether.

Brands should take great precautions in the images and words they put out. No brands, far less powerful ones, have a license to be sloppy with their initiatives. Brands should behave responsibly and use their clout for good by any means possible. And as the saying goes: if you can do no good, at least do no harm.