November 13, 2011

Dakota Fanning's Marc Jacobs Ad Got Banned


When I see Marc Jacobs' “Oh, Lola!” ad I see Dakota Fanning being cute. But when the British Advertising Standards Authority see this ad they see a skankasaurus giving the bedroom eye and holding the bottle in a sexual position. And so, they banned the ad with the following 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. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible and was likely to cause serious offense." 


If Dakota was a dude then holding the bottle in that position would be somewhat scandalous. And if people consider a chick putting something between her thighs is offensive, then I need to complain to HR about our team building where we had to balance a ping pong ball on a tennis racket between our legs. If only this controversy was a few months earlier then I could have skipped the event!

And if you ask me what an offensive Marc Jacobs ad would be, I would tell you:

1. "Oh Lola! A few fragrance for women, even the dead ones"
2. "Oh Lola! Wear it or I'll Chris Brown you"

And now all of the sudden Dakota’s ad looks rather tame, doesn’t it?

45 comments:

  1. I read about this a few days ago. I guess I have to agree with you!

    ReplyDelete
  2. lol. to I'll chris brown you! hahaha

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agre with U! :)

    Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

    ReplyDelete
  4. i think there is so much worse out there than should be banned why bother with this???
    it really isn't offensive unless your mind lives in the gutter!
    brett

    ReplyDelete
  5. you're Hilarious...there's nothing sexual about this ad though, at least not to me O.o

    ReplyDelete
  6. for me she looks so childish and a little like crack addict ;)

    and lol to dead women and I'll Chris Brown you :D

    ReplyDelete
  7. It only looked cute to me until the Brits told me she was holding the bottle in a sexual way. Now of course I can see that. It reminds me how I thought men and women were equals until my dad showed me women were 2nd class citizens. Isn't it great to have authority figures making sure we see things properly???

    I wish I could crawl out of people's tvs--it would save me so much money on travel costs. And I'm hoping someone Chris Brown'ed Chris Brown.

    PS - Like the Brits, I knew my dad was wrong too. =)

    ReplyDelete
  8. HahhaaI like the Chris Brown one... it seems like BASA has a dirty mind!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dakota Fanning you are so stunninng!! One of my favorite actress :)
    Bummer that they removved the advert :( but I guess there's not much to do about it..

    I loled at the 2 edit adverts :P I don't like The Ring girl.. she's scary

    xx

    ReplyDelete
  10. the other 2 are spoofs rite rite? I'm surprised to see Dakota Fanning in this ad,she looks so diff. maybe i don't want her to grow up,lol.

    ReplyDelete
  11. lol, this definitely isn't offensive at all. that's ridiculous that they banned it!

    ReplyDelete
  12. puhleaze if they want sexualized children they need to check out cadeaux in french vogue dec 2010. now THATS. what i call sexualized

    ReplyDelete
  13. i've heard about the controversy. dakota's ad isn't all that provocative...

    ReplyDelete
  14. I haven't heard about this controversy yet, but erm... but errr... I think they're overreacting wayy too much here. I don't think that was scandalous at all. Perhaps someone tied their buns way too tight lol.

    Cheers,

    Wi
    A Single Girl's Musings

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't get it. I really don't get why that campaign is forbidden in the UK.
    I think she's gorgeous and so is the ad :)
    X

    ReplyDelete
  16. hmmm i think there are so many worse ones out there. i don't think she looks that young in the ad either.

    ReplyDelete
  17. hahaha!
    LOL at the bottom pics!
    LMAO!

    i read about this too & i personally don't find anything offensive about it. SO i guess if i want to be considered as a 'proper lady' by the british standard than i have to wear an ankle-length skirt & long-sleeved blouse making sure that they can't see anything between my legs,huh?

    gaaahhhh!!!!
    the rope of conservatism is just too much!

    But it's ok since im not proper at all....
    you can't use the word proper to describe me anyway..
    hahaha!

    i'd rather put a vodka between my legs to spike the punch than have a chastity belt just so that i could be accepted by the society!
    >_<

    ReplyDelete
  18. Well I agree with the Britain people, when I first saw this ad I could see the sexual part of it clearly... I don't get offended by that, but some people feel uncomfortable with that kind of things and the fact she is underage makes it worse I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Did you make those photos of the offensive ones? LOL hilarious.

    Yeah, I think Dakota looks way younger than 17, but I didn't sense any offensiveness or hypersexuality from the ad. Maybe I'm desensitized or something, but I just don't see it. All I see is a huge bottle of perfume she's conveniently holding because how can you hold a perfume of that size any other way?! :p

    ReplyDelete
  20. Those pictures at the bottom are hilarious! You rock!I feel she looks young and maybe there was a bit of *something* suggestive in the add, but such is life..

    ReplyDelete
  21. well...those are quiet controversy photos, but i ams ure there are worse than this :)
    only in my opinion Dakota looks there likse she is on drugs :D

    ReplyDelete
  22. oh wow, i don't know how i feel about it...
    i guess i never thought of dakota fanning to be sexy to think of the ad that way. lol

    ReplyDelete
  23. I have to agree with you.
    Even though I don't understand the use of under 18 years old in ads for grown ups like Heilee in Miu Miu and more others

    Have a nice week
    The Dolls Factory

    ReplyDelete
  24. WOW surprised that the brits would banned this ad. I thought Americans were uptight geez. I mean honestly this ad could be A LOT worst and I agree if it was a dude I can see it being a little more scandalous. I think they have their panties in a knot over nothing.

    http://fashionistanygirl.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  25. Ohhhhh, come on. There is nothing provocative in this picture of Dakota Fanning. People need to get over it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. lol @ the edited pictures! so hilarious!

    ReplyDelete
  27. HAHHA TROLOLOLOL. omg you're crazy! I love the edits! ; D

    ReplyDelete
  28. Haha, the British seem so liberal about everything, this is a bit absurd, but I can see why.

    "Chris Brown you." LMAO

    ReplyDelete
  29. haha I KNEW you were going to post about this ; ) Actually the first time i saw this ad, before all the controversy, i DID think the perfume between her legs was a bit...phallic.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The advert isn't that bad but your illustrations are so hilarious!! xx

    ReplyDelete
  31. I guess it can look a little Lolita-ish especially with the perfume there.

    Anyway, funny edits. :P

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dang!! that's actually a nice pic of her -- not offensive at all IMO. she looks sophisticated and a little grown up :)

    ReplyDelete
  33. ok.. not going to lie, initially i thought it was kind of vulgar. but the more i looked at it, the more it became "editorial" and kind of adorable :)

    ReplyDelete
  34. when i saw the news that it was banned i was like...why? i didn't even notice LOL i thought she looked cute!!! so unnecessary imo

    ReplyDelete
  35. I agree it was a bit silly really. Nothing wrong with the picture. I've seen worse and they weren't banned, videos are worse really!! x

    ReplyDelete
  36. Hi Miss pop champagne, saw this in the newspaper a few days ago but they didnt want to put the picture bleehh thanks to you now I don't have to search lol :D

    ReplyDelete
  37. I read about this last week... If that is inappropriate, then the Ads in the US are porn? LOL

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think it's a sweet photo. They're going to be banning a lot because there is wayyyyyy worse out there.
    http://sassyuptownchic.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  39. ''Wear it or I'll Chris Brown you'' = LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  40. You crack my shit up girl! And I love you for that!!!! Please don't Chris Brown me. lol. And I guess it must be her facial expression. That "come hither eye..." But they seriously need to get OVER.Them.Selves!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  41. I totally agree with you! Hahaha "CHRIS BROWN ME", I love this post! If there was a LOVE button for this, I would totally be taking advantage of it!

    xo
    http://hautecouture3.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  42. I agree with the ridiculousness! She isn't scantily dressed and the bottle is hardly even between her legs; it's more balanced on top, granted that it's in the middle.

    Thanks for visiting my blog! :o)

    -Samantha

    http://thisfashionista.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  43. I guess many people see sexuality to the extreme. Either they see it as taboo and sinful, or in contrast overexploit and overcommercialized it. This one, I personally think, is a bit.. overreacting.

    LeeAnne, Style N Season
    http://stylenseason.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  44. -sigh- she looks perfectly fine. *smh*
    But LOL at those last pics. Ridic!

    ReplyDelete
  45. this is sexualizing children, sorry. the name "oh, lola," is a reference to lolita... look it up kids, it's pedophilia all the way.

    ReplyDelete