禁止されたMiu Miu - Living, Loving, Thinking, Again

Mark Sweney “Miu Miu ad banned for appearing to sexualise a child” http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/miu-miu-ad-banned-vogue-magazine-mia-goth

英国広告基準局（Advertisement Standard Authority=ASA）*1Vogue英国版に掲載された、（プラダの妹ブランドである）Miu Miu*2の広告を、児童ポルノ *3の疑いで禁止処分にした。

Miu Miu, which is owned by Prada, ran a double-page ad that appeared to be shot through a slightly open doorway revealing a young woman reclining on a bed.
The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority received a complaint that the image looked as if a child had been dressed as an adult in a sexually suggestive pose which was irresponsible and offensive.
Prada said the ad was part of a campaign that used three different models which “showed glimpses of the models through doorways and placed the viewer at the heart of a multidimensional, multi-room story”.
The company said the model in the ad, Mia Goth, was 22 years old and rejected the accusation that she was shown in a sexually suggestive pose, or that there was a sexual tone to the ad.
Vogue UK also defended the ad saying that it has a “sophisticated” readership that is educated to “appreciate top photography and great fashion models”. The magazine said it had not received any complaints directly from readers.
The ASA said that the model’s youthful appearance, minimal makeup and slightly-too-large clothes contributed to the impression that she was under 16.
The decision to shoot the ad through a partially opened door, with the model reclining on a bed, gave the image a “voyeuristic feel”.
“We considered that the crumpled sheets and her partially opened mouth also enhanced the impression that her pose was sexually suggestive,” the ASA said.
“We considered that her youthful appearance, in conjunction with the setting and pose, could give the impression that the ad presented a child in a sexualised way. Therefore, we concluded that the ad was irresponsible and was likely to cause serious offence.”

ブランド側及び雑誌側にとっては、この処分は承伏しがたいということだ。問題は主に２つあるといえるだろう。先ずは、恐らくは匿名のチクリが契機になっていること（ブランド側・雑誌側には直接的なクレームはない）。さらに、広告写真のモデルは未成年ではなく、成人（22歳）だということだろう。これを突き詰めていくと、男女を問わず、顔立ちや体形が子どもっぽいモデルや俳優がセクシュアルなポーズを取ったり、セクシュアルな演技をすれば、そのこと自体で、児童ポルノの疑いありということになって、禁止の対象となってしまうことになるのでは？　また、童顔の人の性的自由が否定されてしまうのでは？

*1:http://www.asa.org.uk/ See eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising_Standards_Authority_%28United_Kingdom%29 これは政府機関ではなく、広告業界の自主規制団体。

*2:http://www.miumiu.com/