Madame Cindy Crawford???

I actually had to think before I sat down to write this post. I didn’t want to come down hard on another mom. I mean, we’ve all fucked up at this job. We’ve all done some pretty stupid things. We’ve all had some less than spectacular parenting moments.

And then I though about it some more, and realized this needs to be talked about and it needs to be talked about in a blunt manner. It’s not in my nature to beat around the bush. It’s not in my nature to play pattycake when speaking my mind, and I shouldn’t start now simply because I really, really want to give a celebrity Mom the benefit of the doubt.

Cindy Crawford and her husband Rande Gerber have allowed their 5-year-old daughter to pose for some photos. Allegedly she’s modeling swimsuits, though the suits could be easily called “nonexistent” or “age inappropriate.”

God, I know I sound like one hell of a Tipper Gore here, and I really, really don’t want too. But THIS PHOTO MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE.

Why? Because I can guarantee pedophiles are looking and enjoying.

Because it’s not a family photo, meant for a family photo album, of an innocent moment.

Because it’s posed, premeditated, and meant for mass consumption.

Because a 5-year-old is not only topless, but tattooed in order to seem fashionable and provocative.

Because other moms will think it’s ok to dress their girls like women.

Because other parents will think it’s ok to sexualize their children.

I’m not a prude. I am liberal. I’m ok with naked. I’m ok with art. I’m ok with being free and expressing yourself.

But THIS PHOTO MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE. I’m not seeing naked. I’m not seeing art. I’m not seeing innocence.

I’m seeing a little girl whored out.

And I want an explanation.

Hat tip to Red Stapler and Celebrity Baby Blog and Outside the Beltway Gone Hollywood.


  1. This is the third time I’ve seen that photo and the third time I’ve wanted to puke. What swimsuit? All the kid is wearing is a gauzy pair of shorts. No child goes swimming like that. No normal child has fake tattoos on their lower back. Maybe a goofy tattoo on their arm, but certainly not on the small of their back. I have a 6 year old girl and NEVER has she ever turned around and had THAT look on her face. It’s simply unnatural for a child.

    I’ve always liked Cindy Crawford and up until now I thought that she had pretty good judgement regarding her kids. She just lost any respect I had for her. Doesn’t she have enough money and fame? Does she really need to pimp out her kid like this?

  2. Yes- I agree with Denise… it is the “F” me eyes that she is giving that bothers me the absolute most.
    As mothers of daughters… we have a hard enough time raising our girls to be confident and
    NOT having to be a sex pot.

    What am I sick about with my little girl… what troubles me while I try to raise my TomBoy…
    my little 21 month old girl won’t stop wearing my jewelry and calling it “Pretty”. I don’t know why this burns me.

    ARGHH!! I thought I had done so well.

  3. I’m with you…pure exploitation and someone should answer for it.
    There would be serious issues within the family if photos like this one were ever taken of my nieces; there is a line and lately it’s all about getting it as blurry as possible.
    Sick…just sick.

  4. Thanks for the link back.

    I knew your blog would be a perfect place to talk about this.

    I feel like the machine is spinning faster and faster and it is harder to keep from getting sucked into it…Bratz and Target bras for 6 year olds and now this…It is very disheartening.

    Sex isn’t bad. Being sexy isn’t bad. But it IS complicated and showing sexiness while maintaining your own boundaries and dignity takes a lot of maturity.

    THAT’s why little girls need to be protected from being treated as sex objects. They have other developmental jobs to do at that age and throwing them prematurely into a world of sex is to damage their chances to develop needed life skills properly.

  5. Ew. Ew. And another ew. What the F were they thinking. Or not? It makes me very uncomfortable as well.
    I have 2 girls, they just downloaded and printed out some Bratz Doll drawing pages that were hideously provocative….ummm, really just plain slutty.
    It is a very strange world we live in.

  6. SlushTurtle says:

    That is all kinds of sick and wrong. Uggghhh. Bad Cindy, very bad.

  7. I am with you here! Thank goodness I have 2 boys, I just hope that they don’t think growing up that sexual appeal is everything. I hate seeing things like that!

  8. That is their DAUGHTER. What were they thinking?

    My only guess is $$$$$$$$$.

    I think it is sad.

  9. Queen of Spain says:

    Suebob sent me the link a few days ago, but I was so steamed I actually had to calm down before I wrote this post. I just can’t come up with any logical explanation for this one.

    I think Sarah may be right. or it’s mommy’s pure ego, wanting a mini me.

  10. I read about it but had not had the time to hunt for the pic… thanks for the link and yeah, I completely agree with you…

    In this household, nudity is natural and beautiful and the beauty of it lies in the fact that it is not premeditated nor controlled and just is… the kids wear tatoos sometimes but for fun and not like that, for fashion and appeal and anything to do with “sexy” and children do not mix! I do not know what the hell she was thinking! Fucking moron!

    A permissiveness of such a view of handling of one’s child can cause much damage and it is just nauseatingly wrong… I am glad for the uproar… very fitting!

  11. She should be ashamed of herself. Every mother makes bad decisions once in a while, but that’s just beyond the pale.

    What exactly did she hope to achieve by this picture? I get that it’s mimicking a pose that she herself did back in the day but I don’t understand the motive here. Did she intend for it to get out? And, no it doesn’t really matter if she did or not but I’m still curious.

    You’re right, sick men and women will get off on that picture. Cindy has to live with that. Let’s just all pray that her daughter doesn’t!

    When can we go back to letting our little girls be little girls and not short women? When? What will it take?

  12. OOOOOHHHHHH…very, very bad..just very, very VERY bad. What the hell was she thinking?

  13. Oh. My. God.

    Wasn’t anyone paying attention to JonBenet Ramsey?

    First Brittany, now this. I know that we believe in freedom, but there are days when I honestly believe some people shouldn’t have children. There should be a law: If you have ever

    –Been featured in a music video
    –Gone on tour
    –Had your name appear in movie credits as a character
    –Had a TV role last longer than two seasons
    –Appeared on “Inside Edition,” “Access Hollywood” or “E!”
    –Had your own show on Fox News
    –Appeared on a tabloid magazine cover
    –Appeared in the “SI Swimsuit edition”

    ….you shall not be allowed to reproduce, for the good of the gene pool, the public good and the good of any possible offspring.

    Yes, some of that I’m kidding, but only some…..

  14. Oh that is so sad. She is such a beautiful child and they could do wonderful modeling things with her, but perhaps dressed in Dora or Elmo outfits. She’s FIVE for christ’s sake! I am so speechless over this whole thing, but mostly I’m disappointed in the parenting and saddened for this little girl who will never have a childhood. She is now reduced to an object and will never be able to regain that. Wow.

  15. Hi Erin–I’m a local lurker. Don’t know you, but I live here and I’m an elementary school teacher and a mom. This stuff makes me CRAZY!! These pictures, Bratz, Bling Bling Barbie, and even more the idiot parents who buy this stuff for their kids. And then we wonder why sex crimes seem so prevalent and why our teenagers are having oral sex parties. I wonder. It’s time for PARENTS to wake up and smell the coffee–it’s OUR responsibility. We are on different sides of the fence politically, but this sexualization of our young children is something that we all need to stand against.

  16. Not only is Cindy Crawford an idiot, now she’s a pimp too… I swear I’ll never watch or buy anything remotely connected to that MONSTER…

  17. I have to be honest, before I read,

    “Because it’s not a family photo, meant for a family photo album, of an innocent moment.

    Because it’s posed, premeditated, and meant for mass consumption.

    Because a 5-year-old is not only topless, but tattooed in order to seem fashionable and provocative.

    Because other moms will think it’s ok to dress their girls like women.

    Because other parents will think it’s ok to sexualize their children. ”

    I thought you were being a bit overreactional. This is because I’m a big fan of teaching children self esteem and being comfortable with their bodies by way of nudity. Then I read your explanation and you won me over by way of education.

    See, it’s one thing for a family to walk around the house naked and take baths and showers together (which I think is healthy) and it’s another to dress your children provacatively, sexualize them and teach them that their sexuality is an asset rather than a valuable part of themselves.

  18. Let me clarify that when I just wrote “valuable,” I meant, “to be valued by self… not valuable to others or to be kept from others. The end.

  19. It is disgusting. And what I also want to know is, what company is making these barely there bikinis for children, and wanting promotional pictures like this?

  20. It’s really difficult for me to digest how, as a parent, you could put your children out there like bait for predators.
    Little girls like to dress up and act silly but this is not about dressing up like a big girl and playing.
    This is your daughter, that you carried for nine months and gave birth to in sweat and blood, that you have whored out as though the sum of her worth is her sexuality.
    At an age where sexuality should be unthinkable for her.
    Lolita is a tragedy, in case anyone forgot.

  21. Queen of Spain says:

    I am really hoping there is an explanation for this. I doubt it, but I’m hoping.

    I also agree-healthy naked body image stuff-all good.

    A 5-year-old with a tramp stamp and fuck me eyes creeps me the hell out

  22. I must admit there are SIMILAR pics of me when I was a kid, 5 years old, running around on the beach topless but there was nothing sexual to it, it was just the way we were cos we lived on an island, but to call the outfit a bikini is just wrong and to photograph it and put it out there for mass consumption is even more beyond the boundry of what is right.
    The sad thing is that somehow this kind of behaviour is becoming the norm with so many parents purchasing the most whoreish outfits for their daughters. All I can say is that we should let our children be kids not push them into growing up so damned fast. I am so sad at the loss of innocence in our youth today.

  23. that is sick!! who would allow their kid to be in a photoshoot wearing nothing but what looks like underwear?! celebrity or not, that is CHILD SERVICES reportable!! let any other mom pull something like that and they’d be in jail and the child would become state property. wow…

  24. There are some really good comments on this issue, and let me join the throng, BAD, BAD, Cindy. I always liked her, this is such a disappointment, very bad judgment here. This was the first time I saw this photo. This isn’t just a littly harmless cutesy photo.

  25. Queen of Spain says:

    Total aside here

    If someone could tell me why my type is suddenly TEEENIE TINY from the bottom of this post on down, that’d be swell.

    I have no idea what happened.

  26. That was shocking. The come-hither look just gave me the willies. What kind of a child will that gorgeous little girl become? No doubt, she’s learning that her looks and her appeal to men are her best assets. At five. Horrible.

  27. My girl may run topless through the house but she is not allowed to be or even say the word sexy. For this reason, she is not allowed to watch the Muppets’ Wizard of Oz. My sister doesn’t get it. Guess I’m getting prude.

  28. Hmmm..I waited for this to load and was truly expecting something horrid and sexual and provocative. Hmm.. I just don’t see it. If I’d not read your article and just saw the pic–I wouldn’t have thought much of it. And the fact that ANYONE can see “f”-me in her eyes–I have to really question where YOUR mind is at that you’d see that in a child’s eyes EVER. And that look on her face.. just a smirky smile– wow..

  29. We were chatting about this with another parental couple last night and we were all horrified that she thought this was acceptable.

    Very uncomfortable.

  30. Queen of Spain says:

    Really Jenn? You wouldn’t have thought much of the exploited, topless, tramp stamped 5-year-old?

    Uh, ok then. Can I get some of those rose colored glasses?

  31. Well, that’s the whole thing. We’re pretty much socialized at this point NOT to see this as being problematic, which IS the problem! Frankly, it is ALSO a problem that emaciated women are a standard of beauty and that black women are rarely seen photographed without the company of a white woman. These are ALL problems that our culture has become desensitized to. Children have become more and more susceptible to this passive sexualization as the industry markets sex to them in music videos with things like Jo Jo, the late Britney Spears, Bratz dolls, padded bras and come hither looks. A smirky smile can be interpretted in a lot of ways, but I DO think that when paired with the topless tan child of a super model mom in briefs at the beach, in nothing other than a long necklace and tusseled hair… the effect is meant to be sexual.

    To the average person… we are meant to go about our lives not noticing this or thinking much about it. We are supposed to accept it, buy into it and assimilate it into our lives. We are supposed to think it is cute and even covet it. It’s a marketing ploy and it’s exploitating of that very young girl.

    It sucks.

  32. Ugh. That sickens me. At first, I thought, maybe, just maybe….before I clicked the link…..that maybe the picture wouldn’t be THAT bad. BUT IT’S WORSE!

    Seriously, this is the kind of shit our kindergarteners are going to look up to??? Are you effing kidding me?

    The saddest part of all is back in the 80s when I was a kid we could go to the beach topless as kids without fear of some crazy old man lickin’ his lips looking at us. TODAY?? NOT A CHANCE. The picture is disgusting.

    I won’t be buying whatever brand allowed the promotion of that photo. I can’t even bring myself to go back and look for the brand name.

  33. Taking another look at the photo, it’s not so much the look on her face that bothers me though. It’s more the way they have her body posed. She has her arms up as if she’s covering her breasts, rather seductively. Like when you’re getting undressed and you don’t want people to see you. Yet she’s peaking over her shoulder with that look on her face. Idunno.

    The two do not make for a care free photo of a little girl running around without her clothes on, that’s-fer-sure!

  34. Queen of Spain says:

    Yeah, I’m with you. It’s not really the look on the face…it’s the idea that this is supposed to be selling bathingsuits. That it’s racey, at best. That it’s not innocent.

    If this were for the Crawford/gerber family photo album, some candid home moment caught on film, it would be one thing. But its for AN ADVERTISMENT.

    THAT is my biggest issue with this photo.

  35. I saw the pics and was so disappointed. Children modelling swimsuits? Then show them wearing one for starters. And show them playing like children. It’s posed to be a miniseductress.

  36. Ew.

  37. I am not a prude by any means but DAMN! WTF where they thinking? When I saw this, my thought was “Here’s going to be another little girl lost, like Drew Barrymore”.

    I mean the kid is five…..why try to make her look like an adult???????

  38. John Mark Karr called. He wants his photograph back.

  39. the sexualization of children today saddens me. I work with foster youth and there are som many girls in the system who are wearin gfishnets and heels for halloween because they want to be a “slutty witch” or a “slutty devil.” these girls are about 10 years old!!!

    WTF are people thinking?!?!?!?!?!

    Look at the megan’s law website people. there is scary shit out there!

  40. I agree. What is she thinking? You don’t pose or let someone else pose your daughter in a sexy way. She should be ashamed of herself.


  1. naked teen virgin…

    Description of naked teen virgin….

  2. 2002 ford f350…

    ha-rd-po-rn-fu-ck 2915100 2002 ford f350 introduction…

  3. nude asian teen…

    ka-ka-sh-ka 2915100 nude asian teen application…

  4. uncle mikes says:

    uncle mikes…

    Value information about uncle mikes…

Speak Your Mind