Meg Bitton, a photographer renowned for her portraits of children, is receiving backlash online for posting images of youngsters — some allegedly aged 11 — wearing revealing outfits, smoking, and in t-shirts supporting cannabis. In an age of children growing up and being sexualized too fast, how far is too far?
Bitton is widely regarded as a respected children's photographer, with tens of thousands of followers across various social media pages. Over the last few days, though, a number of photographs have been circulating the Internet for all the wrong reasons. Many are deeming that some of her recent work is highly inappropriate, largely due to the overtly sexual nature, despite her subjects being children.
In one, two young girls are seen pressing themselves against each other, while one has her hand on some money that is tucked into the other's shorts. In a second, Bitton has positioned her child subject in the front seat of a van, wearing barely-there underwear and smoking on a cigarette. Another sees a child so young that she’s likely not even in double digits, bearing a top promoting the legalization of marijuana.
https://twitter.com/WebbDawgTG/status/1035185601664954369
https://twitter.com/WebbDawgTG/status/1035185739355619328
https://twitter.com/WebbDawgTG/status/1033579785241468928
https://twitter.com/WebbDawgTG/status/1033579348144611328
It’s an increasing trend, treating children like adults. Earlier this year, "Lil Tay" gained notoriety online and was giving TV interviews for simply behaving outrageously on Instagram at the age of nine. Meanwhile, celebrities like the Kardashians parade their offspring around in outfits tailored by high-end fashion houses. But these images feel incredibly distasteful and a step too far. Bitton’s subjects are likely old enough to be consciously aware of many of the themes portrayed in the photos. However, positioning them as the subjects within them is in poor taste. It risks putting incredible pressure on these children to be or behave a certain way before they’ve had a chance to figure out who they are as people or the consequences of such behavior. It blurs the lines of how it is or isn't acceptable to behave in front of a minor. And it certainly calls into question the legality of such images; many online are calling it gross at best and pedophilic at worst.
Setting aside the sexual aspect of such images, there is nothing realistic about these photos. They aren’t artistic, documentary style images that capture the livelihood of innocent children. They depict something unrealistic and forced. When was the last time you witnessed 11-year-olds in such pants, gallivanting in the streets, and leaning close to each other in a provocative manner? Never, I hope.
Bitton’s response, written within the comment section on Facebook, was:
Too young for what? To be embracing each other in shorts and tops? Too young to be out at night? Too young to explore? Too young to feel? What are they too young for? What is disgusting?
She claims she is simply depicting a normal child’s evolution into adulthood. Thankfully, the Internet disagrees. Sexualizing children is never justified.
At the time of writing, her Instagram is set to private.
These children are too young to understand the consequences of what they are consenting to. How do you know that in 10 years, when they are in their 20's, they don't become suicidal because these images are glorified on the internet for the rest of their lives? Nobody can know the outcome of how these girls are going to feel when they are old enough to understand the context as to what their parents agreed for them to do...and that is to pose and dress them in a way that the photographer knows will create shock and generate visits to her site. Given that she hasn't explained anything at all (some made up diatribe about reliving her youth or some bs to try and back track) she has left her viewers to make assumptions, which in turn creates drama, and in turn clicks to her site, where low and behold, said controversial images have now been removed, leaving only small babies and bunnies. It's her MO. ..and of course people are going to post anonymously as said photographer and her lemmings are well known to try and contact employers to try and get them fired.
CAN WE PLEASE STOP CALLING SICKNESS EVERYTHING THAT DISAGREES WITH OUR OWN (often conservative, short-sighted and narrow-minded) MORALITY AND ETHICS ?
If you want to have a conversation on the ethics, fine. But mixing-up morality and medecine is super shady.
Maybe not sickness but artistically distasteful. It did not capture anything classy or thought provoking. When I showed my wife the above photos she had a glance and asked why these kids were lesbians? I personally don’t find anything particularly nice about these photos let alone calling them “art”. I suppose there are just too many self proclaim artists.
Bof. Art is personnal expression. It doesn't have to be tasteful, popular, beautiful or else. Having bad taste is not a crime. And, still, bad taste is relative.
Well like someone above said, if this was a man who shot these, and the girl twirling with her butt cheeks hanging out, you just might see him on the news with the cops taking him in, and seizing his computer to see what else is on it. Just saying, and you know its true.
I know. But this is another matter.
No art doesn’t have to be as long as it has visual, meaning, uniqueness. I would not call these art as I see none of the above qualities. She took some photographs of some poorly styled children that’s all.
Not if the federal law views it as damaging to a child. Then it's a crime.
Federal laws are only a representation of what "you the People" want to have criminalized.
YES CORRECT .... How we the people feel about social issues. In USA, we do not tolerate pedophilia.......... and what is wrong with that?
Thank God ... this is reality ... and the art world isn't the end all say all to what is appropriate. The majority of the world agrees.... taking advantage of those who do not have a voice is a crime. I am a citizen of the world before I am an artist. Therefor I respect my fellow humans before my craft. My craft is an extension of my humanity ... .it is not my humanity.
Can you please stop calling conservative, short-sighted, narrow-minded everyone who disagrees with your own morality and ethics?!
Can someone kindly tell me how to block someone on here? William Howell is excruciating.
I'm on the fence about the appropriateness of these. I try to be quite liberal about what is or is not art and in whose eyes and what is or is not appropriate.
As well, Meg Bitton is, in my opinion, a quite good artist. Her use of textures and colors, facial and body expressions, and her technical ability is spot on.
What is interesting to me though is how strong many reactions are, and supposedly in the name of preventing harm to these children. If these children are growing up in the U.S. they'll face much greater challenges that having done these photos for Meg will pale in comparison to.
Young girls in the U.S. are 5 times as likely to be trafficked as those in The Netherlands. Prostitution is illegal in the U.S. which seems a good thing. But it drives the entire industry underground and makes trafficking much easier. There is an inverse relationship between legal prostitution and trafficking, particularly of teens. The Netherlands, Germany and other countries with legal prostitution have the least trafficking while the U.S. is known for likely having the most of all developed countries.
Pot is surprisingly similar. One of these girls growing up in the U.S. is almost three times as likely to smoke pot and five times as likely to do other drugs as those in... Amsterdam.
These girls in the U.S. are over five times as likely to be killed by someone driving a car as a girl in The Netherlands or Sweden or ... Why are we not as angry with our traffic engineers as with Meg Bitton?
Somewhat related to this, a kid in the U.S. is much more likely to grow up to be overweight or obese and will experience many more quality of life altering ailments than kids elsewhere who walk or bicycle to school and other places more, get more activity in general, and aren't fed as much junk food.
Kids in the U.S. will be massively, in numbers and in harm done per kid, more harmed by their parents divorcing or separating than by having done these shots for Meg. IIRC, a kid in Europe is three times more likely to live and eat with both parents (married or not) as a kid in the U.S. and a kid in Asia 4 times as likely. Not all kids are harmed by their parents divorce or separation, but most are and quite significantly.
Is our righteous indignation with Meg misplaced? Do we have much greater issues as a society to deal with than if Meg's photos are or are not inappropriate?
Sexiness is not that much of a problem if both models are kids, but cigarettes and pot are just really stupid and dangerous, and I'm writing this as a consumer of both. This lady seems to be too woke for her own good.
"Sexiness is not that much of a problem if both models are kids..." THIS is what you guys are defending. Wow.
Get over yourself you puritan hypocrite. Not everyone endorses crazy american morailty.
I think some of these concepts are pushing the boundaries of what most adults would consider appropriate. Maybe that was her intent from the start. I just hope she's ready to be judged in the court of public opinion.
https://megbittonlive.com/ from Egypt About Meg .
One of the best she Has Soul it's more than Art and yo will never Understand the meaning of Soul photography .... Sometimes when you Go Deep in your Past you will understand the meaning of hers Photography . I will write Hers Name in the pyramids Stone as one of the best
This is Art. I am not support it but it is art and have right to exist
If this were documentary, it'd be interesting. Instead, it looks like simple exploitation.
I'd definitely agree this is an example of irresponsibility on behalf of the photographer and the parents. While nothing technically illegal is going on it is certainly pushing the boundaries of acceptability a bit too far.
I think the only reason Bitton is even able to get away with going this far is that she is a female photographer with a fairly large presence. Had this been a male photographer I suspect the parents would have all said "no" on principle from the onset.
dumb bitch
I understand being provocative. I get it; the adult demeanor portrayed by children; smoking, gazing out at the world with the apparent weight of the world on the shoulders, the child in the alley leaning against the wall, deadpan at the camera; again, expressing an adult demeanor, etc.
What I don't get is the sexualized presentation. The sexualiztion of the children, in my opinion, takes away from what I believe to be the interesting aspect of these kinds of photos. It lessons the impact.
The good and bad of our first amendment rights. I just hope no one try’s to censor someone holding up a “I LOVE TRUMP” poster or worse, beating that person up.
For those still clueless about what's wrong with Miss Pedo McPornface and her disgusting work, I'll just leave this here and go back to what I was doing...
this image I don't have a problem with at all...
I think you've missed the point of Alvin's post... It's not the image he's pointing out, but the website the image is being circulated on.
Look again this is a pedophile site dedicated to her.
I hope these kids grow up and sue the shit out of her and their retarded mothers for allowing them to be a part of this. These mothers have NO sense.
I am a secondary school teacher and whilst personally I think children should take their time and not rush into adulthood, I know from hearing some stories that some 13-15 years old children do stuff I would never even think people would do this stuff. And certainly not at their age.
Weirdly enough, the stricter the parents are, the more nasty stuff happens. The nastiest shit happens in strict religious circles.
I think that most parents would go into cardiac arrest if they knew their children would to that stuff.
These pictures leave me with a rank taste in my mouth.
I think those things are absolutely out there and if you want to document that then go out on the streets and shoot street or documentary with the aim being to educate and promote awareness. To pose children who are actually not at all in these circumstances (ie: not living on the street, not cutting themselves, not prostituting, not smoking marijuana) and to do so with designer clothing on and make up with the aim being to create an aesthetically appealing and emotively enticing image is not the same.
shout out to meg for being creative and risky where most wont go there "controversy is an artists best friend" if she dont tell the story, someone else will ..
I don't like Meg's photos. To me they are over edited and devoid of those things that make childhood the most beautiful, what is real, innocent and pure. It is her voice she is expressing as a photographer and an artist. She is using subjects who are young children to communicate with her audience and while I don't believe she is crossing any legal line (the parents have given consent) she is crossing a line. These children don't have the ability to know exactly how their images are being interpreted and or used nor do they have the ability to fully commit to being subjects and all that entails. the parents are allowing their children to be used as a medium for Meg's artistic expression, but they themselves are not the subjects, it's their children they are allowing to be used this way. I find it exploitative for that reason. These children do not have the ability to fully comprehend how their images, these images, are out there forever and that they could conceivably be used in ways that are not entirely innocent. That is where I have a problem. If you want to do artistic images where the sky is the limit use consenting adults as your subjects, adults that are of an age to fully and completely understand what they are doing and all that entails.
At the end of the day, people know what these kinds of images portray if they admit it or not. I think the images are just wrong...however..there's nothing I can do about it no more than great grandpa thinking topless women in mainstream movies was wrong back in the day. Or my mom upset that Maplethorpe has a crucifix in a jar of urine or a photo subject urinating in another man's mouth.
Let's be honest, we are, as a society in culture, art, entertainment, running out of boundaries to test. We are on the last leg. Children are naturally the next limit that so called "artistic visionaries" will focus on try to push the limits.
As with the old saying.....History, indeed, does repeat itself
I actually like Mapplethorpe and all his hard core images. But again, he didn't use children as his subject matter...
Damn dude, why you showing your mom dirty Mapplethorpe? Just show her some of his still life flowers and make her happy. Remember, flowers are for moms, penises are not, mmmmk?
LOL...back in the day, we lived in Ohio, the Maplethorpe Exhibit in Cincinnati was big news and subject of many local TV/radio news and talk shows. Mom (and Dad) was appalled by the art descriptions detailed on the programs. I doubt she actually saw any of the images..
https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/museums/25-years-later-cinc...
ha - she needs to open her mind a bit....hee hee. But again, these aren't children's bodies in Mapplethorp's photos, consenting penises of legal age only...
actually Mapplethorpe did one image of a naked child and that generated some controversy but it was a street image, not posed. At any rate he never did any children after that, his main choice of subject matter was adult men.
Yes...I don't think Maplethorpe did much with anyone not legal. He was a brilliant artist...his penis/urine stuff was not my bag...however his so called "mainstream" portraits make Annie's photos (in my opinion) look like polaroids. This is my all time fav: https://aliyamaqsood2015fmp.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/robert-mappletho...
outstanding - I actually love all his stuff and have read up on his life. So sad how his father disowns him. It's a sad story actually and his life with Patty Smith was also a bit on the sad side .....
Dale what about Sally Mann? Thumbs up or down?
I am not really familiar with her work. I just looked at her site. Just looking quickly, Sally seems to be more of an artistic-documentary photographer with a dark artistic twist (FLOABT). Some of the work is interesting.
It's like Jake Olson was channelling Mary Ellen Mark.
For anybody defending Meg, let me ask you this? Would you be defending me, a 35yr old male, if I had taken these photos??
Aaron that is a brilliant point....