The other day, I applauded Emma Stone for reminding Vogue that her stylist does most of the work of dressing her, so we shouldn’t get too excited about her sartorial skills. I liked how honest she was, and I also liked her sole contribution to her look, namely:
“She knows that I won’t dress like a fairy princess, wear a lot of glitter or anything that makes me look like a Victorian doll. If I could wear those things and not look like Dakota Fanning when she was eight, maybe, but I just don’t look good in them.”
Right on, Emma Stone! Despite our culture’s creepy obsession with youth, a 24-year-old woman should not want to look like a little girl. Imagine my surprise, then, when I saw the latest cover of W Magazine, on which Emma looks…not like Dakota Fanning when she was eight, exactly, but certainly like Dakota Fanning when she was a little bit older. Compare it to that Marc Jacobs perfume ad she shot when she was 17. You know, the one that got banned in the UK for appearing to sexualize a child:
I don’t know how much control Emma had over this shoot; it was with famed fashion photographer Juergen Teller, so she was probably not about to meddle. Still, I would like to make an agreement with the fashion establishment right now. A peace treaty, if you will. If you shoot a starlet under the age of 30 in any stage of undress (let alone this kinky “I’m wearing only a bra under this jacket” business), can you at least try to make her looks as old as she usually looks? 24 is not so very old, really, but it’s a definite improvement on 17. I feel like I’m going to go to jail just for looking at this, and I am not even attracted to teenage girls.