#Saint Barth | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

savejamiecampbellbower · 1 year ago

Text

proof B part 04

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/02/02/ysl-perfume-ad-banned-for-simulated-drug-use_n_7412334.html YSL Perfume Ad Banned For 'Simulated Drug Use'

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has upheld complaints against a television advertisement for Yves Saint Laurent fragrance Belle D'Opium.

The advertisement featured a woman dancing to a drum beat. She then pointed to her inner elbow and ran her finger along the inside of her forearm. She was then shown lying on the floor as a voice-over began "I am your addiction, I am Belle D'Opium. The new fragrance by Yves Saint Laurent."

Thirteen viewers complained that the advertisement was "irresponsible and offensive, because the woman's actions simulated drug use".

Yves Saint Laurent responded that they adhered to a strict code of business ethics which governed how they behaved, and added that they did not intend to use drug imagery in the ad. The company argued that the name Belle D'Opium "suggested the addictive qualities of women who wore the fragrance rather than the addictive effects of narcotics".

The ASA report concluded that "while we noted the consumer research found that most viewers did not consider the ad to be offensive, we nevertheless considered the woman's actions simulated drug use, and therefore concluded it was irresponsible and unacceptable for broadcast."

https://archive.is/wip/ClADX

https://www-francetvinfo-fr.translate.goog/culture/livres/affaire-gabriel-matzneff/l-article-a-lire-pour-comprendre-l-affaire-gabriel-matzneff-un-ecrivain-aux-pratiques-pedophiles-assumees_3762443.html?_x_tr_sl=fr&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The article to read to understand the Gabriel Matzneff affair, a writer with admitted pedophile practices The author, who has never hidden having had relationships with young children, is the central character of the book "Consent", in which Vanessa Springora recounts the influence he exercised over her when she was 14 years old.

This is the case that is shaking the literary world and beyond. In the book Le Consentement (Editions Grasset), to be published Thursday January 2, the editor and author Vanessa Springora recounts her relationship under influence with the writer Gabriel Matzneff, in the mid-1980s. She was then 14 years old, he was in his fifties . In a context of denunciation of sexual violence, his testimony met with significant resonance and once again questioned the notion of sexual consent.

Franceinfo returns to this affair in detail.

Who is Gabriel Matzneff? Born on August 12, 1936 , Gabriel Matzneff came from a family of exiled Russians, who fled their country after the communist revolution of 1917. Winner of the Renaudot essay prize in 2013 and published by Gallimard, the writer of 83 years has long been a popular figure in the literary world. He was a regular guest on television shows, from “Apostrophes” on Antenne 2 to “La Grande Librairie ” on France 5.

A prolific author, the man never hid his attraction to young children in his diaries, such as My Decomposed Loves (1990), or his essays, in particular Les Sous de seize ans (1974). “When you have held in your arms, kissed, caressed, possessed a 13-year-old boy, a 15-year-old girl, everything else seems bland, heavy, insipid,” he writes in this latest work.

For several years, he has been chronicling the news for Le Point . After the attacks of November 13, he hit the headlines again with a violent text on the "Bataclan generation" and the victims of terrorists.

And Vanessa Springora? Aged 47, Vanessa Springora has been director of Julliard publishing since December 1, 2019 . A graduate in modern literature from Paris-Sorbonne University, she began her career in 2003 at the National Audiovisual Institute, before joining Julliard Editions in 2006 as an editorial assistant. She met Gabriel Matzneff in 1986 while accompanying her mother, a publishing press officer, to a dinner. The man begins to write to her, to wait for her at the end of school and to contact her to erase the age gap. “As I had not read any of his books, I did not know that this was a process that he systematically implemented ,” she told Bibliobs.

Why is the affair only breaking today? Vanessa Springora's book marks a turning point. For the first time, a former relationship of the writer speaks. " At 14, you're not supposed to be waited on by a 50-year-old man when you leave school, you're not supposed to live in a hotel with him, nor are you supposed to end up in his bed, his penis in the mouth, at snack time" , she writes. Without acrimony or victimization, Vanessa Springora evokes the ambivalence of an era where sexual liberation flirted with the defense of pedophilia, the fascination exercised by the writer, then the weight of this story on her life.

And the author describes a hold that continues on the literary field: the writer writes a lot and puts down on paper his conquests and sexual adventures, including with young boys during trips to Asia. “As if his passage in my life had not devastated me enough, he must now document, falsify, record and engrave his misdeeds forever ,” writes Vanessa Springora. She evokes a “triple predation, sexual, literary and psychic”.

We let him do it because there was the aura of the artist. His work served as security. But why would the damage be less when the person who commits these acts is an artist?

Vanessa Springora at “Libraries” In the wake of the Weinstein affair and the #MeToo movement , which has forcefully denounced sexual violence since 2017, the work does not go unnoticed. "Vanessa Springora's book will constitute a major milestone in the history of pedophilia, to the extent that it is the first time that one of Matzneff's relationships has spoken out to give a very different sound from the sound of bell of Matzneff himself. He always presented the sexual relations he had with the children (…) as euphoric and pleasant (…)" , explains to franceinfo Pierre Verdrager, sociologist and author of The Forbidden Child. How pedophilia became scandalous.

Had no one reacted before? Not really. At the time of the events, in the mid-1980s, the view on pedophilia was very different. When he published Mes amours décomposés in 1990 , Gabriel Matzneff was invited to the set of “Apostrophes”. The tone of the questions asked by Bernard Pivot is light, not to say complacent: "Why did you specialize in high school girls and kittens? Above 20, we see that that no longer interests you", "why collect them so much?” The answers, greeted by laughter from the audience, are accepted: "I prefer to have people in my life who are not yet hardened. A very young girl is rather kinder, even if she becomes hysterical very very quickly and also crazy until she's older."

Only one voice is raised against the writer. “Mr. Matzneff seems pitiful to me. What I don’t understand is that in this country, literature serves as an alibi for this kind of confidence ,” attacks Denise Bombardier, a Canadian writer. What Mr. Matzneff tells us (.. .), is that he sodomizes little girls of 14, 15 years old, that these little girls are crazy about him (…). We know that old gentlemen lure little children with sweets, Mr. Matzneff them attracts with its reputation." And to conclude: "How do these little girls cope afterwards? I believe that these little girls are withered and most of them for the rest of their days" . “I don’t understand how we can publish things like that ,” she snaps again.

Interviewed a few days ago by franceinfo, Denise Bombardier recounts how this position caused her to be vilified by certain French intellectuals. "I spoke up because people didn't say anything about his book. There was a Catholic couple who were there to defend fidelity in marriage and who didn't say two words. Besides, the lady just laughed , she remembers. I did what I had to do. Otherwise, I wouldn't have been able to look at myself in the mirror." Gabriel Matzneff's editor, Philippe Sollers, then called her a "cunt" on France 3, the literary critic of Le Monde, Josyane Savigneau, joked in the columns of her newspaper: "Discovering in 1990 that young girls aged 15 and 16 years old make love to men thirty years older than them, what a great deal!”

In 2013, when he received his Renaudot prize, a few voices were raised. A petition to remove it was launched by the association La Mouette and Innocence in danger filed a complaint against X for advocating sexual assault.

But why was pedophilia tolerated? It seems difficult to imagine in 2019, but in those years there was a pro-pedophilia movement, supported by prestigious intellectuals. In an article published on January 26, 1977 in Le Monde , Gabriel Matzneff defended three men tried for indecent assault without violence on minors aged 15. “If a 13-year-old girl is entitled to the pill, what is that for? (…) Three years in prison for caresses and kisses is enough,” we can read in particular . At his side, in the list of signatories: Louis Aragon, Roland Barthes, Simone de Beauvoir, André Glucksmann, Bernard Kouchner, Jack Lang, and even Jean-Paul Sartre.

As sociologist Pierre Verdrager explained on franceinfo , “pedophilia was [then] the subject of an attempt to valorize it in the intellectual world”. “ It was a time when there was an attempt at liberation on all horizons and we considered that pedophilia was part of that: liberation of women, liberation of gays, liberation of sexuality and the discourse on sexuality,” he resituates. The age of majority was just lowered to 18 in 1974 and, "in this context, it was thought that it was possible to consider sexual relations between adults and children as valid." In a text where he returned to Libération 's support for this pro-pedophilia movement , journalist Sorj Chalandon evokes a post-May 68 period where "the ban, whatever it is, is felt to belong to the old world, to that embittered, oppressors, employers' militias, bludgeoning police, the corrupt.

How has the literary world reacted since the start of the affair? The affair divides. Many, like Bernard Pivot, argue for a change of times. "In the 70s and 80s, literature came before morality; today, morality comes before literature. Morally, this is progress. We are more or less the intellectual and moral products of a country and, above all, of an era" , wrote the former president of the Goncourt academy on Twitter. “ A new tribunal will be set up, as for Polanski, believes Frédéric Beigbeder in the columns of Le Monde. It is an era which judges another, but times have changed… The entire literary world has fear (…). It's over for him, he has become indefensible."

Others, like former Le Monde critic Josyane Savigneau, denounce a “witch hunt” on Twitter . “I don't protect anyone but I don't participate in manhunts either ,” defended the boss of Le Point , Etienne Gernelle, specifying that no column by the writer has “apologized for love with children. His predecessor, also a member of the Renaudot prize jury, is on the same line. “He is an excellent writer, some of whose books I like, others not at all . I loathe pedophilia, but I also hate the constabulary police. People nailed to the pillory always have my sympathy ,” said responded to Le Monde Franz-Olivier Giesbert.

Several voices also welcomed Vanessa Springora's approach. " It's not a return to moral order, just a return to reason. 13-year-old girls have other things to do than fall in love with a 50-year-old guy. They don't are not on equal terms with him ,” says writer Patrick Besson in the columns of Le Monde . The essayist and MEP Raphaël Glucksmann, whose father had signed the column with Gabriel Matzneff, expressed his disgust on Twitter.

How does Gabriel Matzneff defend himself? Gabriel Matzneff declined all interview requests. He simply sent an email to L'Obs . "To learn that the book that Vanessa decided to write during my lifetime is in no way the story of our luminous and burning loves, but a hostile, nasty, denigrating work, intended to harm me, a sad mix of prosecutor's indictment and of diagnosis concocted in the office of a psychoanalyst, provokes in me a sadness which suffocates me" , he wrote.

Can the facts denounced be prosecuted? No, because they are too old. In an interview with Bibliobs , Vanessa Springora says it herself: "It took me a long time to consider myself a victim because I had consented. But I was still below the sexual majority. So I could have gone to court, except that each time I said to myself: 'I was consenting'. I thought about it much later, there was a statute of limitations."

According to his testimony, the facts are similar to "sexual assault" , i.e. "an act of sexual penetration without violence, coercion, threat or surprise, when committed by an adult on a minor under 15 years old " . In this matter, the limitation period varies between 10 and 20 years (with aggravating circumstances) after the victim reaches the age of majority. A deadline reached a long time ago since Vanessa Springora is now 47 years old. If the facts denounced were ever to be qualified as rape, the new 30-year limitation period, which came into force on August 6, 2018, could not apply in any case because it is not retroactive.

For sociologist Pierre Verdrager , this book could, however, change the law, particularly on the question of the age limit for consent. At the beginning of 2018, the government abandoned the introduction of such a measure, which would have made it possible to consider that any minor under the age of 15 cannot give consent to a sexual act with an adult. " I think that this book will raise the problem and the fact that this work has such an impact, I think that politicians must intend to take this question seriously. The fact that we can both consent and consider that this consent is a fiction" , explains Pierre Verdrager.

I was too lazy to read everything, can you give me a summary? In Le Consentement (Editions Grasset), to be published Thursday January 2, editor Vanessa Springora recounts her relationship under influence with the writer Gabriel Matzneff when she was a minor. " At fourteen, you're not supposed to be waited on by a 50-year-old man when you leave school, you're not supposed to live in a hotel with him, nor are you supposed to end up in his bed, his penis in the mouth, at snack time" , she writes there in particular. The book brings to the forefront the pedophilic practices of a writer, whose actions, assumed and claimed in certain of his works, such as The Under Sixteen Years (1974), were viewed with complacency at the time. Her appearance, in 1990, on the set of “Apostrophes” shows this well: only the Canadian novelist Denise Bombardier laments that “literature serves as an alibi for this kind of confidence”. Today, the case, which will not have legal action because the facts denounced are statute-barred, embarrasses the literary world, in which the writer retains some support. https://archive.is/wip/xZdVz

https://www.liberation.fr/checknews/2020/01/02/matzneff-les-signataires-d-une-petition-pro-pedophilie-de-1977-ont-ils-emis-des-regrets_1771174/

https://www-liberation-fr.translate.goog/checknews/2020/01/02/matzneff-les-signataires-d-une-petition-pro-pedophilie-de-1977-ont-ils-emis-des-regrets_1771174/?_x_tr_sl=fr&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Checknews Matzneff: did the signatories of a 1977 pro-pedophilia petition express regrets? In January 1977, a petition defending sexual relations between adults and children was published in “le Monde”, but also in “Libération”. Written by Gabriel Matzneff, it was notably signed by Simone de Beauvoir, Louis Aragon, Roland Barthes, Jack Lang and Bernard Kouchner.

Question asked by 12/26/2019

Good morning,

We have reformulated your question, which was originally: “Did the signatories of the open letter in Le Monde of January 26, 1977, the author of which is the pedophile Gabriel Matzneff, regret this support for pedophiles?”

You are referring here to the writer Gabriel Matzneff, aged 83, winner of the Renaudot essay prize in 2013, and who has returned to the news in recent days ( Libération dedicated its event to it on Monday ).

The reason: a book published today by Vanessa Springora, also an editor, entitled Consent. In this work, she recounts her traumatic relationship with Gabriel Matzneff, when she was 14 years old and he was 50. At the time, the writer hid nothing of his pedophile practices, both in his books and at home. television, where he could be received with complacency. In recent days, an extract from the literary program Apostrophes, dating from 1990, was unearthed by the INA. We see Bernard Pivot asking Matzneff why he specialized in “high school girls and kittens”. And the writer replied that a girl “very very young is rather nicer”. Around the set, only Quebec journalist Denise Bombardier was outraged by the comments made.

Your question refers to another episode: a petition dating from January 1977. It was first published in Le Monde on January 26 , then in Libération the next day.

It was written as the trial of three men, tried for "non-violent indecent assault on minors under the age of 15", was beginning in Versailles, before the Yvelines Assize Court , and placed in custody. preventive detention for three years. The victims were aged 12 or 13, including brothers and sisters, and had been photographed and filmed by the accused during various sexual games. One of the accused justified his practices during the trial as follows: “What interested me was to see the sexuality of children.” The three people were sentenced to five years in prison.

However, in the petition published on the eve of the opening of the trial, it was written: “We consider that there is a manifest disproportion, on the one hand, between the qualification of “crime” which justifies such severity, and the nature of the alleged acts; on the other hand, between the outdated nature of the law and the daily reality of a society which tends to recognize the existence of a sexual life in children and adolescents (if a 13 year old girl is entitled to the pill , what for ?)."

This text, which therefore defended the right to have, as an adult, sexual relations with children, concluded as follows: “Three years of prison [preventive, editor's note] for caresses and kisses, that is enough. We would not understand if on January 29 Dejager, Gallien and Burckhardt did not find their freedom.”

“I know it well since it was me who wrote it” Among the sixty signatories of this petition, who did not wait until 2019 to re-open the debate, several very famous names, already at the time: Jean-Paul Sartre, co-founder of Libération, Roland Barthes, Simone de Beauvoir , Gilles and Fanny Deleuze, Philippe Sollers, Jack Lang, Bernard Kouchner… And Gabriel Matzneff who, in an article published in 2003 on his blog , claims the authorship of this petition.

“I know this revolting petition well since it was I who wrote it,” he explains at that moment, when he returns to this text, regretting that over time, the comments to his regard have evolved: “I am very proud of it and, if I wrote it today, I would not change a single word of it, because it is even more current, necessary today than in 1977. We a few friends (including a lawyer, Alexandre Rozier) and I had talked about it, then I wrote it up, weighing each noun, each verb, each adjective, each comma, each semicolon.”

He then explains, still on his blog: “As at the time email did not exist, we picked up our phone and called those from whom we hoped for support. Guy Hocquenghem took charge of calling the philosophers, me the writers, him and me, helped by a few friends, the others. We suffered rare refusals (for my part, I remember the refusal to sign by Marguerite Duras, Hélène Cixous, Xavière Gauthier, Michel Foucault), but received infinitely more enthusiastic signatures, 67 in all, plus our two, which is not bad, considering the very short time we had to bring them together.”

To answer your question, few of the signatories of this petition, to our knowledge, have expressed regret for having signed it. An obvious reason for this first: many of the signatories in question died a few years after the publication of the petition. This is the case, for example, of Louis Aragon (died in 1982) or Simone de Beauvoir (1986), to name but a few.

2001, the petition returns In reality, we had to wait until January 2001 for regrets to be heard, but also explanations for the reasons which could have pushed some signatories to join this text legitimizing pedophilia.

Why 2001? Because at the time, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, then a European deputy, had just been caught by the exhumation of a youthful text, published in 1975, where he spoke of his activity as an educator in a garden. “alternative” children in Frankfurt.

“It happened to me several times that some kids opened my fly and started tickling me. I reacted differently depending on the circumstances, but their desire posed a problem for me. I asked them: "Why don't you play together, why did you choose me and not the other kids?" But if they insisted, I stroked them anyway,” he wrote in this book.

Libé then made its front page on the subject, headlined on a “provocative generation”, to return to “the sixty-eighter spirit, with its utopias and its errors”.

In this same issue, in a difficult exercise in collective introspection entitled “ Libé en echo d'un vertigo commune ”, Sorj Chalandon returned to the way in which Libération had treated the question of pedophilia, avoiding nothing from the past. He thus recalled that in June 1981 an interview with a certain Benoît was published in Libé , titled “Children’s Hugs”. In it, he said: “I was giving cunnilingus to a friend. Her daughter, aged five, appeared to be sleeping in her small adjoining bed. When I had finished, the little one placed herself on her back, spreading her thighs and, very seriously, said to me "my turn, now". She was adorable. Our relationship continued for three years.” Preceded by a sentence from a journalist, who then wrote: “When Benoît speaks of children, his dark Greek shepherd's eyes burn with tenderness.”

“It’s more than a period, it’s a laboratory” In this same text, Chalandon tries to put words to explain what made this possible. The era, perhaps. “The moral order. This is the enemy. And Liberation of this era is nothing other than the particular echo of common vertigo. We are at the end of the 70s. The traces of the May of the barricades linger on the walls and in people's heads. “Forbidden to prohibit”, “let’s challenge any form of authority”,” he writes, before expanding: “It’s more than a period, it’s a laboratory. Giver of hopes, dreams, senseless fights. And monsters. […] In this tumult, this reversal of senses, this anchoring of new benchmarks, in this new understanding of morality and law, this fragility and this urgency, everything that stands in the way of all freedoms must be brought down.”

On several occasions, CheckNews relied on this text to respond to Internet users who asked us if, for a time, Libération had supported pedophilia.

Reference is also made in Chalandon's article to the 1977 petition. A text which "leaves no room for ambiguity", according to the journalist, who notes that, for the signatories, the children suffered "no violence” and that they were “consenting”.

In the same issue, three sixty-eighters denounce a “Stalinist trial” carried out in Cohn-Bendit. Among them, Philippe Sollers, signatory of the petition of 77, and who then returns for the first time to this signature, in these terms: “In the text that I signed and which must date from the years 1974-1975, consider that “the complete freedom of the partners in a sexual relationship is the necessary and sufficient condition for the lawfulness of this relationship” is indeed extraordinarily naive – because who judges the complete freedom of the partners? It’s not considering that there can be a balance of force or power.”

“I sign this text without really reading it” He continues: “What strikes me most is that the problem of violence against children was not a social problem at the time. It became one. Probably because of an unprecedented expansion of child prostitution and high-dose sex tourism. At the time when I signed this text without really reading it, because it was part of the libertarian demands, I was aware of Freud and I went to listen to Lacan. It is impossible to have a somewhat awakened conscience without realizing that prepubescent children do not speak the same language as adults.”

A little later, in L'Express, in an article in an issue dated March 1 to 7, 2001, devoted to the "duty of memory" concerning sexual liberation, Philippe Sollers will repeat more or less the same thing. “It will soon be thirty years since I signed it and I admit I have no clear memory of it. There were so many petitions at that time that we no longer paid much attention to what was written.” According to him, “it is difficult to bring out this petition today without talking about the context of that time. Pedophilia is a recent problem. We've only been talking about it for a few years. At the time, it was not obvious and it seems to me that the text was not centered on the adult-child question.

However, he made it clear in 2001, “certain aspects of the petition are completely indefensible. Today, I would not sign it and I would weigh my words.

“I signed it in a specific context” In this same issue of L'Express, another signatory of the petition speaks. This is Bernard Muldworf, a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, who has since died. He explained, like Chalandon and Sollers, that it was the context, and the time, which had allowed this signature, since deemed impossible: “In May 1968, we witnessed a real fracture in human civilization. All the traditional rules of morality dissolved like water in sand. Sexuality was seen as subversive. It was a cultural crisis in the deepest sense of the word. It was necessary to be opposed to anything that could be of the order of constraint, to take the side of those who were looking for a new path. It is in this context that I signed the petition.

Adding: “It seemed dishonest to me not to sign because there was an ideological issue: let us rather be on the side of the protesters than on the side of the cops. I signed the petition out of solidarity with the movement, not out of support for the ideas.” To the question “would you have signed the petition today?”, asked in 2001, he replied, like Sollers: “No, certainly not. I signed it in a specific context.”

To our knowledge, there are no other public positions taken by the signatories of this petition, who have since regretted having been associated with it. This article may be updated based on new information. In a column from February 2001, entitled “Autre temps…”, Le Monde also returned to this petition initiated years earlier in its newspaper, half-heartedly regretting having published it, while the public hearing demonstrated that it was not “caresses and kisses” but “a sordid affair”.

The text from Le Monde, signed by Pierre Georges, who at the time covered the trial of the three men accused of pedophilia, and convicted for it, thus justified this “return to”: “If we returned to this affair, and on the incredible intellectual imprudence of the time in this area, it is of course with reference to the misadventures of Daniel Cohn-Bendit for writings from 1975, cited by L'Express. These quotes are indisputable. And undoubtedly reprehensible. The first to do so is the author, who, formerly with the motive of shocking the bourgeoisie and in the name of sexual liberation, admits to having written nonsense and repents of it. Of which act.”

“A portrait that was probably too casual that we made of Matzneff…” More recently, it was a portrait of Gabriel Matzneff, published in 2004 in Libération, and written by Luc Le Vaillant, which came to the surface, criticized on social networks for its character considered complacent at best. The writer is described in particular as a “lover of young girls in bloom, whom he also writes about in his diary” and who “irritates a society with increasingly cautious moralism”.

In a portrait of Vanessa Springora, victim of Matzneff, published Monday in Libé, Luc Le Vaillant returns to his 2004 text: “We tell him a portrait that was undoubtedly too casual that we had made of Matzneff in der Libé fifteen years ago , regretting having neglected the sex tourist side that he had swept under the rug. This academic Narcissus did not particularly excite us and we wondered what all these young ladies could possibly see in him. What interested us, however, was the old-fashioned skill of this razer of the most enlightened and understanding families. The portrait is a work of craftsmanship, where personal information is mixed with character analysis, impressions collected, sensations experienced. We confront human nature, at the risk of misjudgment. This is the beauty of the exercise, and also its limit.”

Sincerely Update of January 2, 2020 at 1 p.m.: addition of Jean-Paul Sartre to the list of signatories of the petition. https://archive.is/IOMlT

Tribune published in Le monde on January 26, 1977 and in Libération on January 27, 1977 ABOUT A TRIAL We received the following press release: "On January 27, 28 and 29, before the Yvelines Assize Court, will appear, for indecent assault without violence on minors aged fifteen, Bernard Dejager, Jean-Claude Gallien and Jean Burckhardt, who, arrested in the fall of 1973, have already remained in pre-trial detention for more than three years. Only Bernard Dejager has recently benefited from the principle of the freedom of the accused. "Such a long preventive detention to investigate a simple case of "morals", where the children were not victims of the slightest violence, but, on the contrary, clarified to the judges instruction that they were consenting (although the justice system currently denies them any right to consent), such a long preventive detention already seems scandalous to us. "Today, they risk being sentenced to a serious sentence of criminal imprisonment either for having had sexual relations with these minors, boys and girls, or for having encouraged and photographed their sexual games. "We consider that there is has a manifest disproportion, on the one hand, between the qualification of "crime" which justifies such severity, and the nature of the alleged acts; on the other hand, between the outdated nature of the law and the daily reality of a society which tends to recognize the existence of a sexual life in children and adolescents (if a thirteen year old girl is entitled to the pill , what for ?). “French law contradicts itself when it recognizes a capacity for discernment in a minor of thirteen or fourteen years of age whom it can judge and condemn, while it denies him this capacity when it comes to his emotional and sexual life. “Three years in prison for caresses and kisses is enough. We would not understand if on January 29 Dejager, Gallien and Burckhardt did not find their freedom. "Have signed this press release: Louis Aragon, Francis Ponge, Roland Barthes, Simone de Beauvoir, Judith Belladona, doctor Michel Bon, psychosociologist, Bertrand Boulin, Jean-Louis Bory, François Chatelet, Patrice Chéreau, Jean-Pierre Colin, Copi, Michel Cressole, Gilles and Fanny Deleuze, Bernard Dort, Françoise d'Eaubonne, doctor Maurice Eme, psychiatrist, Jean-Pierre Faye, doctor Pierrette Garrou, psychiatrist, Philippe Gavi, doctor PierreEdmond Gay, psychoanalyst, doctor Claire Gellman, psychologist, doctor Robert Gellman , psychiatrist, André Glucksmann, Félix Guattari, Daniel Guérin, Pierre Guyotat, Pierre Hahn, Jean-Luc Henning, Christian Hennion, Jacques Henric, Guy Hocquenghem, doctor Bernard Kouchner, Françoise Laborie, Madeleine Laïk, Jack Lang, Georges Lapassade, Raymond Lepoutre , Michel Leyris, Jean-François Lyotard, Dionys Mascolo, Gabriel Matzneff, Catherine Millet, Vincent Monteil, doctor Bernard Muldworf, psychiatrist, Négrepont, Marc Pierret, Anne Querrien, Griselidis Real, François Régnault, Claude and Olivier Revault d'Allonnes, Christiane Rochefort, Gilles Sandier, Pierre Samuel, Jean-Paul Sartre, René Scherer, Philippe Sollers, Gérard Soulier, Victoria Thérame, Marie Rhonon, Catherine Valabrègue, doctor Gérard Vallès, psychiatrist, Hélène Vedrines, Jean-Marie Vincent Jean-Michel Wilhelm, Danielle Sallel Nave, Alain Cuny. »

https://archive.is/0ywDb

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/paedophile-author-was-shielded-by-french-elite-rgg7ht6hj

‘Paedophile author Gabriel Matzneff was shielded by French elite’ Gabriel Matzneff was hailed for accounts of his attraction to teenagers

Several of France’s leading postwar figures are facing scrutiny over claims that they helped an alleged paedophile to escape prosecution in the 1980s. Yves Saint Laurent, the fashion designer who died in 2008, and François Mitterrand, the late Socialist president, are among those accused of supporting Gabriel Matzneff, an author who wrote about his attraction to teenagers. The allegations came to light after the publication of Consent by Vanessa Springora, 47, the head of a Parisian publishing house, recounting being groomed and abused by Matzneff at the age of 14. Springora has forced the French elite to review its stance on a writer who was hailed as a master. Critics conceded that they might have been wrong to treat Matzneff as an intellectual proponent of sexual freedom while overlooking his alleged victims. Prosecutors opened a preliminary inquiry into accusations that he committed statutory rape during liaisons with adolescents, including Springora, who were below the age of consent, 15 in France. Matzneff, 83, admits that he had relationships with teenagers but denies having committed criminal offences. The investigation has led to a deepening scandal that hit Paris’s Socialist council this week when Christophe Girard, 64, the deputy mayor, was summoned for questioning over claims that he paid for the hotel room where Matzneff took the young Springora. Mr Girard told Le Parisien newspaper that he was acting on the orders of Saint Laurent, his employer, and Pierre Bergé, the designer’s business partner. Mr Girard said he was told that Matzneff needed a room in which to write and had no idea that he was accompanied by an adolescent. Springora writes of the event in her book, published in January, but fails to name Saint Laurent. She says that police opened an inquiry after receiving anonymous letters accusing Matzneff. She writes that Matzneff nevertheless moved out of his Parisian flat and into a hotel. “A generous patron . . . financed this investment,” Springora writes. Mr Girard said that Saint Laurent was the patron. “We didn’t support him because he was a paedophile but because he was a writer in difficulty,” he said. Springora claims that Matzneff was also protected by Mr Mitterrand and kept a letter that “in the event of an arrest he thinks . . . will have the power to save him”. In 1986, Mr Mitterrand described the journals in which Matzneff recounted his attraction for teenagers as “a hedonist inspiration”. https://archive.is/L0m34

Yves Saint Laurent ad banned for using 'unhealthily underweight' model This article is more than 8 years old Advertising Standards Authority’s ruling criticises YSL’s use of female model with ‘very thin’ legs and ‘visible rib cage’, calling fashion advert ‘irresponsible’ The Yves Saint Laurent ad banned by the advertising watchdog, which upheld a complaint that the model appeared to be too thin. It originally appeared in Elle magazine.

An advert by the fashion company Yves Saint Laurent has been banned by the UK’s advertising watchdog for using a model who appeared to be unhealthily underweight.

Upholding a complaint that the model looked too thin, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) censured the advert, which appeared in Elle magazine, as irresponsible.

In its ruling, published on Wednesday, it said: “The ASA considered that the model’s pose and the particular lighting effect in the ad drew particular focus to the model’s chest, where her rib cage was visible and appeared prominent, and to her legs, where her thighs and knees appeared a similar width, and which looked very thin, particularly in light of her positioning and the contrast between the narrowness of her legs and her platform shoes.

“We therefore considered that the model appeared unhealthily underweight in the image and concluded that the ad was irresponsible.”

It said YSL indicated that it did not agree that the model in the advert for Saint Laurent Paris was unhealthily thin but did not provide a detailed response.

The use of skinny models has come under increased scrutiny in recent years, with critics claiming that it damages the body confidence of women and girls by promoting unrealistic and unhealthy ideals.

A petition started by an LA-based blogger urging YSL to stop using “painfully thin models” in its advertisements collected just under 50,000 signatures last year. Despite the spotlight on the fashion industry, the YSL advert is one of only a handful that have been banned by the ASA for featuring models who look too thin.

In 2011, the watchdog banned an online advert for the clothing brand Drop Dead, for using a size-8 girl in a bikini with “highly visible” hip, rib and collar bones.

Last year, Urban Outfitters was ordered to remove a photo from its website showing the lower half of a young woman’s body, with the ASA noting that “there was a significant gap between the model’s thighs, and that her thighs and knees were a similar width”.

Responding to the ruling, Jo Swinson, co-founder of the Campaign for Body Confidence said: “Where images are irresponsible, it’s right that the ASA takes action. It’s better for girls to channel the spirit of [Sport England campaign] ‘This Girl Can’ to focus on their body feeling great through exercise, than feeling pressure to have a thigh gap.”

The ASA found the advertisement breached section 1.3 of the Committee of Advertising Practice code, which states: “Marketing communications must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.”

YSL and Elle declined to comment on the ruling.

https://archive.ph/wip/yaS7x

0 notes