These first shots of her are NSFW as they're the topless shots that are causing controversy about Zippora in Australia.

"We Got It Bad" editorial piece photographed by Derek Henderson

From Paris Vogue:

Yeah I'm torn by this one, while I can see the artistic value I can also understand the predatory side of things. Then again, in the past say when they painted nudes of young girls there wasn't that much kerfuffle. The argument can be said that it's a painting as opposed to a photo, however it's all there.

Oh dear, here we go again. Round and round this comes month after month, year upon year.
Firstly, those shots are generally very good and remind me of some early Kate and Vanessa Paradis and have a French feel. Nothing new to get worked up about having shots like that of a 16yr old; where have some people been living.

At 16 a girl can have sex and even marry in many countries but let's not focus on age for that is a silly yardstick to use in this context. Had no one mentioned she was -gasp 16! ppl would be just loving the shots but -gasp 16! Oh my gosh, where is the world going too!!

This should not be about age per se, it is about whether the model is natural, is not being forced into situations and poses simply for titillation, (excuse the pun), whether the model is reasonably mature and comfortable in her own skin (as a model she should be). It is about context, readership, art and fashion, sensuality and life. To sum that all up with some crass judgement or law based on age is just silly and dangerous. Also for goodness sakes, what is so wrong with the female breast; come to a french beach any summer, look in french Italian Vogue, look at Kate, Daria, Gemma, Sasha, Aggy, Lily et al, we all have breasts, it's part of us, we are proud of what we have and it's just no big deal! It is part of who we are as females and when appropriate, we are proud that they are in a shot, as well as legs and hips etc.
Who are we trying to "protect" by some morale huff puff over a beautiful 16yr old doing work as good as her elders? Any thoughts of protecting the model are rubbish. All that will do is to clamp her career and one has no right to say how she or he is mentally or physically without knowing the model personally. If she is with a good agency and has sensible parents, they will all guide her.

So are we trying to protect other 16 yr olds? Come on lol At 16 girls are well aware of boobies and guys. Predators? Men are predators, it's in their genes. Seeing a 16 yr old's breast or a 18 yr old, it's still a breast!

Again all this talk of children growing up to quickly....there is a balance to be drawn, there are pitfalls and dangers and I am all for children not leapfrogging their childhood, missing out on wonderful child things and putting their mental and physical well being at risk. However, it is a balance and each child is so very different, each situation so different and it should be down to good parenting to tread that careful balance. To restrain and keep a child away from things "for their own good", can back fire horribly. In France children grow up in a mature society where they may be allowed to drink wine at the table when young, they will see breasts!!! on TV adverts and in magazines yet they generally grow to be far far better adjusted than many Americans I have met who have been shackled by silly PC correct rubbish and can go kill at 18 but not drink.

Life, art, fashion, photography, modelling, is not a black and white subject where suddenly it's ok one month to do something the other not. That is just silly.

Where people should be applying their brains and efforts and indignation and horror, is in areas of the sex slave industry, low end "glamour" modelling and paedophilia where MUCH more should be done than is. Oh and please dont say that the above images or ones of Kate's CK campaign those years ago, sparked a wave of peado attacks- rubbish.

There needs to be a maturity to the debate on so called skinny models, young models and photo shoots and generally within the high industry there is and they get it right most of the time, not always but generally.

Alicia
x

From news.com.au today:

AUSTRALIA'S literature classification has given the green light for photographers to take pictures of naked under-age models after backing down on an investigation into a fashion magazine.

Last week, the Classification Board said it was investigating Russh Australia for featuring a 16-year-old girl topless in two different fashion shoots.

Zippora Seven featured in the provocative 18-page editorial fashion spread alongside a 15-year-old model, Levi Clarke.

Russh justified the pictures from 45-year-old Sydney photographer Derek Henderson by using Chanel No.5 bath gel in the most revealing image.

After deliberating, Classification Board director Donald McDonald said: "The board has now considered the matter andis of the view that this publication is not a submittable publication and therefore does not need to be classified.''

The most provocative of the images was shot at Sydney's Sebel Pier One Hotel in March, gratuitously depicting the pair sharing a bubble bath nude, with Seven topless and Clarke's eyes closed as if he has passed out.

In the foreground are four bottles of Moet & Chandon champagne.

Both the Sebel and Moet have distanced themselves from the magazine shoot, saying they don't condone under-age drinking or nudity.

The Classification Act prohibits the depiction of nudity and sexual activity of people aged under 18.

The board's decision concerned Federal Youth Minister Kate Ellis, who has called on the modelling industry to show stronger leadership.

"The sexualisation of children and young people in magazines and advertising is disturbing,'' she said.

Community Services Minister Jenny Macklin is currently consulting on the development of a national child-protection framework, she said.

"But the modelling industry must also show leadership to protect young people from exploitation in the industry,'' she said.

But Russh last week continued to defend the shoot, which was inspired by supermodel Kate Moss and actor Johnny Depp when they dated in the '90s.

"The motivation for these images was the celebration of the human form,'' said Henderson.

Post by Wayne

Yeah I'm torn by this one, while I can see the artistic value I can also understand the predatory side of things. Then again, in the past say when they painted nudes of young girls there wasn't that much kerfuffle. The argument can be said that it's a painting as opposed to a photo, however it's all there.

I can also see the artistic value of it and they are great exposures. I also understand the predatory side of it since society still seeing a womans breast as a sexual organ.

There is a naturist/ nudist magazine produced in Australia and this can be bought almost everywhere there. The magazine presents the naturist lifestyle in a clothes free environment and it's not considered pornographic or sexual. They often present families, young and elders. I think that fashion should have a chance to present art that is not abusive or sexually suggestive.

Just my thoughts,
Lou

The nudist magazine is an interesting point... The same could be said for the Bill Henson controversy I guess??