The designers prove they don’t really care who they offend. And never have.
Offending people is nothing new to designer duo Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana.
The pair, better known by their brand as Dolce and Gabbana, are still trying to defend their poor, misinformed actions after labelling children born out of IVF as ‘synthetic’ in a recent interview, but now a 2007 ad campaign has surfaced which brings with it connotations of sexual abuse.
The Dolce and Gabbana campaign shows a woman lying down, slightly restrained, with four men in various states of undress standing over her.
Publicist and former reality TV star Kelly Cutrone tweeted the images and called out the designers for their glorification of ‘gang rape’.
The designers are yet to respond to Cutrone, however the ad campaign was removed after it understandably offended a lot of people back in 2007 when it first appeared.
The resurfacing of this campaign comes just days after one half of Dolce and Gabbana told Panorama magazine what he thinks of the concept of families.
“You are born and you have a father and a mother,” Dolce said.
“Or at least it should be like this, that’s why I am not convinced by chemical children, synthetic babies, wombs for rent.”
Read more: Sir Elton John vows to boycott Dolce & Gabbana after the designers call IVF children “synthetic.”
The outrageous comments became the focus of a movement calling for people around the world to boycott the brand. This boycott was headed up by singer Elton John, who came out to defend he and his husband’s children.
Top Comments
As the mother of 2 IVF babies, I'm not the least bit offended! I made my decision to pursue IVF totally independent of their input, so it doesn't bother me what they think of it. Their opinion is their own just as my decision was my own.
Own your pathway, people! You will not get supportive applause along the way from everyone - or even anyone, so know yourself, have your reasons and get on with your own life. The end.
I tread carefully when I say a part of me can understand where they are coming from. We need to be very aware of the entitlement of a child at all costs mentality. There's a line that I don't know if we even know where it is anymore. I guess the true effects won't be apparent or be able to be understood until well past my time. I am very aware there are many incapable heterosexual couples who clearly don't deserve the title of parents. I also know there are many loving same sex parents with plenty of love to give. There are single parents kicking butt too. However, is a truly capable, loving heteresexual couple not the childs ideal?
There is much research that saying children need 1 good, parent, 1 good teacher and 1 good friend. I agree we need to tread carefully however the fantasy that a man and woman together are the best parents does not make it so for more than half the families in Australia. The amount of single parent families and the non caring parent NOT paying child support is outrageous! If only there was a way to screen prospective parents, gay or otherwise would be the best outcome for children - eg: not having them as an entitlement included!
I'm not sure what research you are referring to, could you please cite it? The research I am familiar with says that children who grow up with two married (generally biological) parents tend to fare better than others (Amato, 2005; McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994; Sigle-Rushton & McLanahan, 2004). Research has also shown that children a FAR more likely to be abused by step-fathers than biological fathers (see Childhood Sexual Abuse: A Reference Handbook By Karen L. Kinnear). Those who do not accept that children are better off (all other things being equal) with their biological, married, parents are unable (or unwilling) to understand the relevant research.