We’re all well aware of liberal bias in the media.
Every word and image is carefully crafted to suit their agenda and push their propaganda on their audience.
And now, one photographer is embroiled in controversy over images that should be shocking to anyone – no matter which side of the aisle you’re on.
Professional photographer Meg Bitton has been doing family photo shoots for years, posting them on her souls.imagined website and on social media.
Newborn babies, young children, maternity shoots — giving the impression that she is passionate about preserving images that celebrate the innocence of children.
Not so.
Britton has come under fire in recent weeks after posting shots of young girls inappropriately dressed or with implied nudity.
Some show girls as young as 9 to 11 in provocative poses that could easily be construed as child pornography.
Others show girls of this age smoking marijuana, drinking alcohol, or scantily clad with wads of money in their pockets.
Bitton has claimed that her photos are “art” that symbolize the transition from childhood to adulthood.
But we don’t call sexualizing children and posing them in adult scenarios art, and Bitton has received backlash in the form of extensive social media commentary from disturbed parents – and even colleagues.
Fstoppers, a photography website, followed up on the story after it began to spread on social media, stating that posing these children as the subjects of adult situations is not acceptable.
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.
When Bitton was criticized on Facebook, she fired back as if nothing is wrong with how she has chosen to portray these girls. The Daily Wire reports on her response:
“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?”
“Times have changed. Can’t pine for elder statesmen.”
No, times have not changed when it comes to protecting the innocence of children.
They are already indoctrinated in our public schools and the media with progressive propaganda.
Young girls, especially, seem to be a favorite target of the left’s brainwashing.
And now this photographer thinks that times dictate that we allow children to be sexualized and exploited for profit?
Portraying children in dangerous and illegal adult themes will never be acceptable in the name of “art.” And there should be legal ramifications for doing so.
Bitton also made headlines in 2016 for protesting North Carolina’s fight against transgender bathrooms with a photo shoot of a “transgender” child, exploiting the girl to create momentum for her progressive ideals.
But perhaps the most damaging account of allegations against Bitton and her work comes from a fellow photographer who dedicated a blog to what he views as a very disturbing trend in her work.
Christopher Pickrell wrote on “boycottmegbitton” that Bitton has established a frightening pattern of taking inappropriate images of young girls and then using threats and lies to cover up controversy.
Himself an artist, he slams Bitton’s claims that these images are art – he says her photo shoots are damaging to children and that she has manipulated staff, children, and their parents into thinking there is nothing wrong going on here.
He chastises her for using these young children for profit. The images are controversial, so they draw more viewers and more business. He says this is completely intentional on Bitton’s part.
He even counters her claim that there is always an officer, crew, or parents present, noting that many say they were kept away from the scene of the shoot – sometimes a block away — or that their view was blocked by lights and equipment.
It is a marketing ploy with small children being used as a commodity.
Pickrell states in the blog:
I have followed Meg’s actions for years. I have seen the pattern. Using children for monetary gain, is not ok. Putting children in provocative scenarios for publicity and marketing, is not ok. And that’s what she is doing. The intent is to showcase her “skills.”
Meg hides all negative comments and criticism. She uses intimidation, coercion, and harassment to silence critics.
Artistic license is no excuse for exploiting young girls.
And using the decay of societal norms as a defense is absurd.
No one in their right mind could possibly accept that Bitton’s images are fine because “times have changed.”
If Chris Pickrell’s observations are true, this woman has no business being around children, especially as a means to make a buck.
And there are still laws in this country that should prevent her from doing so.
What do you think of the allegations against Meg Bitton? Do you think she should remain in business photographing innocent children? Leave us your thoughts.