AIBU?
to wonder whose fault it really is re: stop pimping our kids
DingDongMerrilyOutOfSeason · 21/04/2011 22:30
Have seen the sex education show the past few nights and can't help but wonder...
I have heard loads of comments online and in RL about how disgraceful it is to sell padded bras for 6yos, high heeled shoes for 5yos and knickers with 'come and get it' and the like for anyone under 16. But isn't it supply and demand? I have not heard one person say 'Yes, I buy these items for my children' but at the same time, some parents must. So why is nobody looking at the deeper issue of why some people think this is appropriate. Seems to me to be cutting off supply temporarily without getting to the root of the problem.
Anyone on here willing to admit that they buy things like these and tell me why? I could get the argument that the padded bras are actually t-shirt bras for a smooth outline but heels for growing feet and slogan knickers are beyond me.
So, if you believe that items such as these are wrong, doesn't the fault lie with whoever makes the purchase rather than/as well as the retailer who stocks what is a desired product?
yousankmybattleship · 21/04/2011 22:33
I watched this programme and didn't understand why the retailers were supposed to be the villains. They are in business. They stock items that sell. Parents must be buying these hideous things so as far as I can see the blame lies with those parents. It would have been a much more interesting programme if they had spoken to some of those parents.
soverylucky · 21/04/2011 22:34
This reply has been deleted
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
.hairfullofsnakes · 21/04/2011 22:41
Its all the parents fault. If people didnt buy this vile rubbish them it would not be produced. I read the other day about a T Shirt on sale for young girls with the slogan 'don't even think about it' written on it - I mean, what kid of idiot buys this disgusting shite?! I despair at some people, I really do
GrimmaTheNome · 21/04/2011 22:48
But then again, if it wasn't produced (actively designed, made and distributed) in the first place, no-one would be clamouring to buy it. No one would be getting out their sewing machine and making this crap themselves.
I blame the makers and the buyers. The makers are cynically trying to make money out of idiot parents at the expense of children's innocence.
SkinittingFluffyBunnyBonnets · 21/04/2011 22:50
I meet the parents of which you speak every day at my DDs school...and they're all middle class, high earners, not the often blamed working class families who live in social housing.
I don't know why little "Thalia" and litte "Molly" are allowed to watch teen movies at the age of 6, or why they have bigger makeup collections than I do...but they do...and it's a common thing with the kids in DDs class to have TVs in their bedrooms, mobiles at age 8, tight jeans and heeled shoes too.
It's a private school if that makes any difference.
{all names changed}
DingDongMerrilyOutOfSeason · 21/04/2011 23:00
Skinitting I agree with you and Grimma that designers are partly to blame, but some of the things you mention are nothing to do with advertising things innapropriately for children, such as watching teen movies or having loads of make-up or tvs and mobiles of their own, this is doen to what parents deem appropriate.
I think that shops should not be selling this kind of stuff but as long as people buy it, they will. As soverylucky pointed out, shops are not the moral guardians of our children, we are.
SkinittingFluffyBunnyBonnets · 21/04/2011 23:05
How can you seperate them DingDong?? Mobile phones and innapropriate movies..innapropriate shoes...they're all about growing up too fast!
How is which shoes the kids wear and which films they watch different? And HOW is it not damaging to watch Mean Girls when you're 6?
They don't have the ability to work out the message...they're simply impressed by the btches and their power!
DingDongMerrilyOutOfSeason · 21/04/2011 23:11
Skinitting I was only seperating them into catagories of items that are made and advertised specifically for children and those that are for general consumption that parents deem appropriate for children of a young age. What I meant was, it is inappropriate to sell slogan knickers if they are made for and aimed at children. It is not inappropriate to sell mobile phones as these are for general use and it is up to the parent to decide the age which the child can have one.
Babbling now but trying to distinguish between what parents let children do before and appropriate age and what children are positively encouraged to do because of items created especially for them. Does that make any sense?
DingDongMerrilyOutOfSeason · 21/04/2011 23:13
Clearer explanation:
High heeled shoes made for 6yos: wrong
High heeled shoes made for 16yo: fine
Teen movie marketed PG: wrong
Teen movie marketed 15: fine
Some things are made for children of too young an age, some things are made for older consumers and it is the parents who allow young children to consume.
vess · 21/04/2011 23:15
But it IS the manufacturers' fault as well as the parents'. It's probably tempting for a lot of little girls, when mum takes them shopping, to choose something like that - very fancy and grown-up looking. Because it's there, and it's the right size, and it's the new collection, so it must be trendy...
JoInScotland · 21/04/2011 23:23
Skinitting
Guilt. I have met similar parents, who let their young children play violent 18+ games, watch similar films, and buy them inappropriate clothing and toys. The parents are at work all day and want to buy the childrens' love. For a while it works. Then when the children are older, teenagers or young adults, they look back and realise it was time that they never got from their parents. I have experience of this sort of "parenting" in my own childhood.
DingDongMerrilyOutOfSeason · 21/04/2011 23:23
Vess I agree that the manufacturers have to take some blame. But I am asking why nobody on the show mentioned the fact that some parents are buying these items, like the items are on display and then magically end up on 6yos without any parental input.
Lots of sweets are aimed at children. I have no issue with my or others' DC having sweets. But I would never let them have them just because they wanted them. It is my role as parent to decide what I consider reasonable, how often or what quantity until they are old enough to decide for themselves.
One parent bought the first slogan knickers the shop did as a trial run. So they made more, which sold. And it continues.
vess · 21/04/2011 23:35
Yes, most of the times, DiscoDaisy. But what if the child goes on and on about it, and how all her friends have one, etc, etc - till the mum says 'oh, ok then' and buys the stuff, because the daughter doesn't want any of the more sensible clothes? It happens a lot.
Demand is created. People trust the shops to provide them with the latest trends. If it was a bad thing, they wouldn't be selling it, right?
DingDongMerrilyOutOfSeason · 21/04/2011 23:40
I did this with my mum.
'I want high heels'
'Tough'
'All my friends have them'
'If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you?'
'Yes!' (in a sulky voice)
'Well if you're going to go and jump off a cliff, what do you need heels for?'
She always won.
nobetterthanthat · 21/04/2011 23:41
I don't believe there are any padded bras with an age 6 label on them. There are bras available in small sizes but the alternative would be to deny bras to pubescent girls who need them until they reach some sort of arbitrary age when comfy undergarments are suddenly ok.
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.