Campaign to stop retailers selling products that prematurely sexualise children - let us know what you think...

[JustineMumsnet]

So quite a few folk on the MN campaigns thread mentioned that an issue they'd like to see MN get involved in is the premature sexualisation of children.

So we've put together an outline for a potential campaign, along the lines of Let girls be girls, summarising the issues and some of the research. The aim is to encourage retailers to make a simple, public pledge that commits them to selling only products which do not sexualise children.

Please do have a read and let us know your thoughts, ideas, suggestions.

Thanks.
MNHQ

I worry that this could turn into a witch-hunt-like crusade, with people pointing the finger at clothing hanging on rails that shows signs of 'badness' i.e. 'sexiness' or worse, that fingers will be pointed at children themselves whose parents have chosen clothes for them that do not meet the approval of the vocal, self-appointed 'anti-tart brigade'. People have been posting links to clothing that may not meet the poster's personal taste, but whose 'sexual' character is really not evident to me e.g flat ankle boots for early teens, black toddler dresses.

That's the interesting point and I think I mentioned orthodox Jews, Christians and Muslim covering above. We have to an extent moved to a cover up society. I also woudl like mumsnet to ensure all children under 5 or 3 say can run around outdoor pools and on beaches with nothing on too. Clothing is a very emotive issue - see burka thread.

And see feminism threads too - there presumably is an argument that putting any girl in a dress is wrong too thus ban all dresses - that's one point of view or that any adornment is bad as we should be thinking about helping others and not trying to look good at all. Fasctinatg topics.

My principal aim would always be to ensure the freedom of the people in this country to be as different and eccentric as they like because that is our national character and why people the world over flock to live here so not banning anything much even if we disagree with it (within reason) is a pretty good starting point but that is completely different from lobbying and clothes companies doing what consumer want to maximise their sales which as I am a capitalist I am all in favour of.

And this thread pretty much shows why this is going to end in tears.

Flat ankle boots are far from sexualising children same goes for those bra tops in debenhams, should a pre pubesant girl bind her boobs instead?

a pre-pubescent girl doesn't have boobs so no binding necessary

Pre pubescent girls don't need padded bras though.

No i agree but there is a link above where they are just crop tops, totally different IMO.

Carmelita - do you go from no boobs to boobs with nothing in between then?

The point is, there is a world of difference between padded bras and crop tops.

Same as there is a world of difference between eat me on knickers and gorgeous written on a top.

I wouldn't put my 7yo in a crop top that was designed to resemble a bra. Partly because of the fact it's meant to look like a bra; and partly because I'm not keen on crop tops for little girls.

If she needed a bra, I'd get her a bra. And she could wear something else on top!

That top is designed to be worn under clothes too, and why is it wrong to have an option for children who don't actually want to wear a bra yet?

Personal opinions are fine but are not the point of this campaign.

After reading this thread I have a strong yearning to run out and buy a bra for my 6 year old just to remind myself that we do live in a free society and what we wear should be our choice - or have I woke up in the Middle East.
If you don't like high heels on kids or bras on 7 year olds don't buy them and avert your eyes from people who do. Jeez.

I think the point here is that we should not have a society where it is "normal" for pre pubescent girls to dress as though they are sexually active/available and stress that their looks are more important than anything else.

This narrows the horizons of young girls into a set of behaviours and attitudes that would stop her from doing a large range of careers or from developing a sense of self to enable her to be an individual with free will.

If society says a girl should be pretty, not do sports, dress her in clothes that limit her movement and say girls are nurses, men are doctors it does have an effect.

Also, we are then back in the middle ages when women were brought up to get married and keep house and raise the kids. Anything else was against nature.

Really pleased at the press and the sentiment. I regularly get irritated by the constant gender stereotyping,even down to the excess of pink- and often nothing else, for girls in many stores. There seems to be an underlying current of girls only aspiring to "looking pretty". Although this seems harmless it really grates - see also " pinkstinks" campaign.As a Guider and mum of a 2 year old girl. I think "let girls be girls" is definitely something we need to be shouting.

It's interesting because the sexual libertarians and freedom try not to ban things people which is me really would then be in the camp with those who would be against banning the burka too. But nor would I want a society where women must hide their sexuality. We also have problems as a society in accepting that some chyildren are sexual. It's a verboten topic, the elephant in the room, the masturbating 7 or 8 year old. it also then becomes a children's rights issue too which is why I like it.

If it pleases mothers to have some campaign about clothes and increases sales for M&S and others then I as a happy little capitalist say go ahead but never take that further step that we ban clothes or that we ensure that unless all the children are in the identical Chairman Mau suit or burka or whatever it might be they are not allowed out and about.

I would certainly agree with M's view though above that I would like girls to know their capital is not just their sexual capital but also the brains and their physical abilities too. It is nearly 20 years ago that I deliberately bought my daughters books over which we did at times laugh, but they showed women as plumbers, they showed house husbands - this was in the 80s and they were not a wrong choice to buy; those daughters also saw me really enjoying a wonderful career which I still do and working full time and working, saw me not watching TV, not intersted in pop music videos, engrossed by the FT and never shopping if it could be possibly helped, and they seem to be doing pretty well with their own careers now and I hope not exclusively defining themselves by their looks.

.

Katie Price has recently announced her intention to launch a make-up range for children. She openly admits that this will cause controversy; her general attitude appears to be that any publicity is good publicity. With her low level of intelligence and moral duty, Katie Price clearly has no clue of the negative impact she could have on many girls growing up around the country.

I'm sure most Mumsnet readers would agree that these particular plans should be targeted in the campaign.

I can see this heading towards schools declaring what girls can and cannot wear to the school disco, or what they wear on field trips in the same way that lunch-boxes are checked.

My kids' school is no longer giving out free fruit at morning break, but the school council (constituted of 5-11 year olds!) has announced that parents can send in a piece of fruit for their child's snack as long as the child presents their snack to the teacher for inspection when lining up in the morning.

I agree entirely with HeavyMetalGlamourRockStar. Am tempted to send my child to school with a snack of a day-old Happy Meal just to contribute to the supply of apocryphal stories about dreadful parents that teachers and health promoters always trot out.

I really think parents need to start acting like adults - make your choices, justify them to your child in terms of your own taste and values, and stopping worrying about everybody else. We are really only talking about SHOPPING after all.

With all due respect, I think it is to completely miss the point of the debate to adopt a 'turn a blind eye' attitude. Of course we need to maintain freedom of choice as to what we as adults choose to do. But we are responsible for our children's well being and we need to make as informed decisions on their behalf as we are able to do. If this debate actually causes someone to go out and buy a six year old a bra to prove a point about freedom of choice,(and I know this is merely being used to illustrate an argument!) then they must acknowledge that they would merely be exercising their own freedom of choice and not that of their six year old daughter, which is kind of getting close to the hub here. When does a child really know what's best for themselves? At aged six, seven, ten, fifteen? At what age shall we relinquish our responsbility as parents? This debate is about trying to collectively protect a generation of children, and look at all the implications presented by the sale of clothes that turn seven year olds into seventeen year olds. If peadofiles are using the fact that a young girl (child)! was dressed in provocative clothing as a defence and excuse for an act of sexual abuse, (which if you read some articles seems to be the case). Then I for one am glad we are trying to struggle towards doing the right thing by our children. We won't always agree, but through using our freedom of speech we become better informed and empowered. Hopfully if we can get it right, this generation of girls might thank us and respect us for our struggle to stem this trend, and see it as a return to female empowerment rather than givng in to male dominated capitalist forces. And just maybe the suffragettes can rest easy in their graves. Apologies for my passion!

I object in the strongest terms that a paedophile can use provocatve clothing as a excuse for their obscene behaviour - since when does their opinion get to determine what our children should wear. Maybe we should ban short skirt because they encourage rapists.
My sister (who is in a senior position within a male dominated construction prfession) bought her 6 year old daughter a padded bra - why? because her daughter wanted one, because her daughter wanted to be like her Mum. My niece wore the bra for less than a half a day before declaring it too uncomfortable. My sister's defense for buying her daughter a bra was that my Mum was was obsessed with denying her sexuality through androgynous clothing, she felt my Mum's choice of clothing made her feel ugly and masculine and it's an issue she still struggles with. My Mum had mellowed a little when it came to my turn.
Buying a bra is not something I'd choose for my 6 year old but she enjoys make up - to a surprising degree - I don't wear much but she's always been fascinated by people who do - she is so girly, so pink, so unlike me and to an extent that needs to be respected, she is who she is and creating a generation of mini-me's will not make for happy daughters.
One final thing - a friend of mine, someone I met at Uni - a very clever, accomplished female; musically, linguistically and scientifically and now a Consultant Radiologist, was enormously insecure about her sexuality, all emphasis was put on her achievements at school - her Dad was a 60's intellectual who believed she could be just like men and she was but she was also a woman and no one had nutured that side of her life and that has made her very insecure about being a woman, she doesn't feel worthy - despite all that she is.
Balance is what's needed of course but other parents deciding choice for you? I'm not into that.

I, of course have views on the best way to bring kids up, I'm forced to dilute my views on junk food because other parents see fit to "treat" my kids to rubbish on their child's birthday - but I have to accept that my kids get given cheap junk food at school or at parties - either that or make my kids feel crap at least once a week. My kids have to endure prayer sessions every assembly, worshiping something we don't believe exists - to avoid that would require pulling them out of assembly, and although they don't enjoy prayer sessions, pulling them out would make them feel too different. So we don't always get to have things the way we want them and at least with padded bras I can avoid the bloody shop - school is a little more difficult to avoid.

I object in the strongest terms along side you that a paedophile could use provocative clothing as an excuse for their obscene behaviour. I'm merely drawing attention to the fact that it is only relatively recently that such a defence could be used. I would not want to be seen to be defending their actions in any way, shape or form. And attach no blame what so ever on the child no matter what they were wearing.
I really do know where you are coming from when you talk about issues of femininity/sexiness and how we as individual women find our way through the maze of dress codes and contradictions.
As a four year old I remember my mother buying me a bikini (cotton rushed and totally old fashioned I'm sure)All she could find no doubt, as we were already on the beach. I remember being momenterily thrilled until she took the top and threw it away. My devastation lasted a little longer. She couldn't see the point of the 'bra' component of a bikini, which was relatively new in the mid sixties' and to an older mum must have signified 'sexy'. When I look back now I can understand her thinking, and I kind of love her for it. 'Why would you want to put a bra on a infant?' We've come a long way since then, but I would still want to influence my daughter's choice of bikini today.
Your DD sounds like mine (aged 8), far more into experimenting with makeup etc than I ever was or allowed to be. I have gone with this, but always within the safe environment of her home. I've always made a distinction between 'playing' with make up at home and going out wearing makeup. I want with all my heart for her to be able to express who she is, and fully understand she is a different person from me, growing up at a different time; but I will defend her right to a fully fledged childhood. She might stuff tennis balls down her swim suit, and prance around in a comedy way in the garden, but that won't have me rushing out to buy her a bra, she will find her child like ways to explore her own identity.
I bit of religion and some fast food may have different implications, but won't necesserily curtail an already short and swiftly over stage of life.
We have to be sensible and as I argued in an earlier post, we mustn't imagine all children's 'fashion' is evil and corrupting, but I still think the debate should rage on, and as many mums as possible should think about the implications of dressing our little lambs as mutton.
I won't be able to get up in the morning!

I object in the strongest terms along side you that a paedophile could use provocative clothing as an excuse for their obscene behaviour. I'm merely drawing attention to the fact that it is only relatively recently that such a defence could be used. I would not want to be seen to be defending their actions in any way, shape or form. And attach no blame what so ever on the child no matter what they were wearing.
I really do know where you are coming from when you talk about issues of femininity/sexiness and how we as individual women find our way through the maze of dress codes and contradictions.
As a four year old I remember my mother buying me a bikini (cotton rushed and totally old fashioned I'm sure)All she could find no doubt, as we were already on the beach. I remember being momenterily thrilled until she took the top and threw it away. My devastation lasted a little longer. She couldn't see the point of the 'bra' component of a bikini, which was relatively new in the mid sixties' and to an older mum must have signified 'sexy'. When I look back now I can understand her thinking, and I kind of love her for it. 'Why would you want to put a bra on a infant?' We've come a long way since then, but I would still want to influence my daughter's choice of bikini today.
Your DD sounds like mine (aged 8), far more into experimenting with makeup etc than I ever was or allowed to be. I have gone with this, but always within the safe environment of her home. I've always made a distinction between 'playing' with make up at home and going out wearing makeup. I want with all my heart for her to be able to express who she is, and fully understand she is a different person from me, growing up at a different time; but I will defend her right to a fully fledged childhood. She might stuff tennis balls down her swim suit, and prance around in a comedy way in the garden, but that won't have me rushing out to buy her a bra, she will find her child like ways to explore her own identity.
I bit of religion and some fast food may have different implications, but won't necesserily curtail an already short and swiftly over stage of life.
We have to be sensible and as I argued in an earlier post, we mustn't imagine all children's 'fashion' is evil and corrupting, but I still think the debate should rage on, and as many mums as possible should think about the implications of dressing our little lambs as mutton.
I won't be able to get up in the morning!

I think we should boycott those Retailers who won't back the Campaign.

Has a letter gone to H&M ? I didn't see it on the list.

I think so.

onebatmother Can we also contact Bratz (both the doll company and the clothes shop Bratz

It is a side issue if some are aroused by particular things. Playgrounds have always had their man in a dirty mac. What we need to ensure is that children's freedom to wear what they like, be bare on the beach etc is never curtailed. But this is an interesting topic because is also about freedom - the freedom of speech of parents to express displeasure about particular clothing and say it's hard to buy unless you have more money, clothes which aren't provocative - although I'm not so sure it is that hard but I never voluntarily enter shops so I am bit cut off from it all.

I have noticed a refreshing effect of the recession or mancession as they call it now 600,000 men are principal carers in that women's rights, and work are enhanced and for the first time in a decade we have attempts at better equality laws and a feeling that girls could be proud of careers and define themselves by their intellectual as well as sexual capital and that rolls into how they dress too. I would never have wanted a little girl wearing clothes that means she couldn't swing on ropes on trees and my daughters were never so curbed.

The other issue is not to give in to them because "everyone" is doing X. If had a pound for everytime one of my 5 childen in the last 25 years said everyone has X or wears X I would be very rich. (It's slightly more complex an issue when they're older and even when younger some chidlren have very strong personalities and others don't - you just have to form your won judgment. Some are sexual much younger too in all cultures. Some girls will menstruate at 10 and others at 14. I think the average remains at 13 and of course they are not very mature even then but it obviously affects when they might need or want bras and things like that.

Isn't the paedophile provoking aspect of this rather missing the point?
Surely this is about letting our girls be girls? It's about them not having to 'present themselves' to the world as a sexual object while they are still children? Also the passivity and lack of ambition that is inherent in so many of the girl-nurse/boy doctor, 'wannabe wag' labels and in being the object of the gaze rather than being self confident active people.

Is this presenting themselves as sexual objects or just fashion, there is a difference, at least in the mind of my dc, sexuality doesn't exist, pretty clothes do and are worn for fun. My dd loves fashion - she's arty & creative and very, very feminine. She would have no desire to climb trees and get muddy (much unlike me when I was a lass).
It's one thing to campaign for the freedom of choice but to campaign to restrict choice - to ask girls to reject their desire for all things pink & pretty is silly.

To inspire your child to succeed has more to do with your attitude as a parent and the role model you create than a pair of ankle books with a half inch heel. It's very possible that the parents who buy "wannabe wag" t-shirts for their 7 year olds are never going to be great role models and whether the child wears the t-shirt or not will have little effect on their future outcomes.