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

Image still only matters to some women - I am living proof

Possibly related I've never even heard of the programs you mention. Curious why you're letting your DD watch them at 10 in the morning?

Totally agree (mentioned it myself) that the extension of 'teenage' is a bad bad thing, and as you say, in both directions.

It's on as 'background' whilst she is revising. I could never concentrate with TV on, but this multi-media generation is different (apparently).

Haven't had time to read all of the above but agree in principle with the campaign, but for both sexes. I have 2 ds and 1 dd and I get v depressed by the differences in what they receive for their birthdays and so on. I have just given my neice an alien maker kit for her b'day but of course the box features 2 boys playing with it, why not a boy and a girl? Or will boys not play with anything seen as remotely associated with girls? I would like advertising of toys to go back to looking like this. I adore this image, it remind me of my own childhood, not least because the little girl is the spitting image of my then best friend who had two brothers and was the coolest girl around.

Time to add hair gel to the list?
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/889196-to-think-school-39-s-shouldn-t-be -able-to?msgid=18083330

oops... www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/889196-to-think-school-39-s-shouldn-t-be-able-to?msgid= 18083330

Completely agree with this campaign. I'd quite like to add boys in too - I find it v.hard to find boys clothes without violent imagery (evne if its just ben10 - but what happened to nice, normal, plain dungarees?!). But having just had a girl it drives me round the bend that everything is covered in pink frills and sequins - even jeans! - and i havent' even got to the sexy stuff yet. Focusing on the sexy stuff is probably the main focus for a campaign though as so many people seem to like pink frills. Hopefully it will have a knock on effect on kids clothes in general.
I rather like 'don't pimp my kid'.... but 'let girls be girls' would be easier for shops to sign up to, have as a logo on their catalogues, etc.

What about children being exposed to sexual images in places like their local grocery stores. I think its awful that my daughter can look at semi pornographic images on the magazine racks. I know they are on the top shelf but she can look up and frequently does.

Count me in. And I agree heartily with you paula. Many tabloids have semi-pornographic images on their front pages and are not on the top shelf.

Paula and Franch, this is bad for boys too.

Of course it is. I want to keep my children as innocent as possible for as long as possible. I also don't want my son growing up thinking that women are objects.

Proof it can be done... just wish you stocked sweaters too!(still in search of nice woolly for DD )

I'm sorry, I love you, Mumsnet but I do feel this is about snobbery, classism, fashion tastes and I hate to say it, pandering to advertisers.

Boden, one of your biggest advertisers and for better or worse, practically synonymous with Mumsnet, are all about the traditional clothes. And now KSBKids are using it as a platform to sell their clothes

Yes, slogans are provocative, yes padded bras are inappropriate, yes, high heels are bad for children's feet. I'll concede that. But no-one has actually explained how 'strappy tops' (vest tops?), 'miniskirts' (skirts!) or things with 'laces and rips' are actually pornographic or sexual and not just NOT TO YOUR TASTE.

This is ALLLLL about the headlines for the Mumsnet machine. Usually, I'm pretty proud of Mumsnet. MrsBaldwin's work was amazing this week and your work on miscarriage is vital, but this smacks of outrage and is just a media war. It's not actually going to change anything other than win a few headlines for MN and polarise people's opinions on MN.

Malene...that is just blatent advertising.

Why would running that website stop you participating in MN discusions?

Absobleedinglutely Carmen.

Although imo padded bras are fine. If it's cold and your nipples are standing to attention a padded bra is more demure than an unpadded one. I appreciate I'm going off on a tangent here, mind

I think the strappy tops are tops for little girls with adjustable straps, like bra straps, not vest tops, which are not adjustable. They manage to look flimsy and adult at the same time. Clothes with laces and rips show skin underneath and make the wearer look as if she has been attacked by someone or someone's pet, (in the case of the rips) or that she is wearing rags and doesn't care, and no-one else cares enough about her to make sure her clothes are in good condition. The girl who wears such clothing presents herself as someone who is fending for herself, puts herself in dangerous situations or has been in a dangerous situation -- is unprotected and uncared for, therefore ripe for the plucking. The laces are reminiscent of bodice ripping, often show skin underneath, and are a style belonging to soft porn, imho, rather than practical childhood adventures.

If a campaign raises the issue of what's available out there for girls to wear, and what the clothing choices are broadcasting about our DDs to the public at large, and what this may be doing to them, to how they see themselves, and the boys they associate with, and how they see the girls, then it will have achieved a lot. A campaign can't realistically hope to achieve more than make people think and ask questions.

Good grief.

Or alternatively, straps are adjustable because the proportion of a child's shoulders/chest region vary. Clothes have laces because they're expressing individuality through decoration (as with ribbons in the hair) or indicating chosen affiliation to a social group (goth, boho, whatever).

Rips in clothes might be a signifier that the child likes playing outside, is not conforming to ideals or femining standards of perfection.

Basically, you're reading into it what you want.

And you choose to read porn into them.

Hmmmmmm...

femining=feminine, obv.

mathanxiety...you have given this subject a lot of thought, haven't you.

Carmen - spot on.

mathanxiety, while I think we're more or less on the same side, you risk losing the argument by taking it too far.

I remain solidly behind the campaign against pole dancing, sexual slogans etc, but agree that strappy tops etc are just a matter of taste.

Let's stick to the core argument (well expressed in the MN statement) rather than veering off track and losing everyone along the way.

Wow so a whole campaign based on whether someone's straps are adjustable or not

Carmen has put it much better than me so I will just say I agree with everything she has written.

Let's forget straps and get back to pole dancing and Playboy ...

Apart from the examples in the links in the OP I have never actually seen high heels for babies, items of clothing with sexual slogans or pole dancing kits. I don't think they sell them in most high street shops. In cases where shops have stocked this stuff (like the Woolworths Playboy bedding) it has quickly been brought to the attention of the media and been taken off the shelves. So is a campaign actually needed?

I have had a look on Next, ASDA and Matalan websites and while there is a lot of pink and a lot of it isn't to my taste, I wouldn't say any of it is actually sexualising young girls.

So is this a campaign for campaign's sake - one that will get MN in the papers - or a campaign that is actually necessary?

I'd much rather see a MN campaign to get porn off newsagents' shelves.