Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

This website......

122 replies

jon124 · 14/04/2010 19:44

Doesn't know kids, doesn't know how to deal with kids and is setting a bad example. I'm 16 and can already notice that this is quite obviously discrimination in it's mildest form. Oh a website purely for women trying to change a child's life by complaining. How about you look after your kids instead of expecting the government to do it for you.

No doubt this will get deleted in a minute or 2 but you know

OP posts:
Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:12

my specialist field is pregnancy , childbirth etc.

ChickensHaveSinisterMotives · 14/04/2010 21:13

Ah, see Jon, you're missing the point re Primark. Yes, you can say no to your children (I would actually argue that it takes up around 80% of parenting time). However, IMO, the sexualisation of children is a problem that we as a society need to challenge. We expect the government to support the majority's moral viewpoint. Do you think that children should be wearing padded bikinis?

Original poster
jon124 · 14/04/2010 21:14

Nope, power doesn't help. Just makes people feel like their important.

and lunatic, I can guarantee their are things I know about IT that you don't. Unless you are saying you know everything about IT and their is nothing more to learn.

OP posts:
toccatanfudge · 14/04/2010 21:15

it's all to do with social constructionism and the discourse of childhood you see Jon.

LunaticFringe · 14/04/2010 21:16

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
jon124 · 14/04/2010 21:16

Chickens, nope I don't but I think a mother and father should have full responsibility for their children. I'm not very experienced with business due to age and what not but correct me if I'm wrong here. A large company like primark would stock products that are selling, so if no one buys the product they wouldn't sell it. See what I'm getting at here?

OP posts:
Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:17

but we need power, power has to be held by certain people and committees etc.. otherwise there would be anarchy

public power and uprising is good on occasion

one of the most enduring images of the last century was one lone man facing down the tanks in tianamen square

people dancing on top of the berlin wall as it came down

the miners strikes and poll tax riots showed the governement the people and the public have power and will wield it

petitions are a form of protest

being allowed to protest and try to brign about change is a basic human right

southeastastra · 14/04/2010 21:17

my hard drive is bigger than your hard drive

well i think it's pretty good that in this day and age a collective group of people can make a difference and change things.

toccatanfudge · 14/04/2010 21:17

hell I certainly don't fit the media steretype.

Middle class - nope - common as muck
Working - nope - benefits scrounger
Educated - well vaguely so
Boden wearing - think it's all pants and overpriced.......give me Primark George at Asda any day of the week

Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:18

just becuase some people buy padded bikinis for young children DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT OR ACCEPTABLE

just because some people download child porn, does not make it right

just because something is available in the public domain , does not mean it should remain their uncahllenged

ShinyAndNew · 14/04/2010 21:18

The Primark thing is not about saying no. Imo it's about the fact that places are advertising this sort of thing to children in the first place.

I can say no to my 6yo about a padded bikini. I would say no about any bikini. But she will see it on the shelves next to the my little pony swim suits and think that it must be desirable for your breasts to look larger.

And the fact that Playboy at all be aimed at anyone under the age of 16, is frankly disturbing.

LunaticFringe · 14/04/2010 21:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

toccatanfudge · 14/04/2010 21:20

but many of those products may sell because the wider audience hasn't been educated about the issues surrounding things, such as the sexualisation of children.

Many people once they learn about these things change their opinions and may well stop buying them.

That's how social constructionism works, the tide turns and things change.

And I bet I can play any organ better than you can

Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:21

yes, shineyandnew, it is about creating expectations/desire in children to look/be different to how they should be

it is normalising the abnormal

no 7 year old needs a padded bra

nor should they even thikn they need one

ChickensHaveSinisterMotives · 14/04/2010 21:22

toccatanfudge has pretty much covered it. Except I can't play the organ.

Original poster
jon124 · 14/04/2010 21:24

At no point am i saying it is right or acceptable.

However, is this the right way to go about it? Maybe a child won't listen to the word no to begin with but surely getting them to learn what no means is a big part of parenting. Also, to stop advertising padded bikinis to kids you have created a media story which is all over the news so kids will hear all about it?

Also, Tienanmen square, little different here. Considering what happened right after is the tanks carried on?

OP posts:
Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:26

yes, but my point is protest is remembered. issues that are important make headlines.

Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:28

yes, it has created a media storm and do you really believe Primark did not know this would happen? they get to look really magnanimous now donating their profits to a charity, i would wager this whole thing was planned and thought out and the consequences were known from the start

have you ever heard the phrase 'no such thing as bad publicity'

people will go into primark to see what they fuss is about, and possibly buy something while they are there

tethersend · 14/04/2010 21:29

Jon, WRT to the padded bra issue, what happens if the parent is the paedophile?

Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:29

7 year olds don;t tend to read/hear the news

Lulumaam · 14/04/2010 21:29

what do you thikn is the correct response to mainstream shops selling sexualising clothes?

Original poster
jon124 · 14/04/2010 21:30

tether, if the parent is the pedophile do you think a padded bikini is the largest issue at hand?

OP posts:
MrsPixie · 14/04/2010 21:31

v young children find it hard to understand the nuanced concepts of commodity fetishism jon, there are some things that are exploitative, damaging and simply need to be removed from market.

A 4 year old sees a sparkly pink duvet cover with a bunny head. She is not aware that it relates to a pornographic empire.

ChickensHaveSinisterMotives · 14/04/2010 21:32

Saying 'no' has nothing to do with padded bikinis. The bikini's shouldn't exist for anyone to have to say 'no' to. By making a fuss, and making it clear to the manufacturer that this is unacceptable, hopefully they'll stop trying to encourage little girls to grow up to aspire to nothing but fulfilling male fantasy. There is a wider issue here. Its not a simple case of 'supply and demand', its about how young children are being conditioned. There is a huge contradiction in a society which screams 'Paedos on every corner!' from its newspapers, yet sells padded bikini tops for 7 year olds. I guess its about harm. Sweets aren't good for my children, so I limit them and can say 'no' when necessary. Fine. If a company decided to lace their sweeties with heroin, I would expect the government to step in as well as my saying 'no'.

MrsPixie · 14/04/2010 21:32

Nor would I want to explain you her the implications of it at that age. I shouldn't have to.