So Gross I don't know what to say
From http://www.feministing.com/archives/008226.html
Who needs credit cards when you have a junior vagina?
"Reader Scarlett saw these oh-so-charming panties in the junior department of her local Wal-Mart on Kildare Farms Road in Cary, NC. There's nothing quite like telling adolescent girls that they don't need to worry about finances since they have their very own moneypot between their legs."
And of course, the newest:
http://www.feministing.com/archives/011011.html
"We all know that sexualizing young girls is no new trend; between underwear telling girls their vagina is a commodity to padded bras for six year olds, we can't be too surprised that young girls - including infants - are now being sold high heels.
Reader Lisa alerts us to wedges for young girls called "Hot 2 Trot" sold on Amazon.com that are described in a super icky way:
She'll feel extra fab prancing around in these Hot 2 Trot wedges by Mia. . . . Crossing patent vamp straps wrap over the arches to a slingback . . . . A 1/2 inch cork textured midsole rises to a 2 1/2 inch wedge heel.
In the meantime, the Today Show had a feature this morning on high heels for babies. While the line of heels are soft (because if not, you know, an infant could break her 3-month old ankle on it) and the Heelarious founders seem to imply that this concept of heels for babies is strictly for humor, the shoes still run for 35 bucks a pop and are being pitched as a trend by the likes of Nicole Richie and others. And they come in zebra, hot pink and leopard. (Pic above)
Bobbi Thomas' comment on the Today Show was quite nauseating: "Little girls can get a jump start on their strut and be top-models-in-training before they leave the crib."
Tell the ladies of Heelarious that you're not laughing. "
"Fundamentally the markswoman aims at herself" DT Suzuki
- Strange Quark's blog
- Login or register to post comments
totally blechsters
Tigerfish Mama
WTF???
Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK?
I'm sick.
My husband was appalled, and he comes from a place where nude sunbathing and topless women are pretty normal and soft porn starts on all the major channels after 10pm (the Netherlands).
you stole the word right out of my mouth, lunar. fucking GAG.
If people here weren't so weird about sex and the body and sex were seen as more natural, then, perhaps less high heels for babies? Gstrings for 7 year olds?
I remember going to switzerland when I was in junior high and thinking all of the girls my age were horribly backward -- because they weren't shaving their legs or wearing makeup, they weren't engaging in the 3 inch high teased bang stunts that I was engaging in (oh, the effects of one too many guns-n-roses videos), and they weren't wearing short shorts, miniskirts, heels, and low cut tops like my orange county ass. They played tennis and spent time with their families. Now I would most likely find this refreshing.
Someone told me recently that her 2 year old niece will "only" wear high heels -- well, who's buying them for her? and, how rough is that on developing feet and on kids who want to/should run and play? There have been numerous studies about how putting girls in fussy clothes and shoes (regularly) limits their physical development...why would people do this to their kids?
This is disgusting, but I have to say I am not surprised.
"If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends?"
I'm really not shocked, either. This one woman I know has a 7 year old daughter, who when they came to our house for my sister-in-laws weddingshower, was complaining about the heels she was wearing and her mother jus said "well, thats the price you pay for beauty, honey." Ugh! And she was taking about her eldest daughters junior high scool graduation and how she bought her the biggest padded bra and the highest heels and the most low cut dress. The kids is ,what...13?!
I would just like to say, that I can barely walk in 2 and a half inch heels...let alone someone who can barely walk at all...
~Seriousness is a sickness; your sense of humor makes you more human, more humble.~
~Seriousness is a sickness; your sense of humor makes you more human, more humble.~
I seem to remember something very much like this.
the high heeled baby shoes are hilarious, they really are. I can't believe people would twig out over that, sheesh.
on the nasty drawers, look here *playing devil's advocate*
some things I have read on hipmama and other radical-type supposed sex-positive type sites including feministing:
-having sex for money is an ok thing to do
-exchanging sexual favors for food, money, shelter is fine for survival
-being a prostitute is a valid career
-and so forth
soooooo...given that premise, how are these panties any different than a doctor-kit toy for little girls? I mean if being a prostitute is an ok career and just as valid a job as being a doctor, why is the doctor toy or costume ok but not these drawers?
my mama blog | scrapbook
Wherever there is a human being there is an opportunity for kindness. ~Seneca
is this what the panties are saying? That's just one interpretation. It could also be construed that the panties are saying it's ok to want to grow up to be a prostitute.
I have seen on feministing and hipmama and other 'sex-positive' websites that having sex for money is an ok thing to do, and being a prostitute is a valid career. hence, if one really believes this, why is it not ok to tell/teach little girls that being a whore is something they should aspire to? In the same way we encourage children to be doctors or teachers, or what have you. I'm surprised that these drawers haven't been embraced as some post-sexism, fourth wave-feminist liberating, ethical slut-ism, deconstructing-power-of-sexist-imagery-having, type of clothing construct. LOL!!
my mama blog | scrapbook
Wherever there is a human being there is an opportunity for kindness. ~Seneca
Sex work is a real career and is as valid as being a doctor. I think too many conversations about it are categorically: it's evil, so we don't care about prostitutes. There is nuance to be had there. Does prostitution exist? Yes. Do most people who are prostitutes want to get out of it, is there rampant sexism, drug addiction, slavery and abuse in the trade? Yes. I think looking at the issue as black and white is wrong, no matter which side you are coming from. It is not likely to be an empowering or feminist choice in my eyes, and I will argue that point and have. I don't think it is very sex positive in most cases either. But it is nuanced. Just like thongs and stilettos are not empowering, IMO. Is there a variety of opinions on this? Of course. I defend the right of a woman (or a man or any non binary gendered person) to wear a thong, these undies, or a burka, for that matter. Just because someone is choosing it does not make it a feminist choice, however. Defending the right to make the choice is feminist, however, Does that make sense?
I am not sure who these underwear are marketed towards, but I think we can argue that there is a difference between being sex positive and being for the sexualization of young girls. These underwear are being sold at Wal Mart, we are not talking about a minority of feminists here. Even on Feministing, a site I frequent, posts on sex workers get a lot of difference of opinion. I think we can have a conversation with nuance without saying our opinions are discounted just because some small group of extremists that may agree with us on other issues think prostitution is an expression of female independence and sexuality.
Sunflower the unflower
Mom's Tinfoil Hat
Foodie loves Picky
Sunflower the unflower
I appreciate your response, will mull over it for awhile.
my mama blog | scrapbook
Wherever there is a human being there is an opportunity for kindness. ~Seneca
I'm a pretty sex-positive person, in that I believe sex is healthy and normal and natural and good. Holy, even. But the sexualization of our children is not. Ever. Whether it's at the hands of the child molester next door or the media or W*lM**t. It contributes to a very UNhealthy attitude toward sex, oneself, and one's body in the adult years.
An appropriate education about physiology and sex for our kids until about age 11-15 (depends on the kid) is that of knowing what one's own body parts are, what they do, what they will do once physical maturity hits, and the basics of the opposite sex, too (whether or not they turn out to be attracted to that sex). Knowing that they have a right and an obligation to themselves to say no if they're not comfortable with anything that someone is doing to their body.
That is healthy sexual development--knowledge without this haze of bigger social issues, power, etc. These underwear in the context of the bigger social issues are a big problem to me.
I am sex-positive in that I believe sex that is safe (emotionally, physically, etc) can be as valid a way for someone to get in touch with themselves and with the universe as prayer or running marathons or whatever. Sex that is forced (by financial circumstances, for example) is not emotionally safe. And these underwear teach girls to put themselves in financially vulnerable positions. When you have the financial support, the educational readiness, etc. to become a laywer or a doctor, but you choose sex work, that's fine. When you're forced into sex work because you don't have any other options that pay as well, that's a sign of some very fucked up attitudes in our society, and it is wrong (on the part of our culture, not the individual choosing.) To me, these underwear symbolize that, because in the greater context of things, girls are having a hard enough time as it is.
24/MN. Queer, veg, single, AP mama to DD1.
25/MN and WA. Queer, veg, single, AP mama to DD2.5.
the difference is that when we are talking about legalizing prostitution, we are talking about making the field safer and more regulated for the *adult* women who *choose* to go into it with their eyes open regarding the inherent risks. When we have panties that say "I am a sex object and nothing more, wheee!" we limit the girls' experience to that as the *only* option and therefore make the choice for them. I think it's safe to say that girls see this message enough already without having it screenprinted across their crotches.
really, mercury, if I didn't know better, I'd think you were baiting people here -- you know well that some of the mamas here have worked in the sex industry and have strong feelings about this issue. Is your intention to explore the issue further? Remember that *every* mama's experience is just as valid as yours.
nah I was just asked the question, because I wanted to know...
my mama blog | scrapbook
Wherever there is a human being there is an opportunity for kindness. ~Seneca
if these underpants were the equivalent of a doctor toy, they wouldn't say what they do. if prostitution is a valid career choice, it involves financial autonomy, and these underpants overtly exhort financial dependence - arguably more like the positionality of wives who do not earn paychecks and have been argued to be "kept" by men/husbands who pay their bills in exchange for their sexual and domestic services which also happens to be a very rough paraphrasing of the law as set out in Marvin v. Marvin (1976) 18 Cal.3d 660 [134 Cal.Rptr. 815, 557 P.2d 106].
but maybe i'm justing being baiting, too, 'cuz i actually find the underpants and the shoes and the micro-minis i see on six year olds et al to be seriously troubling.
"if i pass for other than what i am, do you feel safer?" ~ lani ka'ahumanu
dragon knows dragon
"if i pass for other than what i am, do you feel safer?" ~ lani ka'ahumanu
dragon knows dragon
before this turns into a 'you are trying to start a fight! you hate prostitutes! and so forth a la carte this conversation, I was just asking why they are different. thanks for the answer.
my mama blog | scrapbook
Wherever there is a human being there is an opportunity for kindness. ~Seneca
but you're welcome.
"if i pass for other than what i am, do you feel safer?" ~ lani ka'ahumanu
dragon knows dragon
The font and style also remind me of Care Bears, now that I think about it. Eww eww eww...
24/MN. Queer, veg, single, AP mama to DD1.
One of the comments (from last December) on the feministing site is from a woman who said she saw the panties, and she replied that "when you have Santa" is on the back. It's still pretty...yuck.
Navigation
Who's online
Who's New
- BeachBunny
- gayle.mallinger
- Mamapocket
- mjcwriter
- addie smith
I don't think it's right for us to allow grown-ups to have sex with little girls. In fact, it's illegal. Teaching little girls to sell their bodies is child prostitution, which I haven't seen argued on feministing (or any other feminist site) as something that should be supported.
Heels were made for the purpose of making women more vulnerable and needy. For my child, I am working on making them stronger and more independent, and these heels are a symbol of starting that weakness training early...but of course, foot binding in China was considered to be cute and dainty for a long time too. No, this doesn't require a surgery - but it's a symbolic act that has a pretty deep meaning about what we are doing to our girls from the time they are born (evidently).
"Fundamentally the markswoman aims at herself" DT Suzuki