Just when you thought it couldn't get worse, right?
But while this baby shirt (that's right, for 0 - 4 year olds) has created a huge uproar among parenting blogs, Sociological Images updates that the designer of the shirt claims it was actually a critique in response to clothes that sexualize young girls. (Check out her Equal Opportunity Baby Grows line.)
So what do you think, still offensive (after all, I wouldn't be surprised if the designer failed to mention another reason behind the shirt was to get this publicity) or a humorous way of poking fun at the ridiculousness of sexualized children's clothes?
h/t to Daniela!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: My First Boob Tassels .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15998
I think it's actually a pretty clever way of responding to the idea of sexualizing young girls. I think a lot of people hear that argument and say, "No no no, we don't do that," so making a shirt so blatantly sexual seems like an in-your-face response to that. Do I think there are more productive ways to do that? Sure. But I have to admit that I admire the designer's moxy if that was really the motivation.
This is as much a parody to sexualized clothing for young girls as Otis was to horror films.
I must have one.. do they make adult sizes?
I like the concept behind the shirt, but not much of a fan of the execution. =/
eh. I like the actual shirts in the equal opportunity baby grows line (a blue onesie with a tractor that says boy, a pink onesie with a deer that says girl) but the comment underneath them doesn't do it for me:
"SO WRONG IT'S RIGHT."
It's framing the gender non-conformity as wrong and giving the onesies a gag-gift feel.
I guess that's her whole shtick: gag-gifts. That way she can play both sides at once. I'm not buying it. She reminds me of people who I know who are high on their own sense of political-incorrectness. Not everything created for shock value is art.
oops. Blue tractor= girl, Pink deer = boy.
I agree with your post except the language in "gender-conformity". I'm a cisgendered woman but I didn't *conform* to anything. Just as a person born into a male body who is female I have ALWAYS known myself to be female I just had the good fortune to be born in a female body. My femininty wasn't somethign that I feel was thrust upon me and then indoctrined into me. It's a part of who I am.
Well, its existance as something that points out the ridiculousness of sexualized baby clothes doesn't bother me, and it does its job quite well. But I wouldn't buy it for my hypothetical kid to WEAR, I think that would be missing the satire if someone did that.
If they had a picture of this shirt on their site and if someone tried to order it, then a window popped up saying something like "Sick!" or "World's worst parent!" and not actually sell the shirt, then it would be sick, but good social statement. But the fact that they are selling this shirt, is just sick on many levels.
I don't believe in using your baby to make social statements. That's really invasive...who wants to find a baby picture of themselves with tassels hanging from their nipple areas?
I agree. This is the reason I don't like those baby clothes that say things like "F*ck Authority" on them or something (I didn't make that up but I can't find it now). While a small part of me says, "Wow, way to make your baby cool!" a much larger part says that using your baby as a billboard for your political beliefs is selfish. Kind of the same reason I wouldn't dress a baby girl entirely in pink lacy dresses. It's imposing.
I think the designer is a genius.
No parent would buy that for their kid. It effectively enrages those who might not be very attuned to the over sexualization of our youth, bringing the topic to their full, complete attention. The people who already get it don't need that kind of wake up call.
And if there does happen to be some complete dumbass out there who would buy it, everyone who sees the kid in that outfit will have to think about it, too. Not that I think that would happen, and I really hope it doesn't - that would be just plain wrong. All I'm saying is either way, people are thinking about over sexing our youth.
I understand what the designer is saying, and I agree about the sexualization of children's clothing. However, I would never put my baby daughter in it. And I don't think many parents who agree with me would put a child in one, so she's kind of missing the point with the shirts. The only people who will buy them are the ones who DO think they're "cute" for all the wrong reasons.
Maybe she should have gone all the way and put the logo "Future Stripper" on it. Then the people who buy awful slogan shirts for their poor unaware babies will think it's hip and buy them. If you can't guess, I hate baby shirts with adult sayings on them. If it's something you wouldn't let a preschooler repeat in public, then it's inappropriate for a baby's shirt. In my opinion.
I concur. I think she means well and is trying to make a point about sexualized clothing for our kids (ok, just daughters, really) but it doesn't seem to hit the mark.
I think the designer is a genius.
No parent would buy that for their kid. It effectively enrages those who might not be very attuned to the over sexualization of our youth, bringing the topic to their full, complete attention. The people who already get it don't need that kind of wake up call.
And if there does happen to be some complete dumbass out there who would buy it, everyone who sees the kid in that outfit will have to think about it, too. Not that I think that would happen, and I really hope it doesn't - that would be just plain wrong. All I'm saying is either way, people are thinking about over sexing our youth.
It's too bad, because Obama's new Girls Clothing Czar _is_ going to require that such items be purchased and worn.
I hear she has ties to groups that encourage dangerous minorities to vote and other leftist, anticonservative organizations.
I could see the designer meaning it as a critique, but I would still pretty much be o.O at any parent who actually put it on their kid. I critique sexualized clothes for little girls by not putting them on my kid.
I would buy it for the novelty of it, but I wouldn't give it to any little girl I know. Maybe I'd frame it. It would be a great conversation starter. That's the whole point of it anyway.
that's what i was thinking: that i would totally frame it for display. perhaps that's what the designer actually intended.
Well, I have to admit that my first response to seeing the title of this post and the picture of the shirt (before reading the article or what the designer was trying to do) was: "Bwhahahaha!!! I should get that for my son!"
Now, I'm not sure I'd actually go so far as to DO that, but that's the image it put in my head. Evidently the designer and I have the same sense of irony, or something. Heh.
the clothing on her site is FANFUCKINGTASTIC! if i had a baby i would SO dress them with stuff from here like the:
IV'E DONE FUCK ALL DAY baby T or the stomach full of plastic (swallowable) toys. I concur - i think this site and the designer and the wacked out selections offered is GENIUS!!!!!!
It's not so much that I find it horribly offensive as it is that I find it insufficient satire.
Like... what IS being said here?
Yes, I agree. I think that satire, when done right, is not offensive because it gets its point across sufficiently clearly, and people get it.
While I don't think this is inherently offensive, I think that the lack of clarity is what makes it seem so to people. I feel like a lot of satire walks that line.
I like is as conceptual art; a sort of statement piece meant to be looked at and considered and start discussion about the sexualization of little girls.
As actual, buyable children's clothing? Not so much. (Although I'd kind of love one for myself. Is it terrible that I almost want to ask them to make one for older girls just because I'm petite and could squeeze into them?)
Oh, fucking hell. I agree with the commenter above - as an actual comment on the sexualization of kids' clothes, yes, it's ironic and could start discussion, good. But once you start selling it to kids, you lost your opportunity to make that claim.
lol well i wouldnt dress a kid in those, but yeah it's funny and i believe it was made ironically.
thanks for sharing
-------------------------------------
Shopping Baby products , Baby clothing , Baby toys , Feeding , Diaper , Accessories
Go to Shop Click Here !!!
special !