What is wrong with childrens fashion designers???

Post Reply New Topic

Have you guys seen those body hugging pants with the slogans on the bum? things like "sweetie" and such. It's designed to attract the eye to the bum. And some parents have no common sense either. I recently saw a little girl in tiny tiny booty shorts, the beginning of her bottom hanging out, and big boots. it was like, why are you sexualizing your children???

I love the way that kids dressed in my childhood. Just watch some old television shows, set in the late 50's to mid 60's. Little girls wore dresses to school, and had play clothes for afterward. Health Tex was a popular brand of children's clothing. If they wanted to play dress up, they tried on their mother's old clothing, and played around with make-up for laughs. Of course there was a lot of sexism, and male chauvinistic attitudes were more prevalent and more likely to be tolerated, but children didn't look like prostitutes in training.

Clothing design is a business. They make what sells.

That's what kids want to wear. No-ones fault... they aren't forcing the kids into them.

Just a sign of the times. If you want to blame anyone blame the people who started the trends.

I don't like seeing kids wearing skimpy clothes either. it just doesn't look right. And I don't know why they sell low cut tops when the girls who are wearing them still have flat chests.
When I was 10 I kept on pestering my mum for mini skirts and skimpy tops, I can see why she said no now.

I've been wondering this myself for quite some time. Do 10 year old girls need to wear jeans with big hand prints on their bumb? Is that really cute?



I had a look at the link. It's one thing for girls to decide they want to wear thongs for reasons of comfort in their teens but anything before that is absurd. I was a bit disturbed when I saw the size of the childrens thong. They don't need to be thinking about these things yet at such a young age.





While I do agree the fashion is quite inappropriate for the age I can't agree with angry generalizations about the industry without seeing some research to support such a hypothesis. There are plenty of woman who work in these areas of the fashion industry and I'm sure there are lots of men and women alike who have trouble with things their company puts out and may even try to fight the trend from the inside but at the end of the day they have to design what sells or get a new job.

What's really sad is that there's a demand for this and people are buying it. And a company either capitalizes on our disturbed young generation (and some disturbed parents who like to dress their children this way) or they lose money to their competition who is willing to stoop to this level.

Unfortunately if you listen to the lyrics of most rap and r&b that the youngsters are listening to from kindergarten on the result we're seeing only makes sense. Perhaps we shouldn't turn such a blind eye to those marketing these trends to our children first through the music industry.

It's all about market share. When I worked for L'Oreal I learned this: when you've reached the maximum you can extract from one market (say, adult women), you start convincing little girls to wear your clothes. We convinced men that grey hair was bad for them when we had reached the maximum money we could get from selling hair dyes to women. It's obvious that when L'Oreal reaches the male top market share, they'll start convincing mothers that little babies with natural-colored hair is an embarrassment. How do they do this convincing? We used to publish """"""articles"""" on magazines that appeared informative and serious when they actually were secretly our own publicity. I myself worked together with top American model Claudia Schiffer on a (fake, of course) interview of her for a women's magazine. Reaching the maximum of your market share as a company is a tragedy that justifies the sacrifice of anyone, including little girls to paedophiles. Or so they are allowed to believe. In my opinion, governments should prohibit this unlimited freedom of Marketing Business.

If it's any reassurance, I have kids ranging from 2 to 11 year of age, and I don't buy trampy clothes for any of them. Some of their peers wear the stuff but they know I won't get it for them, and usually they don't even seem interested. Some of their peers' moms look like harlots, too, but that's their problem.

I do get sick of them acting like boys clothes and girls clothes should be different in design. Yeah, different colors, patterns, sure, some glitter for the little girls, why not, but it's the cut that gets me. It tried to find my 2-year-old some play sandals, but everything looked fragile and uncomfortable, or were flip-flops (I HATE them, they hurt, and people look stupid trying to walk in them). I ended up buying boy sandals, the nice rugged ones that are like sneakers with holes, and painting flowers on them.

And then there's trying to buy her shorts. The ones in the stores barely cover the diaper! Never mind the sleaze factor (which is something I do mind, also), kids have to ride in car seats and those straps do not look comfortable. There needs to be a layer of fabric in the way, but the shorts they sell are too short to provide it.

Great!! ! That's one down about a billion more parents to go...



At that age that isn't even slightly cute, that's disgusting in every way imaginable... Maybe some increased pedophilic activity might raise some awareness... Some how this has to end though...

If that is the case (which I know it is, as I have seen this when studying marketing), then why not market women's clothes for men??? Oh no, we can't do that, it would break a cultural taboo... I don't care, I'd wear women's clothes if it were acceptable for men to. Personally, the tight clothing feels uch nicer anyways, which is why I once tried to as a kid, and that landed me in counciling as my dad thought I had issues...

they say you aren't suppose to blame the victim but srsly, if you are 8 and dress like that, you have zero right to complain about being leered at.

I whole hearedly agree.

I'd change that a bit... under a certain age, it's the parents who are responsible for allowing their children to wear something inappropriate, even if the kid did beg for it. That's coming from a parent, remember. An eight-year-old should only have a vague second-hand idea what the leering is about, and only that because sleazy adults make the education necessary in order to help children know there are risks in life. And I think anyone has the right to complain... just not to be surprised. Being surprised under certain circumstances takes gargantuan audacity. It's like being surprised when you get in a car wreck when you habitually tailgate, or being surprised when you end up pregnant after performing the required actions with reckless abandon.

just remember these were the same nutcases who made polyester and afros popular back in the '70s.........

still , if you are 12, wear pancake makeup and dress up in skanky clothing, don't be shocked if someone makes a comment about you. You dress like a whore, look like a whore, don't be surprised if someone calls you a whore!

but it's not politically correct!! !! !! !!

screw poltical correctness, if you allow your child to walk around like that, you are setting her up to be molested in some fashion. If you are under the legal age, don't wear that stuff becuase, ding ding, there are people out there that don't care if you are only 12, you dress like that, they will think you want it. Thats why whores dress like whores, cuz everyone knows, if it dresses like a whore, its most likely a whore!