U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-02-2011, 12:51 AM
 
852 posts, read 1,136,977 times
Reputation: 1042

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear View Post
What you wrote is:



So you did equate makeup for young girls to immorality. I didn't make it up.



I agree that sexualizing young girls is morally questionable but I do not agree that makeup is necessarily sexualizing young girls. I don't think that little girls wanting to look pretty automatically means they want to look sexy. If you ask the girls they will tell you they want to look pretty.

Where did I say that marketing does not affect children? YOU said that.
No, you didn't make it up. You just misread and misrepresented everything I said. I said that there was a moral connection to encouraging young girls to pose as older than they are, which is not the same thing as calling makeup immoral. Not at all. You see, makeup in and of itself is fine when it is age appropriate. But that isn't the issue here. The issue here is that a daily use makeup line is being marketed to eight-year-olds. Context.

I'm glad we can agree that marketing affects children.

And I guess we'll have to disagree about make-up being sexualizing. IMO, It most certainly is, whether or not children know the word for it. And as I said before, I think there is a difference between playing dress up with makeup and establishing a beauty routine at a young age, and the latter is what a line of daily use products is encouraging. And in my opinion, that is also encouraging early sexuality.

Last edited by lucygirl951; 02-02-2011 at 01:19 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-02-2011, 12:56 AM
 
Location: NW Montana
6,258 posts, read 12,598,581 times
Reputation: 3422
Why do we take away the lesson of restraint and waiting?
Mascara at 14, foundation at 15. Nothing wrong with having girls develop their esteem on their abilities first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 09:09 AM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,113,623 times
Reputation: 17979
I expect its like anyhting else driven by demand the market sees.We will not see it long if parents don't by it ;will we?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 09:27 AM
 
852 posts, read 1,136,977 times
Reputation: 1042
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
I expect its like anyhting else driven by demand the market sees.We will not see it long if parents don't by it ;will we?
Absolutely right! And that's why we have these conversations, so that parents will understand why it's important not to buy it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 10:17 AM
 
2,159 posts, read 3,738,215 times
Reputation: 2136
I am actually surprised it took this long considering thongs for little girls came out a long time ago starting with Ambercrombie & Fitch

Retailer courts more outrage -- sexy undies for little girls / Abercrombie & Fitch offers thongs with adult allusions - SFGate

Abercrombie criticized for sexy undies - May. 22, 2002

They even had a pair that said "Eye Candy" and had pieces of candy pictures on it. Really! A 6-7yr old in a thong with "Eye Candy" written on the front?!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Kansas
19,189 posts, read 14,096,440 times
Reputation: 18141
Not talking morality here but physical and mental health. With enough chemicals entering your body, aging will be the least of your worries. I remember years ago on Oprah that someone was on talking about how Chapstick was addictive. At 56, I found that the anti-aging lotion I used that burned my eyes and gave me tiny fatty deposits on my face had a sort of withdrawal where my face became dry for the first time in my life. It was almost unbearable to stop it despite the side effects of using it. Also, nothing like clogging the pores for beautiful, youthful skin, not! It took a couple weeks before my skin became normal again. That was probably 10 years ago and now I go with healthy eating and exercise. I don't think that people understand marketing. It is the parents choice and I don't think anyone ever said it wasn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 08:56 PM
 
2,920 posts, read 2,911,732 times
Reputation: 3504
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
This sounds so unfortunate but when it comes to making a buck or hooking someone early, I suspect they will all jump on this one. Sadly, those chemicals are absorbed into the body and now they are starting earlier so more health issues will probably surface. Don't think the skin absorbs chemicals? Think birth control patch, nicotine patch, etc. Nothing like sexing up an elementary age girl for the pervs that lurk behind every corner these days!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucygirl951 View Post
No, you didn't make it up. You just misread and misrepresented everything I said. I said that there was a moral connection to encouraging young girls to pose as older than they are, which is not the same thing as calling makeup immoral. Not at all. You see, makeup in and of itself is fine when it is age appropriate. But that isn't the issue here. The issue here is that a daily use makeup line is being marketed to eight-year-olds. Context.

I'm glad we can agree that marketing affects children.

And I guess we'll have to disagree about make-up being sexualizing. IMO, It most certainly is, whether or not children know the word for it. And as I said before, I think there is a difference between playing dress up with makeup and establishing a beauty routine at a young age, and the latter is what a line of daily use products is encouraging. And in my opinion, that is also encouraging early sexuality.
Are we the only ones here who have thought of this from the perv's point of view? It doesn't matter if you don't believe that the origin of cosmetics was to attract men sexually. IT DOES! (See Desmond Morris' The Naked Ape for the anthropological discussion of the relationship between make-up and the female anatomy.)

There are already too many men who believe that if there is grass on the field, then they are ready to play. I can imagine the minds of those who think that if they dress like they want it and are made up like they want it, then they must want it.

My knee-jerk response when I first heard the story was okay, that's fine, as long as you also let the little girls know about the big "toys" that the men want them to play with. Harsh, but in too many cases, true.

Just ask the little girls in Thailand who pay for play--Uncle, would you like me to sit on your lap?

You can all spare me the stories about it just being for little girls to have fun. Go ahead and believe it if you want. It doesn't matter what the little girls think. It doesn't matter what their mothers think. It doesn't matter how the marketers are framing it.

It matters what thoughts it stirs in the minds of those who see them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:56 PM
ekt
 
7 posts, read 12,619 times
Reputation: 23
I hate it when people say "pick your battles". I think having an 8 year old in make up is definately a battle worth "picking". As the mother of three adult daughters I can say that anyone i knew that had that philosophy now have adult daughters with multiple children by multiple men or are just totally nasty.

I dont think it is for Walmart to decide when my daughter wears make up or anyone else for that matter. We are putting too much pressure on girls to be women when they are simply little girls who should be enjoying their childhood. They will be grown soon enough. Play a little in mommy's make up? Sure but that is for home only. I remember putting on my moms super high pointy heeled shoes and wobbling down the stairs in them. It was fun but its not like she sent me off to school in them at the age of 5.

Let the girls be kids while they can. Its like the ratings they put on movies. Who says that someone in Hollywood should decide that at age 13 it is ok for my child to watch shows with partial nudity? Oh well.....as far as the make up goes......just another way for Walmart to rake in some more money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 07:21 PM
 
11,615 posts, read 19,738,691 times
Reputation: 12051
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucygirl951 View Post
No, you didn't make it up. You just misread and misrepresented everything I said. I said that there was a moral connection to encouraging young girls to pose as older than they are, which is not the same thing as calling makeup immoral. Not at all.
That might have been what you MEANT TO SAY but it's not what you actually said. I commented on what you actually said, not being a mind reader and all....

If you feel that I misrepresented what you said please point to the specific misrepresentation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 08:12 PM
 
852 posts, read 1,136,977 times
Reputation: 1042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear View Post
That might have been what you MEANT TO SAY but it's not what you actually said. I commented on what you actually said, not being a mind reader and all....

If you feel that I misrepresented what you said please point to the specific misrepresentation.
You said that I said makeup was "immoral." I did not. Not once. Not ever. Not in a single post. Never.

I ACTUALLY said this:

"Walmart's marketing choices are interesting to me. The company takes a strong stand on music and movies, but it doesn't see the moral connection when it comes to encouraging young girls to pose as older than they are. And that, IMO, is what make-up at an early age does."

The post is still there. Feel free to go back and reread it. Where exactly is the word "immoral" in that post? Where is the phrase "makeup is immoral?" What I ACTUALLY said is that makeup at an early age encourages young girls to pose as older than they are. Do you see it up there? I said the company doesn't see the moral connection to...wait for it...encouraging young girls to pose as older than they are.

What I think is immoral and unethical is--as difficult as it may be to understand what with me using those exact words and all--encouraging young girls to pose as older than they are!

So, as it turns out you didn't comment on what I ACTUALLY said but rather on your misinterpretation of it.

It also turns out that you don't need to be a mind reader, but sadly, you do have to ACTUALLY read words.

Last edited by lucygirl951; 02-03-2011 at 08:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top