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 03-30-2013, 03:46 PM
 
1,699 posts, read 3,371,553 times
Reputation: 3902

Advertisements

Just to be clear, I don't mean to pick on V.S. alone - I believe that all garment lines aimed at kids need to be more responsible with their advertising imagery. We have too many girls struggling with eating disorders and body dissatisfaction. It's heartbreaking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-30-2013, 04:08 PM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,976 posts, read 11,788,166 times
Reputation: 14677
I'm a pretty ardent feminist, but I think this present attack on VS is just silly. They are not marketing their adult lingerie to teens, it's a specific line, and their use of young-looking models is no different from any other store targetting that demographic.

I would agree that responsible advertising is important, but so is parents talking to their daughters about the lack of truth in advertising.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 04:13 PM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,976 posts, read 11,788,166 times
Reputation: 14677
Here is an interesting read:

Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 04:33 PM
 
1,699 posts, read 3,371,553 times
Reputation: 3902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimbochick View Post

^ I remember when that report was first published. It's helpful when science and research can help us to prove that our instincts and common sense have merit. We all know that our girls are surrounded by unhealthy messages about what it means to be female. The report from the APA outlines that case well, but I would add an item to their list of alternatives to sexualization: boycott and protest the worst offenders. While I agree with parents countering lies with truth, I also advocate eliminating the lies in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Temporarily residing on Planet Earth
658 posts, read 1,241,931 times
Reputation: 392
This is terrible. Indicative of the degradation of society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Denver area
21,134 posts, read 22,102,729 times
Reputation: 35503
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodSchoolols View Post
If people are up in arms about this, where is the outrage for toddler bikinis?

Really - someone bought my 3 yr old a 2 piece bathing suit. It was returned and exchanged. No different from underwear if you ask me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear View Post
IMO it's very different from underwear because you wear underwear UNDER your clothes. Nobody sees it. When you are talking about TEEN GIRLS (not toddlers) underwear can be an acceptable way for them to feel sexy. Their bodies are maturing and they are becoming sexual beings. However, they are asked to deny their sexuality because they are not ready for the other aspects of being fully sexual. In some ways underwear allows them to be sexy without being outwardly sexy. Bikinis are outwardly sexy.


Not all 2 piece bathing suits for girls are sexy. Or meant to be. Speaking as a woman who is long-torso'd, who's daughter is also long torso'd, I can tell you a 2 piece bathing suit is much more comfortable and easier to manage for little girls than most one piece suits. Bathing suit manufacturers do now make one piece suits expressly for long torso'd women. I haven't seen them in girls sizes. Better to have a modest 2 piece suit than a one piece suit that is not long enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 05:50 PM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,319,241 times
Reputation: 32238
Quote:
Originally Posted by certsevtxert View Post
This is terrible. Indicative of the degradation of society.
Hmmm.... I took a look at the Pink link Zimbo posted. (The MLB line was pretty cute, IMHO.)

Women and girls showed just as much skin in the 50's. Yep. In the 1950's American females were wearing short-shorts with 2" inseams and exposing their midriffs. Those wholesome 50's. When Ike and Mamie were in the White House.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 07:09 PM
 
Location: Temporarily residing on Planet Earth
658 posts, read 1,241,931 times
Reputation: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Women and girls showed just as much skin in the 50's.
*BUZZ* *EHRRRRR* WRONG ANSWER. Take a look at a 50's movie, then take a look at a 60's movie, then take a look at a 70's movie, then take a look at an 80's movie, then take a look at a 90's movie then take a look at movies of today.

Sure there were always the 1 or 2 "rebels" (who got a severe scolding from their family or were completely disowned for this behaviour) but TODAY it's EVERYONE and NO CONSEQUENCES.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 07:13 PM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,319,241 times
Reputation: 32238
Quote:
Originally Posted by certsevtxert View Post
WRONG. Take a look at a 50's movie, then take a look at a 60's movie, then take a look at a 70's movie, then take a look at an 80's movie, then take a look at a 90's movie then take a look at movies of today.
Ummm.... I remember the 50's. Lots of short shorts and shirts tied to reveal....... tummies! (Women even bleached their hair. And voted!)

Feel free to Google Image "short shorts 1950's" if you don't believe me. Prepare to be shocked. (Though I was wrong on one thing. Some had 1" inseams. Not 2".)

Last edited by DewDropInn; 03-30-2013 at 07:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Temporarily residing on Planet Earth
658 posts, read 1,241,931 times
Reputation: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Ummm.... I remember the 50's. Lots of short shorts and shirts tied to reveal....... tummies! (Women even bleached their hair. And voted!)
ooo, tummies, well that's so alluring, stomach makes me so horny!
NOT. We're talking about "scantily clad" not "stomach showing". duh.

wow I can't believe how 90's that sounded. "not" and "duh" lol
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