I just saw this story today about a line of “trendy, sweet, yet edgy” clothing for children, being modeled by none other than Noah Cyrus, Miley “Hannah Montana” Cyrus’ 9-year-old sister. This is the same girl whose hooker Halloween costume caused a stir last year.
This is beyond disturbing to me. No child of this age needs to be dressing in this way; they shouldn’t be thinking about snagging a guy (or girl) in their tween years. Thanks to modern medicine, we have roughly 60 years of adulthood in order to get into all kinds of adult situations. It’s trite, I know, but kids should be kids. Despite the fact that some people–one poster on this board, for instance–think that children are just miniature adults, they aren’t. Dressing them up like adults makes them targets for all the wrong kinds of attention.
All I can say is that the Cyrus family must think this is perfectly okay, which is deeply disturbing to me. I’m pretty liberal about sexual activity (I helped keep the Threesome Thread going), and I have no problems with consenting adults dressing however and doing whatever they want to get off. But I do draw the line at sexualizing tweens.
Further evidence of the Cyrus family’s questionable parenting can be found by searching YouTube for a great rendition of “Smack That” by Noah performed at a party. I know this because it’s mentioned in the article.
I agree. I think the children are too young to understand the sexual connotations of this type of behavior. They’re just seeing things like this as a “let’s act like grown-ups” game. So what disturbs me are the adults around them who should know better but are encouraging these kids.
Oh my god. I am of the opinion that everything she is doing is absolutely inappropriate for her age. She is 9 years old and should be a kid and not the designer of lingerie. The Halloween Costumes are horrible. She does not look cute in them.
I think I just vomited in my mouth a little. :eek:
“Oh look, how cute, we’re teaching them to pole dance!”
Talk about the decline of western civilization. How is this in any way good for kids that age? Man, nothing makes me want to run off to the woods and be a hermit more than crap like this.
I’m sorry, but your OP does not make a whit of sense to me. I see the words “children” and “lingerie” side by side and that just doesn’t compute at all. Please re-write an OP that does not use mutually exclusive terms. Those two words do not go together, and makes your OP too head-explodey.
THis reminds me of an episode of The Soup in which Joel McHale shows a clip of a swimsuit contestant on that godawful show Tiaras and something… (its a reality show i think on tlc about children beauty pageants)
McHale never even had to make a joke when the clip ended… it spoke for itself…
Say what you want… their will be parents who think this is cute… and will buy it… and even mommmy and daughter lingerie purchase…
There are times when I think that western culture is coming to a rapid and violent end.
Then I read something like this and I replace the word ‘think’ with ‘know’.
It’s actually very thoughtful of them to make a kiddy lingerie site like that - now all the pedophiles can ogle youngsters in skimpy duds without worrying about having to go to an illegal site.
I misread the thread title as “Disturbing Words–Children’s Lingerie?!” and thought, Yes, those sure are disturbing words when you put them together like that. I figured the thread must be about one of those wacky translation-failure moments, where they actually meant “underwear” and just didn’t realize the horrible inappropriateness of the word they chose. Ha ha ha!
Huh. I don’t find it quite as squicky as everyone else, but I think that’s because I’ve noticed the trend of sexualizing the clothes of youngsters for quite a while, and have become a bit jaded.
Still, the whole concept bothers me. We’re so obsessed with keeping children safe from child molesters (and even pedophiles in general), and yet we do things that help associate sexuality with children. I actually wonder if it’s some sort of backlash reaction.
I saw, ironically also on The Soup I think, a line of baby high heels that made me want to throw a brick at my TV. Granted these weren’t real heel, they were soft foamy stuff so the baby wasn’t actually walking on her toes. But they were billed as “training” high heels for later.
Looking at the pictures I don’t feel quite so squicked. They are totally inappropriate, to be sure, but they didn’t have a “lingerie” feel to me. More like trying to fit into cute clothes that used to fit her two years ago. Nothing see thorugh or lace or leather that I saw there, just tiny, tiny, tiny dresses. It is still absolutely wrong and I think the Cyrus family should be nuked from orbit but I feel better that the pictures don’t have a real pr0n feel to them.
And the pictures there are no more “shocking” than was her costume. Why do people insist on following along with the artificially generated “contravercy” engineered to get this line free publicity? It’s a painfully obvious marketing tactic. People hear about “children’s lingerie” and they can’t help but rush to see for themselves (out of pure outrage, I’m sure… :rolleyes: ). They see that there’s nothing unusual or shocking about it, and the advertizers have done their job of making you pay attention to the clothes.
Oh please, your average dungerees are more revealing than that stuff.
What in the world does this have to do with anything? Do you generally go out in lingerie when you’re trying to find a date?
And if we advance medicine so we can live to be a thousand, we shouldn’t be allowed to get into adult situations until we’re two hundred? This isn’t about relative lifespan behind us. It’s about whether you’re ready or not. That doesn’t change if life expectency is 20 years or 200 years.
Very trite. Also meaningless and a thought-terminating cliche.
Oh please. This is obviously directed towards me, and I think nothing of the sort. Some children are mentally on the same level as some adults, and it is immoral to treat the ones who have acheaved the mental development we expect of adults as though they had not simply as a result of an arbitrary line like age. That is my position, and has none of the elements of delusion you are ascribing to it. The delusion is soely on the side that wants to claim there are no outliers.
What adults do you know who dress like that?
Besides, if I’m representative of the “wrong kind of attention” you’re so worried about, let me reassure you that I find nothing at all attractive about the clothing line anyway.
I really don’t see this as anything more than a manufactured contravercy, and it bugs me that people are so easily drawn in by such cheep tricks. Of course the clothes are perfectly okay. They’re not anything special, and they’re less sexualized than many of the things schools have no problem with kids wearing to class.
The last sentence there is incompatible with the first. Try again.
I wouldn’t call her rendition great. She just doesn’t have much of a singing voice. The footage isn’t particularly good, and the background noise was problematic, but I just don’t think her rendition would have been particularly good even with those techical problems resolved. Her lyrics were too clipped and chirpy.
Look, here’s the thing, these clothes are not that sexualized. I know this because you haven’t all been arrested yet. Because the courts have ruled that sexualized photographs of children, even fully clothed, count as child pornography. If the clothes were half as bad as the article is trying to claim they are, the FBI would have seazed the server and started going through the hits.
That’s repression in action, I’m afraid. Trying to pretend you don’t have these sorts of feelings doesn’t stop them from being there, and tends to see them leaking out in unhealthy ways.
For example, watching Law and Order SVU because the thought of violated children fascenates you, but you can mask that by telling yourself what you’re feeling is outrage. Or To Catch a Predator, where you fixate on the fantasy scenario the sting operation is constructing, only to claim you’re here to watch some sick fuck get his.
Considering how many people have these feelings and how few are willing to admit it, we’re dealing with a lot of repression, and that leads to a lot of indirect outlets appearing while people lie to themselves and others about their motivations.
:: shakes head ::