You’re being too nice. Dude just accused single moms of dressing their young kids sexily for attention. It’s a brush he shouldn’t be painting with in the first place.
It’s a type of classism that I’d not even heard of before. I don’t know anyone who thinks of single mothers as being any different from anyone else.
I may be wrong. But it just seems odd that I hear a lot of hand wringing about prosti-tot clothing, but the stores seem to have normal clothes. The kids at daycare all seem reasonably dressed. I see a lot of kids around town and they don’t look like hookers. I’m only up to 2T, but I don’t see the stores packed with nasty stuff. Can anyone show me where this trove of baby prostitute clothing actually is?
I do see pieces now and then that seem tacky, but I don’t think they are the norm in mainstream realtors. But then, I don’t consider a fitted tee shirt or short shorts to be offensive on a young kid, unless they were black latex or some other clearly sex-oriented look.
As for jockeying for position, we all do it somewhere. Parenting is rife with it.
Real estate’s been a tough business lately.
Ha! Still getting used to these fancy new iPhone third party keyboards.
I don’t agree with that mother’s buy in to short clothing = overly sexualized.
But I definitely agree with her assertion that in 3T - 4T clothing (it could be beyond, but that’s the size my daughter wears, so that’s what I’m looking at) features disproportionally more shorty-short style shorts than longer shorts, especially at stores at price points in the Target/Old Navy/Kohl’s range. Yes, there are SOME longer shorts, but I’ve personally found the selection gets really pinched if one is looking for longer shorts. Especially this past summer, the one inch inseam was the majority selection.
Online vs. in store shopping may also be a factor, I’m sure I can find more longer shorts online, but in store is limited by what is IN the STORE. Shopping for preschoolers online can be a little risky because the various brands run sizes so differently, both in actual size and in shape – some 3Ts still seem cut for “adorable chubby baby” while others are very slim. And like many kids, mine is different on top and bottom, she’s small so she’s a 3T (or even 2T) in tops, but her legs are long in proportion to her body so we’re 3T or 4T for shorts/pants, but those need to be in a brand whose waist runs narrower. (That’s another rant - too many outfits, not enough separates).
The two main reasons I like having some longer shorts are 1. sun coverage, and 2. playground equipment gets really hot in the summer. I’m not morally opposed to short shorts, but I’d like more variety.
Just-above-the-knee leggings are also an option, but man, they are annoying to put on a kid getting out of the pool, or covered with sand from the beach.
I have an 8 year old daughter. We’ve never had any trouble finding clothes that I think are appropriate. We often have different opinions about what colors and patterns go well together, but that’s a different issue.
I’m really uncomfortable with this blog piece and other things like it. I feel like it’s very close to telling little girls that they should cover up their bodies; that their prepubescent bodies are something to be ashamed of; that they should be concerned about what other people can or can’t see. Also, I’m not sure why people think that short shorts are something new. After reading this blog post, I looked through pictures from my childhood, and I don’t think I had a pair of shorts with an inseam longer than a couple of inches until bermuda shorts became popular in middle school.
Honestly, I think the real problem with Target’s children’s clothes is that the boys’ shorts are absurdly long and the boys’ T-shirts are so baggy.
Yeah, and when I was a little kid we all wore short shorts with slits up the side but I’m not advocating bringing that back.
I’m not buying the blogger’s whole thing, but I do think 1" inseams are a little ridiculous for 4 year-olds (or anyone).
I have a 7 year-old and somehow we manage to find clothes that don’t display her crotch or ass cheek, but most of the Target clothes cited certainly do/would.
And this is something I do notice casually if we are just out somewhere shopping and pass by the clothing sections.
Well, she certainly has the right to ask her retailer to stock clothes she wishes to purchase. She can also make them at home.
Not that I’m a single mother or dressing a young girl these days, but from what I see where I work (a big box retailer) yeah, some of the young girls look like they were dressed at Sluts R Us. Not all of them, but a remarkable number of them.
As a grown woman, I do sometimes have trouble finding modest clothing for myself. Hey, I’m middle-aged these days, I shouldn’t be wearing a mini-dress or short-shorts, honestly, you don’t want to see that much of me, either. Just TRY to find a long-sleeved shirt these days for anyone female, it’s not as easy as you think.
Fortunately, I’m enough of a tomboy (still) I don’t mind shopping in the men’s racks for some items. Like shorts. Long-sleeve T’s that aren’t pink and don’t have suggestive words printed on them. And so on. Probably just as well half the year I’m wearing flannel shirts and jeans.
Dressing feminine is hard at times. This year I was thrilled because longer skirts were in for the summer. Of course, half of them had fabrics so sheer you might as well have been wearing saran wrap and just try to find a slip these days!
I don’t like to wear shirts with anything printed on them. If some company or artist or sports team, etc wants to pay me to advertise for them, I might consider.
Goofy and insignificant to the max, I know, but it’s my line in the sand.
The other way 'round: mothers are happy that leggings are back because it’s been a bitch to find longer clothes for a while.
Quote from my sister in law: “the only skirts which are a decent length are school uniforms! What, I’ll have to buy her school uniforms from the other schools so she doesn’t sit on her panties any time she wears a skirt?” Note that she wasn’t defining decent length by how much shows when standing up, but by whether it would cover the ass of a constantly moving little girl while sitting sort of down (can you call it sitting down when she keeps bouncing?).
Go into another neighborhood and try to buy clothing for an active four year old girl at price points below those of Target. Folks limited to Wal-Mart, Kmart, Dollar General, Family Dollar, and Big Lots tend not to have the resources financially, timewise and many times transportationally to shop elsewhere. A good share of these parents are the single mothers that belowjob is accusing of preferring to dress their daughters for attention.
Target, Kohl’s and Old Navy may not be high end, but they are out of reach for many families of young children.
Who the hell is buying all of their kids clothes at Target and Wal-Mart? I’m way above the poverty line and about 90% of my kids’ wardrobes are a combination of hand-me-downs, thrift store finds, or bulk buys from childrens’ resellers. Kids grow so fast that we’re flat out unwilling to buy new clothes aside from underwear and socks, so aside from the birthday/christmas presents my mom buys at Carters (which is basically Talbots for little girls in terms of modest clothing), everything we buy is used.
And used clothes run the gamut from Amish modesty to Miley Cyrus at a strip club. We have some of all of it in our house, and my kids pick out what they want. If they don’t feel comfortable in it, they don’t wear it.
If it’s not clear, chalk me up in the “If this bothers you, blame consumers, not retailers” camp.
Kmart website has some tacky clothing, but their “Basic Edition” line has standard kids stuff. Walmart has a wide range of basics, including a well-stocked “school uniform” shop with basic pants, Bermudas and knee-length skirts that aren’t specifically uniforms.
The others don’t have much online, but eventually you run into the reality that the bottom barrel shops are going to be selling the crappy stuff nobody wants to buy at full price. I don’t know what to do about that-- it’s a reality that if you don’t have any money, it’s not easy to get decent stuff. We have lots of very well stocked thrift stores, so there that option.
Look, I know inappropriate clothes are out there. I’m just not at all convinced it’s an enormous epidemic that is ruining things for everyone.
FWIW, I do have a problem with all these little boys running around in Under Armour stuff all the time. Workout clothes are for working out, they’re not fashion, dammit. What are we teaching our kids? But it’s a losing battle when I see parents (both moms and dads, but mostly moms) drop their kids off at school in workout clothes, and then pick them up 7 hours later in the same clothes. WORKING OUT ALL DAY, WERE YOU!?
Why do we think its cute to have little girls wearing clothing with messages written on their butts? In contrast I’ve never seen little boys running around with messages on their butts.
Now on swimsuits, boys often wear these long shorts while girls swim suits have much less material.
How big should it be before we have the right to make our opinions known on blogs and message boards and letters to the company? It’s not like anyone is suggested armed resistance here.
Are you seriously suggesting mothers are deliberately sexualising their daughters in order to attract men?
If so, I’d point out that single mothers tend to be after single men interested in grown women, not paedophiles.
Well, while we’re on the subject of what’s too short, could someone tell me what’s up with these dresses? I was always confused by how it was apparently fine for these dresses to be this short. Would these be too short now, but 50 years ago considered OK? Or are they still OK?
I clearly remember illustrations of these in old kids books where if the girls leaned over their panties were clearly visible. It was portrayed as normal and innocent. But I don’t know how these dresses would stand today.
So what? When I was 6 and 7, little boys sang along with “Macho Man” by the Village People on the radio.
