# They start early with indoctrination into the hoochie culture



## famousmockngbrd (Feb 7, 2003)

My DD has 2 pairs of jean shorts from Target. They are both size 12 mos. One used to be DS's, so it's a "boy" style, and the other is new so it's a "girl" style. The girl shorts have an inseam of literally about one inch. They don't even cover her diaper. The boy shorts have an inseam of about 3 inches.

She's just barely one year old, and I'm having a hard time finding something that makes her look babyish for her one year portrait. Everything makes her look so grown up. She wears size 18 months. It's like toddlers are supposed to look like mini adults.

My MIL gave DD a shirt for her birthday. It's gathered along an empire waist in the front, and it's kind of puffy above that, so it actually looks like she has a bust. Boobs! On a one year old!

So, to all you mamas of boys out there who wish you had a baby girl to dress up in all those adorable clothes, just remember there is a dark side.


----------



## PadmaMorgana (Apr 14, 2004)

I so hear ya! Even DH (the man is clueless about clothes) saw some toddler girl shorts in a Carter's Outlet we were in and said "there is NO WAY in heck my daughter is wearing this. It won't even cover her goshdarn diaper" Ok...that is not what he actually said to me, you need to insert some swear words there









Honestly....I buy DD's shirts one size to big and her shorts from the boy section. And it is a good thing she likes her shorts as they also go under her dresses (the few she has that she will actually wear).

She is *2* FFS. She does NOT need to look like a hoochie. Good dog....have you seen the bathing suits? My MIL will point out these.....abominations of fabric. Things that look like the suits I wore in my 20's







But my 2 year old. Uh uh that dog won't hunt. She wears her UV blocking one piece (goes to the elbows and the knees). Period. Next year she gets the 2 piece...bought big enough so it goes to her forearms and her shins









Things we so much easier when I just had a boy







:


----------



## elmh23 (Jul 1, 2004)

We went to Target tonight and while walking past the toddler clothing I defiantly noticed this! Everything is so hoochie! My dd doesn't need sexy or hot written on her butt! She's also in 18 months and I buy her pants from Children's Place, size 24m because it's the only ones that don't look like she's 20.


----------



## Nora'sMama (Apr 8, 2005)

A blogger I love, who has ggb triplets, has a fabulous post about this issue. Here's a quote:

Quote:

I'd like to write that I've given up wondering why preschool girls need to show all of their thighs while wearing shorts, but preschool boys get to ward off cancer-causing skin rays with shorts that come down to their knees. But it would be a lie. Every time I think about this, I get a little apoplectic. There is no physiological difference between the waists, hips, and thighs of preschool boys and girls. What perverse set of sexual standards do we embrace when we teach our four-year old girls to show four times more skin than their brothers?
Here's the link, I thought it was a very good analysis of this phenomenon.

http://raisingweg.typepad.com/raisin..._well_bla.html


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Ugh, I saw those awful shorts with some cutesy word scrawled across the seat at Old Navy...in size 6 months. What is wrong with this society? I mean those things are tacky and horrible on an adult, and totally inappropriate on a preteen, but on a baby? I can't even think of a word to describe how wrong that is.


----------



## gen_here (Dec 31, 2005)

If there's anything bad about this place, I haven't heard it yet. But we've had the best luck at finding "I'm just a baby boy" clothes at The Children's Place. I've seen their girl clothes and they look very nice, too. Sure, they have the strange message Ts that other stores have, too... but they have a lot of clothes that are just little boy/little girl clothes.

Hope that helps!


----------



## trinity6232000 (Dec 2, 2001)

Has anybody noticed that if you want to dress your little girl more like a
little girl and not a woman you usually have to spend more money?

I bought some biker shorts for dd for under dresses last Fall in the clearance
at Gymboree and they almost reach her knees. My sister sent me some of my
nieces old dresses and I got them in the mail today. My sister mostly dresses
her dd in Lands End cause she has sensitivity issues and likes to wear only
really soft cotton. These dresses she sent me look like brand new, and
are very modest.

But if I walk threw Target or other lower cost stores the clothing is more
mature, and good luck trying to find a pair of jeans with nothing on them.

I bought a bunch of jeans from another Mom last fall on Ebay. They were
all Gap slim5's. All were modest, and YAY no jewels.

(I don't mind the jewels but I just wanted a couple plain jeans.)

Look at Hannah Andersson clothing. Very modest, child like clothing, and
more than I can spend with my budget. My sister is having a heck of a
time buying clothing for her dd I mentioned above. She just turned 11.
She is in luck that her dd needs clothing that is very comfortable, and she
likes to be covered up. But now that she is 11, they are having a heck of
a time finding this clothing in stores.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

ita with needing to spend more $$ to buy cute baby clothes that don't look like mini-teenager clothes.

hanna anderson is great, as is naartjie.

of course, when you think about it...both of these companies are NOT AMERICAN. they have a much more modest, classic, dare i say european design sensibility. and the fabrics are far superior.

we are lucky to live within 10 minutes of a naartjie store, and we get compliments whenever dd wears an outfit from there. the clothes are unique yet simple, and i love that not everything for girls is pink or purple.


----------



## NoHiddenFees (Mar 15, 2002)

We're fortunate to live near a Hanna outlet. The kids don't wear much else. I can't believe some of the stuff I see at Nordstrom, much less Target; it's not only the lower cost stores working on the hoochie factor.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Actually the current "cool" styles for teens and tweens are pretty "covered up".

Long (very very long) layered tops are in... belly barring is WAY OUT.

The current style for shorts for girls is also long (almost to the knees) and "boy shorts" are also very in among teens and preteen girls.

Styles change. This will proably work its way down from the most fashion concious brands to Target soon.

As luck would have it right now, hoochie is simply not the style.


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

I'm sorry you couldn't find clothes you like! I hate shopping.







: But I think that the reason for short shorts on girls is the same reason why girls used to wear short to very short skirts (even at times when women's skirts were decidedly "modest"), and boys wore short pants: so that they can play freely, they stay cool, and there is less to get dirty or torn. No one can make you feel "hoochie" without your permission. Even short shorts on _women are not all about showing thigh (i.e. about being seen by others) -- they are also about staying cool and enjoying the sensations of summer on one's skin._


----------



## witchbaby (Apr 17, 2003)

while i certainly concur that many stores have clothes that are far too sexual for the average toddler, am i missing something when i shop at target? yeah, some of their clothe are too mature for the audience, but i purchase most of k's clothes there (and some of m's, though he's still going through a backstock of hand-me-downs) and she doesn't look like a "hootchie." everywhere i go for her clothes, i can easily find items that aren't sexualized. is it a matter of perspective?


----------



## Alana (Jan 4, 2005)

Every year I order my dd dresses from the Lands End outlet online. I have found some cute stuff on Target...cute tees that cover her...normal length shorts....they have some Bermuda style shorts too.


----------



## Eman'smom (Mar 19, 2002)

I know, dd needed new swimsuits this year, you know how hard I had to look to find something, that wasn't trashy. I wanted a one piece, but honestly a cute 2 piece would have been fine, but everything even the one pieces were trashy, I did find a cute one at The Childrens' Place and 2 at Penney's (but they aren't holding up well







: )


----------



## annethcz (Apr 1, 2004)

Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous. And it doesn't get any better when they get older. I can buy my boys clothes that are true to size, but I always have to go up a couple of sizes for my skinny 4.5yo DD, otherwise all the shirts are too tight and belly-baring. The difference between the way boys clothes fits vs. girls clothes is just amazing.


----------



## Fiercemama (May 30, 2003)

Most of DD's clothes come to us from another family 2nd hand, and luckily most of it is to our taste. There was one of those really short ruffly skirts tho, I am really dating myself when I say I think of it as a "lambada" skirt. There is no way my kid is wearing that - at any age!

Most of DD's clothes come from other families, I buy a bit 2nd hand at Value Village, when its something really funky and one of a kind, very rarely new at Gap or Old Navy.

DD is not super girly. She likes dresses fine, but lots of frills or jewels or the like is not her style, let alone mine. We like lots of bright colours. DD seems to really like crew neck t-shirts with fun designs on them (tho I avoid branded characters). I will buy anything tie-die for my kid, 'cause I really like the way she looks in it! I love her in nothing better than jeans and a t-shirt. She's 4, and I would say there is plenty of her clothing that is from the boys dept. In the 2nd hand stores, the gender of clothes is usually mixed up. No one has mistaken her for a boy, well not since she grew some hair.

When DD was a baby, I picked up what for half a second I thought was a really cute bikini at Old Navy. It was a 2 pc bikini with a triangle top, zebra striped with pink piping. Then I realized what I was looking at - GAH!!!! Yup, my DD wears an all-in-one sunsuit too. She says its her acrobat suit, and she loves it. I'm hoping that she'll be willing to keep wearing them for another 2 years at least, before she possibily succumbs to peer pressure for wearing a more normal swimsuit.


----------



## flyingspaghettimama (Dec 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kidspiration*
of course, when you think about it...both of these companies are NOT AMERICAN. they have a much more modest, classic, dare i say european design sensibility. and the fabrics are far superior.

Actually, both of those stores are American (HA- Portland, OR; N-San Francisco), but started by European owners.

The only downside to the whole thing is that after a certain age, the kids look sorta...toolish in the European fashions. Very cute on a three year old, not so cute on a nine year old (in my opinion). We do go to the Gap for a lot of her clothes, but I also have fairly lax standards - i.e. no shirts with belly (mostly because I'm cheap - why pay more for less fabric?!), no shirts that make you look like you have the aforementioned boobage (weird), shorts or bike shorts underneath dresses/skirts if we're going to playgrounds (wood chips in the crotch = not so fun). But shorter skirts, shorts, spaghetti straps are all OK with me, I guess I don't think of them as sexy?

OTOH, the new leggings underneath dresses/skirts is an excellent new advancement in the world of less-skanky fashion. If you can overlook the tortuous 80s flashbacks that occur with every pair of leggings made in a factory...


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *flyingspaghettimama*
The only downside to the whole thing is that after a certain age, the kids look sorta...toolish in the European fashions. Very cute on a three year old, not so cute on a nine year old (in my opinion).

This is where peer pressure comes in. "But _Mo-om_, all of the other 9-year-olds in our homeschool group wear Hanna Andersson dresses!"


----------



## Sagesgirl (Nov 22, 2001)

I shop almost exclusively at thrift stores for pretty much this reason. I can't afford the higher-end stuff that would actually cover my daughters properly, so the next best thing is to get it secondhand.

I can't wait til we get back home and my MIL can teach me how to sew (she is a professional seamstress with well over 30 years' experience, so it's not like I'm going to be learning from another amateur!). It is easy enough to find classic styles in sewing patterns.

I have to say, though, that I don't agree that girls' shorts & skirts are so short so they can run and play. Little boys run & play just fine in the longer-length shorts (though I've heard plenty of complaints from boys' mamas about overly baggy pants), and as has been noted there's no physiological difference between them & little girls, at least vis a vis shorts fit. Also, I enjoy great freedom of movement in more modest skirts; much more so, in fact, than in my couple of shorter models, since in the longer ones I don't have to be quite so mindful not to flash the island.

Another annoyance beyond the fit of the clothes...When my eldest was a toddler (and this was at Target too, but I think just coincidence, nothing against that store in particular), I found her a little pair of gray pants that said "junior member of the team" on them...Then I _thought_ I found her a matching jacket. But the 'matching' jacket was the girls' version and had a cheerleader motif.







And that's something I've encountered again & again over the years. The boys' stuff will promote sports, but the girls' stuff promotes cheerleading. Now, I know that cheerleaders are actually pretty good athletes, but it remains that they're typically seen as just window dressing for the actual team. Why support sports for the boys, but window dressing for the girls?


----------



## snuggly mama (Mar 29, 2004)

It isn't any easier as they get older. Dd, who is 11, and I recently went shopping for her first bra. We were looking for something more like a sports-style or halter top, just to cover up a bit so she doesn't show through her clothes. Imagine my shock when I discovered padded training bras!








I mean, I'm talking Victoria's Secret style undergarment for a kid, for cryin out loud! And don't even get me started on the satin underpants or the ones that say things on the backside. Who the heck needs to be looking at my 11 year old's underpants?!? Luckily, she thinks it's just as bad . . . at least for now.


----------



## Shaunam (Oct 8, 2004)

I am sooo glad I have a boy! I noticed this too. 0-12 month stuff is just cute little dresses and rompers, but 12+ months is like a smaller version of the junior's dept (and I think some of that stuff is way too hoochy even for 17 year olds!).

Ick, ick, ick.

Thank goodness I know how to sew. If I'm ever blessed with a girl, I'll be making most of her wardrobe.







There are some really nice, traditional patterns for girls and I can always adjust the length if it's too short for my taste.


----------



## mimid (Dec 29, 2004)

This is one of the things that scares me about my children. I need to learn to sew.


----------



## onlyzombiecat (Aug 15, 2004)

I guess I didn't start having real problems with clothes until dd graduated out of the toddler sizes. I wouldn't say necessarily "hoochie" but definitely scaled down versions of teen wear. We do find decent clothes still.
We avoid clothes with a lot of writing and aren't afraid to buy things from the boys section.
It looks like JCPenney has not-too-mature infant/toddler girl clothing on their web site.


----------



## toddlermama16 (Jun 21, 2005)

I was also going to suggest Hanna Andersson. Their clothes are very classic looking, very sweet, and modest. No slogans across the but here! They are expensive, but they easily last through several children while still looking new, and they get softer with each wash. You can sometimes find them on the Trading Post, as well as e-Bay, too. And if you have an outlet near you, definately check it out. The normal Hanna stores also have big sales every now and then.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mimid*
This is one of the things that scares me about my children. I need to learn to sew.

If you would enjoy sewing wonderful. But it is in NO WAY necessary.
There are pleanty of fine options out there

Target, Kohls, Children's Place and Old Navy all sell age appropriate welll priced clothing. Yes there are some things that you might feel are not appropriate at these stores but there are ALWAYS lots of plain comfortable options out too.

For example right now Old Navy has 100 percent cotton girls shirts that are plain in nice colors for $5 and modest and cute bermuda shorts for around $7. There is nothing to be "scared" of.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

I find that there is a really wide variety of stuff out there, even in more popular priced places like Target and Old Navy. I don't like slogans, none-to-modest stuff for my 3 YO either, but I seem to be able to find what I need without spending a fortune. Yes, there is also a lot of trash that you have to wade through, but it is there. Maybe because my DD is short I actually have to hem stuff so they fall at the top of her knees and don't trip her up when she runs - especially with shorts. Not that she's worn shorts once this summer -- she's into a major dress phase at the moment.

I love Lands End and religiously haunt their overstocks page because their stuff adds up really fast otherwise. Children's Place and Gymboree have great options if you catch the clearance rack.

Am I the only one here who thinks that the Hanna Anderson stuff just looks, um, weird? Or is it just how they model it in the catelog? Always looks like way too many layers, too many colors and patterns all at once. The catalog gives me a headache just looking at it. What am I missing here?


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

LL Bean also has good toddler clothes and you can often get good deals on the sale pages. We got fall clothes on sale at the start of fall there. And Land's End usually has a good back to school sale soon. Sign up for their e-mails. Also if you don't live near one make friends with someone how lives near and Hanna Andersson outlet or get your mom to move near one (well my mom was already near one).

I'm so dreading dd getting older and her wanting to dress like a hoochie mama. It's bad enough driving to work in the morning and seeing kids waiting for the bus in Vermont in January wearing short, short skirts and flip flops. Did I mention in Vermont? In January? With snow? Moral qualms about her looking like a tramp AND concerns about her health. It's just sad that society just presents options to girls that the only way to be cool and hip is to be a slut.


----------



## lalaland42 (Mar 12, 2006)

I just have to add the shirt I saw at Target for toddlers. There is an white t-shirt with a colored (hot pink) half sweater that comes up and is tied in front (center chest level). It almost simulates boobs on a 1 year old! OMG. I could not believe anyone would buy that for their baby.


----------



## meisterfrau (Sep 24, 2005)

It's kind of weird how the experiences are just all over the place. I just recently bought my 18 MO DD a dress at Target just because it was so different from what we're talking about...it looks like something out of Little House on the Prairie, and she looks adorable in it. I'm no prude or anything, but these are babies and toddlers! Yeesh! I would throw up on the slogan-across-the-butt pants if someone gave them to her. I absolutely hate that crap too.


----------



## Past_VNE (Dec 13, 2003)

My 19 mo old son's shorts are about a 3.5" inseam. Poor guy gets so hot, they go to his knees!!

I would kill for little boy shorts that had an inseam of 1 or 2 inches!!

I think it's irritating that that make toddler boy shorts are so long. My DH is not walking around with shorts half covering his knees! He'd roast!!

(Just sharing the other side of the coin.)


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou*
I'm so dreading dd getting older and her wanting to dress like a hoochie mama. It's bad enough driving to work in the morning and seeing kids waiting for the bus in Vermont in January wearing short, short skirts and flip flops. Did I mention in Vermont? In January? With snow? Moral qualms about her looking like a tramp AND concerns about her health. It's just sad that society just presents options to girls that the only way to be cool and hip is to be a slut.

Do I understand you correctly? You are using profanity ("looking like a tramp") in describing _children_ you see waiting for the bus? And your conscience is ok with that but not with your daughter wearing a short skirt? IMO, it would be a huge service to our daughters if we did our part to eliminate words like _tramp_ and _slut_ from the language. Supporting the shame associated with those words, supporting the misogynistic history -- hell, the misogynistic PRESENT -- associated with those words, is NOT going to lead us to a place where girls have pride in themselves and their bodies and don't feel like the need to dress a certain way in order to have value.


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
Do I understand you correctly? You are using profanity ("looking like a tramp") in describing _children_ you see waiting for the bus? And your conscience is ok with that but not with your daughter wearing a short skirt? IMO, it would be a huge service to our daughters if we did our part to eliminate words like _tramp_ and _slut_ from the language. Supporting the shame associated with those words, supporting the misogynistic history -- hell, the misogynistic PRESENT -- associated with those words, is NOT going to lead us to a place where girls have pride in themselves and their bodies and don't feel like the need to dress a certain way in order to have value.

When I see a 15-17 year old girl wearing a tight jean jacket and a skirt that comes just below her bottom and flip flops in 2 feet of snow on a morning in January that is 10 degrees waiting for a bus, yes I'm going to say she is looking like a tramp and an idiot. The problem is in society is when a girl thinks she needs to dress to show off her body that way in order to get boys or be popular or be cool.

I found in my high school it was also usually accompanied by a girl pretending to be dumb whenever there was boy around even though she got straight As b/c she thought the guy wouldn't like her. It was also occasionally accompanied by girls being starving wanting something to eat but when we finally sat down to eat they would realize they'd have to actually eat in front of a boy they liked so they would refuse to. It's the same girls who go to the neighbor house in the school my husband teaches at to give boys blow jobs during lunch.

So yes I am going to say they look like tramps. It's actually what they want to look like. They're not saying I have a great body, I'm going to show it off. I'm assuming you've never heard of CEO's and Ho's parties at colleges? Because apparently there is a prevailing opinion amongst a certain set that a woman could only get ahead in business by being a tramp. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that only the boys dress like ceos. I don't think removing the word tramp or slut will stop that from happening. I think removing the attitude that women are chattle will.

I do see a difference between dressing in an outfit in confidence of yourself and your body and dressing to somehow gain acceptance and popularity. I think in the former you don't mind wearing a coat or some closed toed shoes when it's 10 degrees outside.


----------



## famousmockngbrd (Feb 7, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Past_VNE*
My 19 mo old son's shorts are about a 3.5" inseam. Poor guy gets so hot, they go to his knees!!

I would kill for little boy shorts that had an inseam of 1 or 2 inches!!

I think it's irritating that that make toddler boy shorts are so long. My DH is not walking around with shorts half covering his knees! He'd roast!!

(Just sharing the other side of the coin.)

Exactly! They cover up the little boys and skimp on the little girls. My friend has explained it like this: there is a very specific and limited amount of fabric available to make children's clothes with, so if they add fabric to one thing, they have to take it off another. Hence the teeny girl clothes and the big baggy boy clothes.

As the OP I am sorry I used the word "hoochie". It's kind of loaded and I think it detracts from the real issue.

I can really see where you are coming from, those of you who support a person's right to dress however they want. I agree that female sexuality is not dirty, nor something to be afraid or ashamed of. My problem is with the sexualization of *baby clothes*. My DD is a year old. She is not sexy. She has no womanhood to celebrate. It really kind of disturbs me that these clothes are out there. Yes, there are plenty of other choices. But these kinds of clothes are common enough that I am a little worried about the kind of roles we are encouraging our girls to adopt, from infancy.

And, as far as the shorter, smaller clothes being easier to play in - that may be true, but on the other hand I would rather DD's clothes get dirty and torn, instead of her skin. I guess the good thing about tiny clothes is she won't get snagged on a branch or something.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Past_VNE*
I would kill for little boy shorts that had an inseam of 1 or 2 inches!!

I think it's irritating that that make toddler boy shorts are so long.

My son is the same age (hi, Jaclyn!







) I hate this too- Marcos is still wearing 12 month shorts, and even those are knee length on him! He's slender but not super height-challenged, it's just the dang shorts. I have to roll up every pair! If I don't and he gets on his knees, he has a hard time standing back up.









I have seen some of this too-mature stuff for girls. My dd is almost 5 and I have had no trouble finding decent options for her at Target, Old Navy, Children's Place though. Mostly I shop thrift stores. I have made the offhand comment about a Hollywood starlet or singer who's "not wearing enough clothes", and now she says that too if she sees someone skimpily dressed.


----------



## talk de jour (Apr 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
Do I understand you correctly? You are using profanity ("looking like a tramp") in describing _children_ you see waiting for the bus? And your conscience is ok with that but not with your daughter wearing a short skirt? IMO, it would be a huge service to our daughters if we did our part to eliminate words like _tramp_ and _slut_ from the language. Supporting the shame associated with those words, supporting the misogynistic history -- hell, the misogynistic PRESENT -- associated with those words, is NOT going to lead us to a place where girls have pride in themselves and their bodies and don't feel like the need to dress a certain way in order to have value.

Exactly what I was thinking! How _dare_ you talk about CHILDREN using such filthy, disgusting, misogynistic terms?

Skimpy clothing would not appear "trampy" if you didn't think that women somehow have an OBLIGATION to men to dress a certain way, so they'll avert their eyes. We are not our brothers' keepers! We don't "ask for it" just because we choose to wear a tank top or miniskirt.

And if you believe that, certainly you will believe that children are sexualized. If any of you PPs believed in women's rights to wear whatever they choose without men misappropriating those choices for their own (nonconsensual) sexual pleasure, then this thread would not exist.

I am disgusted and ashamed to see such misogynistic vitriol on MDC. :sad:


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *famousmockngbrd*
I can really see where you are coming from, those of you who support a person's right to dress however they want. I agree that female sexuality is not dirty, nor something to be afraid or ashamed of. My problem is with the sexualization of *baby clothes*. My DD is a year old. She is not sexy. She has no womanhood to celebrate. It really kind of disturbs me that these clothes are out there. Yes, there are plenty of other choices. But these kinds of clothes are common enough that I am a little worried about the kind of roles we are encouraging our girls to adopt, from infancy.

The thing is, while I believe that there is some of this out there, e.g. obviously the clothes with words like "sexy" printed on them, I don't believe that it's anywhere near as widespread as many are saying here. (And I mean, this is IME -- I have shopped at Old Navy, etc.) When you're a baby, you don't need to cover your thighs _or_ your diaper. If you look at a baby in a short, ruffley skirt or a pair of short shorts and see "sexy", then I think it may be time to look closely at the feelings, projections, cultural issues, etc. being triggered for you. (Not necessarily you personally, famousmockngbrd, but the general "you".)

Quote:

And, as far as the shorter, smaller clothes being easier to play in - that may be true, but on the other hand I would rather DD's clothes get dirty and torn, instead of her skin.
Longer shorts aren't going to fix that, but pants would. They are sold at all major stores and on ebay. My kids own several pairs each. (And I didn't even have to sew them.







)


----------



## Ambrose (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *talk de jour*
Exactly what I was thinking! How _dare_ you talk about CHILDREN using such filthy, disgusting, misogynistic terms?

Skimpy clothing would not appear "trampy" if you didn't think that women somehow have an OBLIGATION to men to dress a certain way, so they'll avert their eyes. We are not our brothers' keepers! We don't "ask for it" just because we choose to wear a tank top or miniskirt.

And if you believe that, certainly you will believe that children are sexualized. If any of you PPs believed in women's rights to wear whatever they choose without men misappropriating those choices for their own (nonconsensual) sexual pleasure, then this thread would not exist.

I am disgusted and ashamed to see such misogynistic vitriol on MDC. :sad:

I'm a person who would see a 15-17 year old dress in skimpy clothes no coat and with flip flops in JANUARY and call her a tramp too. Maybe it's because I'm 21 and not so far out of the current high school/college atmosphere. That girl was likely dressing that way BECAUSE she wanted a boys attention IN a sexual way (be it flirting or more who knows and who cares). NOT because she was perfectly comfortable with her body and sexuality as a woman.

Now, to the OP...
you are right in that they start early to indoctrinate the hoochie culture into kids. It really bugs me with some of the outfits I see. SOME mind you. There are outfits out there for kids that I'm sure some of you moms would find totally hoochie but that I would view as not so much (again coming from recently out of high school/college atmospheres) as there are a LOT worse clothing that they could be making for little kids that I thankfully do not see made.

To other moms who do not have teenage kids yet and aren't recently out of the high school/ college scenes):
Seriously go into a mall one day and just browse in teen girls clothing stores. Stores designed for ages 14 (yes they AIM for 14 years old at least) and up (Gadzooks, DEB, PacSun, Abercrombie and Fitch, Aeropostle, EXPRESS, etc). Look thouroughly. There is A LOT WORSE clothing that the fashion industry could be putting on our children. Keep that in mind when calling some of these kids outfits overly sexualized and whatnot. (Again I feel I need to reiterate that YES, I do think some little kids clothes ARE a bit much and oversexualizing)


----------



## Ambrose (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
The thing is, while I believe that there is some of this out there, e.g. obviously the clothes with words like "sexy" printed on them, I don't believe that it's anywhere near as widespread as many are saying here. (And I mean, this is IME -- I have shopped at Old Navy, etc.) When you're a baby, you don't need to cover your thighs _or_ your diaper. If you look at a baby in a short, ruffley skirt or a pair of short shorts and see "sexy", then I think it may be time to look closely at the feelings, projections, cultural issues, etc. being triggered for you. (Not necessarily you personally, famousmockngbrd, but the general "you".)









:


----------



## talk de jour (Apr 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ambrose*
I'm a person who would see a 15-17 year old dress in skimpy clothes no coat and with flip flops in JANUARY and call her a tramp too. Maybe it's because I'm 21 and not so far out of the current high school/college atmosphere. That girl was likely dressing that way BECAUSE she wanted a boys attention IN a sexual way (be it flirting or more who knows and who cares). NOT because she was perfectly comfortable with her body and sexuality as a woman.

I'm not exactly an old-timer myself.

I also find it odd that you find it appropriate to speak for another woman regarding her motives and reasoning.


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Y'all are missing my point. Regardless of a woman's motivations and attire, _it is never a reflection of moral goodness to call anyone a tramp_.


----------



## Alana (Jan 4, 2005)

What I REALLY want to know....is WHO is designing these sorts of clothes for young girls, and teens?? In my mind its always creepy old guys.














:


----------



## cheer mom (Mar 12, 2006)

oh, I hear ya'! I have three girls and sometimes it's hard to find clothes that I like. Swimsuits especially! Gosh, string bikinis for children?!







: Yuck!


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

I hear what you mean about revealing clothing.

So far we have been lucky to find clothing that isn't revealing or makes her look like she's 15 instead of five.

In the event that I can no longer find appropriate clothing, I'll make them. Even the uniforms she must wear for Kindergarten are not great. the shorts are far to short as are the skorts. That's why I am making them









It really aggrevates me to no end!


----------



## huggerwocky (Jun 21, 2004)

If you want babyish clothes for a baby you have to pay...and it doesn't get better with the older ones.


----------



## famousmockngbrd (Feb 7, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
If you look at a baby in a short, ruffley skirt or a pair of short shorts and see "sexy", then I think it may be time to look closely at the feelings, projections, cultural issues, etc. being triggered for you. (Not necessarily you personally, famousmockngbrd, but the general "you".)

Well, there's babyish short and ruffly, and there's sexy short and ruffly. And like I said before - DD is not sexy. She's one. Her clothes still can be, though. And besides - why aren't the boy's shorts teeny tiny? Why just the girls?

You know - I have no problem with women dressing "sexy". I own my share of tank tops and backless hippie dresses. I go without a bra.







But the fact is that we do not exist in a vacuum. If a woman chooses to dress a certain way, she has to be prepared to be seen in a certain light by some people. Sexuality exists. It IS a cultural thing, and a biological thing. If you dress in skimpy or tight clothes, you will be looked at in a sexual way. To some people that is OK, and to others it will mean you are going to Hell.







Sexual is one thing, trampy or slutty is another - that's a judgement call. Whatever - you can't control how people perceive things.

But babies - that is different. It's like those weird beauty pageants where the girls are all made up and wearing evening gowns, and they're 6 years old. It *is* projecting an adult image onto a child, and I don't think my noticing it is a sign that I have been warped by our culture. (I know you didn't say that.)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
Longer shorts aren't going to fix that, but pants would. They are sold at all major stores and on ebay. My kids own several pairs each. (And I didn't even have to sew them.







)

What are these..... "pants" that you speak of?


----------



## WNB (Apr 29, 2006)

I think girls (and women) who dress with the intention of drawing attention to their body in a sexual way are quite appropriately described as looking like tramps. That is quite distinct from saying the girls ARE tramps, or that they are in any way "asking" to be treated as sexual objects and nothing more by anyone, male or female. The only vitriol I've seen on this thread is from the poster complaining about it.


----------



## Kirsten (Mar 19, 2002)

I think it is pathetic that they make it. But they won't keep making it if someone isn't buying it!

There are good and bad choices at almost every store. The few who have almost 100% safe options are

Hanna Andersson
Lands End
Gymboree

IMO. Yes, they are more expensive - especially HA. But if you go to the outlets or look online at their clearance sections, you can find some good deals. Plus, it is well made so you can use it for multiple children then resell it on ebay!

But even at Target or Limited 2, there are decent options. There really are! Some of it (especially words on the butt or those shirts that look like they are trying to focus on boobs) is absolutely not going home with me. And my kids know that. "not appropriate for your age" is a phrase I use a lot - and my kids understand. My sister (who doesn't have kids) likes to take me with her when she shops for clothes for my girls - for birthday or Xmas presents - so I can yay or nay since there are so many "adult" options in kids clothes these days.

I really am pretty middle of the road on kids clothes I think. I don't expect that my ten year old dd will wear prarie skirts and turtlenecks - though I see that prarie skirts seem to have come back! and she does own some HA turtlenecks (so well made; it is amazing). Today was her birthday party and she wore a denim mini skirt and a pale cornflower blue tank - both bought at Target. They were fine with me, and she felt "cool" in them. Win, win.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Yes, it's downright disturbing. As if it isn't bad enough that the fashions for older girls and adult women are all about exposure, they have to do it to babies, too. I don't really mind babies' short skirts or shorts, because I don't see that as being sexual the way it would be for an older girl/woman, but the baby bras and bra-tops are ridiculous.

I will say that right now, the Powers That Be of the clothing world have temporarily allowed us to obtain knee-length shorts and culottes and longer skirts/dresses for girls and women, but we must act now, because by next month, the shelves will all be back to the skimpy look.


----------



## trinity6232000 (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ambrose*
I'm a person who would see a 15-17 year old dress in skimpy clothes no coat and with flip flops in JANUARY and call her a tramp too. Maybe it's because I'm 21 and not so far out of the current high school/college atmosphere. That girl was likely dressing that way BECAUSE she wanted a boys attention IN a sexual way (be it flirting or more who knows and who cares). NOT because she was perfectly comfortable with her body and sexuality as a woman.

<snip>

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ambrose*
To other moms who do not have teenage kids yet and aren't recently out of the high school/ college scenes):
Seriously go into a mall one day and just browse in teen girls clothing stores. Stores designed for ages 14 (yes they AIM for 14 years old at least) and up (Gadzooks, DEB, PacSun, Abercrombie and Fitch, Aeropostle, EXPRESS, etc). Look thouroughly. There is A LOT WORSE clothing that the fashion industry could be putting on our children. Keep that in mind when calling some of these kids outfits overly sexualized and whatnot. (Again I feel I need to reiterate that YES, I do think some little kids clothes ARE a bit much and oversexualizing)


As a woman, and the mother of a dd it just really aches my heart to see women throwing the word trampy around, especially about teens (who in my eyes are still "children" and somebodies dd. Maybe it's because your young and this word has been thrown around more with younger people that it's taken away from the meaning of the word, or desensitized you to the true meaning.

Even if that a young teen might be looking "wanted a boys attention IN a sexual way" does that give anybody the right to categorize the young woman as a tramp. It's one step away from being a bigot in my opinion. It's a huge judgement taken about a person from simply looking at them. The word tramp is slang for prostitute or whore. There is no reason I can think of to simply look at a person and make that judgement.

I have a problem with the clothing choices for teens as well. The fact that "There is A LOT WORSE clothing that the fashion industry could be putting on our children." does not make me feel better about the choices of clothing given to parents of infants and toddlers.

I don't have the largest problem finding clothing for my 6yo. Since she has been born I have found many stores to find clothing for her. That doesn't mean that I don't have to weed threw the clothing to find things for her to wear. Or that I don't find it really odd that boys t's are always boxy while girls tees are always fitted. Or that there are skirts that would barely cover my dd's butt, but that boys clothing usually it to their knees. Why?

Or that sometimes when I am looking in the toddler section and I find myself thinking "if that came in my size I would buy it". I just like clothing for my dd that looks like clothing a 6yo would wear. Not her Mama, in miniature form.

For anybody, take a 3T boys tee and a 3T girls tee and hold them up against each other. Why when the weight and height should be similar is the girls tee so much smaller? Why? I can't think of a single reason that makes sense.


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Three words - Hand Me Downs. That's all dd wears (some from thrift stores) and so far we've mostly gotten cute little girl clothes and not skin-baring items.

love and peace.


----------



## famousmockngbrd (Feb 7, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trinity6232000*
I don't have the largest problem finding clothing for my 6yo. Since she has been born I have found many stores to find clothing for her. That doesn't mean that I don't have to weed threw the clothing to find things for her to wear. Or that I don't find it really odd that boys t's are always boxy while girls tees are always fitted. Or that there are skirts that would barely cover my dd's butt, but that boys clothing usually it to their knees. Why?

Yeah!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trinity6232000*
Or that sometimes when I am looking in the toddler section and I find myself thinking "if that came in my size I would buy it". I just like clothing for my dd that looks like clothing a 6yo would wear. Not her Mama, in miniature form.

Yeah!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trinity6232000*
For anybody, take a 3T boys tee and a 3T girls tee and hold them up against each other. Why when the weight and height should be similar is the girls tee so much smaller? Why? I can't think of a single reason that makes sense.

Yeah.


----------



## flyingspaghettimama (Dec 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Alana*
What I REALLY want to know....is WHO is designing these sorts of clothes for young girls, and teens?? In my mind its always creepy old guys.














:


It's....Bob Dole and R. Kelly!


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Re: the discrepency between boys' and girls' clothes (in terms of fabric volume), IMO, there are two dimensions to this. Yeah, one is that the clothes are modelled on what older people wear. I don't personally have a problem with that... I figure that taking children seriously is a good thing. Why shoud my kids wear something bright red with teddy bears and ducks on it, instead of little versions of my clothes? (I don't personally wear anything with "sexy" or "cute" printed on it, btw.







) But to me, that is purely a matter of taste, and I don't fault others for preferring the teddies. _Not that kind._







:

The second reason for the discrepency is more pernicious, IMO, and a much widerspread problem than sexy kid clothes, IME: the need to indoctrinate gender roles as early as possible. Boys have to wear knee-length cargo pants that weigh 2 tons in dingey shades of brown and green so that they will look tough and manly. The girls' section, meanwhile, is all pink, purple, and yes, "sexy/cute/princess". I have _often_ drawn on "boys'" clothes to get something practical for my daughters -- e.g. a hooded sweatshirt that is actually warm, as opposed to something thin velour, or so puffy or frilly it's uncomfortable. Why don't little girls get to wear a plain old classic navy blue or gray sweatjacket? Why do little girls' Yankees shirts and hats come only in _pink_ when that's not the team color? Why are little boys expected to dress only in camo? (Ok, obviously I'm exaggerating a little, but ykwim. Hopefully.) It's like the way that big box stores' toy sections are divided into girl aisles (all blindingly pink and full of fashion, mothering, and house-playing toys) and boy aisles (all in dingey colors and full of violent or mechanically oriented toys). I mean, pink is fine and all, but the pervasive over-the-top quality and extreme dualism I could live without.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kirsten*
But they won't keep making it if someone isn't buying it!

This really is the answer. "The powers that be" make stuff because it sells. Just like any other consumer item. Some people must enjoy dressing their children this way because there ARE other choices at all price points. And while I won't buy it or allow my children to wear it, I do not think I have the right to dictate what other parents should or shouldn't buy. Its the same way with any other freedom that we enjoy. People believe that clothing is an expression of who they are and we enjoy the right to dress ourselves or our children as we see fit. Dictating what is and isn't appropriate leads to situations like Arab women and the choices they don't have. So, because I love having the choice not to purchase these types of clothes, I will support the right of others to make a different choice.


----------



## MommytoTwo (Jun 20, 2004)

Yeah I agree on the hoochie thing. Never in a million years would I dress my daughter with the word "juicy" on her rear. But I do manage to shop at Target and Old Navy and all the usual places. I just buy basics. I usually find sweet dresses at Carters outlets. I never see hoochie clothes there.


----------



## famousmockngbrd (Feb 7, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
I figure that taking children seriously is a good thing.

Not to put you on the spot, but do you think people who dress their children in duckies and teddy bears are not taking their children seriously? That seems kind of harsh. My kids have worn their share of duckies and I think I take them pretty seriously.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
...a much widerspread problem than sexy kid clothes, IME: the need to indoctrinate gender roles as early as possible.

ITA.

Evan&Anna's_Mom, at what point would you draw the line, if at all? I'm talking about things like thongs, leather miniskirts with handcuffs, etc. I don't know where one would find such items, but just hypothetically.


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *famousmockngbrd*
Not to put you on the spot, but do you think people who dress their children in duckies and teddy bears are not taking their children seriously? That seems kind of harsh. My kids have worn their share of duckies and I think I take them pretty seriously.

Eek! I am so sorry to have implied that!!! No, I do not think that people who dress their children in duckies necessarily fail to take them seriously. In fact, unless it's really, truly nasty, I tend to dress my children in whatever they receive from their relatives, which includes plenty of duckies. Also, I let my older dd pick her own clothes as soon as she was able, and she chooses plenty that are not exactly to *my* taste. Fortunately nothing with Barbie on it...yet.







However, I do kind of think there might be something to explore culturally in the whole ducky phenomenon. Our culture, in general, does not take children seriously. The ducky clothes have that sense of non-seriousness for me, personally. But like I said, it's a matter of taste.


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

ITA that teaching gender roles at an early age is the much more serious aspect of girls' vs. boys' clothing. As a child and young teen I dressed mostly in boys' clothes because I didn't like the short shorts and tight shirts... The boys' jeans fit me better too! Now I always wear long skirts and loose women's shirts, so it wasn't that I wanted to be a boy, but I wanted to be COMFORTABLE!

love and peace.


----------



## trinity6232000 (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WNB*
I think girls (and women) who dress with the intention of drawing attention to their body in a sexual way are quite appropriately described as looking like tramps. That is quite distinct from saying the girls ARE tramps, or that they are in any way "asking" to be treated as sexual objects and nothing more by anyone, male or female. The only vitriol I've seen on this thread is from the poster complaining about it.


Yeah I agree. I also think that teen boys who dress in punk clothing with all those nasty
piercings in their faces look like drug users. Teens who dress like thugs I think they
look like drug dealers. But it's okay I mean I don't think that means they are drug dealers
or drug users. They just look like they are.







:


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
Re: the discrepency between boys' and girls' clothes (in terms of fabric volume), IMO, there are two dimensions to this. Yeah, one is that the clothes are modelled on what older people wear. I don't personally have a problem with that... I figure that taking children seriously is a good thing. Why shoud my kids wear something bright red with teddy bears and ducks on it, instead of little versions of my clothes? (I don't personally wear anything with "sexy" or "cute" printed on it, btw.







) But to me, that is purely a matter of taste, and I don't fault others for preferring the teddies. _Not that kind._







:

I don't have a problem with kids wearing mini-adult clothes--my dd has a few outfits that are distinctively "little girl," but most of her wardrobe is smaller versions of what I might wear. The thing is, I don't wear short skirts or shorts or halter tops or things like that. I don't agree with adults wearing that stuff either (yes I support their right to, I just don't personally agree with it). I really don't need to see anyone's thighs or midriff or cleavage. There are a lot of tasteful alternatives to either fluffy dresses with ducks on them or mini-skirts, bra tops, and high heels.

Quote:

_The second reason for the discrepency is more pernicious, IMO, and a much widerspread problem than sexy kid clothes, IME: the need to indoctrinate gender roles as early as possible. Boys have to wear knee-length cargo pants that weigh 2 tons in dingey shades of brown and green so that they will look tough and manly. The girls' section, meanwhile, is all pink, purple, and yes, "sexy/cute/princess". I have often drawn on "boys'" clothes to get something practical for my daughters -- e.g. a hooded sweatshirt that is actually warm, as opposed to something thin velour, or so puffy or frilly it's uncomfortable. Why don't little girls get to wear a plain old classic navy blue or gray sweatjacket? Why do little girls' Yankees shirts and hats come only in pink when that's not the team color? Why are little boys expected to dress only in camo? (Ok, obviously I'm exaggerating a little, but ykwim. Hopefully.) It's like the way that big box stores' toy sections are divided into girl aisles (all blindingly pink and full of fashion, mothering, and house-playing toys) and boy aisles (all in dingey colors and full of violent or mechanically oriented toys). I mean, pink is fine and all, but the pervasive over-the-top quality and extreme dualism I could live without._
The gender divisions are excessive, especially for babies I think (it's a onesie, people!), but personally I don't mind gender roles as such, so much as what is attributed to them. Why does "femininity" have to mean "skin-revealing sexiness"? There are plenty of gender-appropriate clothes that don't make little girls look like strippers-in-training or make little boys look like militants-in-training. So I think the over-the-top gender divisions of children's stuff is part of the problem, but I think it's also the culture of commercialism and sexual openness and all kinds of other things.


----------



## Joannarachel (Dec 10, 2005)

I just read a thread with the words 'tramp' and 'duckies' in it. How...unusual


----------



## WinterBaby (Oct 24, 2002)

Clearly there's a market for it. Sort of like those Bratz dolls which look to me like preteens with questionable fashions, now they have baby Bratz. Makes me flee in the other direction, but someone is buying. I wouldn't eliminate the choice, but I do worry about our collective cultural values regarding women and girls with aiming these messages at young girls through toys and clothing.

On a side note, I've been known to wear duckies... I'd wear them more if I thought people took *me* seriously while wearing duckies.


----------



## mata (Apr 20, 2006)

oh, I know. my oldest daughter is such a tomboy-she refuses to wear anything "cute" and prefers clothing with skulls, flames, etc. (she's six







.) And she is very modest (which I'm actually very happy about.) Whenever I get a little frustrated by her sense of fashion I remember how bad the opposite end of the spectrum could be!


----------



## lisalou (May 20, 2005)

I find it odd that tramp is a bad word but hoochie culture isn't. The very title of this thread should be offensive to you as well as the use of the word tramp. After all that's what a hoochie is.

I do find it a bigger problem that children are almost forced by clothes into gender roles right off the bat. My bigger problem has been finding warm clothes for my daughter b/c apparently it's assumed girls don't do anything so they don't need clothes that last while boys are more rugged and need warm, thick clothes.

The word tramp or hoochie isn't the problem the culture that's behind it that's the problem. It's cool to be a hoochie now. That's not the role model I want my daugther going after. I don't care if she wears short skirts b/c she happens to like them. I do want her dressing appropriately for the weather. But really the problem is I don't want her thinking she means nothing if she doesn't have a boyfriend. Or that she can somehow gain self worth by the number of lipstick parties she attends. I want her self worth to come from her and not other people. Putting toddlers in pants that say Hoochie or even Cutie on the bum doesn't set someone up to begin to believe that.

And yes there is a big difference between thinking someone looks like X and believing someone is X. I just end up feeling sorry for people who feel they need to dress like they're from the hood or those that feel they need to dress like a hoochie mama. Because they feel they need to do this front to be accepted. I also find they dress that way b/c they want to be put into that category.


----------



## dflanag2 (Oct 4, 2005)

My dd isn't even born yet, and I have had my eyes opened to the disturbing differences in girls and boys clothing. I have looked through racks of INFANT girl clothes that say things like "High Maintenance" and "Born to Shop" on the fronts. (Do I even want to get into the "Princess" thing? Argh.) This disturbs me as much as the miniature sexual clothes. According to our corporate culture, girls are supposed to be sexy right off the bat AND they are supposed to grow up into good little consumers.

I'm glad to see that some people have mentioned the comfort factor, which for me is the most important thing when dressing a small child. I buy DS longer legged shorts in lighter fabrics because he wants to climb all over everything outside and I am trying to avoid his fair skin being scraped up all the time (we pull up his tube socks nerd-fashion as well, avoids sunburn as well as scrapes! He has some really interesting tan lines, let me tell you.) In planning for our infant, I avoid clothes with big floppy collars that always seem to get into baby's face, as well as the 'fancy' stuff with the stiff fabrics, laces, and complex buttons, etc. I love the soft brushed cottons and I can tell already that dd will be wearing a lot of capri pants in the summertime since the shorts are all so small. The trick is finding the looser lighter fabrics with some stretch in them so they have ease of movement and air circulation under the clothes. Less clothing is not always cooler, I find.

Also, I am not afraid to buy bigger sizes if the clothing runs too small. DS is in cloth diapers and for his entire life I have had a heck of a time keeping up with the size of his britches. He was wearing 12-18 mos sizes when he was 4 months old. (I don't even bother shopping at Old Navy anymore, everything there seems to be cut so lean/tight for small children.) DS is very tall for his age (23 months) and right now he is outgrowing his 3T shorts and pants, but he can still wear 18 mos shirts just fine. I just hope his shorts last until the cooler weather...

-dflanag2


----------



## trinity6232000 (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou*
I find it odd that tramp is a bad word but hoochie culture isn't. The very title of this thread should be offensive to you as well as the use of the word tramp. After all that's what a hoochie is.


The difference to me is that when the OP started the thread she was talking about finding
more clothing truly geared toward her child's age. She did make the comment of "hoochie
culture" which is a descriptive term of the clothing. The word "trampy" was used to describe
a young women.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *famousmockngbrd*
Evan&Anna's_Mom, at what point would you draw the line, if at all? I'm talking about things like thongs, leather miniskirts with handcuffs, etc. I don't know where one would find such items, but just hypothetically.

Which line? My personal "I won't buy it or permit it on my child" line or the "This should be banned from the stores line"? Assuming the second, I was about to say that I would never support banning anything, but I guess I would have to starting thinking really carefully at pornographic shirts or advocating violence (Something like "All Xs should be shot") or something of that nature. Because there is a limit to free speech at inciting violence. But shy of that, I wouldn't be in support of any legal limits on what could be manufactured and sold. I believe really, really strongly in the right to freedom of expression and understand that if I want that right for myself and my kids, I have to be willing to give it to others, even if I hate some of what results from it. That doesn't stop my from always hoping that people will stop buying this sort of trash so that companies will stop making it. And my personal contribution to that effort is to be very careful about what I spend my money on.


----------



## eminer (Jan 21, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou*
I just end up feeling sorry for people who feel they need to dress like they're from the hood...

I've been reluctant to get into this dimension of things, but yk, some people _are_ from the hood. We have lived in the Bronx for the past several years, and I find that the clothing culture is pretty different (and that includes different meanings, not just different fashions) from the upstate suburb where I grew up.


----------



## Ambrose (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisalou*
And yes there is a big difference between thinking someone looks like X and believing someone is X. I just end up feeling sorry for people who feel they need to dress like they're from the hood or those that feel they need to dress like a hoochie mama. Because they feel they need to do this front to be accepted. I also find they dress that way b/c they want to be put into that category.









:

Someone quoted me a while back and I don't have the time to sift for it (I need to get to bed because I work tonight for my 12 hour shift







) but I think whooever quoted me mis-interpreted... or rather I didn't word things right to begin with. Yeah, I'd view the 15-17 yr old in January weather dressed in a mini and sandles w/ no coat as a tramp but the above totally words it better than I could.

HTH


----------



## Ambrose (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eminer*
I've been reluctant to get into this dimension of things, but yk, some people _are_ from the hood. We have lived in the Bronx for the past several years, and I find that the clothing culture is pretty different (and that includes different meanings, not just different fashions) from the upstate suburb where I grew up.

I think the other poster just meant that she doesn't understand why maybe the (my words and thoughts on this NOT hers cause I dont know her)....
white upperclass football jock would feel like he needs to dress like a "thug"?

I dunno... I'm grasping at straws here. I personally think that the hood look, looks really comfy....


----------



## trinity6232000 (Dec 2, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trinity6232000*
Yeah I agree. I also think that teen boys who dress in punk clothing with all those nasty
piercings in their faces look like drug users. Teens who dress like thugs I think they
look like drug dealers. But it's okay I mean I don't think that means they are drug dealers
or drug users. They just look like they are.







:









Actually when I said the above it was meant to be taken as a joke.

Teens are just trying to fit in. Yeah they dress like their friends many
times or they are dressing like somebody they saw on tv or some other
form of media. What band they like...etc.

But I don't think that warrants a grown adult to say "they look like X".
They're teens just exercising their way in the world. Many fall victim
to fashion. I don't necessarily think it's sad. It's like dress up. I doubt
a teen girl wakes up in the morning and says I think I will dress up like
a hooker today.

Think about it this way. Do you see a difference in somebody saying
"You look like a bad Mom" to "You are a bad Mom". Would the first
comment make you feel better than the second?

But back to the point of the OP. I don't want to take away choices of parents buying
clothing for their infants/toddlers/young children/or teens. Sometimes it's just harder
than other times to find what *I'm* looking for.
Sometimes I do find it surprising that different styles are being marketed to children
so young. But again it wouldn't be there if it wasn't being bought by somebody. But
in the huge scope of things I would rather them have the choice than to take that
choice away. I'll keep searching for shorts in the boys section for dd, and that works
pretty well for us.


----------



## famousmockngbrd (Feb 7, 2003)

Eminer, I figured you didn't mean that - you seem like a reasonable person.







Just making sure.

Evan&Anna's_Mom - I did mean the second. Thanks for your response. I can see your point, and I agree with it, mostly. I agree that ADULTS should be able to wear whatever they choose. Children are a little different, IMO. They are not wholly capable of making rational choices for themselves. So if I see an 8 year old wearing leather hot pants and a sparkly, see-through halter top, for example, I do not see her as a self-actualized human being making choices for herself that I have to honor even though I don't agree with them. I see her as an immature young girl (which she is) potentially putting herself in danger due to her choices. There are a lot of sick people out there. She could be making herself a target for a pedophile.

I don't think I'm willing to go so far as to pass laws on what children should and should not wear, though. I do think, though, that children depend on adults to help them make good choices, and if their parents aren't doing it, some other adult should. For whatever that's worth.


----------

