Summer is coming, down under, so I have been looking for togs (bathers, swim suits) for my daughters. It has been an exercise in frustration. I wanted something that would be easy for the girls to put on themselves, a one piece, preferably with sleeves and short legs, for sun protection. Could I find anything? Not a hope!
Well… that’s not quite true. Eventually I found togs for all three girls, aged six, six, and nine, but not without some serious searching.
Some togs were simply impractical. Cross over straps, or circular cut outs in the back, lend themselves to six year olds getting tangled up. Two piece suits, with a pair of short pants, and a long top, might look nice, but you can guarantee that a child who goes off to school for her swimming lesson with a two piece will come home with a one piece.
However impractical I can forgive. Sexualisation I cannot. Six year olds do not need cut out holes in the side of togs, to let more skin show through. Six year olds do not need bikinis, with mini bras. Six year olds do not need togs with a belt, to emphasise their hips. Six years olds do not need togs with high cut legs. And for that matter, neither do nine year olds. Even nine year olds need to be allowed to be children, for a least a year or two more.
For goodness sakes, why can’t clothing designers let little girls be children. Make them something pretty, but practical, and above all, child like. They manage it for little boys, so why can’t they do the same for wee girls?
I asked the staff in one store about the designs, saying that they were impractical, and overly sexual. The staff were indifferent. “Oh well,” one blonde ditz said. “They seem to sell, so I guess lots of people like them.”
Maybe. That doesn’t justify selling sexualised clothing to children. All it justifies is a profit.
15 responses so far ↓
Stephen Judd // Thursday 11 October 2007 at 9:00 pm |
Argh yes. Of course it bloody sells, there’s hardly any damned choice, whether you like them or not.
My daughter’s 12 now and taking women’s sizes. Finding clothes that aren’t alarming is difficult. Buying shoes without big heels is also a problem.
I don’t know who to blame exactly but it pisses me right off.
Margaret // Friday 12 October 2007 at 9:42 am |
I’ve noticed even the clothes for very little children and babies are highly gendered. Pumpkin Patch basically has a line down the middle of the store that says “girls this side, boys that side”, as if the clothes have to be segregated in case they catch opposite sex cooties or something.
Looking at baby clothes, and not knowing the sex of my child yet, it’s incredibly frustrating that the clothes that are affordable are also one of:
a) pink and/or frilly and/or have a “girls only” type picture or text on them; OR
b) pale blue and/or with “boys only” picture or text; OR
c) grey/white and ugly.
There is more choice in the more expensive stores, but I’m not sure $45 for a babygro is sustainable when you’re not just buying one offs as baby shower gifts but are instead seeking to cloth your own child day in day out. Particularly when having a baby generally means a drop in income as well.
geekbetty // Friday 12 October 2007 at 11:58 pm |
I have a terrible time finding clothing for my seven year old. Her father says I try to dress her too much like a baby and I can’t help but respond – “she’s only seven, she practically IS a baby still”. She’s not allowed to wear belly shirts or bikinis because I think they are too mature for her age. I can see us butting heads in her teen years, but I firmly believe in keeping her young while she still is.
elayne // Saturday 13 October 2007 at 12:58 am |
oi… você provavelmente não está entendendo nada do que eu escrevi… mas eu compreendi seu texto… é… as coisas hoje em dia estão muito mais evoluidas… as meninas já são tratadas como mulheres… usando roupas curtas e sapatos altos, por que as lojas só querem saber de lucar e lucrar e lucrar… quer me compreender? joga no google.
inmate1972 // Saturday 13 October 2007 at 1:43 am |
Every time I shop for my nieces, I am shocked to the core. They are trying to turn little girls into hootchie mamas and it is shameful.
A freidn of mine went as far as to learn how to sew and now makes swimsuits for her daughters so they can play and not expose their business to the world.
riddlej // Saturday 13 October 2007 at 1:46 am |
I totally don’t buy that “if it sells” thing. Manufacturers decide what to sell first and then pump us full of advertising. I can guarantee that if, for some reason, we were transported to another land and only one-piece normal swimsuits were on the racks, they would sell too…
Good commentary. Try being disgusted at BABY girl swimsuits.
Deborah // Saturday 13 October 2007 at 9:05 am |
Here’s a Babel Fish translation of Elayne’s comment.
oi… you probably are not understanding nothing of that I wrote… but I understood its text… I am… the things nowadays I am evoluidas… the girls already I am not treated as women… using short clothes and high shoes, why the store alone you want to know of lucar and to profit and to profit… want to understand me? it plays in google.
Ray // Saturday 13 October 2007 at 8:05 pm |
And what is with the colour, everything pink for girls
Just glance down the warehouse rows and see nothing but pink and dolls for girls but bright colours for the boys…grrrrr
Stephen Judd // Sunday 14 October 2007 at 6:04 pm |
I think I can do better with elayne’s post than Babelfish. I knew I’d get to use my elementary Portuguese sooner or later!
Hi… you probably don’t understand anything I have written… but I understand your text… that is… things today have changed a lot… girls now are treated like women… wearing short clothes and high heels, because stores only want to know about profit and profit and profit… want to know what I’m saying? play with google.
Deborah // Sunday 14 October 2007 at 6:29 pm |
I’m impressed!
Sarah // Monday 15 October 2007 at 4:13 am |
Have you seen this swimsuit site? Modest Swimwear…. for a while people were circulating it as a joke, but when my daughters are that age, I think I’ll be ordering a couple of them…I have little girls (and boys) and I have all but given up buying from mainstream stores… the best non-trashy stuff here (and I say this as a NZer in North America) tends to come from the most expensive kids’ boutiques and I look out for those brands on discount websites. My last shock this week was trying to find a pair of jeans for my 18mth old that weren’t low-slung …. My answer to the pink and blue with the older girl was to invest in fabric paints, buy the better fitting “boys’ colour” t-shirts and paint design of her choice on the front.
merc // Monday 15 October 2007 at 7:11 am |
Me too.
Robyn // Thursday 18 October 2007 at 7:35 pm |
I was always tall for my age, and I ended up shopping in women’s clothing stores when I was 11.
Here’s me aged 12, looking more 22 (but not acting it):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/robyn-gallagher/212886419/
The thing is, while a girl can wear clothes that have elements of sexy grown-up clothes, she’s still going to act like a girl. Part of sexiness is attitude, and girls don’t have that; women do.
As for pink, well, when I was 10, I was hot for pink. Everything I owned was in varying shades of pink. I didn’t feel oppressed by the patriarchy, and eventually I grew out of it. I tend to go for dark grey these days. (Perhaps I should introduce a little pink back in to the mix.)
jemima // Thursday 8 November 2007 at 1:25 am |
I am impressed with the reactions above. It shows that we have people who are sensitive to childrens needs and thus care for children.
miss 11 (i was miss 9) // Friday 6 November 2009 at 8:29 pm |
I agree. And my opinion should be useful, because i am actually a victim of this crazy ‘pick and chic’ fashion.