Just in from Australia & the Kay is mad!!!!

This article from Australia's Herald Sun really tripped my trigger!!!!!!


Retailers peddle padded bras for girls

by Jane Metlikovec

September 09, 2006 12:00am

BREAST-enhancing padded bras for girls as young as six are being sold in Victorian shops.

Childhood experts have warned parents they could be baiting pedophiles by dressing their young girls as raunchy women.

Tiny matching lingerie sets of lacy bras and knickers in many children's brands including Bratz, Saddle Club and Barbie, have hit the shelves aimed at girls who are barely old enough for school.

The Herald Sun last week revealed the latest Bratz Babyz range included sexually provocative baby dolls dressed in leather and lingerie.

The padded Bratz "bralettes" were among more than 30 different junior bra styles starting at size six on sale at a city Target store visited by the Herald Sun yesterday.

The Australian Family Association warned parents against sexualising their children. "We have a growing problem with pedophilia and people viewing children as sex objects," spokeswoman Angela Conway said. "Children do not need these products and I am appalled. It is more than bad taste. The sexual portrayal of children in this country is illegal and these products are pandering to just that."

Australian Childhood Foundation CEO Dr Joe Tucci said padded bras were "the most ridiculous piece of clothing a parent could buy".

Bratz distributor Funtastic defended the range. "The idea of the padding is for girls to be discreet as they develop," a spokeswoman said. "It is more about hiding what you have got than showing it off. It is certainly not there to make children look like they have breasts."

Target also stood by the underwear range. It provided "fashionable items that give girls modesty and style as they go through development changes", a spokeswoman said.

A friend forwarded the above news flash and all I could see is red! If Target is selling it in Oz, how long will it be until this crap hits their racks here? Sexy lingerie for little girls? How sick is that? Little girls certainly don't need it. They need cotton Fruit of the Looms -- undershirts & old fashioned panties.

I remember being mildly annoyed when my then mother-in-law took my Kate shopping one day when she was about ten and, along with some really cute, appropriate clothes for school, bought her some Calvin Klein undies. I decided not to say anything about it because I knew she meant well and it wasn't that big of a deal. She's the same granny who bought Kate a Raggedy Ann doll that was 3 feet tall -- & Kate was only 3 months old. Grandmas can get a bit silly -- we're allowed. When my first grandchild -- a boy -- was born, I went to the Cleveland Indians Shop (Go Tribe!) at our local mall and bought him a little outfit and paid six dollars (!) for a pacifier with the Tribe's logo on it. As I was walking away from the store it hit me that yeah, I was really a grandma -- I'd bought something silly that cost too much.

Sexy lingerie is another kettle of fish. Allowing 6-year-olds to wear such things sends a message that I don't think I need explain here as from what I know of my wonderful readership here, they are very intelligent people. Why would a mother push her daughter to grow up too fast? I suppose the same mothers who push their daughters into beauty pageants covered with more makeup than I probably wear in a year. Or perhaps mothers like the woman I know who took her grandaughter to a Britney Spears concert. Hello? Is Britney what what we want for our daughters' role model? I don't think so.

The justification offered for this lingerie by both the designers and Target are inane if not insane. Developmental changes in a six year old? I sincerely doubt that. Can we say stupid and unnecessary? I think we can.

What in the hell happened to that little item we grew up with -- the training bra? In my day that semi-useless piece of lingerie did the trick without making us look like hookers! You got one when your mom noticed you had started sprouting bumps and it made you feel less self -conscious and a bit grown up. I was a late bloomer -- I got my first at 13 (and, sadly, didn't outgrow it until I was 16). My daughter scared me at age 9 by asking. "Mom, when am I going to need a bra?" I hadn't expected a question like that yet! It seems that one of the 10-year-olds on her swim team had started wearing one. Her mother was in horror that she'd started sprouting so soon. I told Kate that she would most likely get a bra when she was 12 or so but wouldn't really need a bra until she was about 16 if she took after me. She got one a couple years later because she was the only one on the volleyball team still wearing undershirts and the other girls teased her and she complained as time went on that bras were a nuisance. I don't understand why people are in a hurry for their daughters to grow up -- little girls are cute and fun -- teenaged girls are not although Kate was a rather easy teenager to raise -- she was more interested in her sports and books than boys. (Kay shouts, "Thank you, Jesus!") While she was going through her preteen and teen years, I saw mothers pushing their daughters to date -- even allowing 8th grade 13-year-olds to go out -- in CARS -- with 16-year-old boys and worrying that their daughter wouldn't asked to the Prom in high school. I didn't worry about any of that. I worried that she was happy and safe.

I think I'm going to have to stay out of Target. I might wind up throwing what a Southern friend refers to as a "Hillbilly fit" (which I'm told isn't pretty) in their childrens department. Their selling this trash is sick. I'm inclined to go to Target's website and tell them what I think. If you, gentle bloggers, feel the same here is their website:

http://www.target.com/gp/homepage.html/601-6530658-2108105

Call me old-fashioned. Call me crazy. Call me anything you want but I think I'm right on the mark on this one.

Happy Blogging Kay

Copyright 2006 Kay Dennison