Is this Armani ad too sexy?

If you are a prude then I am a prude too. I've been thinking this for years. (I saw a seven year old girl with eyeliner and mascara on the other day. She was SEVEN. I was trying to figure out why her parents were okay with that...)

As much as it would be really nice to have a little girl, I am glad that I really do not have to worry about sexualized clothing like this right now.

Reply

Didn't one retailer put out a thong for girls ages about four and up last year? Anyone remember which store it was?

Yep, this is too much.

- L
http://www.quickservekids.com

Reply

I went to the site and didn't find the music sexy at all. i looked at the clothes and while I found the string things a little too risky for my kid, I think on vacation at the beach outside our hotel room the outfit pictured above wouldn't get veto'd at our house. but just for everyday - yes - total veto marker. Cam doesn't get to wear anything belly exposing just cause, I totally expect her father to throw that fit so I don't have to. He already throws a fit about two peice bathing suits and would have a heart attack if I bought her a string bikini.

Reply

I don't have a problem per se with 2-piece bathing suits or halter tops for little girls. What bothers me about the photo is tiny size of the halter, the low waistline of the pants, and the pose of the girl in the halter top. This isn't a natural pose for a little girl; I do think they are trying to send sexed-up vibes through this photo.

It would be interesting to see whether this kind of advertising increases or decreases sales of these clothes. After all, it's parents who make these purchase decisions for little girls - I hope.

Reply

You, for myself, what I am reading into this is that skin is sexy (reading in the complaints about the ad). I personally think little kids showing skin is way not sexy, ever, but there is something about a child's skin that is pleasing. What about Jodi Foster's Coppertone ads when she was a toddler? Was it sexy to show her little tush?

I personally believe the only people who would be bothered by even naked kids are either troubled about their own sexuality or are pedophiles. To me, until there are present the secondary sexual characteristics (or they are added), then there is no sexiness going on, period. In that end, what troubles me more is the move to make adults more and more child like in ads (removing all 2ndary hair, small breasts, minimal hips, etc...) which blurs the line between children and adults.

Reply

I dressed like that when I was a little girl and no one molested me or even thought it was too "sexy". I honestly think it is where your mind is going when you look at the picture. If you look at it and see a teenager, then it might be too little clothing but just think about all the photos on the net of naked babies (put up their own parents)and I take pictures of my kids all the time in just their diapers which should be more alarming than a little girl in a halter top. She isn't hugging on a grown man. She is with another girl her age. I would honestly let my daughter (if I had one) wear this until she had curves, then it might be an issue. How many little girls do you see onthe beach in bikini's and not worry one bit about it. They look like a small child playing...The music doesn't bother me either. The little boy with is shirt half tucked...that would be considered sexy too if the little girl is to be considered that and my kid looks like that nearly everytime I try to make him tuck his shirt in. And, if we are thinking along the lines, what about the baby kissing the little boy...is that not a grown-up activity...well of course not, I encourage my kids to blow kisses to people all the time and they wouldn't hesitate to kiss a baby or be kissed by one ever. You got get in the right frame of mind. You are looking at children's pictures, not teenagers, not adults...babies.

Reply

I was more worried about the belly and underwear exposing pants/shorts (see picture 5 and 14) they are wearing!!

Reply

But, Jerri Ann, whhat *BABY* wears a string bikini? So, the ad is trying to tell you that you are, in fact, looking at a sexualized being and not a baby. Or that a baby is a sexualized being.

Why would any parent WANT to dress their young child in clothes that older people wear? I just don't even begin to understand parents who would buy a string bikini for a young child. Why in the hell would a 6 year old need to wear a string bikini.

I think it is an extremely inappropriate ad.

Reply

Jessica- I wore a string bikini when I was a baby. I have photos to prove it. It had cute little flowers that covered the nipple but that was about it.

Chriss- picture 14 is not showing underwear, that is her bathing suit. I think the point of that picture is to show you the tag.

I agree with Ethel and Jerri, I do not find this ad sexual at all. There are other childrens ads that I do find too sexual. I also believe that we are bluring the line between women and girls. Our society as a whole is very prude. If we could all just let the skin thing go no one would bother to think about it sexually usless they are a pedophile.

Reply

These kids are so cute! My 6 year old runs around nekkid half the time - let them enjoy their innocence.

Reply