One thing that concerns me about the future is my never-directly-disproven hypothesis that becoming a parent turns you into a hysterical idiot within two years. Or maybe, as recent evidence has shown, it only does that to British people:
Tesco condemned for selling pole dancing toy
Quote of the day:
“This will be sold to four, five and six-year olds. This is a most dangerous toy that will contribute towards destroying children’s innocence.”
THE SKY IS FALLING!
I remember those good old days when I was five and would walk unaccompanied into Walgreens. I would stroll up to the counter with my stripper pole and champagne, buying them with the money which I did have from my job for five year olds.
“Oy, where’s your mummy?” would ask the British shopkeep.
“Clam up,” I would reply, “and hand over the hooch before ya get a knuckle sandwich, see?” Then the compliant shopkeep would do whatever she was told by a small child, and I would drive my car for five year olds home.
If an adult actually did see a portable stripper pole and say, “You know who would love that? The four year old,” what do you think the four year old would do with it?
a) use it as a pretend mic stand
b) weaponize it
c) use it and a blanket to make a tent
d) not know what the **** it is, because she was four years old
It’s the same violent video game nonsense all over again.
March 15th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
Yes, a stripper-pole as child’s toy is a bad idea. The garter looks like it could be a choking hazard, and it really is much more enjoyable to refer to this thing as a “fitness accessory.” Incidentally, I think “fitness accessory” might be the contemporary expression for “mom’s neck massager.”
Be that as it may, I don’t think this product requires the intervention of Parliament. Primarily because there will be a new destination for the “hysterical idiot bandwagon” within just a few weeks or months. But also because eventually someone will remember that time when they were a kid, danced around the Maypole, and totally did NOT think “Man, this is so PHALLIC.” So, let the kiddies weaponize that hoochie pole, and remember what Rousseau said, “Blushes are the sign of guilt, true innocence is ashamed of nothing.”
March 15th, 2007 at 9:55 pm
Looking at the website, the toy was certainly packaged in a very sexualized manner. Not that 4 year-olds necessarily know much about sexuality, however, these images certainly become part of the tapestry of social influences on kids, especially girls. While arguments and evidence can be presented how sexualized images can influence girls, and adults, in the short-term, I’m not sure how much evidence is available for the long term effects of repeated exposure to such sexualized images for youngsters. I’m not sure I’d want to raise my girl in a place where they are repeatedly exposed to stimuli that highlight mostly, or only, their physical attractiveness and women as sexual objects.
Go around the toy store sometime, look at boys and girls toys - see how the images differ between the toys marketed to boys and girls. I think the final straw, for me, was the highly sexualized toddler Bratz dolls. Of course, I’d not suggest doing this as a lone male for too long - lest you become the subject of a local news channel undercover sexual predator news story.
I often think of the parents role in this, but also consider that parents are pitted against a multi-billion dollar industry whose primary incentive is to make money, and caring about kids is a secondary concern to making money. Just as I’m not quick to trust Monsanto for the food I eat. For similar reasons, I wouldn’t be too trusting of Mattell either.
March 15th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
But… the central premise seems to be that a five-year-old girl will somehow get this toy. My contention is that she very, very obviously will not. Under any circumstances. It is impossible.
Now, the teenagers? You’re on your own.
March 16th, 2007 at 8:27 am
Really? There are a lot of teens out there with 5 year old sisters and negligent parents.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
I have a couple of thoughts in addition. I would like to think it is unlikely that any parent would by this toy for their kid. When I saw the packaging, I thought it almost looks like some sort of SNL skit (like Johnny Human Torch, I think). The part that concerns me more is what a toy like this reflects in broader societal trends. This specific toy is just at the extreme end of a concerning trend. A parent that would actually think this toy is great, well, I wouldn’t even know where to start.
TR raises a good point, I think. In my family-to-be, younger aunts and uncles often buy Bratz toys (hence, my familiarity with them) for a 9 year-old girl. Talking to her is interesting, as she already thinks she is fat and refuses at family gatherings to eat much, if anything. She’ll also say that she thinks my fiance is also a little too fat, if pushed. The only upside is that all her female cohorts of similar pre-teen to teen age are similarly disposed. This leaves a lot of food and leftovers for the rest of us.
March 17th, 2007 at 10:32 am
That the world in general, and the world of marketing more specifically, is hyper-sexualized in a deeply unhealthy way is very true. Unfortunately, the individuals quoted in this article miss the opportunity completely to have that debate, and instead choose to make proclamations such as:
and:
(Finally! cries the long-neglected depraved people market, Someone is paying attention to us… at last!)
Call me a cynic, but I can’t help but think that stocking the item in the “toys & games section” of the store may have been part of a bigger brand-building strategy by those naughty-naughty folks over at Peekaboo World HQ. Contained in this article, amid all the harrumphing, is a full description of the product, along with a picture, a mention of its retail price and exactly where to find it in the store where it is sold… alongside mentions of other Peekaboo-brand goods! I have no doubt that good number of sensible Britons finished this article and thought to themselves, “Blimey, Dr. Adrian Rogers is spot-on, sum’pin like that just idn’t proper for a wee child… but my wife’s birthday is coming up… “