Here's an article on the "Baby Bratz" (is it possible to say that as a singular noun?) with a thong:
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/bizarre&id=3765173
It carries a BOTTLE. And wears a THONG. Here's a picture:
http://www.weblogsinc.com/common/images/5607149836182359.JPG?0.19433504057705142
But, frankly, just seeing the dolls themselves is enough to freak me out:
http://z.about.com/d/toys/1/5/L/9/Babyz.jpg
Hmmmm.
In other news, some words of wisdom from Mike Jeffries, CEO of Hollister, Aeropostale, and Abercrombie and Fitch, excerpted from a Salon.com article:
Our first bump came when I mentioned the 2002 uproar over the company's thongs for middle-school girls, which had "Eye Candy" and "Wink Wink" printed on their fronts. "That was a bunch of bullshit," he said, sweating profusely. "People said we were cynical, that we were sexualizing little girls. But you know what? I still think those are cute underwear for little girls. And I think anybody who gets on a bandwagon about thongs for little girls is crazy. Just crazy! There's so much craziness about sex in this country. It's nuts! I can see getting upset about letting your girl hang out with a bunch of old pervs, but why would you let your girl hang out with a bunch of old pervs?"
I still think those are cute underwear for little girls.
Oh, okay.
Source
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is disturbing, alright. However, America has historically been, and to some extent remains, a pretty prudish country. I mean, we were founded by Puritans who thought 16th and 17th century Protestants weren't uptight ENOUGH. And we still have vestiges of that era, such as the no-sex-before-marriage coalition. Although in certain parts of the country (dens of sin?), these conventions seem more like weird anthropological relics.
ReplyDeleteWill the increasingly early onset of puberty deal the coup de gras to American prudishness, I wonder?