Image courtesy of Huffington Post
Elizabeth Hurley is currently under fire for her new swimwear line which targets young girls. On Hurley’s company website she describes the pieces as “fun”. A UK child protection charity and parents don’t find them ‘fun” at all but feel like she is sexualizing girls. Why does everything have to be so damn sexy? Doesn’t this sound like the same problem mothers had with Abercombie & Fitch padded bikini top, if you don’t recall check out “No Boobs, Buy Puberty!”.
“It is very disturbing to see some inappropriate items in this swimwear range,” Claude Knight, the director of the charity Kidscape told the Daily Mail.
Knight also points out that a swimsuit with a gold ring holding it in place is “for girls 8-13 who want to look grown up.” As if children aren’t growing up too quickly as it is, lets throw in a bikini call it “fun” to fasten the process.
“Siobhan Freegard, founder of the community Netmums told the Daily Mail that she knows “a number of mothers who are concerned about the sexualization of their children and would be horrified by their daughters dressing like mini-strippers.”’
“A recent study found that girls as young as 6 think of themselves as sex objects and want to be considered sexy. In an earlier study, Psychologists named clothing as a factor that encourages these youngsters to objectify themselves. This research was particularly disturbing given that “almost a third of girls’ clothing for sale at 15 major retailers [had] sexualizing characteristics.”‘
Young girls shouldn’t have to worry about being sexy especially when they haven’t even hit puberty. I don’t think I have an issue with the swimsuit but more of a problem with the language used to describe and attract children. Ultimately, the parents have the final say and also hold the wallets. [Huffingtonpost]
So what do you guys think strippers or just “fun”?
Fashionbystander 