Wednesday, July 2, 2008

6 going on 26.

[the following post is in response to a facebook note, posted by kathleen, called "high heels for babies? yes, it's true."  in case that link doesn't work (due to facebook's privacy controls), here is the note:

Read the article below and take action if you'd like.

The designers of Heelarious are American and can be reached at: ---you can check out the story behind the shoe
If you do contact the makers of Heelarious shoes, please do so with tact and respect. They are most likely not going to respond to contempt or vehement please be compassionate if you choose to write them a letter.
I encourage you to talk with those you know whom have young girls...if it's not Heels for babies, then it's lacy black underwear for 9 year-olds...have a discussion, raise awareness, and begin a discussion.
Kids need to have their role models talk to them about this stuff before the media does.
peace, Kathleen

Heelarius high heels for babies go on sale
By Rupert Neate

High heeled shoes designed specifically for babies have gone on sale.
The tiny stillettos, called Heelarious, are intended for babies up to six months and come in hot pink, black and leopard print.
Britta Bacon and Hayden Porter, the American inventors of the footwear, said the heels are only for show and will collapse if any pressure is put on them.
Christopher Cloke, head of child protection awareness at the NSPCC, said: "This is part of a worrying trend of inappropriate clothing being marketed at young children."
Miss Bacon said she hit upon the idea for the shoes while walking to her daughter Kayla's 4th birthday party. She said: "It would have been hilarious if I could have brought Kayla to a party in high heels when she was a baby."
The $35 (£17.80) shoes, which come in six different styles named after the inventors' children, are on sale at over 50 stores in America, Canada and Switzerland. British parents can purchase them from internet retailers.
In April supermarket giant Tesco was criticised for launching padded bras for girls as young as seven. The "bust-booster" bra, which costs £4, was sold alongside vests in the supermarket's seven to eight-year-old range.
It was the latest embarrassment for Tesco, which in 2006 removed a pole dancing kit from sale after being accused of "destroying children's innocence".
Asda was also condemned for marketing black lacy underwear to nine-year-old girls.
Last year the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, said children were being psychologically damaged by inappropriate "sexy" clothing and toys.

Story from Telegraph News:
Information appearing on is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence.

If you require any further information on permitted use, or a licence to republish any part of the Site (or any Content), please email us at, or contact us by telephone on +44 20 7538 2921, Facsimile: +44 207 931 2867.

alright, now hold on. first and foremost, for the record, the following is strictly my own person opinion. kathleen, i have the utmost respect for you and what you stand for; i do want you to know that. however, I feel a slight reality check is necessary.

let's look at the facts, which begin with 2 woman thinking it would've been funny for a baby to show up to a women's party in "heels". It's really just a baby outfit with a little sense of humor. of course, everyone's initial reaction is "heels = sexy clothing.. add in babies = WRONG", but have you really thought about it? c'mon, you have to admit they're kind of cute and it is a funny concept. they're not meant for walking in and - here's the important key - they won't be in them when they *do* start walking. now, if these ladies decided to invent "training heels", our society would have just lost substantial amount more of my already dwindling respect; that would just about level out with decking your child out in makeup for the little miss 6-going-on-26 beauty pageant*, which i despise for a million different reasons. not to mention the physical health problems that come with young girls wearing heels. no, scratch that.. that come with anyone wearing heels.
however, this is not what the creators are selling. they're selling a funny gag idea for a baby's party outfit that the baby won't even remember by the time they can walk.

as for the rest of the article, yes, now i'm disturbed. padded bras and black lacy underwear for children????? now, i know there's something in the water that's been starting girls' periods as young as 7, but come on now. this is really too ridiculous to even be upset about. obviously, if someone thinks this is okay to market, we're not dealing with a full deck. and where do we start dealing with a problem like this? yes, the perv who wants to help pre-pubescent girls get it on is certainly a good starting point, but i'm inclined to think there's a bigger problem when there are parents buying this stuff for their daughters.

have you ever tried to think about the verrry beginning of time? like, where the earth came from, what set off the big bang theory, what was there before.. thinking about things like that makes my head actually hurt because the human brain does not have the capacity to think that broadly. that's kind of how my head feels when i try to think about all the damage in our society that needs to be corrected.
*the "little miss 6-going-on-26 pageant is not a real pageant.. it's just meant to stand for how i see the idea of all children's pageants. i mean, seriously, have you seen those girls?
oh, texas..

1 comment:

Callisto said...

The padded bras and lacy underwear I find upsetting. But the heels? Not so much. What little girl didn't sneak into her mother's closet to try heels on? It's like the article is suggesting that wearing high heels makes a woman loose. Most professional career environments expect women to wear heels to work. I'd totally buy a pair of those baby heels just for the hell of it. I don't even have a baby.

But back to those panties, wtf? I'm not sure what would possess somebody to try selling something like that to children, nor do I want to think too hard about the reason.