JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I was in Fred Meyers last week and I noticed they had a wall of TapOut shirts for boys aged 5-12. I thought it was irresponsible of them to sell that stuff but this takes the cake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 It has to exist in order to sell...you're putting the cart before the horse. I agree 100% with this fathers' thinking....he neglected to mention that it sends the very wrong message to pedophiles as well. To "advertise" in a way that presents this train of thought as acceptable is irresponsible. How much lower can we go?....I find myself asking this pretty much daily. GM....do you have kids? I don't suppose you do but that's a rather shortsighted view of things. It goes beyond "don't buy it"...it's about the fact that anyone would think there's an appropriate market for this. That it's a sorry state of affairs the day there is. (Just read your comment DBTR...great minds?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horny Manatee Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 If a girl gets down to her underwear then chances are high that stuff is going down regardless of what the underroos have written on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 Another bible thumper trying to impose his views on everyone else. Here's an idea, if he doesn't like the products, don't buy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MillerGenuineDraft Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Limited Brands is the most unethical and horrible corporation out there. I say this because I've worked for them. They do whatever it is possible to push revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logic Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I'm not complaining But in all seriousness, I don't agree with it. But at the end of the day you're the person/parent buying the product. And if it's your choice to wear something like that, I have no problem with that. It's exactly the same as alcohol, I can tell you brands like Palm Bay, and Cariboo aim their products at minors, because even though its illegal there is still a market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Another bible thumper trying to impose his views on everyone else. Here's an idea, if he doesn't like the products, don't buy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyledude Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 This could all be solved by not buying these products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannik freaking hansen Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 This could all be solved by not buying these products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 As an aside, I saw an elderly, yes elderly, lady wearing a pair of those "Juicy" pants. I can't even possibly begin to tell you some of the thoughts that went through my head but the first one was "Yuck!", the second was "That's just wrong", and the third was "Not likely." Maybe there is a market to exploit seniors for VS too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I was in Fred Meyers last week and I noticed they had a wall of TapOut shirts for boys aged 5-12. I thought it was irresponsible of them to sell that stuff but this takes the cake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 For those saying don't buy the product, I think you have to consider that these are teenage girls who most likely get an allowance. I really think parents need to be responsible for what their children buy, but at the same time, this puts parents (fathers in particular) in an uncomfortable position. I'm not a father, but I imagine I would be pretty uncomfortable monitoring my teenage daughters underwear purchases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raoul Duke Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Nothing surprises me anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niloc009 Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Another bible thumper trying to impose his views on everyone else. Here's an idea, if he doesn't like the products, don't buy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I'm a bit conflicted on this. On one hand I believe it's parents' job (not the manufacturer) to better educate and guide their kids purchasing decisions on stuff like this and that in a perfect world the market for products like this simply wouldn't exist due to that parenting involvement and education of women's self worth not based on their sexuality. Problem = solved. Sadly, we do not live in a perfect world where parents all parent at the same "level" and kids are bombarded daily by media with the message that they should emulate the current slutty pop star du jour etc. Hence the reality is there IS a market for 14-18 year old girls to buy and wear overtly sexual clothes, underwear etc. Hell I remember as a ~16 year old almost 20 years ago going to Halloween parties where significant numbers of girls seemed to be in a costume competition for who could "dress" like the sluttiest tramp (lingerie is apparently a suitable Halloween costume...). Can you blame a company for fulfilling an existing market? Should we limit/govern the teen sexuality market similar to how we monitor tobacco or alcohol? There's no quick or easy answer there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I find it wildly ironic that you feel someone is 'imposing their views' yet your second sentence is no different than anything this man is trying to accomplish. It is also shortsighted of you to assume that he is a 'bible thumper'. Despite being a reverend, nowhere in that post does he allude to religion. You do not have to hold religious beliefs to agree with his message. I am agnostic and I agree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 As someone who has teenage daughters, I'm not particularly crazy about this marketing scheme either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I find it wildly ironic that you feel someone is 'imposing their views' yet your second sentence is no different than anything this man is trying to accomplish. It is also shortsighted of you to assume that he is a 'bible thumper'. Despite being a reverend, nowhere in that post does he allude to religion. You do not have to hold religious beliefs to agree with his message. I am agnostic and I agree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 And how is suggesting this Rev (who by the way, I'm sure doesn't believe or support gay marriage because homo sexuals are not natural and gays all go to Hell according to organized religion) choose not to buy these products as opposed to making sure no one in the entire world should make that decision for themselves "wildly ironic"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I think people should have the right to buy a product or ignore it? You know where they wouldn't allow these products to be sold? In places like Iran. You can go live there if you want. I prefer to live in a country that has freedoms. If I disagree with someone, I state my position and have a civil interaction. Something that seems a little beyond you. And how is suggesting this Rev (who by the way, I'm sure doesn't believe or support gay marriage because homo sexuals are not natural and gays all go to Hell according to organized religion) choose not to buy these products as opposed to making sure no one in the entire world should make that decision for themselves "wildly ironic"? Here's the thing though...when it comes to "making decisions" of sexuality and suggestive clothing and it involves kids, the options shouldn't even be there. I'm all for the freedom of choice, but to even put kids into the equation isn't something that anyone should be entertaining. Protection of kids trumps anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.