Home

Advertisement

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Babies are NOT fashion accessories...

  • Feb. 28th, 2007 at 11:36 AM

Nor are they lifestyle statements, nor are they ways to make a political or religious point. I don't know what it is lately, but the dignity of children seems to be severely lacking from this country.

Who in their right mind gives a 2 or 3 year old girl a mohawk?? Okay, I could understand if the kid cut her own hair (which is never pretty) and mom cuts it like a mohawk for a week since she will probably have to practically shear the kid anyway, esp. if said mom is all into neon colored hair and tattoos and whatnot. But to do it on a whim??? COME ON.

Maybe I'm turning into a prude in my old age but sheesh - shouldn't lil ones be allowed to keep SOME dignity?

Comments

[info]hippie1120 wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 09:24 pm (UTC)
Until kids have their own opinion on what they want to wear, etc., they're going to reflect Mom/Dad's taste. Hair, to me, is no big deal-that's temporary. Clothing too, except those really nasty t-shirts that say things like "I'm a boob man"; people who put that on their kid just plain don't know appropriate from STUPID. What I really hate is when people pierce their kid's ear(s)-that's a permanent freaking hole, let the kid make their own decision when they're old enough. Same for tattoos, though I can't honestly say I've ever seen a kid with one. ;-)
[info]hellhoundfiat wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:25 pm (UTC)
Of course lil ones like that don't have "formed opinions" and will reflect Mom and Dad... but that doesn't mean that they are now the posterchild for whatever it is Mom and Dad are all big over - it just means that Mom and Dad will choose Loony Toons over Disney or decide that pink is too girly for a girl. My kids won't wear shirts that say "Cutie for Christ" even though I will raise them in the Catholic Church.

And yes, hair too. Good, bad, or otherwise, society has some preconceived notions, and when it comes to hair, mohawks are still considered "outside." Children deserve better than that. If a teen wants a mohawk, fine. Hair grows back. But leave the little tykes alone! I look at this child and all I can feel is sorry for her because HER MOTHER did this to her.
[info]hippie1120 wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:52 pm (UTC)
Yup, you're an old fuddy duddy now. :-P

Seriously, though-where do we draw the line with people being different and its effect on their kids? Most kids don't have 2 dads, but if a stable, loving gay couple want to adopt, should they? I mean, that's "outside" but don't they deserve that right, especially if the kid gets a loving home instead of years of foster care?

Conversely, most people think circumcision is okay, and ear-piercing for infant girls is acceptable too. But to me, it's just cutting a child who has no say in the matter.

See what you get for posting stuff that makes people think?
[info]hellhoundfiat wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 11:09 pm (UTC)
tsk tsk tsk... having gay parents (or conservative parents or atheist parents or whatever) isn't the same as creating or altering a child's appearance!

And I will have to make an exception for specific cultural practices that have reason. (Jewish circumcisions come to mind.)

But that all aside, what I'm talking about is allowing children to be children. There is an innocence to infancy and childhood that is all too soon lost and I think that parents should let their children enjoy it while it lasts. And, no matter who does the dressing, what you wear is a statement about you. If a one year old had on a "Down with Bush" shirt, I would want to slap the parents for assigning a political point of view to the child. If that same kid had a "My parents hate Bush" shirt on, I would still want to slap the parents, but for turning their kid into a political billboard.
[info]queennora wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 11:18 pm (UTC)
YUH HUH!! The kid will be all rainbowed out singing nothing but Judy Garland music! EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK!!
[info]hippie1120 wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 11:46 pm (UTC)
I have to play Devil's Advocate, it's fun.

I DO agree that childhood innocence is too soon lost-which is why I can't stand parents letting their kids dress "older". You know, the 8 year old girls dressed in micro-minis, or elementary school boys with one earring. The harder political stuff? Save it for the older ones. But the funny stuff? Nothing wrong with that, IMO. I saw a onesie that said, "I already know more than the president" and I thought that was hilarious. But a little boy with a mullett, an earring, and bad cowboy boots? Not funny. ;-)
[info]hellhoundfiat wrote:
Mar. 1st, 2007 07:48 pm (UTC)
And to me, that onesie is funny, but an unnecessary political statement. To me, it's using the child as a billboard for the parents political views. Children should not be used in that manner. Until the kid is old enough to request a shirt with a political(ish) statement, the only time I think one should be put on a child is if the child is attending a event of that kind. (And kids shouldn't be going to events like that without a bloody good reason.)
[info]hippie1120 wrote:
Mar. 1st, 2007 09:18 pm (UTC)
Then I guess we agree to disagree. Putting a shirt on like the one I described is VASTLY different than putting an "Abortion stops a beating heart" shirt on a small child. There's a continuum of appropriateness; slightly funny and vaguely political is way different than hardcore, in-your-face politicism.
[info]queennora wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:32 pm (UTC)
I WANT A T SHIRT THAT SAYS CUTIE FOR CHRIST!! MAKE ME ONE!!
[info]hellhoundfiat wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:35 pm (UTC)
Don't tempt me... I have a friend who does custom design work!
[info]queennora wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:36 pm (UTC)
I'm still one day going to get you that "Got Christ?" wife beater shirt.
[info]hellhoundfiat wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:46 pm (UTC)
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! sweet!

And *drool* oh my... your user pic... Fr. What a Waist and Fr. What a Waste ... YUM!!!
[info]queennora wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:48 pm (UTC)
how bout this one?
[info]queennora wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 10:48 pm (UTC)
This one is good too
[info]hellhoundfiat wrote:
Feb. 28th, 2007 11:12 pm (UTC)
I WANT THOSE! NOW! GIMME!!!
[info]kira29 wrote:
Mar. 1st, 2007 05:47 am (UTC)
I'll add another one to that too.

On the subject of mohawks, it doesn't bother me. I saw a kid with his parents a while back, both the parents are pretty punkish (tatt's, piercings, etc...) so it just seemed pretty normal to me. I'll say what someone said earlier too, its just hair, it'll grow back out. Of course, I also think that if Angelina Jolie hadn't done it to her son a while back I don't think it would be that popular. LOL
[info]fluff79 wrote:
Mar. 1st, 2007 09:47 pm (UTC)
I dont understand why having a Mowhawk takes away your dignity? its only a hair cut who decides whats an "outside" hair cut or a "normal" one is, a parent always has to decide how to dress their child, cut their hair etc until the point the child starts to get an opinion of its own then it can decide. I just dont understand why one hair cut is ok and one isnt? who decides

Latest Month

April 2008
S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Kenn Wislander