Miley Cyrus' 9-year-old sister launches a line of kids' lingerie

Dear lord, that is grotesque. Really is.

Billy Ray, your tearing my achy-breaky heart here ( [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] cheesy joke over)

Seriously, is this what they are allowing kids to do? I saw something obscene on facebook the other day, I won't go into it because it's disgusting, but it is cringeworthy to know that these kids are up to some adult things that even teenagers weren't quite doing yet till they were 15-16.

Well, kids these days are pretty different, I've definitely noticed that. My little sisters are talking about all kinds of stuff that I sure hadn't heard of when I was their age. And the older of the two is running around saying, "I'm hot! I'm sexy! Look at my boobs!" Scares the crap outta me.

AgentKaz wrote:

Well, kids these days are pretty different, I've definitely noticed that. My little sisters are talking about all kinds of stuff that I sure hadn't heard of when I was their age. And the older of the two is running around saying, "I'm hot! I'm sexy! Look at my boobs!" Scares the crap outta me.

D: Does she even HAVE boobs?

Seriously, the last thing I wanted when I was developing breasts was for someone to look at them. :/

Well, she's got the training bra kind. She's creepy.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure most people were embarrassed about 'em at that age. I know I was.

Nihilist wrote:

AgentKaz wrote:

Well, kids these days are pretty different, I've definitely noticed that. My little sisters are talking about all kinds of stuff that I sure hadn't heard of when I was their age. And the older of the two is running around saying, "I'm hot! I'm sexy! Look at my boobs!" Scares the crap outta me.

Really? What kind of perfect childhood were you coming from? When I was a kid walking in the hills, I found a couple of eight year olds huddled naked on an old mattress trying to have sex. When I was eight, and that fucking awful movie Harriet the Spy came out, everyone saw it as a free pass to talk about a certain girl's boobs and even touch them. And there was a lot of dry-humping. In second grade. And kids who smoked, drank, and copied Scarface by snorting powdered candy.

This was in 1996.

So I doubt Miley's sister is contributing to some kind of massive rot, the rot was already there. It's only a problem apparently when it reaches Suburbia.

This. When I was twelve, in 1988, a friend and I went walking in the hills near her home and came across her older brother having sex with his girlfriend. Far from being shocked or repelled, we stood there and watched until my friend couldn't restrain her giggles and the two lovebirds realized they were being watched. Then her embarrassed older brother and his girlfriend chased us back across the hills and only stopped chasing us for fear of his mother finding out.

About this same time, my mother had a really hard time explaining why one of the kids she was baby-sitting for and my youngest sister (both of whom were five at the time) had been dry-humping doggy style in the front yard. She finally managed to explain it to the little boy's horrified mother, but they were both really embarrassed. It seemed that Mom was no more comfortable explaining where babies came from to my youngest sister than she had been to me, and had told her that people had babies the same way guinea pigs did. My sister knew how guinea pigs had babies, because she'd seen them mating and asked me what they were doing, and being a know-it-all twelve-year-old, I'd explained it. So, my sister and the little boy Mom was baby-sitting for decided to try it--leading to great embarrassment for the adults, confusion for the little kids, and endless snickering for the older kids.

Yeah, sexual behavior in kids is nothing new.

Lady Anne wrote:

Nihilist wrote:

...So I doubt Miley's sister is contributing to some kind of massive rot, the rot was already there. It's only a problem apparently when it reaches Suburbia.

Yeah, sexual behavior in kids is nothing new.

True... but this just reeks of mass-marketed kiddy-pornification. It's not like two kids of whatever gender getting naked and examining their own or each other's junk because they're curious about whatever differences might be there; it's an overexposed celebrity's child pushing herself (or being pushed) into the lime-light with her own line of highly age-inappropriate crap to try to sell to people, as if all the Hannah Montana junk connected to her older sister wasn't enough, and she has enough familial wealth and name recognition to do so.

...Plus, her makeup is absolutely atrocious on a purely aesthetic level. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Jeez. Shows how oblivious I was/am. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Guess I was too busy with Pokémon or something to pay attention to that sort of thing in my kiddie days. I'm very glad about that, after reading all of that.

GDI IT WASN'T A LINGERIE LINE.

Rabby wrote:

Also, who names their daughter Noah? They wanted a son and when they
got another girl instead they just decided to go with the name they
picked out?

You of all people can't talk shit about naming kids.

Also, way to ride coat tails there, kid. You make Ashley Simpson look like a rank amateur.

Also Also

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I can't imagine how disappointed all the pedos were when they actually looked at this supposed "toddler lingerie".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] -> [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

AgentKaz wrote:

Jeez. Shows how oblivious I was/am. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Guess I was too busy with Pokémon or something to pay attention to that sort of thing in my kiddie days. I'm very glad about that, after reading all of that.

Dude, same. When I was little, the closest thing I got to that was a friend in elementary school asking if I was a virgin. I had no idea what this was, but it sounded bad, so I said no. She wen't all crazy like, OMG WHAT. And when I went home and asked mom what she meant she went all OMG WHAT. And she said she'd tell me when I was older.

And now that I'm older, she can't stop asking me if I still am.

AgentKaz wrote:

Well, she's got the training bra kind. She's creepy.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure most people were embarrassed about 'em at that age. I know I was.

This mindset never ceased to annoy me as a kid. I started developing at 9 and was wearing bras far before anyone else in my grade was. All of the books about puberty that I read told me that it was ok for me to be "embarrassed" about my changing body, which never made sense to me; embarrassment implied an amount of shame in my own body, and it was mine. They were my boobs and I was growing them and it wasn't atypical or weird for me to be proud of them. So I was. And I didn't really notice any of my girl classmates being particularly ashamed of their own changing bodies when they started developing, either.

Really, teaching girls that it's 'ok' to be embarrassed about their bodies changing helps create a foundation on which they think it's ok to be ashamed about other aspects of their female physical selves. Yes, some girls can be weirded out by the changes, but this isn't something that should be enabled by media telling them it's ok and natural to be afraid of your own body, or the fallacious notion that 'most' girls also feel that way.

Nihilist wrote:

Malganis wrote:

True... but this just reeks of mass-marketed kiddy-pornification.

This has been going on far before- in order for something to be successfully marketed, there has to be a market for it. You make it seem as if Miley's sister opened up a can of worms and made dressing like this fashionable when in all reality, the framework for this existed beforehand.

I brought this up on my facebook when I posted it there: just because a product line or service is created by no means indicates that there's a market large enough to sustain its profits. Yes, there are string bikinis for girls and what have you before this, but is there any indication that these business ventures are actually doing well? How many young girls do you see, on average, wearing frighteningly provocative things? How much revealing clothing do you see on the shelves, or in the windows of children's clothing stores? From my own experience, I don't see nearly as much as to believe that there's a child-sexualization epidemic out there where parents are gnashing at the bit to buy their toddlers thongs.

That said, everything that you said about the cultural issues are definitely true, but the "A product existing means there's a market for it" is a dangerous fallacy that many people, newsreaders and entrepreneurs alike, fall prey to.

BE ASHAMED OF YOUR BLOSSOMING SEXUALITY CHILDREN!

AMERICA, FUCK YEAH

e: my body's been embarassing me from the moment I was born so i guess it's subjective

Lol

My body embarrasses me more now than it did when I was 13, probably because I actually look more like a 13 year old now than I did when I was actually 13. Where did you go, c-cups. :c

What I mean is that, despite what the founders of a business or R&D may think, the market can act completely differently. The consumer base that these people were (literally) banking on might not come through in the end to be truly interested enough in the product to actually buy it. Just because one person (or a lot of people) want to make money off of a particular idea doesn't necessarily mean that they will.

An example of this came up in one of my graphic design classes: a guy really, really wanted to make this yogurt liquor, and had a slew of designers and marketers work on it to make it as beautiful and appealing as possible. The venture wound up tanking, though, because at the end of the day, very few people wanted to drink a yogurt liquor. There are plenty of other business ventures that follow suit.

It could be that I live in a northern city and it's wintertime now, but even in the summer I didn't notice any particularly raunchy children's clothes around.

Bamshalam wrote:

I brought this up on my facebook when I posted it there: just because a product line or service is created by no means indicates that there's a market large enough to sustain its profits. Yes, there are string bikinis for girls and what have you before this, but is there any indication that these business ventures are actually doing well? How many young girls do you see, on average, wearing frighteningly provocative things? How much revealing clothing do you see on the shelves, or in the windows of children's clothing stores? From my own experience, I don't see nearly as much as to believe that there's a child-sexualization epidemic out there where parents are gnashing at the bit to buy their toddlers thongs.

That said, everything that you said about the cultural issues are definitely true, but the "A product existing means there's a market for it" is a dangerous fallacy that many people, newsreaders and entrepreneurs alike, fall prey to.

Yeah, I think it's possible for a product to appear without a pre-existing market (because nobody ever thought of it before, for example) and then create a market for itself. If I remember correctly, that was what happened with Post-It notes: the creators had to give them out as free samples to start with because nobody was willing to buy them, but then they turned out to be so useful that people would pay for them.

Also, I'm pretty sure one of the criticisms of modern commercial/consumer culture is that it creates 'false needs' (i.e. the marketing/peer pressure machine creates a social environment where people 'have to have' certain items which are arguably or blatantly useless/stupid/harmful).

tl;dr - An anti-consumerism campaigner could easily spin a "ZOMG these kiddie-whore clothing lines must be stopped before everyone starts putting their kids in them!" argument out of all this.

My mother bought me a string bikini when I was 12 (in 1988). It was the only swimsuit the store had in stock in late August that fit. I wasn't exactly a little girl, but I wasn't particularly sexy, either.