Louisa May Alcott is rolling in her grave. ;)

I am with the grandmother on this one. I think 11 is too young. I was 11 when my mom let me get my ears pierced. At 12 I begged my mom to let me wear eyeliner. She eventually gave in. I might have been 11, I can't remember- but she didn't want me growing up too fast and I think that's good. There's no way in hell she would let me wear a shirt with "sexy" on it, she would not want me wearing it even at 16 or 17 likely, and she wasn't a repressed or prudish woman in that sense. She was/ is a feminist. I still disagree with my mom on a lot of things but I think that she was right as far as how she guaged age appropriateness though- and the exploitative practices of pop marketing. There's a film called "Killing us Softly"- a film about the exploitation of women and girls by the advertising industry. It really is pervasive and it bothers me.

Any 'problem', as I see it, is completely cultural. We send out piles of mixed messages, then feign innocence when things get f***ed up.

Young girls are to be sexy, and attractive, and girly, bad at math, and needing completion (by a man, of course). Yet, when they exhibit any sexual behaviour, despite the fact that advertising, boys (and men) all suggest that this is the desired female behaviour, they are 'slut-shamed' until they are 'safely' married. 

And yet, at the very same time, we have our very own "boys will be boys" rape culture.

And the pants down at the knees with the underwear showing? That's a direct mimicry of prison culture, indicating an availability to be used as a sexual object. Do we say anything about that? Worry about it?

And we wonder why there's confusion. Sheesh.

I don't think any 11 year old is mature enough to seek out the development of their sexuality from an external, impersonal source while also declaring in such an overt way that hey, I'm sexy.

I don't say this in a way of slut shaming, but it's something they aren't ready for.

When I was a teen, the playboy bunny logo was popular with mostly a demographic YOUNGER than me.  That wasn't appropriate either.

It doesn't make these girls bad or wrong for being interested in it, just as a 2 year old who is interested in crossing a busy street isn't bad or wrong.

I agree, that they need to develop a healthy attitude about their sexuality.  Publically displaying it in an overt manner when it's at the early stages of developing isn't the way to do it.

When it came to boys, the pants being down quickly lost it's meaning, at least outside of prison.

I never knew about the pants thing. I always just thought it looked stupid.

That's the point. We don't have these conversations about boys' clothing choices.Or mens' clothing choices. Is there a woman politician anywhere with an unexamined wardrobe? (Too dressy, too plain, too masculine, too feminine, too bright, too dull...)

Advertisers lead in the sexualisation of children and it's something for which a few ad agency managers should be jailed.

It sets the tastes of children and generates body image issues among pre-pubertal girls and boys, It generates punishing peer pressure and parents with any sense of caution or good taste can find themselves clear outsiders. A year or two ago I heard some radio interviews about a "controversial" 'Pimps and Tarts' PRIMARY school "graduation ball". One mother was sayiong how great it was to see her daughter dressing up for a change. So there are at least a few parents who are are as sick as the ad agencies.

It is a form of marketing that incites the abuse of girls, not necessarily by adults but by immature boys, which might not be physically inflicted but which shines through in attitudes and behaviour… and blossoms into in those odious orientaion chants at universtities where our nation's brightest, most thoughful leaders of the future are groomed: and they are a pack of sexual deliguents and personal relationship illiterates  with riiculously  inflated egos.

The pressures are disporortionaly inflicted on girls. Boys are not put under much pressure to be respectful, mannerly or considerate. 

Leaving us unable to imagine why relationship breakdowns might be anything but "normal".

Lolita imagery is nothing new. Our culture has been sexualizing chidlren for eons. Ever watch Shirley Temple? Watching them as a fully aware adult is something else. In Polly Tix in Washington she plays a lingerie wearing prostitute. Never seen it? Think it is all Bright Eyes? Parts are on YouTube. There is however never a word about sexualizing young boys.

Call me a prude but I, like Kimmio, am with Grandma on this one. Sometimes I feel like kids want to grow up way too fast. I know 6 year old girls who wear shirts like that and it makes me sad. At work we don't even let the children listen to songs like "I'm Sexy and I Know it" - and I mute out parts of Gangnam Style. 

It doesn't mattter where iit originated SG: the fact is that NOW it's advertisers who are sexualising children and with more cynicism than Shirley Temple who just depersonalised kiddy-youth into the vacuous concept of "cute". 

I'me sure that opened the door to more exploitative imagery… but right now, it advertisers who are leading the paeophilic aesthetic. Also the 'skinny woman as volunteer victim' aesthetic, while it's Hollywood that promotes the 'male as personification of violence' aesthetic.

We get the society we tolerate.

I just looked up too sexy attire on girls, and agree, there is a line. I think "I'm too Sexy" is a fun song for girls to play around with, and my best friend and I had a blast singing Like A Virgin in the backyard one night from the tent. We didn't know what a virgin was, my Mom filled us in, and then we were embarrassed. But it was still fun! All the dissaproval of early Madonna became laughable later on. But I agree it went too far with other acts after her. I don't know what to say about CHristina Aguleira...don't know enough about her...

I agree you don't want to make your girl more attractive to pedophiles, of course. 

I think society still shuns female sexuality.

Thaks for your answers.

Then there was the whole Spice Girls phenomenon followed by pre-teen girls everywhere. They promoted "girl power" as power to look sexy- but not a whole lot else. Playing right into the hands of what chauvinist men want- and women spend thousands a year on their "sexy" looks- and women who grew up with those role models don't even realize the con job that's been done.

Then there's Hanna Montana- Miley Cyrus- former child star now degrading herself on stage.

I can't believe how many young women I see downtown wearing platform stiletto 'hooker' shoes with business clothes, to work- in offices! Look in regular shoe stores- they're everywhere. The sort of shoes that people used to have to buy discretely and only in adult shops are now mainstream fashion. It freaks me out how brainwashed women have become into thinking that's a powerful, independent, statement when I think it plays right into the wishes of chauvinist bosses. After all the hard work feminists have done fighting for equality it saddens me. It's a step backwards (and a painful, ankle breaking one at that)! Here's a sample of what I've been seeing women wear to work:

http://m.aldoshoes.com/mt/www.aldoshoes.com/ca-eng/women/shoes/platform-...

It's ridiculously disempowering in my opinion.

These shoes don't cultivate respect from men. Even if those same men have to pretend to be PC at work. I hear and see their reactions when I'm sitting at the local coffee shop. I'm sure some of the Alumni from the universities like those Mike was talking about love this new trend ( they're secretly laughing, "they think they've got girl power, and we're getting rich off all the products women buy from us, and we're hiring sexy secretaries. Shh. Don't let them know our scam.let's keep it going until they wear lingerie to work. What, that's new for Fall Fashion? Awesome!") I can imagine if moms dress like that their daughters will want to too. I probably sound prudish again- but where's common sense? I'm not saying women need to dress dowdy all the time. It's okay to look attractive... But those shoes are over the top. They're for adults in private or in the sex business. I don't like that they've become mainstream. But if those have become the standard women are in trouble. Equality is in trouble.

My daughter is 22. She grew up through the Spice Girls age.

She's was indifferent to Barbie Dolls, loved Beany Babies.

I actually found the Spice Girls, as a group quite neutral. There was the sweet Baby, the sophisticated Posh, the gritty Scary, the sport wear active one Sporty and the other one whose name I forget.

Her friends all had favourites but I don't remember any of her friends loving Baby or Posh. They all wanted to be gritty and sporty and cool.

She wore pretty standard tees and jeans when she wasn't in school. She grew up with a great body image.

Her style evolved as did her taste in music, fashion.....

Now, 15 years after she was little , I see too many little girls wearing clothes more suitable to teenagers. I see too many teenagers wearing clothes more suitable to the beach.

But fashion evolves. Young girls have always strutted their stuff in some way or other.

The original 11 year old in the opening post? That is a tough age. Some are very young still, dolls and stuff. Some are quite grown up. One tee shirt isn't growing to make a big difference though I personally would not buy a daughter that age a tee shirt like that.

To me, I don't want to promote the image of a child as a sex object

Shoes are different. I think women wear shoes for other women. We seem, for the most part , to like shoes. That "pop" to your outfit.

I mainly wear comfortable shoes, runners and jeans but I have a couple of killer heels. Tough to wear, tough to walk fast in' but love them.

Some thoughts on this:
.
First - I used to shop with my granddaughter when she was in that age group. No, I definitely wouldn't buy her a shirt with the word 'sexy' on it. And I would definitely resent any passer-by who tried to tell me that I should.
.
I had standards for my daughter when she was school-aged. And she has standards for her daughter. She tries to teach her what is appropriate for the occasion. School requires a different standard than might be appropriate for backyards or the beach. At a sleepover, girls might want to try on their big sister's clothes or try make-up but they don't wear it to school the next day.
.
It is hard to find appropriate clothing at times - this goes for both boys and girls. Personally, while I'm not in favour of school uniforms, I think there should be guidelines set by the school for both boys and girls.
.
Shoes?? I remember taking my granddaughter (then probably about 11) out to buy her shoes. Everything she looked at was platform, or high heels, or flimsy straps - nothing comfortable, practical, suitable for the activities she was likely to be involved in.
.
I'm not talking about hiding their sexuality. I'm talking about not exploiting it.
.
I would expect the same rules to apply to boys clothes. My grandson is only nine - so far he seems happy with jeans, t-shirts, hoodies.

I don't think shoes are different. Women wear shoes for other women- but not platform stilettos. Those are trashy. To me they are because they cost a lot of money to cause a lot of pain. That's trashy- whowever invented them is not very nice, and it's a fashion idea that should be in the trashbin. Really, if someone can afford pricey shoes, a nice pair of shoes from roots or something- or Brown's. Shoes with some taste- there's a beautiful pair of purple suede Roots boots I can't afford that I keep eyeing in the window by my bus stop- but they're not stilettos! Tasteful shoes- because they don't look like they'll cause soneone foot deformities and slipped disks in their spine- look way sexier to me. Platform stilettos just look cheap and tacky and exploitative, and painful (see link I posted- 100 bucks and they're just molded plastic). They look that way to me. Women wearing those to work, doesn't scream, "intelligent", even if they are very intelligent. They must've had a little lapse when they put those shoes on. Really. (again- see the link I posted)

Btw. I couldn't walk in them if I tried. They are very obviously not made for walking in- that's obvious, and every podiatrist alive will tell women it's not wise to do so. So, seeing as I am someone who can't wear them they look extra ridiculous to me. At one point I might have been jealous. I wanted to be like the other girls. Now, I am just put off by how silly we women can be.

Kimmio, what you wear does  not affect how competent you are at work. High heels, no heels  doesn't tell me how good you are at the computer. I f a woman wears stilettos, it is her feet that will be sore at night, not yours...................The TV show. Tots and Tiarras in my opinion is obscene. The women need their heads read, so does the industry that produces it, the channel that carries it. It is not the children's fault. Notice , they are girls not little boys, although, I have only watched it once.

I never said it affected work competence. I just don't think it's a wise choice of footwear or a statement that reflects well on we women in general. What kind of torturous clothing and shoes do men contort themselves into to look 'hot'?...there isn't anything I can think of. Just picturing it now- my husband walking to work in a suit and stilettos. A funny image. Lol! But, women do it all the time and no one points out how equally ridiculous it is. Sorry to stiletto owners but I had to say it.

Those shoes are most unfortunate. Now that I've reached the sensible age, I just ignore fashion when it gets too ridiculous. I can 'age' my various pairs of Birks by how many times I've had them re-soled. Although I must confess to have had some killer stilettos LAST time they were in (late 80s), when they had a more sensible sole; the hammer-toe causing toe was there, but they didn't have the ankle-breaking potential. And in the early 70s I had some platforms that should have given me altitude sickness... In electric blue. Straight from Liverpool.

Heading into late middle age, with pretty healthy feet, I'd say now that what I've worn on my feet has been less important than two critical items: traumatic injuries (like breaks and tears to foot bones and tendons) that lead directly to arthritis, and heavy shoulder bags that put more weight on one side of the body than the other.

If so inclined, one can move pretty quickly on these things. Other items of women's clothing can be equally hobbling, like slim skirts. I'm not sure why women allow an entire industry to dominate them so completely. It took me until I was well into my 40s to shake it almost completely, and to this day, I always seem to need to ensure that my jeans are fairly close to the 'correct' width, length and general style.

Platforms can be comfortable if the heel isn't a lot higher than the front- like a wedge platform. But the ones these past couple of years- ouch. Electric blue. Cool!

I can't wear pencil skirts either.

I like comfortable but not frumpy. I've been a Gap girl for quite some time (for the sake of description of my taste in clothes) but I don't even shop there. That general idea though. Simple, decent quality, looks good, mix n' match and doesn't go out of style too fast. Clothes you can't tell are 5 years old. Maybe a bit boring but I don't care anymore. I'm not into trends. I buy a lot second hand. I really do like roots purses and shoes. If I could I'd be tempted to buy several, but I can't so don't. I have a little roots pouch purse I've had for probably 10 years. I feel sexy when I feel well put together and comfortable- go figure. I don't know. That's me. I don't feel sexy when I'm strategically taping my boobs for a little dress, or safety pinning my bra in place, or going to the bathroom to change the band aids on my feet, or tugging at my clothes, or having to be careful how I stand up or sit down so something doesn't shift or ride up or tug or snag. I hate that. I wore spanx once. That was enough. For those who don't know- spanx are "shape-wear" underclothes. Spandex girdles and coresetts, basically. All the celebs are doing it.

Having a 6-year-old daughter, I feel somehow compelled to chime in.

I joke about dressing her in a burqa as she gets older, but that's a just a joke. I expect she will want to dress in ways that I don't want her to. There will be discussions.

But, as always, I still maintain that the way you raise a kid is not to hide images or language from them in an attempt to shelter them. My daughter and my son listen to "I'm Sexy and I Know It". Carter's favourite song is "Gangnam Style". They'll hear these songs, whether you want them to or not. Try to shelter them, and this sort of thing will just become more interesting to them.

My daughter asked, "What does 'sexy' mean?" a few months ago. We told her it was looking really pretty for your boyfriend or girlfriend, or husband/wife. And that was the end of it. Big deal.

I'm resigned to the fact that she'll grow up faster than I want. I'm encouraged that she thinks of herself as very good in science and math, and does not think boys are more suited to any particular subject. We need to keep her self-esteem up, and a lot of those problems should solve themselves, so she doesn't go looking for approval from boys because she doesn't get it at home.

Again, if you think sheltering your kids from language or images is going to work, you're in for a surprise. It's bound to backfire. Kids are ridiculously observant, and they most want what they can not have.

You can't shelter them- but if there's a way to teach them so they're not 'owned' by marketing bullshite...So they learn the dangers and exploits of it.

*add bookmark*

Teach them that there are entire teams of people trying to get them to dress and act in certain ways. Tell them the truth. Appeal to their dislike of being manipulated.

In short, teach them to be skeptics.

Great! I agree. I don't have kids but you make sense.

I agree, but when she's 11 (or even 14) would you let her have sexy plastered across the butt of some yoga pants, or carry a purse with the playboy bunny logo?

I see here even brown's has a few platform stilettos

http://www.brownsshoes.com/1308/1308,default,sc.html?prefn1=siteAssignme...

I think these are sexy... Noboody laugh. But really. I do. Okay, you can laugh. My favourite shoe (and now sells clothes) store in Vancouver never bought anything there but I love to look and have found some 'last season' things from there in the consignment store down the street from there.

http://www.gravitypope.com/shoes/product/24319-arche-habana-tea-habana

I get it kimmio. You hate high stiletto heels.

Great. Dont buy them

I like the look of myself in them for the dressy event occasion. Yes they are bad for feet, but if I like them and want to wear them, as do many women, then we do.

Fashions of all type come and go. Funny to have these past years of wedge and platform shoes. I wore them in the 70s in high school.

I find it odd that you seem to be saying that your views of feminism and beauty are the ones we should all adopt.

Gotta say I bought a killer pair of shoes with my daughter this summer. High stilettos, black ankle boot shape that is lace instead of leather. Zips up the back. They are very sexy and I like them. Not daily but occasionally

And you ask what men wear that is only for style not comfort? Well my son and husband would say that hard leather shoes, dress shoes for work are terribly hard on their feet. My son complains at a collar and tie and in the summer wearing a suit coat is pretty unbearable when you are on the subway or street car.

The daily shave is something lots of men detest.

And plucking or trimming nose hairs and ear hairs.

But I would bet that lots of men do really detest the long sleeve shirt , tie and jacket that is required for many businesses. Especially in the summer

And I think these are sexy (love the name - the style is called "Kim" ;) ) my idea of "heels".

http://www.gravitypope.com/shoes/product/22301-camper-21241-048-#also-like

About as trendy as I'd get- just for my feet. I can't afford them anyway.

I wish more women would rethink "sexy" yeah- for the sake of all of us. Make it a little easier on girl's self image and tendency to be manipulated by marketing- but I can't do anything about it. I'm just telling you my perspective. That train left the station long ago. There's no stopping it, but I can give my opinion about it. I'm not the only woman who feels this way. I can't tell people what to wear. But we wear what is sold to us. Walk into any mall in North America and you'll find a sea of the same trends in all the stores. Can't really opt out without making an effort to find something more unique- especially if you need something. Those are the choices. There have been fashion seasons so trashy I couldn't find a thing I liked and would be comfortable in, in a mall. But I'm onto the marketing tricks and I don't care anymore what my 'friends' think of my clothes. Teenage girls don't think like that generally. I believe what people think is sexy, without thinking much, is what marketing pros bombard us by flooding the popular media and shopping malls with. Would we think all this stuff was sexy if it wasn't shoved in our faces?

Hard flat shoes (I have some of those- get some orthodic insoles for them problem solved) and neckties, and trimming the odd nose hair have nothing on the stuff women pay for to go through.

I realize I've grown very opinionated about this. I didn't used to be. But I realize how much we are subliminally fed a load of garbage constantly. I walk past one of the main downtown shopping blocks, several times a week, and I used to pass through a huge shopping mall after work on the way to the transit loop near my old job, and sometimes I just feel frustrated and manipulated by it all. It's not good enough to be ourselves. Image, image, image. We have to be plastic versions of ourselves, more and more, to be considered attractive. Adult, critically thinking, women can take it or leave it, yes. More often, it seems we accept it. But girls are more vulnerable to it. And advertisers know it. Boy, do they ever!

I like the look of many of those Aldo platforms.  Sadly, I can't wear most of those, as I need a strap.  I still wear platforms though, I recently bought these (and now they are on sale, will have to see if I can get a price adjustment):

I'm pretty sure I find them sexier than chemguy.  He really doesn't care what I wear on my feet.

I find if the stiletto is in the correct place they are just as good as a wedge.  Better than wedges on ice!  Ballet flats can be worse for the feet.  When I first had major foot problems it wasn't from the high heels I used to wear, it was from athletic casual shoes (not runners) that I basically used as runners, that's what they were being marketed as at the time.

Arg. Okay. Whatever ladies. We reserve the right to be manipulated and wear bondage gear on our feet- to work. Fine. I give up the debate.

Back in the '70's, I wore a pair of platform shoes to a party in the country. I went for a walk with my date and lost both the heels in a field. Noticed it when I got back. That was it for the fancy shoes - at least for walking ;)

A sexy broad with CP wearing stilletos. That's hot. I suppose I could buy a wheelchair. I urge you to think about "sexy". It's much from the inside. But, marketers won't let us think that. Imagine what it does to women who don't, who can't fit the image when that stuff goes mainstream. I am lucky my husband loves me for who I am- but the chauvinism out there is pervasive and fierce and we let it work against us by buying those things as mainstream fashion.

Depends one your job :)

I don't wear those in the lab.  I would wear them for teaching a balboa class.

Right. For certain occassions that don't involve walking, or standing- sure. ;)

My feet were made for walking.  I expected to be able to walk around all day, including keeping up with male companions on my way to the court house or for a luncheon meeting four or five blocks away.  That was 30 years ago - it was difficult but not impossible to find suitable, attractive shoes with a mid-height heel.  I think it would be more difficult now.   I liked business style clothes - skirt or slacks, a nice but not frilly or sheer blouse, a jacket - a briefcase rather than a purse.  I left sexy for the dance floor. 

The marketing industry has succeeded in dividing and conquering women on what sexuality is and means and where it belongs (I don't think at work in an office is the right place- work is work- some things should be private not flaunted) and it's not working out well for women. We're backsliding into being less equal again. I don't think men take 'career' woman seriously with those shoes- unless she's aiming one at them. She's a sex object first. Maybe an intelligent woman second. Men keep the upper hand in the working world. A lot of men will say otherwise but they don't mean it, they just want her to keep wearing provocative shoes and clothes to tickle their fancy. And women in high power jobs are picked apart and denegrated over what they wear if it's not attractive enough. I want to be appreciated for my brain first. Looking pretty is fine, some people just are attractive no matter what they wear- it comes from inside out- but what they throw at us to buy is just way over the top.

How do we help girls to explore their developing sexuality in ways that empower them and make them feel good about their bodies, while at the same time protecting them from the sexual attention that they might get and which they aren't ready to handle yet?  

The problem I have with all the talk I usually hear is that it always comes down to two things:  "Hide yourself because boys will find you sexy and that's bad" or "Show yourself because boys will find you sexy and that's good."  In neither situation is the focus on the girl, her body and her desires regarding how she'll be perceived.  

I'd like to suggest an alternative in which pre-teen girls who are "blossoming" can experiment with looking sexy and trying on different looks and where older women around them help them to see that there are different times and places and occasions for different kinds of looks in our culture.  Instead of teaching that sexuality is something bad to hide, we can teach girls that sexuality is wonderful and be excited about the changes in the girls' bodies.  Instead of teaching that sexuality is something that belongs to men and should be used to attract attention or sell things, we can teach girls that their own sexuality belongs to them and that they have the right to decide how they want to experience their own sexuality.

Also, instead of making boys and men the "bad guys" in this, we can teach girls that most boys and men are good people.  We can prepare them for the risks of the few who will seek to take advantage or see them only as sexual objects while not scaring girls in to thinking every man is just a potential rapist.  It's also important that boys get the corresponding message that it's wonderful to become a man and that sex is great and that finding someone attractive and sexy is a powerful feeling that also comes with the responsibililty of making wise, loving choices.  That's true for girls as well.  

Instead of putting an arbitrary age on when it's ok to have sex, we can talk about good reasons to have sex and unwise reasons to have sex (notice I didn't say bad reasons).  Recognize that when you're in the midst of the hormonal hurricane and opportunity is right there that it's not easy to resist.  Make sure teens have easy access to contraception.  Keep the lines of communication open by providing support and advice instead of judgement and condemnation.  

I seem to have veered away from the original topic, though, haven't I?  

Well, I have to admit - I think stilletos look sexy.  But I can't wear them!  I would break a leg or an ankle or my hip when I fell down.  Now perhaps if I were 40 years younger . . . I'm sure I would have worn them in my late teens/early twenties.  In my twenties I did wear some "high" heels, but not as high as they are today.

When I see young girls/women wearing them it reminds me of the Chinese women who bound their feet, because "small" feet were considered "sexy".  I just can't imagine doing that . . . but that was what their culture was.

In Reader's Digest an article says (about stilletos) - that they can cause Haglund's deformity on your heel bone, stress fractures, and joint repositiioning and muscle atrophy.

Well, at least I don't have to worry about that .

As for the "sexy" on the t-shirt for little girls.  It irks me that the fashion industry does what it does - what happened to "kitten" and "princess" and . . . whatever else - but "sexy" . . . pul-ease.

Mists, that was brilliant.

No. I veered. You steered back on topic. Unfortunately, I have met too many chauvinist men in my life. I have listened to too many conversations degrading women- that I don't think most guys in the working world are that good. I think some are. Where I work now there are. Totally different priorities. I think there are a lot fewer nice guys in the fashion marketing business- judging by the result. I think a lot of powerful men are playboys. I think a lot didn't make it to positions of status and power by being nice guys. I have overheard conversations in public of wealthy businessnesmen, bike couriers and construction workers, different ol' boys clubs, on different occassions, referring to women as broads and chicks and sluts and you name it- that would make their mothers ashamed. I see a lot of older men with 'trophy' wives and girlfriends- where the woman on his arm clearly puts more effort into looking sexy than he does. So, I sometimes wonder- who does own our sexuality? As long as we listen to trends set by men, not ourselves- we, ourselves, don't. Will we ever, really? I hope so.

Oh, I forgot "b__" and "hoes".

You're stereotyping men. Period. Mist's approach is bang on precisely because it isn't based on negative stereotypes about boys/men and acknowledges from the get go that most boys/men aren't the enemy. It prepares girls for a world that isn't always friendly without assuming that world is always unfriendly.

Mendalla