'Funny' babygrow - or not?

Jaxie

Paddyann54
I am a republican. I agree with you about the royals. BUT, dressing children in crass clothes just gives ammunition to the ghastlier members of the ruling classes who delight in slagging off those they consider below them. They are usually of course, hypocritical enough to confine their nasty remarks to conversation with their own kind, but I’ve heard’em at it.

Strange post 🤔

Do you have a lot of interaction with these ruling classes then, that you often hear 'em at it?
I've heard/read rather more slagging off, as you so delicately put it, of the Royal Family on here than I would think they do about others.

Or is it that you are saying that anyone who criticises such ghastly clothes must be members of the ruling classes - ergo that includes most of the posters on this thread?

I'm confused.

Paddyann54
I am a republican. I agree with you about the royals. BUT, dressing children in crass clothes just gives ammunition to the ghastlier members of the ruling classes who delight in slagging off those they consider below them. They are usually of course, hypocritical enough to confine their nasty remarks to conversation with their own kind, but I’ve heard’em at it.

Horrible. I loathe clothing with "funny" phrases written on them. What's wrong with nice colours or patterns.

Depends on your experience I suppose.
If advertising and/or being a child model leads to too much emphasis on the body, in a negative way, for the viewer or the child modeling. Surely it is a bad thing?
Advertising has been highlighted many times as an influence, has it not?

I did some modelling in my teens ,not catwalk ...well only one ,but I was too short so it was stuff for newspapers and magazines,my sister did some too .It was good fun
One of my GD's did some too ,being in the photography business we often had folk asking if they could have my daughter for a particular campaign .
I didn't have the time to chase around different locations so I said no .My GD only did it for a short time the company who employed her was London based and we felt it was too much for her to do as a toddler .
Theres nothing wrong with advertising ! Theres nothing wrong with children/teens learning about the discipline of a workplace and earning money .A lot of children love the attention and the nice clothes etc .
As to the "royal kids" jaxie they are used as advertising every day of their lives to prop up the system that will ensure their future wealth .The only thing they advertise is inequality .I know which child I'd prefer to be mine and it aint the royal ones!1

It isn’t allowed of course, but my mother would say, “ How common.” Can you imagine any of the royal kids wearing something as crass as that?

'My daddy says condoms don't work'!

Why do people have to amuse themselves by debasing a child's lack of adult awareness?

I would actually have bought this and my daughter would have seen the funny side as she loves her tan and lashes etc. But if you weren't sure of the mum's reaction then it wouldn't be any good.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202303/medium-244268-d5b12ca8-dfde-4942-bb5c-4154c4528eaa.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202303/medium-370315-6da92fe4-50e2-4075-a74a-335891c4ee6c.jpeg

Not all writing need be bad or tacky though
DGS was given this as one of his first Babygros and I found it quite lovely
It’s a (mis) quote from Marlowe’s Dr Faustus which DD had worked on while pregnant
It says on the front , " Had I as many souls as there be stars ”,
and on the back
“ I'd give them all for Mummy "

We need a "finger-down-throat icon “

Like this Luckygirl ? 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

Alison333

Wyllow3 Now that is a genuinely funny one!

The first example given by Fleurpepper is dreadful on so many levels.

DS thought so too!

The point about that one is that the joke is on Dad, whereas some are a joke against the baby. Like the huge number on excessive poops.

DGD now aged 6 brought up in neutral garb chooses Disney Unicorns all pink and fluffy on her clothes when she can, on the other hand her very favourite outfit is Moana (a Disney character who overcomes her fears and saves her whole tribe from disaster)

Happysexagenarian - that's another very "odd" one.
Why?

Callistemon21

^Fortunately, my parents would never have consider allowing me to become a photo model as a child. But some parents did, presumably in an attempt to provide for their children on a very small income. There are still parents trying to do that^

We knew someone whose young daughter was a model for catalogues; every penny she earned was put into an account for her future.
She probably had a tidy sum by age 18.

I did both catwalk modelling and photoshoots as a child and it was most definitely not as you think grandtante an attempt to make money for me (or them). My parents had high hopes that it would be my education that would provide my income in future.

I didn't do TV adverts but did have some catalogue photos on a TV ad.

Callistemon21 - I was paid 7 guineas an hour plus expenses in the 1960s for photographic work. I don't remember the fee for catwalks. I remember modelling for Ladybird and being given the outfits afterwards. I was not given the swing-set by Grattan catalogue though! Like the person you knew, I had my "earnings" in an account for my own use when older.

I loved doing it BTW and did catwalk work occasionally until i was maybe 19 - but was truly hostile to my children doing it.
I think it's wrong to use children in advertising.

Oh dear. I thought it was amusing.
When my son was a teenager he had t shirts with pretty offensive (to some) slogans. They were just t shirts. They didn’t damage him for life or anyone else.

When my kids were little there was a t-shirt doing the rounds saying,
'My daddy says condoms don't work'!
Whatever you buy for your own child, or someone else's, there will always be someone who doesn't like it, hates the colour, can't understand the joke, whatever!
Best thing is to get the parents in on it, so you don't go wrong, as everyone has their own sense of what is funny and what isn't!!

Depends on mummy's sense of humour, but I see nothing wrong!

I don't know how they can call them baby grows now. Manufacturers careful no to let them grow these days. They used last practically from birth till walking. Not any more, not what I've seen anyway.

Sad.

That babygrow is tacky in the extreme, and if that makes me judgemental, so be it.

As for Disney princess dresses etc. for very little girls, I don’t see a problem. Until she was 4 or 5, my Gdd loved dressing up in such things but at coming up to 8, no longer.
Before you know what they’ll be Goths in black, or something equally un-girly.

No, not funny.

Wyllow3 Now that is a genuinely funny one!

The first example given by Fleurpepper is dreadful on so many levels.

I don't think anyone with any class - and that includes the whole spectrum of the 'pecking-order' because those at the bottom of the pile, also have it... would buy one of those babygrows.

I saw a babies changing mat with CHANGE MY BUM on it. I thought that was tacky.

Last summer during the heatwave we were strolling along a seaside esplanade when my eye was caught by a little girl, about 2, fast asleep in a buggy. she had the most beautiful blonde curls really angelic. The I noticed her t-shirt. It had the slogan 'I've got one of these', below the words was a photo of a woman's most intimate body area in full colour. Under the photo it said 'Tickle me!' I couldn't believe my eyes. It made me feel ill to see that on a child. Just think of the messages that conveys and the danger it could put that little girl in. I'm guessing there was probably a male version of the garment as well. So so wrong!!!

Tacky. Not my cup of tea at all.