Funny or inappropriate?

[Laila619]

Just curious what you personally think of this :

I was at a 1st birthday party this weekend for a little girl. The mom was opening all the presents because obviously the little girl was too young to understand what was going on. Anyway, mom opens this one gift, and pulls out a tiny little tank top for a baby/toddler and it says "Future Hooters girl" with the Hooters logo on it--just like the Hooters girls wear. The tank top was a present from the girl's aunt (the mom's sister). A bunch of people were chuckling. Do you find the gift amusing or inappropriate?

 

[Shoopy]

I find it hilarious actually. I wouldn't let my daughter wear it outside of the house but I would get a chuckle out of it, especially from one of my siblings.

 

[AGBF]

Just curious what you personally think of this :

I was at a 1st birthday party this weekend for a little girl. The mom was opening all the presents because obviously the little girl was too young to understand what was going on. Anyway, mom opens this one gift, and pulls out a tiny little tank top for a baby/toddler and it says "Future Hooters girl" with the Hooters logo on it--just like the Hooters girls wear. The tank top was a present from the girl's aunt (the mom's sister). A bunch of people were chuckling. Do you find the gift amusing or inappropriate?

Just vulgar, not actually inappropriate, and most of the world is vulgar.

AGBF

 

[Kaleigh]

I think it's funny!! Gosh people need to get a sense of humor!!!!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I guess it would depend. If it was ironic to pull my leg -- because I most definitely would NOT want my daughter doing something like that for a job -- then I would think it was funny.

 

[lyra]

Not my taste, but I can see where it would be considered humorous. Someone gave my daughter (at age 3-4) a dress that said "Anything boys can do, girls can do better." I always felt weird letting her wear it outside of the house.

 

[Lady_Disdain]

I don't find it funny, just inappropriate.

 

[Nashville]

I would totally laugh if someone gave my daughter that (but wouldn't ever let her wear it in public).

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

I would totally laugh if someone gave my daughter that (but wouldn't ever let her wear it in public).

agreed!

 

[AGBF]

I think the women's movement was about giving women freedom: the right to own their own bodies, not to be owned by men. To me that means that women should be free to wear sexy clothes and not be accused of enticing men to rape them. It should mean that they can burn their bras if they want to do so and opt not to dress in sexy clothes to please men. And it also means that they should not be treated like sex objects by the likes of Hugh Hefner and other men who want to exploit them for money. I think women should be as sexy as they want, but to see Hooters making money off their breasts turns me way off. And I find it really, really vulgar. It's sex for money, and that is vulgar in my book.

I don't think it should be illegal, but I do think it's an exploitation of women. Unless women own the Hooters franchises. (If women own the Hooters franchises it's still sex for money and, in my opinion, vulgar...but it's not exploitation of women by men.)

Deb/AGBF

 

[Circe]

I think the women's movement was about giving women freedom: the right to own their own bodies, not to be owned by men. To me that means that women should be free to wear sexy clothes and not be accused of enticing men to rape them. It should mean that they can burn their bras if they want to do so and opt not to dress in sexy clothes to please men. And it also means that they should not be treated like sex objects by the likes of Hugh Hefner and other men who want to exploit them for money. I think women should be as sexy as they want, but to see Hooters making money off their breasts turns me way off. And I find it really, really vulgar. It's sex for money, and that is vulgar in my book.

I don't think it should be illegal, but I do think it's an exploitation of women. Unless women own the Hooters franchises. (If women own the Hooters franchises it's still sex for money and, in my opinion, vulgar...but it's not exploitation of women by men.)

Deb/AGBF

Very, very, very well said. To add: I think that clothing which assumes and prioritizes the general sexualization of grown women is kinda grody. Clothing for little baby girls that does it? Is tacky and offensive and contributes to the kind of culture in which 8 year olds get bikini waxes. If they're "future Hooter's girls" before they can walk or talk, and worrying about dieting and looking sexy before they can read, when the hell do they get to just be kids?

 

[Mara]

This makes me think of those shirts that say things like 'My Mom is a MILF' or 'I'm with the MILF'. I think they are funny, but on the flip side I am like...hello I don't (a) want my kid wearing that NOR (b) want to refer to myself like that.

 

[swingirl]

I am pretty cool to joke gifts. And since I don't want my daughter to ever even consider working at a Hooters...

 

[junebug17]

I don't find it very funny, but I also don't find it inappropriate to the point where I'm outraged or anything like that. I don't know, I just think it's a little tacky and tasteless. I guess I just don't get the joke.

 

[Shoopy]

I think it's a huge leap between someone giving mom a gag gift for their child and that mom allowing their 8 year old to get bikini waxes and talks of women rights.

And I really doubt that a shirt worn at an age where they find cardboard boxes to be the greatest things in the world is really going to pave the path to their future.

 

[anitabee]

i find it kinda yucky. not my cup of tea.

 

[kenny]

I'm a guy, one of the evil enemy, so I don't get to have or express an opinion.

See, I'm learning.

 

[AGBF]

I think it's a huge leap between someone giving mom a gag gift for their child and that mom allowing their 8 year old to get bikini waxes and talks of women rights.

The only reason that anyone "leapt" from a gag gift to the topic of women's rights is that someone posted the topic of said gag gift in a discussion forum. No one "leapt" onto this gag gift in the middle of a party!

In a discussion forum things...uh...get discussed. So the topic of, say, a gag gift...gets discussed. One forum member might, even, have the audacity to let her mind wander into the realm of women's rights.

Was it Napoleon who was quoted as having said, "Audace, audace, toujours l"audace!"? If he dared to diss Hooters, then, I agree with him. I shall go look it up.

Deb/AGBF

 

[Shoopy]

Right AGBF and I am discussing my disagreement with the link between giving a 12 month old a shirt and 8 year old bikini waxes.

 

[Cehrabehra]

I think this is no different than an 8 year old girl wearing a playboy bunny logo on her underwear. Funny? To some perhaps... there are plenty of things that are ironic and goofy to get a good laugh at without sexualizing babies or children. Things like "Help! I've started talking and I can't shut up!" or "Future Geek".

 

[Cehrabehra]

I don't find it very funny, but I also don't find it inappropriate to the point where I'm outraged or anything like that. I don't know, I just think it's a little tacky and tasteless. I guess I just don't get the joke.

ultimately this is where I fall as well... I might laugh to open it but I wouldn't put it on my daughter at all - in public OR just inside the house.

 

[AGBF]

Was it Napoleon who was quoted as having said, "Audace, audace, toujours l"audace!"? If he dared to diss Hooters, then, I agree with him. I shall go look it up.

It was, apparently, Frederick the Great.

Right AGBF and I am discussing my disagreement with the link between giving a 12 month old a shirt and 8 year old bikini waxes.

Fiery, we seem to be talking at cross purposes. The statement of yours I quoted talked of "leaping" and "women's rights". Now you are talking about the bikini waxes part of what you said; someone else will have to discuss that topic. I never mentioned bikini waxes.

Deb

 

[Laila619]

Interesting, thanks for all your replies!

Kenny, you get to have an opinion too! Guys are welcome to weigh in.

Cehra, interesting that you brought up the Playboy bunny. I was kind of wondering how the future Hooters girl shirt was any different than a little girl wearing a future Playboy Playmate shirt. I think both are tasteless and gross for a tiny little baby to wear.

So that's my next question, would y'all think a future Playmate shirt was humorous?

 

[Indylady]

I think it's a huge leap between someone giving mom a gag gift for their child and that mom allowing their 8 year old to get bikini waxes and talks of women rights.

And I really doubt that a shirt worn at an age where they find cardboard boxes to be the greatest things in the world is really going to pave the path to their future.

I agree that there is a big difference between a gag gift and a bikini wax. Unless the gag gift is a bikini wax.

I disagree that there's a leap from a Hooter's shirt to a talk about feminism. Sexualized women are so mainstream that Hooter's is considered "family restaurant". IIRC, Hooter's employs their servers as "entertainers" so they are allowed to discriminate based on looks (again, IIRC). That's where it crosses the line for me, and that is why I don't think its an appropriate gift for a for a baby girl.

 

[AGBF]

Kenny, you get to have an opinion too! Guys are welcome to weigh in.

No, Laila, don't encourage him to get in trouble. Other guys can certainly chime in, but Kenny is right to sit this one out. He is on probation.

Deb

 

[Nashville]

Jeez, if a Hooters shirt is offensive maybe I shouldn't have bought those "Boob Man" and "Lock Up Your Daughters" onesies for my nephew

 

[Shoopy]

I'll sit this one out too. I received my own dose of assumptions and leaps based on photos I shared of my 13 month old. It was her 1 year professional photos and a friend sent me an email to say she was ashamed that I exposed her breasts and posed her in a sexual manner which was offensive (to say the least) so I am admittedly too close to the topic.

 

[Cehrabehra]

I'll sit this one out too. I received my own dose of assumptions and leaps based on photos I shared of my 13 month old. It was her 1 year professional photos and a friend sent me an email to say she was ashamed that I exposed her breasts and posed her in a sexual manner which was offensive (to say the least) so I am admittedly too close to the topic.

Well now to me that's silly - I don't think a little baby girl has breasts to begin with!

And if it makes you feel any better... my beloved mother, long now departed, in my BABY ALBUM put a picture of me at 4 days old laying on my tummy taken from behind and put on a little pink piece of paper under it "Beaver Shot" @@@@ I know it was 1970 and I know most of the pics said things like little knot head or first bath - but seriously mom what were you thinking???

 

[Lady_Disdain]

I don't think it should be illegal, but I do think it's an exploitation of women. Unless women own the Hooters franchises. (If women own the Hooters franchises it's still sex for money and, in my opinion, vulgar...but it's not exploitation of women by men.)

Why is it more acceptable for women to exploit other woment than for men? I find neither acceptable. If it were a cooperative run by the women, then I would think it made more sense.

However, does Hooter's exploit its workers any more than any other franchise? I find it difficult to believe, since the young women working there probably could find other work (since attractiveness is a strong hiring factor for service industries, whether stated or not, conscious or not), pushing other people off, instead. To me, this indicates that Hooters is offering what they think is a better proposition (I would guess, better wages for wearing a tight t-shirt that show off their breasts).

If a woman believes that selling her body (whether by prostitution or as an "entertainer") is her best alternative, then it is her right to do so. I don't believe that every form of selling a woman's (or a man's, for that matter) sexuality is exploitive. Sure, there is plenty of exploitation, specially as you move to harder core stuff but not all of it is.

Let's try to come up with a few parameters. Can the people in the line of work get out and earn a living elsewhere? And I mean a living, not necessarily the same style of living. If you want to be a **** star to afford your diamonds instead of working your current office job, you are going of your free will. If you can only find a job as a stripper to pay your rent (no retail work, no data-pusher, no tele-marketing), then you are in a position to be exploited.

How about (wages per employee)/(business profit)? Mind you - profit, not revenue! I have no idea how this number crunches...

I would also look at competitiveness. If there are a thousand people who want and are equiped (by skill, looks or whatever is needed for the job) for a position, then exploitation is more likely than if there are few people available, by simple supply-and-demand. From friends who have done stints as "exotic" dancers, attractive girls are in short supply.

From this, I would say Wal-Mart exploits its workers far more than Hooters

 

[sillyberry]

And if it makes you feel any better... my beloved mother, long now departed, in my BABY ALBUM put a picture of me at 4 days old laying on my tummy taken from behind and put on a little pink piece of paper under it "Beaver Shot" @@@@ I know it was 1970 and I know most of the pics said things like little knot head or first bath - but seriously mom what were you thinking???

This is BY FAR the best thing I have read in a long time.

The t-shirt in question doesn't bother me with a 1 year old - I would laugh. It would bother me a lot with a girl over the age of 5 or so, though, at the point these messages of early sexualization mean something.

I might not be the right person to ask though, as the only reason I would consider having a kid is to dress them up in this onesie: