Excellent topic Graham,

I can see your point but I believe it is still corporate responsibility. Corporates have a choice to puruse a socially responsible growth strategy to improve their image in the society. They can educate the market and sponsor education programs on harmful social & consumer trends.

Pursuing every $$ opportunity simply because there are buyers for it is not what one expects from the market makers.

DJ had a choice to make, and they chose wrong in my view.

T

Graham
you are touching on a very 'core' issue here.

Question (to all)

1/ "Why" are there people in our society who, according to marketing people, are happy to have our children sexualized like this ?
2/ In who's interests is the promotion now, of all manner of sexualization of children ? Clearly the economic interest of those who have invested in the manufacturing outlay.
3/ What are they likely to DO now that they have spent a lot of money ?

Is it jussssssst possible, that we have abandoned our moral compass ?
Sufficiently at least for a large chunk of our society to feel comfortable with this moral choice.

Each time I drive up Canterbury road past 'SexyLand'sex supermarket and get petrol from Ampol and walk past the in your face array of pornography, I ask these questions.

Would people feel comfortable sexualizing children if they were reminded that "Anyone leading these little ones astray will have a large millstone placed around his neck and be cast into hell"

But this sexualizing of children is just one of many little steps which taken together result in the degradation of our whole society.
We can accomodate 'small' steps down the slippery slope, but not LARGE ones. But many small steps make up a long journey.

In view of the absence of any human social force or idea likely to stem this tide, the words 'National Repentance' come to mind.

F.H. ...'socially responsible' is a concept continually being challenged by economic interests.

They seek to re-define it, to re-shape it into a more advantageous concept. The Canberra porn industry ... man.. they tried to change the law and make it legal to show this and that. They laughed at me even.. (by email) but now, I think the net has bypassed them and they are whining about an economic struggle due to direct access by the net.

Poor them.. Poooor them.. NOT. I asked our government to ban the mail order of xxx rated porn. They refused. Now maybe its irrelevant, because of net access.

This is just another piece of evidence that "Make_it_up_as_you_Go" morality leads down that road which is "broad, and easy, and leads to destruction"

If we could show people in ONE hit, the cumulative degeneracy of their society, they would shriek in horror. But because it comes in little chunks like this.... they are not suffiently motivated or shocked to see if for what it really is.

David

“1/ ‘Why’ are there people in our society who, according to marketing people, are happy to have our children sexualized like this ?”

Well, would I be in the minority in not seeing any sexual connotation in this sort of thing? We are talking about young children, dressed in fashionable clothes, photographed to look good. We are not talking about nudity or lewd photography. So….. what is this carry-on about “sexualising” children?

I reckon any connotations of this sort are purely in the eye of some beholders. And I think that the interpretation of this sort of thing being included under the banner of paedophilia is just ridiculous. It reminds me of the silly outrage expressed by some people when women first dared to show their knees in public or wear two-piece bathing suits. Could it be just a reaction to changing fashions?

“2/ In who's interests is the promotion now, of all manner of sexualization of children ?”

Your question takes for granted that there is child sexualization. Well, I don’t believe that there is. We could very easily look at it in a completely different light – simply one of fashion.

“3/ What are they likely to DO now that they have spent a lot of money ?”

Some companies are likely to get very angry due to there being no significant public concern expressed up until now, and that they have spent their money in good faith, only to find themselves in the poo overnight…. and be more than willing to take legal action on the basis of defamation where no indication of a problem existed even a few days a go.

The rest of your posts to me are irrelevant, because (again) there is no sexualization of children going on and therefore comparisons with the “Canberra porn industry” and so-on are irrelevant.

Delighted to find myself in full agreement with Ludwig here (unlike some other topics).

I think that this current moral panic is a bit contrived. Rather than children being supposedly 'sexualised' by fashion and its advertising, I submit that young girls and boys are usually dressed in ways that emulate 'adult' clothing and adornment - and that this largely holds across cultures.

My opinion is that those adults who are most obsessed about this are mostly likely to be the problem, rather than the rest of us who aren't all that worried about our daughters 'dressing up'. Sure the filthy corporates exploit this - but that's the nature of capitalism, no?

The childhood innocence of sexuality has been exploited for profit is undoubtedly true. The whole of societies obsession with overt sexuality is being exploited. There is money to be made in exploitation of the natural desire to be perverted for profit. Sex sells!

Current image of sexuality is about enticing any and every one else to view onself as a sex object - an object of sexual desire. It is the eve apple promotion. If it looks good it must be good to be eaten. The DJ promotion is about the children models, their make up and their flaunting poses. Since this is the aim of the promotion then pedophiles will naturally be attracted to children bearing such provocative images. How often at a party have you seen 13 year old girls appearing to be 18 because of their dress and make-up. They then become a target of interested males in their mature sexual portrayal.

If we remove the models from the images where we only have the garments displayed I believe it will reduce the promotion. It is about body image displaying sensual enticement. "Look at me aren't I sexy". Sexy has become a vogue word even among three and four old girls.

Remember many designers of women's clothes are male homosexuals who are obsessed with the display of female clothing.