How do you feel about this?

Twixie said:
If it was my child, I wouldn't want to put cheap trash on her to make her look ''sweet''..

But as pointed out..she doesn't look in any discomfort and sleeping soundly!!..:love_heart:
Click to expand...

I think she looks adorable in her bow and beads... I guess it's a matter of taste.. I would have done it if I had had a girl.. CUTE.. To each his own. and I don't think an elastic bow on a babies head for the sake of a picture is going to permanently deform her.. The soft spot.. ie the fontenelle is on the top of the head.. If coming down the birth canal doesn't give everyone a cone head.. this isn't going to do it.
 
Well, IMO.........some of us are showing our age! Perhaps years ago, people wouldn't see this kind of thing that much, if at all. BUT, that was "years ago"! Today is an entirely different "day and age". Parents try to think of the cutest ways to dress-up their babies and kids. There are even Halloween costumes out there for babies! Go to a professional baby photographer and see what they will put on a baby. Parents want to be "creative", even with their kids.
 
QuickSilver said:
I think she looks adorable in her bow and beads... I guess it's a matter of taste.. I would have done it if I had had a girl.. CUTE.. To each his own. and I don't think an elastic bow on a babies head for the sake of a picture is going to permanently deform her.. The soft spot.. ie the fontenelle is on the top of the head.. If coming down the birth canal doesn't give everyone a cone head.. this isn't going to do it.
Click to expand...

Instead of cheap beads I would have bought some big roses to put round her head whilst I was taking the piccie....
 
Twixie said:
Instead of cheap beads I would have bought some big roses to put round her head whilst I was taking the piccie....
Click to expand...

Now HOW do you know those bead are cheap? For all we know they could be some sort of family heirloom.. or a tradition. I still think it's cute. Our family passes down a tiny diamond cross necklace. Every baby girl has a picture wearing that cross.. It was NOT left on.. it was for the picture, and then put away for safe keeping. I would hate to think someone thought we were a bunch of baby girl hussies.. lol!!
 
QuickSilver said:
Now HOW do you know those bead are cheap? For all we know they could be some sort of family heirloom.. or a tradition. I still think it's cute. Our family passes down a tiny diamond cross necklace. Every baby girl has a picture wearing that cross.. It was NOT left on.. it was for the picture, and then put away for safe keeping. I would hate to think someone thought we were a bunch of baby girl hussies.. lol!!
Click to expand...

Obviously they look like cheap beads..didn't really go with the elastic round her head..one this occasion QS...we will have to agree to disagree..:)
 
I find those elastic thingies with the big flower ridiculous and they look uncomfortable and distract from the real beauty and cuteness of the baby. If there's a special occasion and one wants to dress up a baby a bit, I'd go for a sunhat or little cap. Beads on a toddler are asking for trouble.
 
So I guess you all will have to make sure when you have your next baby... not to put any of that on her!! lol!!

It's just a joke... ok? I'm just not feelin' the seriousness of this..
 
My next baby (next lifetime maybe?) will not be wearing any of them doohickies, fer darn sure.

I like the non - seriousness of this - light and superficial is a nice break from more stressful subjects we read about.
 
I think might be about gender identity - dressing girls in pink and boys in blue. This is changing now. This seems to be a loaded topic - from what appears to be an innocent little headband. I'm glad I didn't have to deal with that when my son was a baby. Could dress him in overalls or whatever without worrying about whether it would affect his identity negatively.

But my cousin's daughter is a 'model' who was always very cute as a baby, now displaying sexy exploitative photographs of herself online - which I find disburbing, and putting herself at risk - so I can see where all this can lead - in the extreme.

View attachment 10828

g
 
Davey Jones said:
One4 thing you gals are forgetting,a circumsized male makes sex a hellova lot more pleasureble for him then one that is "covered".
Click to expand...

Really? I think a lot of Europeans would argue with that. My husband has no complaints about his pleasure. ;) He did wonder why American men make comments or jokes about vaseline....so I had to explain it to him. Uncircumsized males don't need it.
 
I know of parents whose baby wore the headband. But they were fake and no beads. Also were being held in Mama's arms all the time. Didn't like to pass the baby around. So I guess my vote is no beads or tiny parts but the rest depends on how vigalent the parents are. The baby in this photo didn't seem to be enjoying it! LOL!
 
How about some tats and piercings?

20070410171609_baby_piercing.jpg
 
Please tell me that image is photoshopped.

I've been trying to analyse my reactions. I think part of it is my ethnic origin which tends to avoid ostentation everywhere. I'm not happy with the whole 'princess' label for little girls.

The other part is my feminist philosophy that wants little girls to be allowed to develop unfettered by female stereotypes that channel them into narrow life choices as adults. "You are so pretty," is not the highest compliment you can pay anyone, but girls do become conditioned to need this kind of compliment from a very early age.

I'm also against using babies as dress up toys.

Anyhoo, I've located the website that set me off in the first place. It's on Facebook. If you want to look at the goods for sale, including some very fancy baby wipes, see here: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jewells/548599655226998
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Please tell me that image is photoshopped.

I've been trying to analyse my reactions. I think part of it is my ethnic origin which tends to avoid ostentation everywhere. I'm not happy with the whole 'princess' label for little girls.

The other part is my feminist philosophy that wants little girls to be allowed to develop unfettered by female stereotypes that channel them into narrow life choices as adults. "You are so pretty," is not the highest compliment you can pay anyone, but girls do become conditioned to need this kind of compliment from a very early age.

I'm also against using babies as dress up toys.

Anyhoo, I've located the website that set me off in the first place. It's on Facebook. If you want to look at the goods for sale, including some very fancy baby wipes, see here: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jewells/548599655226998
Click to expand...

I understand exactly what you mean.
 
I have no problem with dressing as ones gender if that is what you are more comfortable with. I have no problem with little girls being dressed in frills and little boys in football jerseys. I have always liked feminine dress. I always wore dresses and hair bows as a child. To label me a "little princess" would be a very bad mistake. I think we should pay less attention to how we are dressing little girls and MORE attention to what we are teaching them in school, and in how we can steer them to obtain their potential in society. More attention to ensuring women are paid equally for equal work and to giving them the opportunity to excel, by providing affordable child care and healthcare. Bows and bracelets or lack thereof do not define a female..

ps... I STILL think the little headband and bracelet are adorable.. :bowknot:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top