Welcome to the Commenting Pixie Party!
Another reason to thank god we're safely in Canada... although I'm sure it's only a matter of time.
Ugh, ugh, ugh.
Well, Rachel, I don't think you're as safe as you think. It's gone behind their paid firewall, but if it hadn't I would have linked to Rebecca Eckler's Globe and Mail article about four years olds getting manicures and pedicures. Instead I had to content myself with linking to her comment at Miche's site, where she tells us how loving and positive this development is, and, besides, everyone is doing it.
As I said over at APL's , I can't believe this place exists. My daughters never would be allowed to go. Just like they were never allowed to have a glamour shot photo taken. They are girls, and they don't need their sexual idenity formed through exploitation. I mean it's hard enough to avoid the stuff that gender roles, society and media cram down our throats as adults, there is no reason to emphasis it this early.
Apple had friends outside the school who started wearing make-up in 5th and 6th grade. I thought it was appalling. My kids don't even play with make-up as part of dress-up. Luckily her friends at school don't seem to be in a hurry to wear make-up. In 8th grade mascara is the exception rather than the rule. We will see what high school brings next year.
I thought most of the false advertising posts-including mine- were more in the spirit of discussion rather than attacking. A handful of posts and comments got out of hand, which wasn't all that constructive. I think we should be looking at the fact that society creates this whole ideal of beauty and acceptance and MIM isn't the only one who feels that way. I disagree with her, but she has generated a completely interesting discussion.
Lisa, I had no problems with your post, or Jody's, or Moxie's, or any of that. I did have problems with MIM's post, because she seemed to have absolutely no idea that any discussion about weight, hair length, and "false advertising" has to be contextualized. There are issues whose values are solely determined by the partners in a relationship, and then there are issues that have thousands of years of history and culture weighing down on them when partners are trying to negotiate them.
She sparked a discussion, all right, but it wasn't at all apparent that that was her intent.
You are right, she fell into it. My guess is she thought she would have most people agreeing with her, because of the context of her world and perceptions. I know she in no way thought it would spark the debacle that it did. I think she created a great platform for people to disagree with her, even though I too seriously doubt that was her intention. So it was left to rest of us to add context through discussion.
I really think it's an important discussion though that women continue to talk about and debate appearance and its importance or lack of importance in our lives.
I think the most interesting--though not the most commented-upon--aspect of the whole False Advertising thing is the question of spouses changing over time: how much change (physical or otherwise) can one partner take from another without harming the edifice? Where does personal autonomy clash with responsibility to the community? A marriage, a family, is a small community, and people give up some individual freedom to join any community. Sometimes it's worth it, sometimes not.
I didn't like MIM's post or what I've read of her outlook, but that bigger question is a valid and thought-provoking one. And--as she keeps protesting, though not entirely convincingly--what she wrote is probably perfectly true for *her* marriage, for her and her husbands' priorities.
Lisa V, I just read your post on all this, and you said a lot of what I was thinking about it. I really liked Moxie's post too--it was chilling, and I think she meant it to be.
I went to the Club Libby Lu website and what I saw there seemed to me no different from what I see at Claire's, Limited Too, 5-7-9 and all the other stores aimed at "tweens." Lots of glitter and jewelry, a princess costume, a few t-shirts and several pairs of funky shoes.
If I had only seen the website, I probably wouldn't have had a problem letting my daughter attend one of those parties because I know little girls like glitter and pink, and that doesn't bother me (of course, I have a 5-month-old so it doesn't really apply, but I'm projecting if I had a 10 year old).
It didn't seem to reflect the same place that the Washington Post article talked about, which made me wonder if Libby Lue was trying to pull one over on parents, or was just misrepresented in the article. The picture makes me think probably the former.
I think we may have another strong case of "false advertising."
Oh, and Rachel, the first thing I thought when I read this post (and I've thought it before when hearing about Libby Lou birthday parties, especially considering MG's personality and proclivities) was "Thank God we'll be in Canada before MG is old enough to get invited to one of these!"
Okay, all this comment-hijacking is a sign that I need to think *seriously* about posting regularly on my own blog again soon. Sorry, Phantom!
No such thing as a comment hijack for you, elswhere! And also, from what the article says, it sounds like MG is exactly the targeted age for this crap.
I have to say, the first thing I thought when reading this was, "It will be worth the $16K a year to have Miss M in a religious day school if we can completely avoid places like Libby Lu." I am not the type of parent who would use the phrase "nice religious girls don't dress/act/talk that way" (in most cases that would be true, I hope), but I don't think I'd hesitate in a situation like this! Uch! (Shivers!)
It still boggles my mind that little girls have such an interest in makeup and the glittery stuff--I don't even wear it now. (I guess I was atypical, but I used to be able to get out the door in 10 minutes.) And I thought the Build-A-Bear workshop was a little creepy. Move over, butter! 
eww, how depressing. it is bad enough that kids are so bombarded by gender stereotypes, even when parents try to create a more decent landscape. it creeps me out that some parents think this is great stuff.
but our birthday parties from 3-8 included: a backyard luau! dinosaurs! thomas the tank engine! picnic in the park! picnic in another park! visit to the biology lab at a science museum! yay! they were always family-friendly events, with parents and sibs of the birthday friends invited. even in the older years up to teendom, barbeques and science museums figured heavily in the lineup for both our kids and their friends, and also old faves like bowling.
how sad for these little girls to miss out. and for their families, too.
How scary!
Without having a child myself I couldn't say for sure but I'm fairly certain that businesses like this don't exist in Australia. Perhaps the population is too small to support them. Anyway, I just wanted to say that from what you've said about this Libby Lu thing I think you're absolutely right to pick up that kind of hypersexualisation of the body of the prepubescent girl child (and attendant draining of eroticism from the body of the mature female) and link it to the attitudes revealed in that False Advertising post, which shocked and appalled me to pieces.
I'm reading Tracks right this very second in your honor, Laura.
Holy Hannah! And I just recovered from the shock of a neighbor hiring actresses to dress up as Bratz dolls for her pre-schooler's birthday party...
Any more room under that rock?
I'm so glad my daughters are grown, because I'm pretty sure they, especially LD#2, would've been attracted to that crap--girly stuff was appealing to them, no matter how gender neutral and gender fair I tried to keep things.
More disturbing than the girly-ness is the overlay of sexuality. Girls just can't stay little girls very long, and that is too sad. It's fun to play dress and go "glam" for pretend, but it's a whole nother thing to market that look as what you should be like all the time, and to market shopping and makeup as great pastimes. Sheesh.
And the false adverising thing....people change, get a grip. And there are far greater changes to deal with over time than some weight gain.
Oy, the Bratz dolls skeeve me out, too.
Ugh. Ugh. Ugh.
Yes, let's teach little girls how to be sex objects and good little consumers.
I despise the Disney princess crap and Barbie dolls but Club Libby Lu has taken the prize when it comes to promoting harmful gender stereotypes.
How can parents possibly encourage this sort of thing? Just what are they thinking?
Here's another great commentary on the "false advertising" thing, in which Bitch Ph.D. and MIM go at each other. It's fun...
I'm still processing what to think of this all. Club Libby Lu makes me so angry, trying to make our little girls into sexualised objects. What's wrong with allowing little kids to have a childhood?
And this False Advertising debate? I've read through MIM's posts, and the ensuing discussion, and all I could think was, "I'm so thankful for my husband." I could never handle having a husband who didn't want my physical appearance to change. I had all my hair chopped off two days after the wedding, and Chris's immediate response was that it would now be much easier to kiss the back of my neck. He dyes my hair for me (and has a good time with it, the chemist that he is). And so what if I've put on ten extra pounds in the past couple of months? He thinks the extra weight suits me.
His approach to physical beauty is that it can only go so far, if there's no inner beauty behind it. He told me that he thought I was pretty when we met, but that as he knows me better and better, I become more and more beautiful to him.
(He is incredibly good for the self-esteem, considering what a neurotic creature he married.)
The internet tells me things that make me sad. It tells me about this Libby Lou and about Jane Doe and about South Dakota. What the HELL is going on out there?
On the other hand, regarding nail polish: my best friend taught her girl colours by painting each nail with a different colour, and then I did the same with my eldest son. He went through a huge nail polish phase.
I don't wear it, myself. But he saw someone with nail polish, and wanted his fingers to turn colours, too!
Gosh darnit! Our Libby Lu was destroyed by the hurricane. When the department store at the Mall re-opened after renovations, no Libby Lu!
If you hate Libby Lu, avoid those dance schools where they teach tiny girls to bump and grind in garish hottie costumes at events called "dance recitals", Ok?
Oy. Good point, St. Casserole. Though if Baby Blue has inherited my native clumsiness, we won't have any conflicts about avoiding dance schools, that's for sure.
Arwen, I don't have a problem with nail polish beyond the usual concerns about phthalate exposure and other less-than-savory chemicals. I get as much pleasure from seeing splashes of color at the ends of my flip-flops as anyone else. But the article suggested that all the hip Canadian mommies were flocking to bond with their little girls over professional manicures and pedicures. Somehow I don't think you painting Ripley's nails was conforming to that message...
OK, I have kept the whole 'false advertising' thing at arm's length, because, as you said dear Phantom, Twisty did all the work! But this thing I have never heard of! I'm ready to lose my lunch. I can only imagine Mr. Blue's head-shaking. This is a sad commentary.
I am stunned. And I know I totally shouldn't be, but I am. I am. HOW do these places exist? Who takes their little girls there? WHO??? Aaahhh!
As for the false advertising thing, MIM is a sort of friend of mine, but to be honest, that post and her subsequent "defense" of it was so appalling and so disgusting really, that I'm having a hard time with our "sort of friendship". I don't konw, it just turned me off completely.
Off to read the Bitch phd thread . ..
Oh, Liesl, eeeewwww! Hiring actresses to dress as Bratz dolls for a kids' party skeeves me out almost more than Club Libby Lu. (though not quite as much, actually, b/c Libby Lu is affecting more kids and is making a profit.)
I love love love the idea of the Usborne Feminine Mystique. Shall we have other Usborne classics to explain social issues to our children as well? Usborne's "The Jungle," for why Mama and Daddy buy organic meat; Usborne "Silent Spring," for why our lawn isn't nice and green like our neighbor's; Usborne "Grapes of Wrath" to explain the dust bowl pictures in the "This Land Is Your Land" book? And I could use an Usborne "All the President's Men" to add to the discussion of what President Nixon did that was bad (yes, it has come up several times -- though we always point out that he did create the EPA, so there was something good he did at least.)
LOL at Genevieve's suggestions. Those are great!
Well, I just tossed a grenade at the blog to which you linked, Phantom. The woman is so rigid and limited in her thinking. Do you suppose she has any idea that her philosophy would dovetail nicely with the Christian Right's agenda for women?
Phantom -- I mostly just meant no Libby Lu specifically, at least not according to the store locator. It'll reach Canada eventually, and I have no doubt that among certain circles, taking your daughter to the spa is already commonplace. Vancouver is spa city.
But I thought "Thank god I'm in Canada" had a better ring to it than "Thank god I've got a boy" -- especially since I'm already starting to see the outlines of the cage HE's going to grow up in. He loves flowers and likes to wear barettes in his hair. I will be interested to see how long he can last (and helping him last as long as I can, but it isn't all up to me, alas).
The Usborne Silent Spring is hilarious, Genevieve!
Rachel, I used to think the same thing when I had just LG. I wouldn't trade my baby girl for anything, but there was something to be said for not feeling my throat close when the subject of hypersexualizing little girls came up...
Reading Tracks? In my honour?? Wow...I'm crossing my fingers that you enjoyed it, esp. as quiet time to read seems a precious commodity at your place.
rachel ... Just thought I'd do the chat room thing and say hi to another Vancouver mom of boys...
Blogger playdate in the making? I love when that happens!
I was introduced to Libby Lu last year when we took Ella to a birthday party there. I'd never heard of it and had no idea at all what to expect--thought when I RSVP'd that it was just another gymnastics place or something. It was terrible, though not as bad as this article makes it out to be, at least on that particular occasion. The kids were doing more princess dress-up than "rock star," so it wasn't a lot of bare flesh or anything. But the make-up was terrible, and they included pamphlets for modelling classes in the goody bags for each of the 4-6 year olds.
Ella had fun at the thing too. She's asked once or twice to have her birthday party there, and we've said N-O, no.
I have my issues with the Disney princess stuff at times, mostly I just figure making a big deal opposing it will just make it more appealing for them so I go along, but this Libby Lu thing is way worse.
Arwen! Nice to meet you! I'll go check out your blog!
(Also, I really, really want to make a joke about spouse-swapping [since you're presumably married to Aragorn], but since I don't know your sense of humour yet, I'm being very very good! Note the goodness!)
*g*, rachel. I'm not, in fact, married to Aragorn - although there was one incident in my life when I called a music store, and the guy answered: "Random Music Store, Aragorn speaking."
I froze up - "Uh, hi. This is Arwen, you have the thing with the music on it ... Uh..."
We both were suddenly tongue tied and silly, stumbled through a conversation. Finally, he asked me if we should meet, just to see if we were in fact fated lovers. He told me his work schedule.
I am shamefaced to say that I chickened out, and never did. I am happy to say that one of the reasons I chickened out was that I had had a couple of dates with this guy I was falling for: and now, we've been together/married for 9 years.
And if THAT'S not thread drift, I just don't know.
So wait, Arwen's your real name? Cooool!
(Oh, hi Phantom! Want your blog back?)
No, no! Do go on! I love being a playdate yenta.
LG? As usual? Rocks.
Forgive me for being pretty much uninformed on that whole "false advertising" thread, since it mostly came up while I was out of town. Earlier this afternoon, I read the Twisty post you linked to but I think that's all I've really read.
Has anyone pointed out, beyond the stupid gender dynamics of MIM's argument regarding "false advertising," that you'd have to be a real loser to ever expect the person you marry to remain completely and perfectly unchanging or the rest of your lives together? What a paltry picture of both marriage and of humanity it reflects to believe that the goal we should aspire to in marriage is to fix ourselves in stasis and refuse to learn, grow, or change in any way from that point forward.
rachel - yup! Since birth... Hippie parents!
My friends and I absolutely despise the Club Libby Lu at Tysons... It's nothing like Claires or Limited Too... It's worse. I'm 16, and I mean, COME ON... when at least 40 girls of the teenage population hate Libby Lu, you know there's a problem with it.
I have a good friend IRL named Arwen, and when I first saw you posting here, Arwen, I had to go check around on your blog to see if you were she. You weren't. 
Commenting by HaloScan
