Parents Angry Over Disney Underwear With "Dive-In" Printed On Them

[twinkiesmom]

As for the Juicy on the butt thing: I am a huge fan of Juicy Couture, I own very many articles of clothing, handbags, and accessories. My 6 month old daughter owns a couple articles of Juicy Couture clothing as well. The word "Juicy" on the butt of their bathing suits and sweatpants has no meaning other than the name of the brand. If you notice, the pieces of their clothing that does state the name on it, will usually just say Juicy rather than the entire Juicy Couture. It's not meant to be taken as a sexual reference, it just happens to be the brand name.

Back on topic, isn't there any other phrase they could have chosen in place of "Dive In"? Why on earth would they pick that one for clothing? Jeez.

Why do you feel the need to educate us on the branding? We're well aware of the fact that the maker is Juicy Couture...We're questioning the morals and ethics of a company that would manufacture a swimsuit for a young girl (a 4-year-old is clearly a baby) with the word JUICY in bold large print across the entire backside.

 

[CASuzk]

Yeah, sorry. Juicy Couture is aimed at certain demographic; the person who gets that frisson of thrill by pointing out their sexual nature. It's also overpriced and hardly 'couture', since it's made in same little sweatshops in third world countries that K-mart gets their stuff made.

And just so we're clear on this, I am a big fan of In 'n Out Burger.

 

[January.]

twinkiesmom- Feel free to attack me if you wish, I was merely trying to point out that they do not intend it to be taken as a sexual reference. Only people who are NOT educated on the brand would take it this way. Which was my point...

And CASuzk, I'm glad you feel you can judge me by the brand of clothing I choose to wear. I do not "get a thrill out of pointing out my sexual nature", I am a married mother of two. I simply enjoy their bright colors and designs. And please read the inside tag on the next article of Juicy clothing you encounter. It does say "Made in the Glamorous USA", no?

Good God, where did the friendly, light-hearted people around here go?

 

[GlitchWizard]

twinkiesmom- Feel free to attack me if you wish, I was merely trying to point out that they do not intend it to be taken as a sexual reference. Only people who are NOT educated on the brand would take it this way. Which was my point...

And CASuzk, I'm glad you feel you can judge me by the brand of clothing I choose to wear. I do not "get a thrill out of pointing out my sexual nature", I am a married mother of two. I simply enjoy their bright colors and designs. And please read the inside tag on the next article of Juicy clothing you encounter. It does say "Made in the Glamorous USA", no?

Good God, where did the friendly, light-hearted people around here go?

*waving* Didn't go anywhere. Right here. I've got a girl who wears thongs (claims they are more comfortable.) She's worn them since she first discovered them.... I think she was NINE. So far, no one has noticed.

 

[eleven]

*waving* Didn't go anywhere. Right here. I've got a girl who wears thongs (claims they are more comfortable.) She's worn them since she first discovered them.... I think she was NINE. So far, no one has noticed.

They ARE more comfortable! Shoot, I haven't worn a full-size pair of panties since 1988! LOL, back then, thongs could only be bought at Fredericks of Hollywood.

As far as Juicy brand goes, I just think their items are sooo ridiculously overpriced that it borders on being laughable. To each his own, though. I'm not into the whole brand name thing, though.

 

[hipmamajen]

When it's a kid's butt with a word on it (not just Juicy) it seems to me like we're just giving the whole world (pedophiles included) excuses and/or permission to be checking out that kid's bottom.

When 99% of kids' clothing doesn't invite strangers to read my child's butt, why would I go out of my way to buy stuff that does?

 

[hipmamajen]

As far as the underwear goes, I don't think the kids will think anything of it if the parents don't make a big deal. Underwear is meant to be private, if a lot of folks have access to your kids' underwear there's probably already a problem, no matter what the undies say, kwim?

 

[CASuzk]

twinkiesmom- Feel free to attack me if you wish, I was merely trying to point out that they do not intend it to be taken as a sexual reference. Only people who are NOT educated on the brand would take it this way. Which was my point...

And CASuzk, I'm glad you feel you can judge me by the brand of clothing I choose to wear. I do not "get a thrill out of pointing out my sexual nature", I am a married mother of two. I simply enjoy their bright colors and designs. And please read the inside tag on the next article of Juicy clothing you encounter. It does say "Made in the Glamorous USA", no?

Good God, where did the friendly, light-hearted people around here go?

January,
"Made in USA" can mean many things, including made in US territories which do run under sweatshop conditions, without US interference. Juicy is owned by Liz Claiborne, a company that paid several millions in fines for their manufacturing irregularities. Made in the USA can also mean Asian Sweatshops right here in the US: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/a-queens-sweatshop-found-to-owe-workers-53-million/

The name "Juicy" most certainly was chosen to convey a titillating message on adult clothing. Put the words "Juicy"on a baby bib, and I'd think "Cute, babies drool, they're juicy." Put it on your azz in three inch high letters, well, it has a different connotation. Why not "Moist" "wet" "Happy Valley" or "Tunnel of Love? It's not the words so much but how they are used.

This is friendly place and so I do want to give you some friendly advice as a parent of two older kids. Juicy Clothing pretty expensive and putting the Brand Name in big letters lets people know that you have spent a pretty penny to dress your kid. You might want to explore that choice and how it impacts your future.
When she was younger, I spent a small fortune making sure my cutie DD had the latest and greatest in kid fashion. She had three strollers, one for fashion, one for travel and one for jogging, all of them top brands and a $200. highchair. Her room had more stuff than most well stocked boutiques. I derived a great deal of satisfaction on how cute my DD was and I dressed her to be noticed. I also rationalized that we could afford it, my husband is an airline pilot.

So now my DD is 19, I have no say in what she wears and if it were still in fashion in California, she might be wearing Juicy. But, she can't; she works to help pay for her education. In the last 10 years, my husband's airline has gone bankrupt twice and they took his pension, he had a serious case of cancer, his pay is 60% of what is was 16 years ago. Thankfully, our house is paid for and we always contributed to a 401K but I wish I'd known that life can toss you some hard lessons.

IF I could go back in time, I'd plan better and spend less on disposables like clothing. Many of the hard choices we have to make right now are the direct result of my desires, admittedly foolish on my part, to make sure my kids had everything that I thought they needed. (I don't even want to think about the thousands spent on dance lessons and dance competitions, it's too painful) Not more than two weeks ago, one of DD's friends sobbed (wearing $100. jeans) on my couch because her parents had told the kids that they have 50 grand in credit card debt. Even though both parents work and make excellent money, they may lose their house and she might not be able to return to college.

I'm now educating myself on financial matters and sharing what I know with my kids. I know that a pair of sweatpants with letters on the rear don't keep you any warmer than the ones that come from Target and Polo shirt from Ralph for $70. is equal to one from Lands End for $22.

I know now that "Rich" people follow fashion and value status displayed, but wealthy people do not. Wealthy for me means money available for all that life throws at you whether it is a major illness or being able to travel when you retire or being able to make a difference by funding a charitable group.

I truly didn't want to hurt your feelings! Anyway, I'll step off my soapbox now and tell you that the kiddo in your avatar is absolutely adorable.
Suz

 

[January.]

Thank you, Suz. I appreciate it. I should clarify. While my daughter does own a few Juicy articles, she also wears less expensive brands such as Old Navy and Circo (Target brand), which by the way is one of my favorite "brands" of clothing for my kids, they make super cute stuff. But I don't see a problem to splurge every now and then. Besides, the last shirt I got her was on clearance for $12 at the Juicy store. My own Juicy wardrobe has been built over years and was for the most part the result of gifts from family members. I do admit my kids are probably a little spoiled, but I don't go totally overboard. Sure I looked at the $200 Maclaren stroller, but ended up going with the $55 Cosco stroller which works just as well. I don't want to come off as a brand snob.

I'm sorry to hear about your husband and his cancer and job. Prayers to you and your family, and thanks for taking the time to post to me.

 

[twinkiesmom]

twinkiesmom- Feel free to attack me if you wish, I was merely trying to point out that they do not intend it to be taken as a sexual reference. Only people who are NOT educated on the brand would take it this way. Which was my point...

There you go with your "educated" again....It's not a matter of being educated, it's a matter of being fluent in the English language and having the good sense and taste level to recognize when children are being exploited by a marketing message.

And how would you know what the company intends? I'm sure they're happy with the implied sexual message their clothing is presenting to the public.....I wouldn't have a problem with it if it was limited to adults....but on a small child or preteen, the implications are disgusting.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

It's very simple. If you have an issue with any item offered by any company, don't buy it. If it disturbs you more, write the company. As I see it, you have done your active part in what you feel is "wrong".

As far as making this a huge deal, I can't go there. Perhaps it's because I decided what I felt was "right" to wear for my children. It wasn't a huge deal. I didn't approve, I didn't buy. Now, to judge others that do for whatever reasons, who am I to say? My own were/are my own. I chose clothing for whatever reason I did at that time. I live my life and go by my standards. I thinks that's pretty good.

BTW, pedophiles are going to find *anything* about children because they are into innocents. Period. It doesn't matter what children wear, it's the age that pedophiles love. That is the nature of the pedophile beast.

I still think much has been made big for nothing regarding this underwear. Then again, I am a person that does not automatically go mind nasty with everything. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Nothing to get my Hanes all up tied up into a knot.... Just say'in.

(FWIW, thongs freak me out. My daughter's wear them. Ugh. Walking around with an intentional wedgie does nothing for me!)

 

[Ciara]

I dont think kids need to go around with underwear that says Dive In or Juicy or anything similar on it. If you go read some of these paedophiles blogs you will see that they DO take stuff like that as a "sign" that kids are sexual etc. I have seen them talk of the way tiny kids even SMILE at them as a sign that the kid is "interested", thats how twisted they are. I am surprised at Disney doing this and no kid of mine would be wearing them thats for sure.

 

[angelmom]

It's very simple. If you have an issue with any item offered by any company, don't buy it. If it disturbs you more, write the company. As I see it, you have done your active part in what you feel is "wrong".

As far as making this a huge deal, I can't go there. Perhaps it's because I decided what I felt was "right" to wear for my children. It wasn't a huge deal. I didn't approve, I didn't buy. Now, to judge others that do for whatever reasons, who am I to say? My own were/are my own. I chose clothing for whatever reason I did at that time. I live my life and go by my standards. I thinks that's pretty good.

BTW, pedophiles are going to find *anything* about children because they are into innocents. Period. It doesn't matter what children wear, it's the age that pedophiles love. That is the nature of the pedophile beast.

I still think much has been made big for nothing regarding this underwear. Then again, I am a person that does not automatically go mind nasty with everything. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Nothing to get my Hanes all up tied up into a knot.... Just say'in.

(FWIW, thongs freak me out. My daughter's wear them. Ugh. Walking around with an intentional wedgie does nothing for me!)

ITA about not buying stuff like this if you don't like it. I think the objection in this particular case was that it was a multi-pack of panties and you couldn't see all of the designs. If I understand the story correctly, they thought they were buying cute Disney panties and got one pair that surprised them. I would have just thrown that pair away, but I'm generally lazy. :crazy:

You might ask "who would see it?" but how many pedos are babysitters, step-fathers, uncles, step-brothers, friends, etc? Aren't most kids who are molested hurt by someone they know?

 

[GlitchWizard]

...
(FWIW, thongs freak me out. My daughter's wear them. Ugh. Walking around with an intentional wedgie does nothing for me!)

All I can think of is that they are a direct bacteria highway to some kind of infection if you aren't careful.

 

[Kymistry35]

I don't see anything wrong with the panties. No one except the child and parents should see them anyway and I am sure that the children don't realize the innuendo.

 

[Anubis]

*waving* Didn't go anywhere. Right here. I've got a girl who wears thongs (claims they are more comfortable.) She's worn them since she first discovered them.... I think she was NINE. So far, no one has noticed.

Sorry, I have to disagree on this one. A 9 year old wearing thong underwear? And just be happy that some upskirt perv hasn't had the photo op to get her picture. And trust me, people notice. Do you think a child molester is going to point out to you that he likes your daughters panties?

Apparently none of you all have ever delved into the real world of child *advertiser censored* and the pictures that are out there...girls (all the way down to infants) in bathing suits, panties, naked, you name it, some freak of nature has taken their picture. And they would make you vomit, if you are anywhere close to normal.

Manufacturers in American sexualize nearly everything, from Dr. Scholls shoe inserts to beer to childrens clothing. Pretending it isn't true doesn't make it not true, and over sexualized clothing has nothing to do with being "politically correct" either. We have turned women into objects from Playboy to Pageants, nothing more than *advertiser censored*, butts and made up faces so no it does not surprise me in the least that some manufacturer has placed "dive in" on GIRLS underwear (I doubt you'll ever find it on a boys pair). In fact, I challenge anyone here to find a sexualized item of boys clothing here (and I mean boys, not teenagers.) My answer to that garbage is I don't buy it, no matter how much my kid likes it. After all, I am the adult and can say no. I mean, just yesterday there was a story about a cop trying to teach high schoolers a lesson on internet safety: he printed off one young *advertiser censored* MySpace picture (and if you saw it, you would agree). What he did with is is questionable at best but the point is, the picture is of this 15 year old with her thong covered *advertiser censored* (or uncovered as it may be) lovingly displayed for the camera and then pasted to MySpace for thousands if not millions of people to see. What does her daddy say? He's outraged AT THE COP. HELLO?

I'm not trying to pick on you GlitchWizard, :blowkiss: I am just using your example as a point so please don't get all worked up. I just wanted to say that reacting to something like this is important. I would return the underwear to the manufacturer with a letter stating exactly why it was being returned.

 

[Mimi]

ITA about not buying stuff like this if you don't like it. I think the objection in this particular case was that it was a multi-pack of panties and you couldn't see all of the designs. If I understand the story correctly, they thought they were buying cute Disney panties and got one pair that surprised them. I would have just thrown that pair away, but I'm generally lazy. :crazy:

You might ask "who would see it?" but how many pedos are babysitters, step-fathers, uncles, step-brothers, friends, etc? Aren't most kids who are molested hurt by someone they know?

DITTO, Angelmom....let's keep them as innocent and carefree as long as we can and God look over all our kids, no matter what age.

 

[Mimi]

I dont think kids need to go around with underwear that says Dive In or Juicy or anything similar on it. If you go read some of these paedophiles blogs you will see that they DO take stuff like that as a "sign" that kids are sexual etc. I have seen them talk of the way tiny kids even SMILE at them as a sign that the kid is "interested", thats how twisted they are. I am surprised at Disney doing this and no kid of mine would be wearing them thats for sure.

Forgive me for reading backwards on this thread, but I agree whole heartedly, Ciara....better safe than sorry especially when it comes to our kids!!

 

[White Rain]

Forgive me for reading backwards on this thread, but I agree whole heartedly, Ciara....better safe than sorry especially when it comes to our kids!!

My sentiments exactly...

 

[Ciara]

Sorry, I have to disagree on this one. A 9 year old wearing thong underwear? And just be happy that some upskirt perv hasn't had the photo op to get her picture. And trust me, people notice. Do you think a child molester is going to point out to you that he likes your daughters panties?

Apparently none of you all have ever delved into the real world of child *advertiser censored* and the pictures that are out there...girls (all the way down to infants) in bathing suits, panties, naked, you name it, some freak of nature has taken their picture. And they would make you vomit, if you are anywhere close to normal.

Manufacturers in American sexualize nearly everything, from Dr. Scholls shoe inserts to beer to childrens clothing. Pretending it isn't true doesn't make it not true, and over sexualized clothing has nothing to do with being "politically correct" either. We have turned women into objects from Playboy to Pageants, nothing more than *advertiser censored*, butts and made up faces so no it does not surprise me in the least that some manufacturer has placed "dive in" on GIRLS underwear (I doubt you'll ever find it on a boys pair). In fact, I challenge anyone here to find a sexualized item of boys clothing here (and I mean boys, not teenagers.) My answer to that garbage is I don't buy it, no matter how much my kid likes it. After all, I am the adult and can say no. I mean, just yesterday there was a story about a cop trying to teach high schoolers a lesson on internet safety: he printed off one young *advertiser censored* MySpace picture (and if you saw it, you would agree). What he did with is is questionable at best but the point is, the picture is of this 15 year old with her thong covered *advertiser censored* (or uncovered as it may be) lovingly displayed for the camera and then pasted to MySpace for thousands if not millions of people to see. What does her daddy say? He's outraged AT THE COP. HELLO?

I'm not trying to pick on you GlitchWizard, :blowkiss: I am just using your example as a point so please don't get all worked up. I just wanted to say that reacting to something like this is important. I would return the underwear to the manufacturer with a letter stating exactly why it was being returned.

Great Post Anubis and I totally agree!