Primark row signals backlash against unsuitable marketing

With the ‘Mumsnet election’ taking place in the UK, the timing could be right for a fightback against the commercial sexualisation of children

WHEN THE Irish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (ISPCC) started its confidential Childline service 21 years ago, it was getting regular calls from 17-year-olds under pressure to have sex. Today these calls are coming from 10- and 11-year-olds.

To draw a link between that trend and this week’s controversy about the selling of bikini swimsuits with padded tops for seven-year-olds may appear to be stretching it, but the ISPCC’s director of services, Caroline O’Sullivan, does not think so.

“This product is a symptom of what is actually going on for children,” she says. It is another link in the chain of early sexualisation of children.

The Irish-owned Primark in the UK was forced to withdraw the bikini from sale after it was condemned by children’s rights groups. The company, which trades under the name Penneys in the Republic, apologised for the offence caused and said it would donate any profits it had made to children’s welfare organisations.

Unfortunately for Primark, the timing of events in the run-up to what has been dubbed the “Mumsnet” election in the UK guaranteed high-profile publicity. The women’s vote is being courted through adverts on the influential parenting website and both prime minister Gordon Brown and Tory leader David Cameron weighed in with their denunciations of selling such an item to children.

It is not the first time adverse publicity has compelled a retailer to remove inappropriately sexualised products marketed at children. Tesco, for example, is not allowed to forget how it once had pole-dancing kits in its toy aisles. But it remains to be seen if isolated outbursts of moral indignation will be channelled into more consistent pressure which commercial interests cannot ignore.

Prof Sheila Greene, director of the Children’s Research Centre in Trinity College Dublin, is heartened by the outcome of this week’s events.

“It does show that parents are not powerless – and that is a very good message to get across,” she says. “Individual parents do not have to succumb to pressure to buy these items and to collude in the sexualisation of girls. And groups of parents, like Mumsnet in the UK, can be very effective on this matter.”

Meanwhile, O'Sullivan points to other products, such as Playboy-type T-shirts, and says the problem is not only that children's desire for these things is fuelled by the media but also that parents do not know how to say no.

“Children need to be children and parents need to be parents,” she says. “That is the biggest issue. Who in their right mind would think a padded bra for a six- or seven-year-old is an appropriate piece of clothing? Where is this going to end? We are dressing our five-, six- and seven-year-olds as if they were teenagers. There is a huge rush to move from childhood to become independent individuals. This can have a huge impact on children.”

Growing up too quickly is storing up problems for later in life, says educational psychologist Nicky O’Leary. “If you have a little girl, you want her to have a childhood and not be skipping into adolescence. From the developmental point of view, it is very important to go through each stage.”

You can’t get away from the fact that the Primark swimsuit was targeted at seven-year-olds who don’t buy their own clothes, says the manager of Parentline, Rita O’Reilly. “Parents do have control and, if they feel it is inappropriate, should say no. Then, if the parents aren’t buying it, it is very quickly withdrawn.”

Mother of two Saundra Walsh, who owns two children’s clothes shops, in Bray, Co Wicklow and Nenagh, Co Tipperary, agrees parents are primarily responsible. But as a retailer catering for “parents who care about what their children wear”, she is also careful about what she sells. For this reason, she chose to build her stock around the classical clothes of the Danish range Wheat, after which her shops are named. At trade shows, she says, revealing clothing for children is everywhere. “The problem is they are selling it so cheap, they are enticing retailers to put it out there.”

The “padded bra issue” has been around for a few years, says Clíona Saidléar, policy and communications director with Rape Crisis Network Ireland. She hopes that this latest acknowledgment of it may be a sign of a hardening attitude towards commercial sexualisation of children.

“Five years ago you would have been dismissed as a radical on the edge getting hysterical,” she says. “Now it is being taken up as an election issue – that’s a huge change.” There is blatant sexualisation of girls in popular culture, she adds. “The marriage between sexual objectification and capitalism means our children are a target at a younger and younger age for the sales person.”

For example, Jordan’s next business venture is a make-up range for children, as modelled by her two-year-old daughter in recent pictures.

Saidléar sees parents struggling to hold the line against influences coming into the house and believes they need to help each other. Parent groups in school should talk about it and draw up guidelines on issues such as appropriate gifts, “like no make-up products before 12”, she suggests.

The constant emphasis on the need to be “sexy” has very serious consequences for boys and girls, stresses Sheila Greene, and its impact is being seen at a younger and younger age. She recently heard of a three-year-old in a creche being bullied by another three-year-old about her appearance. “Where did the little three-year-old who was whispering things like ‘you’re too fat’, ‘your clothes are ugly’ and ‘your hair is messy’ get that from? From mum and others.”