"Naughty" Costume for Toddler Girls?

[Pixilated]

I'm glad to see the responses here because I was extremely puzzled when this came up on my FB page with a load of vitriol attached to it. The child is covered from neck to knees by the dress alone. Then she's got black leotards on (sorry, tights; I used to call them leotards when I was young ...) so she's pretty much covered from the neck down. Is it the colour scheme? But what's so "pervy" about black and purple? The sparkles? But almost ALL little girls LOVE sparkle. So yeah, I didn't get it. Still don't, actually.

naughty also has other contexts other than sexual. mischievous or troublemaker kids are often called naughty. it may be one of those things that is more the mind of the reader.
cuz first thing i thought of seeing that was "oh, like rumpleteaser"

I think you have hit the nail on the head here, because "naughty" does have many other contexts. I believe it was used often with children around the turn of the century, and it had nothing to do with sex at that time ... it meant, as you said, mischievous or a troublemaker, period. I think far too many readers were funnelling "naughty" through the contemporary adult meaning and then freaking out.

[catcul]

Apparently, some groups were outraged over this costume. The Unhinged Paranoia crowd strikes again. Wal-Mart has decided to stop selling this outfit because it "sexualizes" toddlers.

Walmart Yanks Scandalous Kids' Costume After Uproar

[Andara Bledin]

Anyone who thinks that outfit "sexualizes toddlers" has some serious issues.

[Pixilated]

That somebody could look at that costume and claim it's sexual is seriously scary ...

[fireheart17]

I can tell you precisely who would be seeing her in her training bra: Her fellow classmates. And I'm sure it's no less bitchy and vicious now than it was 20 years ago when I was harassed in gym class simply because my own bra was utilitarian as opposed to some known brand.

Also, it's worth noting that a person wearing what they think are attractive undergarments will have better self esteem than one who is wearing undergarments that they find to be embarrassing.

What you wear under your clothes is more about making the person wearing them happy than showing off to someone else.

That said, I do find the sexualization of pre-teen youth to be disturbing.

Two things:

1) The person in that post is from Aussieland where 9-year-old kids do not strip down in front of one another on a regular basis. The only times when they would "strip" would be:

-On camps in their dormitories.
-At swimming lessons.
-When they're sick/spilt something on themselves.

In both cases, most girls that age will hijack a toilet/shower cubicle and change in there for some privacy. In the last case, the sick bay would also give them privacy.
Before you ask "what about PE", public school student uniforms are designed to be worn to PE lessons. Private schools often allow students that age to wear their sports uniform to school on PE lesson days. There is no changing of clothing AT school whatsoever until high school (year 7/8).

2) By the time she would be changing in front of her classmates (Year 8+), many girls would have been introduced to a "sports bra" by that point and would most likely be wearing them for PE lessons. Although having said that, she would likely be able to hijack a shower cubicle and change there.

[Hyena Dandy]

And as for the second part of the post? That someone with underwear they like is more confident and has higher self esteem?

[catcul]

Looks like Oddee.com is getting into the act. Compared to some of the other costumes on the list, it really isn't that offensive.

[Andara Bledin]

I'm not even sure why two of those are even on the list and two more are only there due to unfortunate naming.