“Sexy” tights for tweens on Amazon.com

Girls Spider Web Sexy Tights Hosiery Leg Wear

I have no problem with the sale of sexy lingerie. It’s, well, sexy.

But it’s a bit jarring to see a product on Amazon called Girls Spider Web Sexy Tights Hosiery Leg Wear from a risque lingerie company called PrettySinful next to the picture of the little girl, above.

One Amazon customer reviewer sums it up nicely:

Are you crazy?
Should ANY product featuring an 11-12 year old girl be named “Sexy”? I think this product is inappropriate.
~Jerry Ozbun

Another reviewer sums it up, not-so-nicely:

Perfect gift for all the slaves you could go visit in Thailand
You guys know about that right? The international and domestic childhood sexual slavery rings? That’s your target demographic, right? Or, do you guys promote a ‘look but don’t touch’ attitude?

Also, I wish I could punch you.

~Dennis J. McAneny

Maybe PrettySinful should stick to products for grownups. Or, at the very least, consider renaming their products for girls.

In the meantime, what action, if any, should Amazon take?

Subscribe to this feed.

. . .

Thanks to Deston Nokes for pointing out a post on this topic in The Consumerist.

Join the discussion 15 Comments

  • This particular product’s name and the accompanying image are both inappropriate. I doubt anyone would argue with that, especially from a parent’s perspective. If I were Amazon, I would pull the item off my site, but I don’t think Amazon can be required to do that.

  • Lissa Boles says:

    From a pure public relations standpoint, can Amazon AFFORD to be seen as profiting from (and tacitly supporting) stuff like this?

    Methinks not and for that reason alone Amazon should pull this tout de suite.

    It’s fast becoming bad business to do ‘bad’ business.

  • As an addition to my previous comment…

    Here’s my tweet response re: “sexy” tights: http://tinyurl.com/6cq5kz

    And here’s my tweet http://tinyurl.com/6lj47u in response to @queenofspain’s tweet on a 5yo girl she saw http://tinyurl.com/5b7gyf

  • Tara Anderson says:

    I’ve been seeing an increase in “sexy” attire for younger girls over the last few years. A recent visit to a Halloween Superstore-type place in the Seattle Metro Area left me shocked and disgusted – almost every “costume” they had for tweens (in this case, ages 6-14) was a miniature version of the “sexy ______” costumes they had for adults. Sexy nurses with short skirts, french maids, so on and so forth.

    Friends of mine with children express disgust at the clothing options they find available in stores, or the clothing that seemingly well-meaning relatives purchase. “I have young daughters, not 18 year-old club girls,” they say.

    Others comment about how children grow up too fast, lose their innocence at a younger age than their parents and grandparents. Perhaps it’s time to stop marketing “sexy” products toward younger children and their parents. Give kids the chance to be kids. Don’t open the door to promiscuity, inappropriate reactions from peers (or adults!), etc.

    While Amazon.com provides a great resource for smaller companies and retailers to make their products available to a larger sector of the public, I think it’s imperative that Amazon review the products they allow to be sold on their site. It’s one thing to market sexy lingerie to someone who is at or beyond the age of consent, which differs by state and by country. It’s another thing entirely to market the same product to kids.

    I feel that it’s entirely inappropriate to have items like this on Amazon’s site. Based on other searches I’ve done (recently, searched for “All-Clad” and got results for adult videos and other similar products rather than my intended cookware), maybe it’s time Amazon and other similar retailers stop marketing inappropriate products to kids and move their adult products to an adults-only section of their site?

    …just a thought.

  • This child is no more than 7 or 8 years old, hardly the 11 or 12 years old as the product specs. would suggest. She has more makeup on than I wear and she is standing in what I feel is a somewhat provocative pose. Why does a child need to be “sexed-up”? What are we as consumers saying to the youth of this country if we not only purchase this completely unecessary product, but support a merchant who markets inappropriate products to children so readily on their web site.

  • Melissa Griswold says:

    Child porn is bad. Sexy tights for little one is good. No wonder we have so many messed up people -both men and women. UGH! We live in such a hypocritical double-sided world and this just continues to prove it. Unfortunately, we say “Boo Amazon” or “Boo manufacturer” but it all boils back down to bad parenting, money, and our sexy celebrity-loving-media. We can’t continue to put band-aids on huge open wounds.

    Never in a million years would my mother allow me to wear something like that.

    Oh and I love Dennis’ response on Amazon.

  • Moon says:

    Amazon should pull this company, no company with a name like Pretty Sinful that sells lingerie should be featuring anyone under 18 on it. It’s pedophilia, it’s inappropriate, and it just plain isn’t somewhere any parent in their right mind should be allowing their own children to model, where are the parents in this situation? I don’t think that girl even looks twelve, maybe more like nine or ten. The scary thing is this, they might be showing that product modeled on a child, and it might seem like marketing it to a child, but it’s adults who have the means to buy this stuff, it’s adults who order this stuff, if the adults ordering it are the parents, what the heck are they thinking? I do have a problem with a company that is clearly meant to sell adult products marketing to children, or posing children in provocative photos, who is buying this stuff from them, the parents? Some weirdo? All that aside, there is way to much pressure on young girls these days to look and dress much older than they are, the styles that are coming out any more are way older looking than they were when I was that age. But is that the fault of the company marketing it, the company manufacturing and pushing it, or the parents who aren’t setting limits and telling these companies enough is enough?

  • IdaRose Sylvester says:

    While I cut advertisers (and consumers who fall for it) much slack for poor taste, promoting sexy for a 11-12 year olds is extremely inappropriate, and reminds me of Jodie Foster in Taxi Driver. Why would someone want their child to look like this? Is it supposedly cute at this age, and offensive only later? I thought we all learned a lesson with JonBenet Ramsey 10 years ago–dressing children up as adults is not appealing.

  • Kathy says:

    (1) I wore fishnet “hosiery” in the 7th grade (age 12). They were cool. I would probably have worn these, because they’re even cooler. [Note: I’m a boomer. I’m old!]

    (2) That said, I think the product positioning is wrong for a couple of reasons. First, as someone else pointed out, the child does not appear to be a “tween” but younger. Second, there’s the issue of a minor finding the tights through a product search and then clicking through to the provider page. Not good.

    (3) As far as the comments about the makeup and modeling, I have one thing to say: JonBenet Ramsey. There are a lot of people in America who are into beauty contests for very young children.

    (4) Amazon has pulled the product:
    Currently unavailable.
    We don’t know when or if this item will be back in stock.

  • A commentor over at my blog noted that although the tights are still for sale, the photo and description are now gone. Thanks!

  • Anonymous Pirate says:

    They have also changed “sexy” to “cute”. I remember reading another article on training bras. WHat exactly are the point to training bras, except to sucker dumbass parents into buying superflous clothing for their kids?

  • Ted says:

    Nothing really wrong with the product itself. Spiderwebs are cool. The marketing however is pretty sick

  • James Riske says:

    Admit it, people. She does look sexy. All you guys are hypocrites and just want to run around trying to stifle and repress everyone’s sexuality. Those tights DO look sexy on her. You sick twisted people are too submissive to society to admit it.

  • James – Wow. Quite a comment. You call a pre-teen girl sexy, then call anyone that thinks this is wrong “twisted?” I wonder what others that read this post will think?

Leave a Reply