Yeah, ya see. That's messed up. I have nothing against little girls growing up to be skilled pole dancers, or even having a pole dancing doll...but the way they are advertising it is atrocious! o.o

Yeah, it's the video to suggest dance moves that's REALLY over the top. I'm capitalist, they ought to be allowed to make such crap, but I sure as hell can vote with my dollar and refuse to shop anywhere that carries it.

"I have nothing against little girls growing up to be skilled pole dancers..."

That's the key order that seems to be missing, here. First grow up, then become a pole dancer. I would have thought that was fairly obvious, but we are talking about a society that markets thong underwear and pushup bras to eight year olds.

Tesco today agreed to remove the product from the Toy section of the site, but said it will remain on sale as a Fitness Accessory...

...?! *headdesk*

Hey, nothing is healthier than sliding your loins up and down a pole. You know, nothing like jump rope or soccer....

Hey, at least you'll know that someone in your family is a pedophile if your kid receives one for xmas.

Bright side to everything, eh?

It's not for children, it's clearly marked for adult use only. It was put into the wrong section accidentally. But articles are missing that part out, because it's more interesting to let people assume that this IS something for children.

Why is it talking about "peekaboo dance dollars" then? Most adults aren't particularly enticed by play money.

Not to mention that garter looks a little smaller around than the DVD. Now, maybe it's extremely stretchy, or maybe their marketing the product to girls with thighs as thick around as DVDs, but you know who it would fit perfectly? Children. Preteens, even young teens.

Not only THAT, but I'm fairly sure if you're going to sell adult products on the same site you sell chilcren's toys on, the person you hire to do the site has a clear idea that those kinds of toys have to be behind a different category, with a "must be 18 to enter" page or something. Not an easy mistake to make, and if it was made I'm betting someone lost their job today.

I don't see a picture of the garter so I can't really comment too much on that, but I can say that if it looks small, it's probably elasticated so it can be worn by various sized-people and still be small enough to fit in the packaging.

I dunno, if anything it sounds like some kind of drinking game to me.

Also on sale on the Tesco website is a strip poker game, "Peekaboo Poker" which is illustrated by a picture of a reclining woman in underwear.

The card game is is described as a game that "risks the risque and brings a whole lot of naughtiness to the table.

"Played with a unique pack of Peekaboo Boy and Girl playing cards, the aim of the game is to win as many Peekaboo chips as possible and turn them into outrageously naughty fun."

The Peekaboo brand has strip poker. How many kids do you know that play poker, let alone strip poker? The brand is for adults. I imagine the chips are forfeits and dares, similar to the Dance Dollars from the other set.

To me it really just looks like someone glanced at the product, saw pink and girly, and assumed it was a child's toy when it was sorted into a section. Tesco stores stick to the same sections and catagories in practically every store, so if the main office makes a mistake, it'll be a ripple effect in every single store in the country, as well as the website.

It has been rectified now though, so no problem, right?

With the way it's pitched, with pretend garter and all, I really think the "adult use only" is just the company's little way of covering their ass...

Maybe. But if it is marked for adult use only, and a parent buys this item for their child, who's to blame here?

OMGWTFBBQTOKYO!?!

I might be more willing to believe that it was intended for adults, if the package weren't frighteningly similar to the packaging in most toy departments.

Although I have to admit, I did own a garter when I was ten, but I also owned the whole crinolined dress thing, as well as a hat with an ostritch plume in it.

Yeah, I could believe the whole thing about it being in the wrong section a lot easier if it wasn't so screamingly designed for little girls. Yes, SOME things for Sexy Adult Play are done up in childish pink, but VERY little is. Most is packaged far more obviously Not For Kids.

And why does it have cartoon barbie-doll-style art on it?

I mean, yeah, if you're a full grown woman and you want to learn how to pole dance, good for you. The packaging should be red and black... with a gorgeous brunette in a red bikini on the front...

I am finding this to be very very strange.....it looks like something that you could buy at Spencers gifts, except for the tiny garter. And the "dance dollars". What I want to know is who the hell would buy this for thier kid, as kids usually don't get to buy anything themselves....:(

I suppose some parents are so kowtowed by their kids they'll get it just 'cause it's on the Christmas list or suchlike...

Do I need to tell you what I think about this?

No, between the icon and how well I know you, I think I can pretty much guess...

Okay, you finally have a minor dissenting opinion - although it /is/ minor.

First: Yes, the toy was supposed to be for adult use only, yes, they screwed up putting it in the children's area. But Amber and I saw a 20-something chick the other day whose legs were as narrow as Amber's upper arms were... so the size of the garter has /nothing/ to do with the age range of use. (I could've fit that chick's waist in one of my thighs, too.)

Second: Tesco's a British toy company, as far as I can tell, so it's not marketed this way in the States - or at least, /I/ can't find it anywhere. I can, however, find similar telescoping poles that lack the "Peekaboo" brand, generally sold at adult novelty stores. Which brings me to...

Third: The packaging is so damned typical for adult novelty stores that it rather surprises me that anyone's assuming it's like kid-packaging. I mean, c'mon - I've been to quite a few adult novelty shops, and the cheap-ass stores have all sorts of Barbie-pink vibrators and such with little cheesy flowers on 'em, in 1970's looking packaging that's far worse (and far more kid-like to me) than that packaging.

And finally, fourth: Surprising or not, pole-dancing /is/ becoming an exercise craze right now. They've even had programs on HBO about the fitness values of it (generally late at night, so the guys can point and gawk if a girl ends up arching her back while stretching). It doesn't have to always be sexual, although I'm sure that any guy who's dating someone who 'pole dances for fitness' probably really wants her to use it like that. You aren't always sexing up the pole - in fact, it forces you to do a lot of rather painful stretches that you can't do without something to balance yourself with. Hell, /I've/ considered getting one of those poles, and not because I think I can grow up to be a stripper - it's just far easier than trying to do stretches while holding onto a doorknob or leaning on a wall.


So - there's your two-cent dissenting opinion. And like I said, the dissent here is minor - it's mostly dissent against the comments that were expressed in this post, rather than against the article. I don't agree that it should've shown up in the kids' section... but then again, I'm also the sort of parent who's probably going to buy a good vibrator for the kid so that she doesn't run around as a teenager and find something more pregnantifying (yay, new word!) than a vibrator, too. (Very liberal in my parenting skills, yes I am. Scary, ain't it?)

Would I buy a pole for the kid? Only if she actually /used/ it. Anything to get her away from the freakin' computer for a couple hours and get her to do exercise, lemme tell you! And while I don't at /all/ like the idea of her becoming a stripper, I can always opt not to give her the video with it, and can suggest stretches and 'dance moves' which are far more appropriate. (Besides, any idiot can figure out the sexy moves anyhow.)

(more, in second comment)

(continued from prior comment)


... the whole point of this is simple: anything can be sexualized. To provide a rather potent example, please read the following words and tell me if you see any sexual content there.

Cucumber
Latex
Magnet
Silicon
Hello Kitty
Leather




Okay, you've looked at those. Now, think about it. A cucumber is a veggie. Latex is what they make medical gloves out of. Magnets, while purported to be used for 'magnet therapy', are great for making jewelry with as well. I have a silicon spatula and there's loads of silicon bakeware out there. Hello Kitty is a very popular brand name in Japan. And leather, well, I sell lots of it.

But in the wrong context, cucumbers are food-like dildos, latex is what they make condoms (and some dildos) out of, magnets are sometimes in the tip of vibrators and are used to make magnetic nipple and clit jewelry, silicon is used to make dildos and is in some personal lubricants, Hello Kitty markets vibrators, and... well, you can figure out all the leather stuff for yourself.

It's context, like much of American prudishness is. And quite honestly, if I had a pole like that in the house, the kid probably wouldn't realize that it can be something sexual unless I used it as such in front of her, as most kids don't hear about strippers and their poles until late high school. Hell, tell a kid it's like a fireman's pole, and they'll spend the day trying to climb up it so they can slide back down. (And hopefully you'll have been smart and bolted it in place so that they don't make the 8-foot monstrosity break your furniture and their arms/legs.)

Now, if the company had been /smart/, they wouldn't have put a chick in underwear on the packaging... but alas, they weren't. So that might ruin their court case for 'em, assuming they end up in court over it. :)


End of longwinded commentary. You may now return to your regularly-scheduled post. :)

Thank you, very much seconded.

This whole issue irritates me quite a bit, because it's a typical example of tabloid newspapers picking and choosing what parts of the story they convey in order to give people completely the wrong idea. People start reading the articles and they immediately think that this is a depraved toy created with the sole intention of corrupting children and creating the whores of tomorrow. The important information (such as the fact IT IS NOT FOR CHILDREN) is just lightly touched upon.

And then the fact that since Tesco is a british store, the comments that my country is depraved and disgusting really do offend me. I've seen comments saying 'Oh, well, it's Britain, that's typical'. Oh, really? I'm not saying Britain is perfect, but to completely disrespect us from misinformation on this absolutely ridiculous mistake on Tesco's part is just pathetic. Not accusing anyone here of that, I mean elsewhere.

I've seen comments saying 'Oh, well, it's Britain, that's typical'.

That's weird, I've never come across anything of that sort...

Oh.. I just had to add this in. There's nothing to do with the ad but there's a commercial here in Canada (not sure if it's from United States).

It starts off as this couple after a date, and ended up at the guys place. There was this pole and it's located on an area that looks like a stage. So the girl said something to the effect of "oh, you have a pole, did you want me to dance?" and she started doing some pretty cool pole dancing moves when....





the guys roommate slid down on the pole, fireman style, to come down from the second floor!

I'll try to find the ad, just had to share that for your amusement.

Huai Hsing