Girls risking psychological harm in 'sex sells' society

GIRLS as young as five are growing up at risk of psychological damage from a society that exposes them to clothes, toys and images carrying sexual overtones, a new report has warned.

The study, from the American Psychological Association (APA), said a generation of girls could face problems ranging from depression to eating disorders and unhealthy sexual development because the marketing industry wanted to "sexualise" them at an ever younger age.

It cited the availability of clothes aimed at children, including thongs carrying slogans such as "eye candy", mini-skirts and low-cut tops, as examples of a society that was in danger of turning young girls into sexual objects.

The APA report also looked at toys, music and other media, such as films and magazines. One particular target was the Bratz dolls - which outsell Barbie in the UK - who wear raunchy gear such as hot pants, fishnet stockings and feather boas.

Even the Disney Corporation, which promotes family values, was criticised. The study singled out cartoons including The Little Mermaid and Pocahontas for featuring characters "which have more cleavage, fewer clothes, and are depicted as 'sexier' than those of yesteryear".

Eileen Zurbriggen, one of the APA report's main authors, said: "The consequences of the sexualisation of girls in media today are very real and are likely to be a negative influence on girls' healthy development.

"Girls develop their identities by modelling what they see older girls doing and by imitating the ways in which women are represented in the media."

Other media - including magazines and rap music - are guilty of creating a climate in which teenage girls are encouraged to look sexually attractive to please men, according to the APA. It quotes the title of the Pussycat Dolls' song Don'tcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me? as symptomatic of the problem.

The 72-page study urges parents to encourage their children not to fixate on appearance and to resist pressure to conform to celebrity notions of glamour.

The children's charity NCH Scotland said it would welcome "more support and guidance" for parents and teachers.

A spokesman said: "We are concerned about the highly sexualised environment in which children are growing up today. It is unfortunately now impossible to put the genie entirely back in the bottle, though NCH would support moves to examine the scope for tougher regulation."

Parental pressure in the UK has in the past forced chains to withdraw some children's clothing. Four years ago, BHS withdrew its "Little Miss Naughty" range of knickers and padded bras aimed at younger girls after public criticism.

In 2005, Asda withdrew some lingerie, including a push-up bra aimed at young girls. In 2002, the fashion chain Next withdrew T-shirts for six-year-old girls carrying the slogan "So many boys, so little time" after a similar outcry. However, the issue remains a live one. In May last year, the Tory leader David Cameron launched an attack on high-street stores which sold "harmful and creepy" clothes for children.

UK teenage magazines such as Mizz and Bliss have been criticised in the past for sexual content aimed at teenage readers. However, the industry insisted it was acting responsibly.

Dr Fleur Fisher, from the Teenage Magazine Arbitration Panel, said: "The issue of sexualisation of young girls is a real issue and the magazine editors are aware of it. Their approach is to try and encourage young women to think positively about themselves."

SHORT STEP FROM BABY TO 'SUPER CUTE BABE'

PARENTS shopping on the high street face many examples of clothes which some campaigners say are unacceptably adult in tone.

Boob tubes aimed at children as young as nine are among some of the fashion items on offer from Littlewoods Direct.

Marks & Spencer's Girls' Boutique range - aimed at seven- to 14-year-olds - meanwhile, sells a T-shirt carrying the slogan "Super Cute Babe".

While it may be an innocent slogan for the wearer, the American Psychological Association study suggests some adults with paedophile leanings may take the branding on children's clothes as giving an entirely unintended signal.

Tammy, part of the BHS chain aimed at young teenagers, also offers a "spa boob tube" in colours including "party pink" for 5.

The same chain sells a "baby doll vest" for 6.

BHS has been in trouble before - for selling a range of knickers and padded bras for pre-teen girls under the now-withdrawn Miss Naughty logo.

Matalan, the budget clothing chain, is selling a "halter-neck sequin bodice with bow" aimed at children from seven to 13 years for 6.

While the APA says the sexualisation of girls is taking place at an ever younger age, it points out the trend started to creep into advertising more than two decades ago.

One controversial advertisement in 1981 depicted a girl in jeans, dropping her rag doll by her side with the ambiguous headline "13 going on 18". There was also criticism of a Calvin Klein advertisement in which actress Brooke Shields, then aged 15, was pictured with the slogan "Nothing comes between me and my Calvins".

Psychologists say the trend to emphasise female sexuality has even crept into something as innocuous as Halloween outfits. The study found that boys were targeted with straightforward ghoul outfits, while girls' costumes used names such as "sexy devil" and "bewitched".

'I don't want daughters to look like little tarts'

WHEN I was a little girl I always wanted "little-and-big clothes", and my mum could never understand what that was. I wanted what she was wearing, basically. They didn't make it, and rightly so.

Now they do make little-and-big clothes. I don't want my children wearing black velvet cocktail dresses at Christmas, because they are seven and four, but, sadly, you can buy them. If it's available, kids will buy it, because there are no boundaries any more.

At Christmas time there was a black velvet off-one-shoulder dress for children. There's no way I would ever let them wear that; it's completely inappropriate. But they want it because it's available.

Why do children of seven need things like lacy underwear? About two years ago I was so cross that I wrote to Marks & Spencer because they had a turquoise and brown lace thing that looked like a bra and a pair of matching knickers for five-year-olds. I didn't get a reply but I noticed it went out of the shop - whether that was because it sold out or I was one of many people who complained I don't know.

I don't mind with 12, 13 or 14-year-olds, I have no issue with that and I know kids grow up a lot sooner than I did. When my seven-year-old looks at things, I don't understand why there is a need to sell that.

I can buy the same outfit as my seven-year-old in some shops - there is no difference in the clothes except the size. It's putting profits above morals.

Someone, somewhere, should take a stand on this. I don't buy it, so that's my stand. I actually buy a lot of my kids' clothes online now because I find some children's clothes so grown up.

I want my little girls to look like little girls. I don't want them to look like little tarts. I want them to wear dresses like seven-year-olds should.

• Janet Nicol, 41, has two daughters, Natasha and Gabriella, aged seven and four. She lives in the Morningside area of Edinburgh and runs the MacGregor hairdressing salon.