New Here?

▼

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Ooh baby.

Today at the supermarket there was a woman ahead of me in line with a baby girl who looked about nine months or a year old. The kid was cute as a bunny, but something about her face seemed very strange. Her eyes and lips seemed too big and well-defined, her skin oddly colored. It took me a moment to realize what was going on.

The baby was wearing makeup.
at

19 comments:

  1. Kimberly WrightJune 7, 2009 at 9:20 PM

    omg...that is shittay

    ReplyDelete
  2. LabRatJune 7, 2009 at 11:28 PM

    Congratulations on your self-control. I'm pretty sure I would have screamed. *sob*

    ReplyDelete
  3. StanJune 7, 2009 at 11:36 PM

    Whisky Tango Foxtrot, over?

    ReplyDelete
  4. VeliciaJune 8, 2009 at 12:51 AM

    ...Wha?

    Jesus people, babies are already cute, they don't need help!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Christina RN LMTJune 8, 2009 at 2:07 AM

    Mommy obviously has issues. Serious issues!

    ReplyDelete
  6. StringsJune 8, 2009 at 3:54 AM

    Electricfunk already said all that needs BE said...

    I'm sorry, but I would've asked her what her malfunction was...

    ReplyDelete
  7. UnknownJune 8, 2009 at 7:01 AM

    *head desk*

    *repeat*

    Nope didn't help... have to echo Electricfunk's comment.... Whisky Tango Foxtrot.

    ReplyDelete
  8. TamJune 8, 2009 at 10:30 AM

    Her ears were pierced too, I presume?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Cliff PervocracyJune 8, 2009 at 10:45 AM

    Christina LMT - I wonder, when do you stop? You have to stop at some point. I mean, you can't send the poor girl to kindergarten in lipstick and eyeliner... can you?

    Tam - Of course! She was dressed in one of those disturbing mini-adult Designer Baby outfits, too.

    ReplyDelete
  10. AnonymousJune 8, 2009 at 7:37 PM

    Oh, my God. That's depraved.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Not MeJune 8, 2009 at 8:49 PM

    Ignoring the fact that most people would think that it looks ridiculous, what exactly *is* wrong in making a baby look like a mini-adult? It's not like they get to choose what they wear anyway. Any logical argument I can think of would also be an argument against humans wearing clothes, period.

    (Just playing devil's advocate.)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Cliff PervocracyJune 8, 2009 at 10:23 PM

    Not Me - The problem is:

    a) Makeup is sexualizing. "Come and get me, boy babies!" is the message. And that's weird.

    b) She's already a baby, she's already cute as heck, how can you see that widdle face and think "hmm, needs a little help"?

    c) In the least creepy scenario, Mom is merely using her as a human dress-up doll and taking it a bit far. And that's still fairly creepy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. majaJune 9, 2009 at 9:49 AM

    There are two things I find very wrong with this:

    (1) I am always disturbed by the sexualization of children. It freaks me out to see 9 year olds wearing clothes that on an adult would be very slutty, on kids it just creeps me out

    (2) Teaching our kids, and esecially our girls, that they aren't pretty enough without the help of make-up, and that it MATTERS oh so much that they BE pretty, is so very wrong. I have a very serious issue with teaching girls that their only real value is in how they look, and for me, that's what this does. It sends that poor little girl the message, that even at the age of one, she just wasn't cute enough, she HAD to be dolled up. Because gods forbid the girl not be pretty enough. ugh.

    I'm not sure I could have held back if I saw that. "What's *wrong* with you?!" would have been the first words out of my mouth, I dare say.

    ReplyDelete
  14. EvanJune 13, 2009 at 1:50 AM

    May I interrupt this fascinating discussion the mom's shortcomings as a human being to suggest the possibility that she might not be an idiot? Moms, in my experience, have quite enough to deal with just keeping a baby's tummy full and diapers dry, and wouldn't in a million years bother with putting makeup on a squirmy worm unless there was a very good reason, such as a commercial photo shoot.

    That, however, is not my theory in this case. My theory is that the baby has an older sister.

    ReplyDelete
  15. StringsJune 13, 2009 at 1:53 AM

    That could well be, Evan. MY biggest question, at this point, is how did someone manage to GET a baby's makeup done? I mean, without the use of horse tranquilizers?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Cliff PervocracyJune 13, 2009 at 2:07 AM

    Evan - I think you need to ask yourself, what did this anonymous supermarket mom ever do for you?

    This baby was definitely not coming back from a commercial photo shoot. Older sister isn't impossible, but she wasn't at the store and she sure didn't pierce the baby's ears or buy her the Mini-Me outfit.

    I think you have to at least leave your mind open to the possibility of truly dedicated idiocy.

    ReplyDelete
  17. owenJune 13, 2009 at 9:08 PM

    do not want

    ReplyDelete
  18. joanandthejetsJuly 27, 2009 at 11:20 PM

    is ear piercing babies really that bad? my parents had mine pierced when i was six months old. I've heard people freak out over babies with the piercing but i don't understand why, the kid doesn't know whats happening, its not super permanent(the holes might last but you don't have to wear earrings)

    ReplyDelete
  19. AnonymousAugust 1, 2011 at 5:04 PM

    Ear piercing is wrong because babies can't consent to something that permenantly alters their bodies. It's not necessary in any case, so there's really no excuse.

    -allein

    ReplyDelete