Tesco has been forced to remove a pole-dancing kit from the toys and games section of its website after it was accused of "destroying children's innocence". Be sure to catch the photo of the shell-shocked family who happened on the kit.
Dr Adrian Rogers, of family campaigning group Family Focus said yesterday that the kit would "destroy children's lives".
He said: "Tesco is Britain's number one chain, this is extremely dangerous. It is an open invitation to turn the youngest children on to sexual behaviour.
"This will be sold to four, five and six-year olds. This is a most dangerous toy that will contribute towards destroying children's innocence."
He added: "Children are being encouraged to dance round a pole which is interpreted in the adult world as a phallic symbol.
"It ought to be stopped, it really requires the intervention of members of Parliament. This should only be available to the most depraved people who want to corrupt their children."
Reader comments:
Adam says:
I particularly liked the comment from "Family Focus" spokesman Adrian Rogers about "Children are being encouraged to dance round a pole which is interpreted in the adult world as a phallic symbol. It ought to be stopped". I wonder if he is so adamant about insisting that Children shouldn't be allowed to dance around the equally phallic Maypole?
Alazka says:
Being an elementary teacher, I was pretty prepared to get uppity about the poledancing kit y'all just boinged…but on a deeper reading I found that, in the "panic the populace first, ask questions later" style typical of Brit journalism, the article completely overlooked the fact that the kit was in no way marketed toward children. The other allegations they make (like the push-up bra for nine year-old girls) are creepy (and unsubstantiated; there may well be very petite women out there with every right and reason to buy a push-up bra), but Walmart's been selling faux-whore couture for very young girls for years (while removing products like the girl's t-shirt saying "someday I'll be president" as "not family-friendly") and somehow America's evangelical overlords seem to think it's cute.
The essential problem seems to be a category error…the outraged parents automatically categorize all toys & games as "for children," and so assumed a clearly adult toy was "going to be sold to four, five and six year-olds." And who, one might ask, is going to buy it for them? Is someone giving a toddler a credit card and teaching her to shop online?
For the retailer's part, obviously they need an "adult toys and games" category. But mainly I think it's the "journalists" who need to grow up.
Alexander says:
A couple things come to mind. The first is that 4, 5, and 6-year-olds don't buy things. They have things bought for them by older people who can make informed choices about the appropriateness of products.
The second is that (as far as my understanding goes) strippers' poles were invented for the pragmatic purpose of giving the dancers something to hold on to to precent them from bein pulled off the stage by over-eager customers. Phallic associations are a secondary artifact.
Andrew says:
A quick Google search for "peekaboo pole" led me to their official website.
I thought someone ought to clarify that this product is NOT aimed for children. Rather, their products seem to be aimed at adults; "With your own dance pole the possibilities are endless!! You can boogie on down in the living room, spice things up in the bedroom or even liven up a friend's party!!" A customer's comment reads, "The most fun I have ever had at a Bachelorette Party, thanks to the Peekaboo Pole!"
I think this was merely a case of an extreme mistake in stocking, which the press turned into a sensationalized "Society is sexualizing our youngsters!" story. Of course the kit would be harmful for children, but that's not who the product is intended for.
"This will be sold to four, five and six-year olds. This is a most dangerous toy that will contribute towards destroying children's innocence."
I think this is a terrible overreaction on the doctor's part. If a book on drinking games was accidentally shelved in the children's section of a bookstore, would this doctor say the same thing? That this "children's book"–although it is NOT a book for children, merely a book placed among children's books–will be sold to "four, five, and six-year olds" and "destroy children's lives?" No. It was an error. The Peekaboo Pole is not a "toy". It was placed among toys. It was created with the idea in mind that it would be used by children.
Sensationalizing at its best.
