As I said earlier, I am against censorship. However, that doesn't mean treating 'corporate paedophilia" as just a bit of fun.The pressure on children to adopt sexualised appearance and behaviour at an early age is greatly increased by the combination of the direct sexualisation of children with the increasingly sexualised representations of teenagers and adults in advertising and popular culture. Young children today, particularly girls, face sexual pressure unlike that faced by any of us in our childhood. This harms children in a variety of ways.
Constant exposure to the ideal ‘slim, toned’ body type that is considered sexy for adults to the development of eating disorders in older children and teenagers. Children in the UK are developing eating disorders at a younger younger age. Such disorders however ‘mild’ can have significant effects on a child’s physical health.
Surrounded by images such as the advert and the Britney video in question, children are under greater and greater pressure to initiate sexual behaviour at far too young an age, when they don't have full knowledge of the potential consequences. The UK has the highest incidence of teenage preganacies and STD's in Europe.
Because sex is widely represented in advertising and marketing as something that fascinates and delights adults, it could be argued that such sexualisation of children could play a role in ‘grooming’ children for paedophiles. Those who sexually abuse children remain wholly responsible for their abhorrent actions. But there is a risk that publicly displaying sexualised images of children undermines the existing social prohibition against seeing children as sexually interesting.
Sorry to sound like a pompous and didactic arse but what appears to be just a bit of harmless titillation actually has far reaching consequences. I don't have a daughter but if I did I would be extremely worried about this increasing trend. It is not something that any of us should be condoning.
Cheers.
