J crew ad?

[MrsJackSparrow4Life]

I use to paint my younger brother's nails all the time (there is nothing like having a life size doll to practice on ). He is now an adult male who dates women, fixes cars and loves riding motorcycles.

I don't think the pink nail polish harmed him any but I'll be sure to ask him if he needs me to pay for therapy

 

[kwelch10377]

I see nothing wrong with it and quite honestly, my 2 year old nephew came up to me the last time I saw him with his mom's bottle of purple nail polish and asked me to paint his nails and then 5 minutes later he was sporting his batman outfit and playing with is race cars.

I also don't see how this can tell a boy that it is ok to paint his toes pink since I don't know of any boys that age going around seeking out J Crew ads or even reading anything that would have a J Crew ad in it to even see the ad.

 

[Parkers_girl]

Yikes, what is going on? I don't consider myself stuffy or closed minded but is this really the direction they are going in?

http://www.jcrew.com/womens_feature/Jennaspicks.jsp

Sadly, it's people like you who make it such a big deal for a boy to paint his toenails pink. Who cares?!?!?!?! There are bigger issues in the world than a little boy who wishes to paint his nails. How come nobody gets upset if a little girl plays with trucks or chooses not wear dresses?

You rock on little boy!!

 

[Cinderella94]

 

[appplel]

Yes, I'm conservative (duh!). IMHO (and the O is for opinion - it's mine and you can't change that), nail polish is not for little boys, whether it's pink, blue, red, or green. Now if grows up to be goth or emo and wants to paint his nails himself, that's his business. I'm not bothered with pink for boys - plenty of manly men wear pink polos or pink ties. If his favorite color is pink, buy him a pink shirt.

Thank you!

Can we also remember that this was staged for an ad - not a cute, naturally occurring mommy-son moment?

 

[RitaE]

Thank you!

Can we also remember that this was staged for an ad - not a cute, naturally occurring mommy-son moment?

When you're trying to sell mommy-son clothes, cute mommy-son moments are often staged in the name of advertising.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

Umm.. whatever.

I was expecting half naked girls or something super trashy. I don't care if little boys (or big boys) want their toes painted.

 

[kiddo76]

Thank you!

Can we also remember that this was staged for an ad - not a cute, naturally occurring mommy-son moment?

Maybe this particular photo was staged, but it's not inconceivable that something like this hasn't happened before between this mother and son.

 

[pansmermaidzlagoon]

it is absolutely adorable - staged or not!

there is something wrong with whoever started the stink about it - not with the depiction of this cute mother/son moment!!!!

I don't think J. Crew did it to create a controversy (due to the fact that most people would never see one), but I bet they are thanking the nutters who started the controversy for the free advertising!!!!!

 

[KristaTX]

Umm.. whatever.

I was expecting half naked girls or something super trashy. I don't care if little boys (or big boys) want their toes painted.

ARE YOU SERIOUS? Pink nail polish on a little boy is what all the hubbub is about? I clicked the link before I read any of the posts, and I went through that site for like twenty minutes and couldn't figure out for the life of me what the problem could have been. Then, I read the posts and find out its about mom painting her little boy's toenails pink.

When I clicked the link I thought for sure whatever they had was so outrageous that they had to replace it with the ad that is there now. Until I read through the thread I had no idea the ad I saw was the "offensive" ad.

Me, too. I clicked the link, looked at it for a bit, and decided they must have changed out some "naughty" Abercrombie-style picture for something innocent. Or that people were upset that J. Crew was selling kid clothes .

Then I read what people here on this thread were saying. . .

The photo, to me, is another sign of the same mentality that tells us all men are potential rapists and wife-beaters, the only good man is a gay man, all men want to do is force you have children and kill puppies. Apparently we are supposed to encourage our children to cross those horrible narrow-minded old-fashioned unenlightened oppressive gender stereotypes and turn boys into girls with flatter chests.

Wow . I'm with the others who are trying to figure out if this post is a joke, but I'm thinking not. Is it fun out there on that slippery slope you're on?

 

[Aisling]

Yikes, what is going on? I don't consider myself stuffy or closed minded but is this really the direction they are going in?

http://www.jcrew.com/womens_feature/Jennaspicks.jsp

I agree. It's not the nail color on a boy that bothers me, though...parents and kids do things like that all the time.

I just don't like those kinds of advertising techniques that deliberately create controversy to get their name out there, especially a company like JCrew which I thought was above that.

OR maybe they want to show how 'cool' they are, "see, we Gay-friendly. Look at us. BUY from us!"

To those who say geez it's only a color, no it's not only a color. Anyone who knows a bit about advertising knows there's an ulterior motive by using that color. They just didn't pick it off the shelf blindly.

That said, I won't lose sleep over it!

 

[NHdisneylover]

Thank you!

Can we also remember that this was staged for an ad - not a cute, naturally occurring mommy-son moment?

While THIS photo is a staged ad--it depicts something which DOES occur naturally and is fun and sweet with mothers and their sons (happened with my son--and I bet it might have happened with the mother and boy in the ad before which is why they recreated it for the ad copy).

 

[FireDancer]

OR maybe they want to show how 'cool' they are, "see, we Gay-friendly. Look at us. BUY from us!"

If that is what they were shooting for wouldn't it be BI from us?

 

[kiddo76]

OR maybe they want to show how 'cool' they are, "see, we Gay-friendly. Look at us. BUY from us!"

How is it 'Gay-friendly'? How is about sexuality at all? It's a little boy and his mom hanging out on a weekend morning.

 

[Spoodleink]

I'm not horribly offended by the ad, I'm not going to go out of my way to campaign against it or boycott J. Crew, but if you ask my opinion, that is what I think. I painted my 3 year old DD's toenails and I had someone tell me that I was making her grow up too fast, she was going to turn into a slut, blah blah blah. No, I don't think painting a child's toenails (boy or girl) is going to change their personality one way or another in the long run. But IMHO I see this as the mother (and company) making a statement and it's a statement I don't like.

What is the statement you think they're making? That it's ok or cool for boys to where nail polish, or are you referring to the feminists want people to think all straight men are evil statement you made earlier? What agenda do you think J Crew is pushing? I don't see anything other than look at this cute mother and son wearing J Crew shirts.

Do you take issue with the fact that in the Victorian era toddlers dressed pretty much the same and that most of the clothes were frilly and feminine ?

 

[BeefJerky]

Oh BFD. There is no controversy and really no reason to start one. I was painting my nails and my son saw me doing it and asked if he could paint his own. I said "Ok" and he's fine.

 

[Pakey]

My youngest son (total of 3) turned 30 today.

They all got their nails painted as children. I'm not going to discuss their sexuality because painting their nails had nothing to do with anything other than a mom having fun with her kids.

I think it's a cute ad and see no statement being made.

 

[princesshannahsmom]

How is it 'Gay-friendly'? How is about sexuality at all? It's a little boy and his mom hanging out on a weekend morning.

I was thinking the same thing.

And I still can't figure out why anyone would think that J. Crew did this to create a controversy, because I for one (and I see many others), DO NOT see anything controversial about it.

I honestly DO NOT understand the commotion. It was staged, it wasn't staged, it is a naturally occurring type of event or it isn't, who the HECK cares, because there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with a little boy who has his toenails painted pink....or purple or yellow with green polka dots. IT DOES NOT MATTER, he is a CHILD for pete's sake, NOTHING about painting his toenails ANY color is going to adversely affect this child, either now or in the future, so please help me understand what the problem is.

I don't want to hear that it is "confusing", because that makes no sense to me either. It didn't confuse my brothers as children to have photos of themselves in tutus and makeup, and so far, it hasn't confused my DD (11) by playing with trucks and guns and dressing in camo gear. My brothers know they are men and my DD knows she is a girl. My DD appears to "like" boys (so far!) and my brothers both have female spouses. BUT, you know what, if my DD turned out to be a lesbian and both of my brothers had turned out to be gay, WHO CARES, it wouldn't have a DARN thing to do with dressing up in girls clothes or in DD's case playing with boys toys, it would be WHO they are, and I for one, would love them JUST THE SAME.

 

[BeefJerky]

I was thinking the same thing.

And I still can't figure out why anyone would think that J. Crew did this to create a controversy, because I for one (and I see many others), DO NOT see anything controversial about it.

I honestly DO NOT understand the commotion. It was staged, it wasn't staged, it is a naturally occurring type of event or it isn't, who the HECK cares, because there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with a little boy who has his toenails painted pink....or purple or yellow with green polka dots. IT DOES NOT MATTER, he is a CHILD for pete's sake, NOTHING about painting his toenails ANY color is going to adversely affect this child, either now or in the future, so please help me understand what the problem is.

I don't want to hear that it is "confusing", because that makes no sense to me either. It didn't confuse my brothers as children to have photos of themselves in tutus and makeup, and so far, it hasn't confused my DD (11) by playing with trucks and guns and dressing in camo gear. My brothers know they are men and my DD knows she is a girl. My DD appears to "like" boys (so far!) and my brothers both have female spouses. BUT, you know what, if my DD turned out to be a lesbian and both of my brothers had turned out to be gay, WHO CARES, it wouldn't have a DARN thing to do with dressing up in girls clothes or in DD's case playing with boys toys, it would be WHO they are, and I for one, would love them JUST THE SAME.

I'd actually be kind of jealous if the kid got polka dots. I don't know how to do that!

 

[tomtoot]

I don't have a problem with this either.