Comments on: Three Unusual Baby and Toddler Products, Vol. 9

By: Denae

Denae — Fri, 23 May 2008 05:17:53 +0000

When I see that bear all I can think of is a real bear dead and skinned. It freaks me out. Bears can't take off their fur!!

As fo the pink legos. I never would have played with them as a child. I was a very rough and tumble little girl. I probably would have melted them.

By: AJ

AJ — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:44:39 +0000

You'd have to provide a more detailed example. Can a poor child still be lavished with products or have parents who wait on him hand and foot or eat at a restaurant every night for dinner (child's choice of course)? Yes.

The definition of "impoverished" is difficult to tack down because it's a much broader issue than just your salary and number of dependents. There are certainly people who earn less per year than me who have a higher standard of living because of their purchasing choices... buying goods and services that make their immediate circumstances better while I'm saving money every month, contributing to a 529 college savings plan, putting funds into an IRA, etc.

Also, note that I wrote, "parents who wait on him hand and foot..." So I suggest that being "spoiled" isn't exclusively about possessions, but also how a child is treated. Do parents exist to serve their children, or do the children have a responsibility to contribute to the healthy functioning of a family?

By: Carrie

Carrie — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:29:02 +0000

Interesting perspective. Do you think it’s impossible for an impoverished child to be spoiled?

By: AJ

AJ — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:40:06 +0000

I didn’t say the rich have a monopoly on spoiling children. A chandelier is an excess, whether it’s a $20 version or a $2,000 one. I do stand by the idea that children are spoiled by products.

In fact, I think that would almost be my definition of a spoiled child… one who receives “too many” possessions, trips, catered meals (or trips to Burger King), or other nice things. The meaning then is in relation to the speaker’s personal concept of what constitutes “too many” or “too much” of a good thing.

By: Carrie

Carrie — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:23:45 +0000

"I wondered, on a practical level, what type of product best represents a spoiled child?"

I don't think children get spoiled by products. Certainly, the $47,000 bed is ridiculous (and the train chandelier hideous), but to suggest that the rich have a monopoly on spoiling children is silly.

By: Chief Family Officer

Chief Family Officer — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:06:18 +0000

I’m okay with the pink Lego bucket – some girls really like pink, after all. But that bear … weird.

By: Christina

Christina — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:47:30 +0000

It’s like the pink doctors’ kits and pink pop push toys (I don’t know their names). What, the white and blue was too boyish? Ugh.

By: K

Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:32:05 +0000

I’ve got no problems with the pink lego blocks. I could even see some ending up in our lego stash. My 3 year old son likes pink and purple and building houses, so he’d like them. In fact he’s in my lap and keeps pointing at the lego box saying he wants some like that.

By: Becki

Becki — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:16:52 +0000

I love the..erm… bare bear! Too cute! Do they sell new suits, for when the first one is off and soon lost?

By: K G S

K G S — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 18:40:17 +0000

To me, the fur-stripping bear is bizarre and hilarious– I’d buy this (if it weren’t $80, that is). I’d have thought this would appeal to a family that decorates onsies with bloodstains…

I guess the pink and flowery lego sets might appeal to some pink-obsessed kids. I also remember reading somewhere about a company that made pink laptop-looking devices for playing games marketed to young girls; their market research suggested the pink color discouraged girls’ school-age brothers from appropriating the toys. Apparently if you have issues with toy sharing (and your boys have been completely anti-pink-socialized by their peers at school), pink can be strategic.