Of course you'll read it--it practically a shopping list of NYC's "flippant," "hipster" baby stores--but Daisy Carrington's NY Observer article about the wrongness of dressing your city kid in shirts with political, punk, and or hipster-related outfits gets a lot wrong itself.
She's starts out fine: Che Guevara onesies DO have basically zero political content now; they're just a standardized icon of rebellion. [Which isn't to say the kid didn't have one; of course she did.] But there's a world of difference between projecting "cool" onto your kid [e.g., Sonic Youth or Sid Vicious] and projecting "political" on them [e.g., "George Bush poopyhead"].
But what's this crap? "What kind of unresolved adolescent anger are New York parents trying to express by plastering images of angry rockers and political revolutionaries on their tots? Could it maybe be anger at the pressure to acquire a baby, now, as if it were the latest Marc Jacobs handbagócramming it into your closet of an unaffordable one-bedroom?" Does seeing a kid in a Ramones bodysuit really provoke randoms to such paroxysms of over-analysis?
On the bright side, a shopper in the Jacadi on Madison Avenue actually told a reporter, ìThat would not be my cup of tea.î [She was from New Jersey.] Rather than take cheap potshots at Billyburg hipsters, I'd like to see the Observer do a takedown of the parents who go all out with the "classic" thing, all flannel pants and cashmere. Maybe we can call them Cookie-cutter kids.
Red Diapers, Platinum Umbilical [observer, expiring link]
previously: Che Onesies [sic] and punk baby clothes
get your own Che gear at appaman
first of all, the writer said "that" when she meant "who." this allows me to dismiss everything she says. furthermore, stephanie dolgoff is an awesome, funny person and should not have been mocked. in addition, i wrote this piece better six months ago. (http://www.forward.com/main/article.php?ref=ingall200505181048, registration tragically required, sorry, not my choice, use bugmenot). finally, the line you quoted, greg, in which she hypothesizes that hipster Onesies are a manifestation of adult resentment about the pressure to breed, is demonstrably nutball-lunatic insane.
I have to say I am getting a bit sick of this trend as well. I mean I'm not advocating going back to all bunnies and ducks or some such but I am advocating not blindly sticking kids in punk rock and or politcal gear you don't understand and likely wouldn't wear yourself. I'm all for putting your kid in a Romones t-shirt if you are actually a fan of the Ramons. Ditto ACDC, The Clash etc.. But if you wouldn't wear one your kid shouldn't either. I mean I already bought a tiny Wilco t-shirt for my future child and he/she isn't even concieved yet so I can't get all high and mighty on anyone here. But the first time I encountered one of those CBGB onesies on a little one I commented to the mom how cute it was and said I would have to get one for my kid some day becuase my husband and I went to CBGBs on our first date (Give me a break we were 18) she had no idea what or where CBGBs was -- we were in Los Angeles but that is no excuse. And don't even get me started on Che Guevara onesies. 30 dollars for a probably sweat shop made onesie with the face of a Marxist Socialist revolutionary on it. Enough already.
I agree that the hipster thing may be a bit much, but who's to say that we aren't projecting our "taste" on our baby's fashions by choosing bunnies, sports, earth-tones, or CBGB's outfits?
I do, however, like that onesie(C) that says "My IQ is higher than the President" only because, well, it's true. ;-)
Read the response "poopyhead president" James Frost, aka babywit t-shirt maker has to say about the article and making his kid into a bilboard...
http://babywit.com/blog/blogger.htm
Go to Wal-Mart or Target and be done with it....It's such a waste of money in my mind. Now putting my son in a t-shirt with my website logo on it, that's something special!!!!
A dad wearing a website logo-related t-shirt, though, it don't get any better than THAT...