Two female UWaterloo profs all upset about ‘sexist’ superhero baby onesies

02 Oct

You can’t make this shit up.


Baby onesies at a Target store that label little boys as future superheroes and little girls as their dating partners has sparked online outrage after two University of Waterloo professors called attention to their message.

Christine Logel, an assistant professor of social psychology, found the pair of onesies at a Waterloo Target while shopping for toys for her two daughters on Sunday.

“Sadly, I was not surprised. I have come across things like this before, but I expected better of Target,” said Logel.

When Logel showed the photo she took to a store manager, she says the manager’s reaction was along the lines of, “Awww, cute.”

Logel posted the photo on her Facebook page, hoping to attract attention to what she felt was a troubling message. A fellow professor, Aimee Morrison, then offered to tweet the photo in order to galvanize her followers, many of whom share an interest in comics and feminism. Morrison is an English language and literature professor.

“It’s the juxtaposition of the two articles that really sort of frames this whole feminist critique that says women are judged powerful by who they date, and men get to be powerful in their own rights,” said Morrison.

“We were kind of appalled to see this message being inscribed literally on the bodies of pretty much indistinguishable infants. They’re chubby, they’re bald, they have giant heads, they drool and they poop in diapers all day. They’re not dating anybody, but these messages are so powerful and they start so young that it seemed really noteworthy.”

Blah blah blah…

I dislike the baby girl one because of the asininity of having an outfit whose message implies that a baby girl is ‘dating’ anyone, plus the promotion of the idea that for women, only men who are ‘heroes’ are worth dating…

I think those are far better reasons to dislike it. But then, I’m not a tenured feminist prof…


33 responses to “Two female UWaterloo profs all upset about ‘sexist’ superhero baby onesies

  1. forgottenpaths

    October 2, 2014 at 8:57 pm

    “…feminist critique that says… men get to be powerful in their own rights”.

    The penis envy is strong in this one. Seriously, feminists must really hate the gender they supposedly “fight for” they are this full of hate for femininity and women. Like I always say, feminists are the real misogynists; they’re the ones who hate femininity… real femininity that is

  2. Will S.

    October 2, 2014 at 8:58 pm


  3. Eric

    October 3, 2014 at 1:32 am

    I have to disagree here Will: “the idea of a baby girl dating anyone, plus the promotion of the idea that for women only heroes are worth dating.”

    If they’re educated from girlhood to see heroes as worth dating, then they’d be less inclined to throw themselves at losers later on, like too many now are doing.

  4. Will S.

    October 3, 2014 at 2:29 am

    I agree with you Eric, in that regard.

    My objection though is to the notion that only the top alpha males, the very highest status ones, are worthwhile, and that lesser but still decent, non-hoodlum types, are unworthy of consideration.

    I’m sure we’re not really in disagreement in this respect.

  5. dcalfine58

    October 3, 2014 at 6:13 am

    “When Logel showed the photo she took to a store manager, she says the manager’s reaction was along the lines of, “Awww, cute.”

    Bahahaha. That’s too good. I always find it funny when normal people can’t comprehend what’s “wrong” with whatever a feminist is cranky about that day.

  6. Kilrud

    October 3, 2014 at 10:16 am

    I am highly offended at these for setting the bar unrealistically high for men. Women merely have to date superheroes, but men have to become them.

    How would they like it if things were switched and the girl’s clothing said “Future Supermodel” and the boy’s said “I only date super models”?

  7. Will S.

    October 3, 2014 at 10:22 am

    That’s exactly what offends me about them, esp. the one for the girls; agree completely!

    If there wasn’t the suggestion of superheroes, what with the Superman logo (did they pay to use it, I wonder? Hmmm…), and just ordinary heroes, I might have less of an issue. But even so; how many men get to be ‘heroes’, versus simply ordinary decent good citizens?

    If it were the other way, with ‘supermodels’ like you suggest, the same feminists would have still criticized them as sexist, of course. 🙂

  8. sfcton

    October 3, 2014 at 10:24 am

    this reminds me of the old internet cartoon of Louise Lane thinking she could do better

  9. Kilrud

    October 3, 2014 at 10:31 am

    I was actually being tongue in cheek, just flipping the script to show offense can be found anywhere if you look for it. I don’t mind the hero stuff if you qualify what are true hero qualities. Elijah from Kings had hero qualities, bad-boys do cheap imitations of some of those qualities.

  10. Will S.

    October 3, 2014 at 10:42 am

    @ sfcton: Not familiar with that.

    @ Kilrud: I know, and I agree that boys should aim for heroic qualities. But even so, not every man gets to be a top-dog alpha type; not every man gets to be an actual hero, say a soldier, or a fireman, or whatever. It’s good to aim high, but not every man can be at the peak, and I’ve long resented the implication that only the men who achieve the highest honours and distinction are worthwhile to date.

    I’ve noticed, in evangelical church culture (during the years I was part of that, and even afterwards in reading some of their books like ‘I Kissed Dating Goodbye’), that they tend to, esp. in their writings, encourage young women to only consider men who are leaders – books like IKDG ask a young woman to consider, “Does he lead a church group?”, for instance. Now, I’ve led church Bible study groups, so I suppose if I were selfish, that wouldn’t bother me. But it does, because not everyone can be a leader; there have to be followers, in order for any one person to be a leader. Does that mean that men who are not leaders are automatically less worthy of consideration for a young woman looking at marital prospects? I think not; I think a man could still lead a wife, if she’s willing to follow him as husband, even if he’s never taken on any official leadership role within the church, or at work, etc. If his other qualities are good, why reject him on that basis?

    So, I have a major beef about this ‘apex’ tendency, being encouraged both by society and, sadly, within church communities, as well.

    That’s my issue. Not with encouraging heroic qualities and noble character, by any means. 🙂

  11. sfcton

    October 3, 2014 at 12:51 pm

    she is sitting on the bed, half dressed, Super Dude is in the bed, naked and sprawled out but somewhat covered by a sheet and she has one of those thinking bubbles over her head that says “I don’t know, I think I can do better”

    Couldn’t find it on the web but its a true enough statement. I was as far up the special food chain the Army has and still not good enough for my ex wife. Nor was I the only guy to experience that

  12. Kilrud

    October 3, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    I think we stand in agreement Will. I may be diluting the title of hero. I definitely don’t see leadership or simply being at the apex of any social group as innately heroic. Instead of power, I tend to see wisdom and courage as defining heroism (I swear I didn’t set out to make a Zelda/trifoce allusion).

    And I guess I’ve veered off topic since those onesies don’t seem to be promoting that sort of heroism. As for feeling offended, we are not of this world, so I don’t worry about it outside of a church or family context.

    That’s great. I bet Batman would be an improvement in her eyes since he’s brooding, mysterious, and a bit of a rogue.

  13. Will S.

    October 3, 2014 at 6:27 pm

    @ sfcton: Ah.:)

    @ Kilrud: Yes, we are indeed in agreement. 🙂

  14. Eric

    October 3, 2014 at 9:54 pm

    LOL—isn’t that typical. And most of the femihags complaining about these clothes would probably be no different: not even Superman would be good enough for them.

  15. Eric

    October 3, 2014 at 10:09 pm

    Will & Kilrud:
    I see where you coming from, but still not sure I agree. Boys today lack heroes to look up to as role models, too.

    If you look at pop culture you see what I mean. Hollywood’s ‘hottest couple’ now has Selena Gomez—about as high-status as they get—paired off with the loathesome Justin Bieber—a creepy Omega of the lowest order.

    “I have a beef with this apex tendency.”

    The problem here is that I don’t really see an apex tendency in our culture. Most professions where men could shine as heroes have been dumbed-down and politically-corrected to the point where there’s not much of an apex left. Soldiers, firefighters, even sports stars are told that women could fill their jobs better than they could; and of course they have to be fag-friendly too. There’s no room for masculinity in our culture.

    • Will S.

      October 3, 2014 at 10:36 pm

      Eric: Indeed, it would be good if there were more heroes today for boys to look up to.

      I guess we just have to raise any sons we have to admire the heroes of yesteryear.

      Yes, there’s much devaluing of masculinity in our culture.

      And yet, when the shit hits the fan, like on 9/11, the first thing they do is turn to the real men for help…

      As for the apex tendency, I think it’s most clearly visible in things like when a girl only will consider dating someone who can afford to buy her expensive shit like Grey Goose.

      The type of mother who would buy the baby onesie shown for her daughter, is probably the type of mother who only dated and married some wealthy guy – that’s the only kind of uncompromised ‘hero’ left in our society, he who makes lots of money… (Which only requires he be masculine insofar as it makes him aggressive enough to go for what he wants, and achieve it.)

  16. Eric

    October 3, 2014 at 10:55 pm

    You’re probably right about that; and it would be difficult to raise sons today. One thing that’s really lacking today are good stories for boys to read about heroic men and how they overcame problems.

  17. Will S.

    October 3, 2014 at 10:58 pm

    Agreed, Eric, which is why we must turn to inspiration from yesteryear, and forget about our current malaise, in seeking such stories to impart to any sons we may have, to accordingly inspire them.

  18. Eric

    October 4, 2014 at 12:23 am

    Looks like baby clothes aren’t the only thing femihags are upset about. Looks like Kilrud was wrong about Batman, here’s he coming under attack:

  19. infowarrior1

    October 4, 2014 at 1:18 am

    @Will S.

    Heroism is so diluted nowadays. Merely helping people is heroic WTF?

  20. sfcton

    October 4, 2014 at 5:45 am

    LOL never thought of that Kil, brooding, “mysterious, and a bit of a rogue”…. and wealthy. Still they’d fine something to bitch about. The whole problem that has no name deal

  21. Will S.

    October 4, 2014 at 8:01 am

    @ Eric: Oh for crying out loud…

    @ infowarrior1: Yes, it is rather diluted, if that’s all people see it as. The notion of self-sacrifice is of course utterly alien to the modern mindset.

  22. Socially Extinct

    October 4, 2014 at 9:55 am

    I’m sure they would have no issue with pajama boy’s onesie…

    • Will S.

      October 4, 2014 at 10:11 am

      Probably not.

  23. sfcton

    October 4, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    had to water down the word heroic so women and betas could be heroes

  24. Will S.

    October 4, 2014 at 12:10 pm

    No doubt.

  25. Mark Citadel

    October 4, 2014 at 4:21 pm

    Feminism is becoming more shrill than ever. Have you watched the speech from billionaire bimbo Emma Watson for the UN? I have written a commentary on just how desperate feminism has become now that it is publicly having to recruit white knights to replenish its ranks.

    Incidents like this just keep the inequality fire burning, but it does seem to be going out. Finally.

  26. Will S.

    October 4, 2014 at 5:52 pm

    I didn’t bother watching it, but I’ve read much commentary about it, including your most recent post.

    Her distortion of the Burke quote is most amusing, and highly revealing.

  27. Phero

    October 4, 2014 at 11:01 pm

    A “pro” is someone who’s getting paid money or does it for work….

  28. Will S.

    October 4, 2014 at 11:19 pm

    Yes; a slang term for a whore…

    Not sure I follow where you’re going with that…

  29. Eric

    October 5, 2014 at 12:19 am

    Yes—it’s seriously diluted. Here in Washington State there are signs along the highway that actually read: ‘Be A Hero’ along with a toll-free number to report people illegally driving in HOV lanes.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s