This post is part of the corrupted archives restoration and includes the old comments as text at the bottom of the post. Sorry if this is confusing.

What’s that? You’re still using Johnson and Johnson products on your baby? You must really suck or something. I don’t think we can be friends anymore.

After reading a recent article in the Washington Post I’ve seen the error of my ways and will never put such banal products in shower baskets for my new-mommy friends ever again.

“Going Goo-Ga for Kiddie Chic: The New Baby Brand Names: Bulgari, Burberry, Bobbi Brown” explains the rapidly expanding market in chic skincare products for infants.

I think this was my favorite part:

Burberry released its Baby Touch perfume, costing $24 to $38, this year, part of a full baby line, said a New York-based spokeswoman. The company declined to comment on sales projections, but industry sources have forecast $9 million to $17 million in worldwide sales for the first year.
Another firm, Swiss-based Laboratoires Valmont, plans to introduce its four-year-old baby line, Soin de Fee, in the United States next month. The five-item line, which includes $30 Anti Stress Serum and $43 Baby Cream, will be sold in a limited number of spas and salons, said spokeswoman Charlotte Coutrot.

Anti-stress serum? What in the hell does a baby need a 30 dollar anti-stress serum for? I thought we had that covered. I was operating under the silly impression that mushy food, clean diapers, and the act of bobbing around the house making idiotic cooing sounds while contorting your face into equally idiotic expressions were the primary ingerdients in the anti-stress arsenal for your average baby. Clearly, I was mistaken. For starters, I forgot that the babies of the wealthy and foolish are never, ever average.

(newsflash: no matter how well-off you are, your baby still looks like Winston Churchill. Deal with it)

And what need, may I ask, does a baby have for 38 dollars/ounce baby perfume? Babies are supposed to smell like babies, are they not? I guess when you forgo the usual baby-type products for lilac-scented wrinkle creams (hint: babies are naturally wrinkly, they grow out of it) you have to buy special baby-scent so your baby will smell like a baby?

I could take this to it’s logical conclusion by asking if Calvin Klein is working on a special fragrance line called “oatmeal” or “poopy diaper” but I’ll show some self-restraint.

Incidentally, I’ve seen several of these 300 dollar Kate Spade baby bags. (matching stroller only $350 more).After a few weeks they look just as ratty as the 20 dollar ones from Target. It’s probably wrong of me to be amused by this, but it’s probably also wrong to use your child as a fashion accessory. But there again, what do I know?

Posted by skarlet at October 7, 2002 06:00 PM | TrackBack
Comments
I take issue only with the thought that a newborn resembles Winston; I’ve never seen a baby with a cigar.

Posted by: Linkmeister at October 7, 2002 07:24 PM
Sent the link on to Max’s parents. ;)

Posted by: Faith at October 7, 2002 10:45 PM
My son’s feet stink. I just always spray a bit of Acqua Di Gio on them before we head out.

I’m kidding.

Posted by: melly at October 7, 2002 10:58 PM
my son’s feet have smelled really bad since he was just a tiny guy. my daughter was forever sniffing his toesies and saying, they smell like vinegar!

and they did. and that’s ok.

i kinda feel sorry for the designer babies.

Posted by: kd at October 7, 2002 11:32 PM
According to my father, I looked like Edward G. Robinson, not Winston Churchill, when I popped outta the womb. Gee. Thanks, Dad. :P

And what? I still use Johnson and Johnson products for ME. Baby shampoo is the BEST for getting your eye makeup off — washes it all off, and…’no more tears’! Yay!

Maybe the anti-stress serum is actually for them moms? Eek.

Posted by: Jen at October 8, 2002 11:14 AM
Well then Faith you did this to yourself. *giggle* No more quick and cheap baby gifts from Old Navy, you’re going to have to hit the Burberry counter from now on. Don’t come complaining to me! ;)

Posted by: skarlet at October 8, 2002 11:32 AM
$300 baby bags?
Damn. I’m not going to be able to wrap my brain around this concept…
But that was a great article. I can’t wait to see how many of these products they’re still selling in a year…

Posted by: batgrl at October 8, 2002 01:41 PM
$300 baby bags?
Damn. I’m not going to be able to wrap my brain around this concept…
But that was a great article. I can’t wait to see how many of these products they’re still selling in a year…

Posted by: batgrl at October 8, 2002 01:41 PM
Oops…

Posted by: batgrl at October 8, 2002 01:42 PM
I admit that I wouldn’t buy a $300 baby bag. But my sister has two Kate Spade ones and has been making noises about the Burberry one for the past two years.

Of course, she gets all her KS at a deep discount (75% off), so there’s no money thing there. She is a bit of a label whore, though.

The perfume is just as sad as the pet perfume. Some things just don’t go together. I still haven’t read that article, btw, but I did set it aside to send to my sister last week. ggl.

Posted by: bunny at October 9, 2002 06:23 AM
Hello Bunny. And how does your sister get 75% off KS goods? Hmmmm? Sweetie? Darling? Hannukah is approaching and I’m nearly hysterical coming up with an appropriate mother-in-law gift. The DVD sets of the Sopranos are just not coming out fast enough, damnit.

Posted by: skarlet at October 9, 2002 12:41 PM
Bunny’ darling, pet perfume can be a very good thing. Especially when your dog’s new nickname has become Stink Bomb.

Posted by: Faith at October 9, 2002 08:35 PM

Please clap.
onpost_follow

Comments are closed.

Post Navigation