I may be a prude, but I just think it's wrong!

I was perusing a couple of stitching message boards yesterday.  Lots of folks post pictures of their kids, pets, grandkids - you name it and someone will post a picture of it.  I don't have a problem with that at all (although I, personally, would not post pictures of my children if I had any).

A proud grandma posted some professionally done portraits of her granddaughter at age six months, eleven months, and twelve months.  The little girl was cute.  And in all three of the pictures, she wasn't wearing a shirt.  Although her "nether regions" weren't showing, the posings and props in the pictures made you believe the kid had no clothes on.

Fer cryin' out loud!  I'm not a fan of "nekkid" newborn baby pictures anyway, and this kid was way past newborn age.  I think these pictures were wrong on many levels.  

For starters, this child is a girl.  Girls should not go around topless.  Okay, yeah, she doesn't have breasts that show, but she is still a girl!  It's not cute.  It's indecent.

And while she's "still only a baby," do you really want your child to associate disrobing with getting her picture taken?  Kids pick up on more that most adults realize.

And parents should protect their child's modesty when they are too young to do it for themselves.  This helps them learn modesty.  

Long ago, DH and I were visiting some friends with a very young baby.  We were walking around taking in the sights of a local city when the mother noticed the baby needed her diaper changed.  The father proposed that we sit down on nearby benches to change the diaper.  The mother said, "I'm not changing her diaper there where everyone can see her!"  The father said that the baby was too young to know the difference.  The mother replied with a steely voice, "I will know the difference!"  And she found a secluded place to change her baby.

Call me a prude, but that's the way I see it.

LoneStar