Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Buy My Baby

Posted by Rachel Neumann at 1:01 PM on June 23, 2006.


Selling your fourteen-month-old for fun and profit.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get The Mix in your
mailbox!

 

Just the other day, I was naive enough to worry about blatant advertising for make-up in young adult novels, but that was before a friend told me aboutBuyJake.com. For ten thousand dollars, you can get your company's name tattoed on the toddler's forehead for a month. For a year, the cost is a hundred thousand dollars. Questions? Talk to his publicist.

The woman who made $4,000 by advertising space on her belly on Ebay is one thing. It's cringe-inducing, but it's her body and if she want to sell it I suppose she can. In fact, it's she's become part of a trend with a number of bellies available on Ebay. A woman in New Zealand is even starting a business called Bump It Up that specifically connects advertisers with pregnant women who need money and would be willing to sell their belly space.

But selling your children's bodies, even your children's forehead, is another thing altogether. Even if there's still quite a bit of debate about when personhood begins, almost everyone agrees that once a baby is out and toddling around it is most definitely it's own person. A person with a rapidly growing brain who doesn't need the words "Golden Casino" tattoed on his forehead, even if it's only temporary.

The money for all this advertising goes into a savings account for Jake for when he's bigger. In fact, as the parents write, via Jake's voice, on his "blog": "My Mom does not need and is not going to use a dime of my money." But the problem with it isn't the money involved, it's the impmrinting to that young child that everything, even you, are for sale.

Digg!

Rachel Neumann is Rights & Liberties Editor at AlterNet.


On the religious right 'nuts,' liberals, and catching a break
A response to a colleague...
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 17, 2006.
Bush thinking of 'replacing' Iraqi government? [VIDEO]
A whole new definition of Democracy.
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 16, 2006.
Religious right rally's first gaffe
Church opposes bigoted agenda
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 16, 2006.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Renting Children's Skin = Child Abuse
Posted by: kenadrian on Jun 23, 2006 2:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Renting a child's skin to advertise and make money is, in my books, immoral. It fails to respect a basic idea that children are not our "property". Kahlil Gibran wrote the poem On Children, in part, to reflect this idea.

I personally would consider it a form of child abuse. I know that might sound extreme but I think that it's essentially a form of "forced labour" even if the child doesn't have to exert any physical effort beyond tolerating stares from passers-by.

A child does not have the capacity to even consent to the deal... and that, in my books, makes it wrong, wrong, wrong.

I also think that it's undignified, thoughtless and disrespectful. Of course, that's just one opinion. I'm sure there are people who will argue that poor people should have the right to make money even if it's on the backs (or in this case skins) of their children. There are other ways to make money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Baby may be better off with the tattoo on account of finances
Posted by: aouie01 on Jun 23, 2006 4:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Presuming that the funds will be used directly for the baby, and that the parents are badly broke, the sad truth is the baby may be better off with the tattoo on the forehead and $10K or more spending money. Ideally, we wouldn't allow such advertisements for the greater good. But, the parents are probably just concerned about the baby (or maybe themselves) and the corposrations or individuals who utilize the forehead for advertising for profit are probably just concerned about profits.
Try to make a distinction between the bad that such advertising represents for society as a whole, and the mixed bag of good and bad for the baby.
Sincerely,
Aouie

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Parasites
Posted by: Pat Kittle on Jun 24, 2006 11:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If parents are that unprepared for breeding, they have no business breeding in the first place!

Aside from that, it seems there are no depths to which the advertising industry will not descend -- and the parasites keep finding fools that respond favorably to their depravity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Baby Jake
Posted by: tmack on Jun 25, 2006 2:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I went to the site and found nothing wrong with it. In fact, I think the idea is pretty cool. Also, it doesn't say where the tattoo could be placed, but it is temporary and my kids have put on Spiderman tattoos that come off in the bath. It looks like most of the advertising is on the clothing, which we all do for free every day. The mom said she does not need the money, and it is all going into Baby Jake's account. So, what is the big deal people? So what if he wears a Pampers logo on his arm and a shirt advertising for them. What's the harm? And, why would he need some "counseling" after doing this. GET REAL!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gorgeous Baby!
Posted by: Mdew on Jun 25, 2006 2:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He is really adorable! It is a controvsial subject, that is for sure, but I don't see any problem with it. We do this every day if you think about it. You have to hand it to the Mom, because it is a great idea! She made it very clear that the money is for Jake and she is doing this for his college, etc. So, before you jump on her case, maybe you should read the entire site and the blog! I hope to see you as the next "Gerber Baby!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

buyjake.com
Posted by: LaVerne R. on Jun 25, 2006 2:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I visited the site and thought Baby Jake was just the cutest little guy! I think it is a creative idea and wish I would have thought of it myself. There is no harm in dressing your baby in a cute outfit that has been approved by the mother! He could care less as to what he is wearing. Let's give the little guy and his mom a break. It is no different than putting your kids in modeling or on a commercial. Maybe we will see him in the movies someday and we can say we heard of him when he was just starting out. I say, more power to you Jake!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: buyjake.com Posted by: Pat Kittle
When I tell friends "Everything is for sale" I can now mention Buy Jake as an example.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jun 26, 2006 7:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is true that this generation has grown accustomed to having some fashion factory's name embroidered in huge letters across their chest or back. I admit I wore my high school sweater with pride, because I belonged. But...

What's the status in being a signboard for some corporation? Who wants to belong to "Tommy" or "Fubol"? Is it that we are so lacking in identity that we want to be a TM or R? Why not just embroider the price of the garment on it?

How can being a sandwich board be high status? I consider fashion to be somewhere down near cigarette brands and spiked hair. I thought only the Japanese would do anything for money.

Those comments above that love the idea of tatooing their baby help me to understand why I feel so alienated. We are now all just "things" for sale to the highest bidder. Next thing you know we will be selling our babies' organs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]