Does anyone else do this? Generic names to licensed toys? - Page 2

[starling&diesel]

Reading with interest ... DD is only 13 months, but I abhor licensed characters being hyper-marketed to children!
DD doesn't watch any television so far, so no problem yet.
Most of our people are on-board with not getting licensed items. One of the grandmas did get her Bert and Ernie shoes, and I just said they were too small and put them in the consignment box.
I *hope* to avoid licensed merchendise ... I don't like children being billboards.

[ASusan]

DH immigrated to the US as a teen, and has pretty much ignored child-associated programming/marketing since then, so his naivete helps us in that regard. DS's stuffed Pooh Bear is "the yellow bear."

[redvlagrl]

Great to hear that I'm not the only crazy one!

We were recently gifted a fantastic trike which also has the parent handle on it. The one problem is that it's a Disney Princess one! Fortunately I was able to remove all of the parts with the actual characters on them (I don't know which one is which anyway, apart from the Little Mermaid), but it still says princess all over it! Oh well. It's also *extremely* pink!

[fustian]

I don't buy licensed merchandise for my daughter, and we don't watch TV. However, it doesn't bother me if she knows the name of licensed characters. Some of them originally came from books, so those she's picked up from there, and some she's picked up from playmates or adults.

I don't understand why knowing the brand name is problematic. If your child knows Thomas as "Robert the blue train" does it really matter? The branding / marketing is to do with the characters themselves - the visuals - not the name at this age. It's hoped that by having your child recognize Thomas or "Robert the blue train" that they'll request items emblazoned with their likeness (or, at this age, that you'll pick out those items for them because you perceive them to be more valuable to your Thomas-lovin' child). I don't think that the name much enters into the equation.

[barefootmama0709]

I haven't taken a stance against licensed characters but I do try to limit them. We don't buy much in the way of character clothing or books based on characters, but Canaan loves both Thomas the Tank Engine and Lightning Mcqueen. We don't watch a ton of TV in our house but I really don't have a major issue with licensed characters, as long as they don't outnumber the non-commercial stuff (not even close right now).

[shanniesue2]

I have only purchased one licensed toy... and it was a Thomas train starter set--I bought it b/c money is tight and Target happened to have this particular set on sale for cheaper than the other generic sets and a train set is what we were getting him for Christmas. DS does know that it's Thomas, b/c my mom has let him watch the show a few times (much to my chagrin). We don't have cable, dish, or even a converter box... so we don't get commercial TV... although we do like movies and we have a few that we will let DS watch.
However, to answer the question: no, I do not make up generic names for licensed characters. Elmo is Elmo. Thomas is Thomas. And Cinderella is Cinderella. I guess I feel like if I insist that Dora is really Maricela, it's just going to create a barrier between DS and other children at some point. Like if DS goes to preschool calling Elmo by some other name... he will get laughed at and the other kids will wonder what planet he's from. However, that doesn't mean that I'm going to go out of my way to teach him who Elmo, Dora, Diego, Spongebob, and Cinderella are. Certainly not. I won't put clothes on him that advertise characters. I won't buy a box of cookies just because it has a picture of Thomas on it. And as a general rule, I don't buy toys that are licensed characters. But he'll still figure out who they are.

I'm not sure if I'm going to express this idea coherently, but I figure that by taking this approach, I'm doing something to teach DS to be a wise consumer. Like on some level I'm demonstrating that we can recognize when something is a marketing ploy...that just b/c we see it on TV does NOT mean that we have to buy it at the store or have it plastered all over everything we own. Does that make sense?

[nolonger]

I'm right with you. I don't have a clue if it's going to do any good or not, but if someone shoves a tickle me(tm) Elmo(tm) doll(tm)in my two year old's face, my reaction would be something along the lines of, "This pillow was made with polyester fur like the kind we saw at JoAnn's the other day and whoever made it must not have known how to put in the right amount of stuffing because it's not as soft as the toys (insert name of your favourite WAHM) makes."

[pinuchkin]

OMG, I have a huge HUGE problem with the Disney princesses and all of the princes/Diva marketing of little girls. Big problem for me, with two very socially involved (@ school) little girls. We call them "fancy dress ladies". DDs (3 & 5) still call them princesses, but I maintain that princesses aren't special unless they're smart too ... *sigh* Back on topic, though, we won't put marketing on their beds or walls (except for the Dora sheets from Gramma before I could censor the package *groan*), but do have quite a few Dora/Little Critter/Diego/Clifford etc. books. Tons of other books too, but DDs do like to have some predictability ... it's the stage of categorization as learning, I guess.

[blessedwithboys]

Originally Posted by _betsy_

The Disney princesses are all called "pretty girls" in our house.

just wondering, but why cant they be "intelligent ladies" or "kind ladies" or "talented ladies"?

[minkleaf]

Originally Posted by crittersmum;15194858

I [U

am[/U] ticked off at her Montessori preschool, though. A few months ago, twice in one week I came to pick up DD and her teacher was reading a Dora book. I said I knew she was really busy, and offered to bring books that were on theme to her classroom, an offer that was enthusiastically accepted. Then, last week, I was there during free reading after lunch and noticed that well over half the books available were Barney or Disney.

Yes, that would bug me too. Not only are they branded, but I am shocked by how bad some of the writing is in the Disney Pooh books we have. As well as a by a Nemo book. But every time I try to return it to the library DD1 begs to keep it.

[SiobhanAoife]

We don't do television, or any branded characters from TV or movies or the like, which is not uncommon where I live (San Francisco). But what I find amusing and a little baffling is the extent to which people make this a Sacred Rule and are then sniffy about how "oh I thought you didn't do CHARACTERS" when my daughter knows character names from BOOKS. I loathe Disney's Pooh, but we read the original books and love Pooh bear from there. I didn't know there WAS a Maisy television show, my daughter knows Maisy from reading Maisy books. I just find it funny that, at least where I live, it seems to have become an orthodoxy. Someone above said that Cinderella was a brand, and that really surprised me. Upon reflection, I understand what the poster meant with regard to Disney branded Cinderella merchandise, but since we never run into that stuff in my life, I was taken aback for a second -- in my life, Cinderella is a fairy tale, one we read in a book!

[MeaganS]

It's been my experience that when a kid is really "into" a particular character and has all the accessories, it's because either the parents or grandparents have been supporting it. They think things like, "let's have a Disney Princess birthday party, dd LOVES Disney Princesses." They make a big deal about it and buy them the stuff, so naturally the kid makes a big deal about it too. Also, sometimes a grandparent will visit twice a year, and during that visit the kid may say they like Elmo. As a result, the grandparent proceeds to send the kid Elmo stuff for the next year, when in reality, it was the kid just liking Elmo that one day. Sure, kids like characters, but for the most part, I think it's the parents who are the driving force. Most really young kids I see would be completely content to play with a normal teddy bear just as much as a Winnie the Pooh.

Also, I hate Dora the Explorer. Bugs me to death. Just thought I'd mention it.

[blizzard_babe]

DS has a Thomas Train (well, I think it's one of the other characters; I'm really not sure) and ADORES it. It has wheels, a face, and magnets. What more could a little boy want ? We're also a TV-free household; he got it from his cousin who is not TV-free and is a HUGE HUGE HUGE Thomas fan.

He knows its name is Thomas because his cousin told him. He has no clue what it means. It might as well be named Frederick Train or Juanita Train or Field General McPoopypants Train. I'm not overly worried about him calling it by its licensed name because... it's just a name to him. Without the TV show context, it doesn't bother me. I guess we could have called it his "blue choo-choo train," but we just never bothered. The actual names don't really bother me because, at least as of right now, they're just random assemblages of syllables to DS. Perhaps once he's older and there's more peer influence, I'll feel differently, but as of right now, a name is just a name, licensed or not.

I'm pretty middle-of-the-road on most everything, though, so take my "meh" answer with a grain of salt .

[moonjunio]

One thing that bugs me is going to borders and seeing brands becoming -categories- for shelving childrens' books. Here's the shape and color books, here's the bedtime books, then it's the Nickeldean shelf, the Disney shelf etc...

Nana bought DD a Dora blanket but I don't think she had any idea who it was. She just liked that it said "Hola" and such. Then she got a couple of those electronic books where the kid ends up pushing buttons instead of so much as opening the cover, because the sound effects are more intriguing than reading.

I have conflicted feelings about gifts from family that I would never have bought for my toddler (things that light up, branding, PVC bath toys)... So far I just shelve the things that I really can't stand, but I'm wondering how to put my foot down because it wastes effort and money for everyone. Maybe take them all to Grandma's house as a "treat?" But doesn't that sort of fetishize the stuff even more?