A girl's Halloween costume sold online has been called out for "sexualizing" young children after a disturbing difference between the girl's and boy's outfits was noticed.
One Reddit user took to the platform to share comparisons of both children's costumes she had found online, highlighting the difference between how exposed and dressed up the girl was in hers compared to the boy.
Admitting she was "raging" at what she had found, the Reddit user said the girl's outfit was "sexualized" compared to the boy's version of the same outfit.
In the screenshot posted by user u/SpacedOutTrashPanda, a series of children's Halloween costumes can be seen.
Focusing on the bat costumes for boys and girls, the boy’s costume is covering his whole body, the batwing cape reaching all the way to the child’s knees. The cape also features a furry hood with ears and fluffy mittens too.
The boy wears black leggings and shoes as well, fully covered from head-to-toe.
Meanwhile, the girl's version shows the child wearing a batwing cape that barely touches her thighs, leaving her with legs that are wearing ripped, bandage-looking tights and boots.
The girl also wears a hood but has what appear to be red hair extensions or an accessory in, and red lipstick on.
Sharing her findings online, the Reddit user wrote: "Looking for a costume for my girl (she wants to be a bat) why is the little girls costume sexualized? Why is she wearing makeup? Why isn’t the girls costume warm and practical like the boys? They are CHILDREN."
The post has since racked up hundreds of comments within hours being posted, with other Reddit users rushing to comments on the difference.
One said: "It’s so ridiculous. She wants to be a BAT. It should look like a BAT. Not adult woman’s fashion wear inspired by a bat."
Another wrote: "Child: wants to be a bat This company: Oho, not so fast, little girl. How about a sexy bat?"
While a third aded: "And you can notice that her costume is shorter than the boy’s. His goes down way lower than his waist which is a creepy detail to include for young children."
Many pointed out the irony that, for less material, the girl's outfit was probably more expensive too.
