Additional Piece: The Ethics of Parenting and Business Ventures
The case of Ruby Tuesday Matthews sparked an ethical debate over the boundaries of parenting and entrepreneurship. Matthews, an Australian influencer and mother of three, received backlash for selling hand-decorated T-shirts made by her five-year-old son, Mars, to her followers. While some supporters defended the move as a valuable lesson in money management for children, many critics condemned Matthews for exploiting her son’s creativity and charging exorbitant prices for basic tees.
The question that arises is where to draw the line between teaching children financial literacy and profiting from their talents or amateur crafts. On one hand, parents like Matthews argue that it is a harmless way to instill entrepreneurial skills and incentivize creativity in young children. Mars reportedly enjoyed designing the shirts and splitting the profits with his mother, who promised to convert the earnings into savings towards his future education or endeavors.
On the other hand, detractors contend that such ventures exploit children’s labor and commodify their innocence for adult consumption. Critics also argue that it undermines the principle of fair pay and devalues professional artists or designers. Moreover, the optics of a wealthy influencer using her son’s shirts to generate revenue during a pandemic-induced economic crisis seem callous and tone-deaf. Inadequate transparency about the sourcing and quality of the shirts also raises ethical concerns.
The issue of how parents balance their personal and professional lives is not new, but the rise of social media platforms and e-commerce channels have made it easier for parents to monetize their parenting experience and their children’s skills or charisma. While some argue that it is a harmless and creative outlet, others warn against the risks of blurring the lines between parenting and performance, as well as the commodification of childhood and privacy.
The debate also touches on broader issues of economic inequality, consumer culture, and social media ethics. As parents navigate the challenging terrain of raising children in a digital age, they must weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of exposing their children and their family life to public scrutiny and commercial exploitation. The challenge is to find a balance between nurturing children’s talents and interests without compromising their values and dignity.
—————————————————-
| Article | Link |
|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
| Sponsored Content | View |
| 90’s Rock Band Review | View |
| Ted Lasso’s MacBook Guide | View |
| Nature’s Secret to More Energy | View |
| Ancient Recipe for Weight Loss | View |
| MacBook Air i3 vs i5 | View |
| You Need a VPN in 2023 – Liberty Shield | View |
Parenthood
June 5, 2023 | 3:57pm
Ruby Tuesday Matthews models a shirt made by her 5-year-old son (left). The blogger mom (pictured right with her family) is being skewered for her decision to sell T-shirts.
Ruby Tuesday Matthews / Instagram
An Australian influencer is gaining heat for selling T-shirts that her five-year-old has garment dyed to fans.
Ruby Tuesday Matthews has amassed a huge following documenting her life as a mom of three living in Byron Bay, New South Wales.
But after recently revealing that she was selling hand-decorated T-shirts from her middle son, Mars, the former model has come under fire.
“Mars has some tees and tank tops that we’re going to sell here,” she said in a recent Instagram Stories post.
“100 (sic) of the profits go to his piggy bank because he doesn’t have a bank account yet.
“He just owes me money for the nut (sic) and shirts LOL, but I’ll let it slide.”
The unexpected business venture quickly caught the attention of the influencer’s watchdog account Dutch mint.
“What do you think of @rubytuesdaymatthews selling $50+ tie-dyed shirts made by her 5 year old?” the registered account.
Responses came thick and fast, with many quick to condemn Tuesday’s lucrative move.
“People are literally struggling to pay for groceries, $50 is a joke,” one person enraged.
“What the hell, when you think it can’t get any worse, IT DOES,” complained another.
Others accused Matthews of taking advantage of his loyal fan base by selling the clothes, believed to be from Kmart, at a premium.
There was also the suggestion that the money in a five-year-old’s piggy bank should come from their parents’ pockets, not from strangers on the Internet.
“Yes, because we will buy T-shirts to finance a children’s piggy bank, we will certainly get our ass. The physical anger reaction I had to that,” one said.
“What happened to a good old fashioned lemonade stand,” added another.
News.com.au has reached out to Matthews for comment.
There were many who supported Matthews, saying it was an important lesson to teach children.
“I’m all for teaching kids how to make money and save. I believe it should be taught from a young age. It makes them appreciate things much better. Money doesn’t grow on trees,” argued one.
“Cute concept, wild price,” someone else claimed.
“If his fans want to pay for something his son has allowed them! He’s laughing all the way to the bank,” added another.
While one person stated, “If people are dumb enough to pay that much, then it’s fine by her.”
The controversy comes just weeks after Matthews was slammed for posting a photo of Mars posing shirtless in hipsters for a fashion campaign.
The image was labeled “exploitative” by angry social media users, later prompting Matthews to respond to her criticisms.
“If you’re sexualizing that image of him, I think you really need to look at the bigger picture of what your problem is and maybe you’ve become so overly sensitive,” she said.
“The lines between what is wrong and what is right are blurred. There is nothing wrong with that image.
She went on to say that while she knows there are dangers to posting baby photos online, she believes she has adequate safety structures in place to protect her little ones.
“I’m very aware that there are predators online who harvest images of children, but I’m much more concerned when my child has a phone than an image like the one put on the internet,” she continued.
“I feel like I’m doing everything I can to protect my children and I don’t think putting an image like that on the internet is endangering him. If I did, I wouldn’t. This is my choice as her mother to make.
Load more…
{{#isDisplay}}
{{/isDisplay}}{{#isAniviewVideo}}
{{/isAniviewVideo}}{{#isSRVideo}}
{{/isSRVideo}}
https://nypost.com/2023/06/05/mom-slammed-for-selling-t-shirts-her-5-year-old-made-to-fund-his-piggy-bank/amp/
—————————————————-