Even if it is a male buying the products, the girl must...
The hypersexualization of little girls is a step backwards for feminism.
I accept this debate. Best of luck to my opponent Since Pro has not provided definitions in their first speech, I take it upon myself to provide them. Hypersexualization: accentuating the sexuality of, making extremely sexual Definition provided by Pro in comments. See there for further reference. Feminism: the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities http://www.merriam-webster.com... My argument is clear and simple. In order for Pro to win, they will have to provide evidence that this hypersexualization is infringing of women's rights and/or opportunities. I will be arguing that this is not the case. Looking at the definition and the clarification graciously provided by Pro in the comments, one can infer that "hypersexualization" is the result of marketing and television. Since both of these require consent (either to be shown as such, or to buy a product) we can infer that the people buying these products are willingly making the decision to purchase said items. Even if it is a male buying the products, the girl must make a conscious decision to wear them. Since in no way is either of these actions forcing the girl to do anything this is not infringing of said girls rights. And since this is a consensual act, any loss of opportunity is a result of individual action. Therefore hypersexulization is not infringing on feminism.