The reason why Pampers ditched Sesame Street Characters

Status
Not open for further replies.

BabyTyrant

Est. Contributor
Messages
2,852
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
https://nypost.com/2018/09/16/pampers-quietly-pull-sesame-street-characters-from-diapers/amp/

So to summarize the reason why Pampers ditched Sesame Street Characters and switched to more Generic Characters was because of a huge amount of Male Characters on Sesame Street with few female characters; which also translates to mostly Male characters on their diapers.

I guess not having as many Female characters as Male Characters is "Gender Unbalance" and viewed as "Sexist" ?

I think they are reaching a bit much because I dont think Sesame Street Creators meant for it to send any kind of message along those lines.
 
This is a perfect example of someone with nothing better to do. I can honestly say I have never heard of anyone saying they buy pampers because of the prints. Have the SJW's really gone so far to accuse a diaper company of being sexist because generations old characters gender ratio is off? The baby doesn't care who is on their diaper its parents with nothing else to bitch about that do. The part we she got a refund because the diaper leaked to much on her 2 year old is also asinine. Take the issue up with pampers. If I tried to return an open pack of diapers I would probably get flipped off.

But i'm sure these wall street families with kids who have hyphenated pretentious first names will only complain about the print on a diaper when they aren't being "wronged" anywhere else. Shame to the companies who don't stand up to these cry babies and just bow down to their every whim.
 
Pampers doesn't market their diapers to babies, they market to the parents. And most millenials do expect to see more diversity than previous generations. Regardless if parents admit it or not (or even realise it), those character prints are what they want to see.
 
babyblueblanket said:
Have the SJW's really gone so far to accuse a diaper company of being sexist because generations old characters gender ratio is off?

No. If you read the article, there's nothing but one woman's anecdote about speaking to one customer service person who only partly blamed the change on gender representation.

Staff in customer services usually have no idea of the strategic moves of the company, and are often experts in bullshit -- inventing any reason off the top of their head that might get the customer to go away.

This is just fake news -- conservative clickbait. Right-wing tabloid-readers love to read this kind of stuff and wind themselves up into a frenzy about their sworn enemy -- damned liberals! :p

babyblueblanket said:
I can honestly say I have never heard of anyone saying they buy pampers because of the prints.

Exactly! Isn't it far more plausible that they're doing this to reduce the HUGE licensing fees that they pay to use Sesame Street characters? Anyway, they're not dropping them completely -- just on a few product lines.

P&G officials stressed Sesame Street characters are still on the brand's popular Baby Dry line of diapers.
"As a proud partner of Sesame Street for over 15 years, we love featuring Sesame Street’s iconic characters on our Pampers Baby Dry diapers," Dressman said. "This includes Elmo, Zoe, Cookie, Rosita, Big Bird, and Oscar (the Grouch) among others."

https://eu.cincinnati.com/story/money/2018/09/17/p-g-nixes-sesame-street-pampers-diapers/1336097002/
 
Bwahaha I knew it that diapees looking cute is actually an important thing to more than just ABDLs!

Next we will see P&G violating copyright and reproducing baby sized SDKs to try and win the parents back (don’t sell it back to them ABU!)

For years here in Oz the leading baby nappy has been Huggies with boy and girl versions available featuring Winnie the Pooh but now I see at the supermarkets non gender Huggies nappies with that evil Mickey rat (glad I don’t have any babies now to be wearing those.)
 
Argent said:
Next we will see P&G violating copyright and reproducing baby sized SDKs to try and win the parents back (don’t sell it back to them ABU!)

I didn't know ABU had purchased or P and G had sold any type of design rights to the SDK. I thought they were just repro/replica.
 
babyblueblanket said:
I didn't know ABU had purchased or P and G had sold any type of design rights to the SDK. I thought they were just repro/replica.

P and G stopped using the Design that is on the ABUniverse SDK a long time ago, so ABU had the right to take that design and put it on an Adult Diaper and sell that Adult Diaper as a "replica" or what have you of the original Pampers design; it is only when designs are currently used that the rights to them have to be Sold/Bought.
 
babyblueblanket said:
I didn't know ABU had purchased or P and G had sold any type of design rights to the SDK. I thought they were just repro/replica.

I do remember reading that ABU bought the design for the taping panel from someone that P&G sold it too, while I don’t know the whole story pretty confident it is ABU property.
 
BabyTyrant said:
P and G stopped using the Design that is on the ABUniverse SDK a long time ago, so ABU had the right to take that design and put it on an Adult Diaper and sell that Adult Diaper as a "replica" or what have you of the original Pampers design; it is only when designs are currently used that the rights to them have to be Sold/Bought.

That's totally wrong. IP doesn't work like that.
 
Well, regardless ABU knows what they are doing and wouldn't do anything illegal.
 
I read a quote on the article saying they thought that they were too masculine. These are diapers we are talking about here, for kids, the characters themselves aren't what I'd call masculine.
 
I'm so old that when my kids were still in diapers, Pampers had pictures of serial killers on their diapers. My son was especially fond of Ted Bundy diapers.
 
You may have a point here, but it could also be because Sesame Streets show was designed for preschooler kids (typically at an age where you don't wear diapers anymore), and some started to complain to their parents that they didn't want to watch a baby show because they remember seeing the Sesame Streets characters on their diapers when they were babies, or on their younger brothers or sisters diapers.
 
dogboy said:
I'm so old that when my kids were still in diapers, Pampers had pictures of serial killers on their diapers. My son was especially fond of Ted Bundy diapers.

The "It" Huggies with Pennywise the Clown were better. Babies potty-trained so fast with those...for some reason.
 
Whatever their crazy reason is, it's pretty stupid.
 
Slomo said:
Pampers doesn't market their diapers to babies, they market to the parents. And most millenials do expect to see more diversity than previous generations. Regardless if parents admit it or not (or even realise it), those character prints are what they want to see.

I remember Pampers from my days in them and they were plain white. So what's the fuss about?
 
Lol - I would have thought royalties would have been the issue (to save money)but the unequal gender thing is simply A joke, remember babies are not born with bias, it’s us older people that teach them bias.
 
Argent said:
Bwahaha I knew it that diapees looking cute is actually an important thing to more than just ABDLs!

Next we will see P&G violating copyright and reproducing baby sized SDKs to try and win the parents back (don’t sell it back to them ABU!)

For years here in Oz the leading baby nappy has been Huggies with boy and girl versions available featuring Winnie the Pooh but now I see at the supermarkets non gender Huggies nappies with that evil Mickey rat (glad I don’t have any babies now to be wearing those.)

Are you talking about the Huggies Essentials? Pretty sure they just replaced the snugglers nappies with those instead.
 
Andybun said:
I remember Pampers from my days in them and they were plain white. So what's the fuss about?

If they were plain white now millennial parents would complain that it lacks diversity and the ACLU would file a federal suit claiming racial intolerance. We shouldn't be forcing that kind of stuff on infants. We need to sit down and have a conversation with our 6 month old and let them decide. LOL. (Note heavy sarcasm)

They would hold marches in the street and file petitions on change.org and create a witty yet irrelevant hash tag campaign and probably loot a walgreens.
 
Parents probably think their kid looks "cuter" in a printed diaper vs an all-white diaper. And as mentioned above, it's the parents making the purchasing decisions that drive the design.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top