Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

jennings ford direct
Sponsored by
 
 
Tuesday, 9th February 2010

Store places nudity ban on baby pic cake

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 27 June 2008
A mother who wanted to give a birthday cake to her son featuring a photo of him as a baby has been forced to have it censored because it showed his bottom.
Gail Jordan, 41, had gone to an Asda store in Liscardon the Wirral in Merseyside on June 13 with the photo of her son David taken when he was five months old.

But staff at the supermarket initially refused to scan the picture on to a cake because it featured nudity.

They eventually put a star over the offending part of the photo which was scanned on to the cake.

The cake was to be a surprise for David's 21st birthday on June 18.

Ms Jordan, who lives in Rock Ferry, said: "I took the photo of my son to the store in Liscard and they said we can't do that - it's nudity.

"It was a photo of my son at five months old. I could not believe it. Eventually another member of staff cut a star out and put it on his bottom on the cake.

"I just wanted a picture on his cake. Staff said it was deemed as pornographic. I don't normally shop there, but it would not stop me going back."

Speaking about her son's reaction to what had happened, Ms Jordan said: "To be honest he was a bit embarrassed by it all. He liked the cake in the end."

A spokesman for Asda said: "We did not say it was pornographic. It is policy across the board that we don't do nudity of any sort at any age. It is nothing new."

>> Vote in our latest web poll

i-map

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 27 June 2008 7:50 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Preston
 
Prev
1
Next
1

Angélique Breaux,

Charlotte, NC, USA 27/06/2008 13:37:36
Aww! This is overreacting. Babies' bottoms are natural. Renaissance art sometimes would feature bare-bottomed cherubs. It's really excessive when someone gets all hot and bothered about something so minor. Can't people wear thongs at the shore? Some people need to get a grip.
2

Mr. Common Sense,

San Jose 27/06/2008 16:10:02
This is not overreacting. This is a typical company policy that is not unheard of. There is a reason why there are certain policies concerning nudity. There is a reason why an adult male can't go around in public with his appendage flopping all over the place, just as much as the reason why women can't go around jogging topless.
There are people in this world who are perverted, no matter how "natural" YOU THINK it is. It is just more ironic to me that "baby nudity" is considered to be "cute" and "natural" but yet the sickos who WANT to see a baby naked are the worst kind of criminal. A man wanting to see a woman jogging topless is considered less a criminal because it is more socially acceptable or socially "normal".
Unfortunately, what your opinion of what is "cute" or "art", is still in fact, your opinion. Nudity is nudity no matter where you draw the line, and there will always be people who are turned on sexually by it. Because of these sick people we must sometimes safeguard ourselves, especially as a business in this day and age of sexual predators.
Besides, did this woman ever think of going somewhere else? I dunno, usually when i am not happy with a potential product i will not buy it, but hey, that's just my opinion.
3

Ex-Callon,

USA 30/06/2008 23:20:58
I'm willing to be that Mr Common Sense is a sicko.
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.