Saturday, January 12, 2008

:: Tiny McSmall Fortune ::

The Internet is just clamoring over Tiny McSmall, an online clothing store for children. Oh, how beautiful, the Internet's proclaiming. Oh, how darling. And yes, the Internet is right: it's adorable stuff. See?

Polka-Dotted Outfit from Tiny McSmall

But apparently the Internet is AJ's-Rich-Girlfriend-on-The-Sopranos rich because cute as this is, I would have to choose between buying it and feeding my son for 21 days.  And P.S. I could handsew this outfit in the dark and paint the spots on with my teeth and still not have the balls to charge $79 for it. Tiny McPricey is more like it.

6 comments:

Christina January 12, 2008 at 1:18 PM  

$79 for something a baby will spit up on?!?

Sometimes I think people have too much money. I'd be happy to take that excess off their hands so they wouldn't have to buy $79 sleepers to get rid of it all.

Julie January 12, 2008 at 1:32 PM  

spit up on and OUTGROW IN EIGHT WEEKS!

Toni January 12, 2008 at 6:06 PM  

$79 for one outfit! If I remember correctly, my son wore only white onesies for about the first three months of his life.... I hope I didn't emotionally scar him for life.

juliepippert January 13, 2008 at 11:55 AM  

I did pay something about $50 for a special outfit as a shower gift for my SIL. It was very cute and impractical so a good gift, I thought. She seemed happy. I've also given her a bassinet and loads of clothes and toys that are very practical.

But yes, that sort of thing is for people who have more money than is necessary.

And for some reason? That's always the popular highlighted stuff. Why is that?

Janet January 13, 2008 at 4:04 PM  

Yeah, that's just stoopid, with TWO O's.

Dharmamama January 14, 2008 at 8:33 AM  

Holy cow! I think it's the popular highlighted stuff because it's a prestige issue. Oh! You have a tiny mcsmall sleeper? You must be rich, successful people! So glad I've learned to define success for myself.

We're just reading Series of Unfortunate Events #6, where the family the orphans stay with is ruled by "what's in". Actually, the orphans are staying with them because "orphans are in". Really silly stuff, like having no lights on and the shades drawn because "dark is in". This kinda stuff reminds me of that. Forget common sense! We must be "in"!

There was an error in this gadget