'Mr Sex': Primark, the Hammer of the Paedophiles

There are a lot of people in this country who are currently ripping into Primark for their decision to sell bikinis with padded tops for girls as young as seven. Some of them are expressing shock that the company have found a way to exploit even more children than the ones they employ in their sweatshops, while newspapers, in their usual calm, measured tones, are going as far as to say that these items of beachwear are actually promoting paedophila. 

I'm sorry, but this is absolute piffle. I would like to be the first to congratulate Primark on their bold stance, which - in my opinion - actually deters paedophiles. Think about it; imagine, for a brief moment, that you're Gary Glitter in a raincoat, prowling Skegness beach, when you espy what you imagine to be a seven-year old girl in a Primark bikini. Just when you start doing that wiggly-finger gesture with both hands, you notice the top - and stomp off in anger when you believe that what you thought was a child was actually a very small grown-up woman. Surely this is what Primark were thinking when they conceptualised, designed, and then cleared the selling of a bikini with a padded bra for children - because the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.

So while other people continue to lambaste this fiercely ethical company for their courage to tackle the vital issues that other clothing companies shy away from, I applaud Primark for not at all being exploitative fuckwits in the slightest. And why stop there? Why not stitch fake hair into the bottoms while you're at it, Primark? Why not introduce a range of split-crotch knickers with Winnie The Pooh on them? What about My First Rabbit, or rub-on transfer slag antlers? 

(and by the way: who actually bought this shit?)