You’d think after decade of consciousness-raising about women’s roles in modern society and the sexualization of children, we wouldn’t see stuff like this.



Value Village, popular purveyor of second-hand duds, has been blasted by a Victoria, B.C. mother upset over some pre-packaged kids’ Halloween costumes that not only reinforce gender stereotypes but make little girls look sexy.



Raina Delisle was shopping at her local Value Village for a costume for her four-year-old daughter, whose possible choices included dressing as a firefighter.



Value Village, which has an advertising blitz every Halloween to pitch its stores as a costume mecca, offered both girls’ and boys’ police and firefighter costumes. But the take is vastly different.



The boys get tiny replica of a cop’s uniform, while packaging shows the girls in a form-fitting blue mini-dress and cap.



The differences between girl and boy firefighter costumes is even more striking; the boy is shown wearing an orange turnout coat and helmet and holding an ax, while the little girl is in another version of the mini-dress and instead of a helmet she’s wearing what Delisle calls a “fascinator” on her head.



“What kind of message do these costumes send to our girls?,” Delisle, a writer and communications consultant, blogged on the Huffington Post.



“While the boys have costumes that look like the real thing, girls are expected to dress up in spoof ensembles, thus suggesting they can’t, or shouldn’t, do the real job. The costumes are not only ‘sexy,’ they’re also sexist.”



The dubious Halloween costumes come just a few weeks after discount retailer Target found itself under fire for selling one-piece baby pajamas for boys with a Superman logo and “future man of steel” emblazoned on the front. The pink girls’ version has the familiar S logo and “I only date heroes” on it.



Walmart was also called out for a T-shirt aimed at pre-teen girls that reads “training to be Batman’s wife.”



Delisle said spoke to the store manager and tried unsuccessfully to reach someone at Value Village’s U.S. head office before blogging on her experience. CBC News, which followed up her post, also was unable to get a response from the company Sunday.

[ Related: ‘Sexist’ baby PJs Target of Twitter outcry after prof posts photograph ]



However, the thrift-store chain, whose corporate name is Savers, did respond Monday to an email request from Yahoo Canada News for comment, saying costumes were being withdrawn from sale.



“Every year, we select our Halloween inventory based on feedback and demand from shoppers,” communications director Sara Gaugi said via email from the company’s Bellevue, Wash., office.



“We’ve taken the recent comments surrounding certain Halloween costumes sold in our stores very seriously, and as such, are removing this merchandise from our sales floors. We apologize to those who were offended, and as we move forward, we will evaluate all costumes and packaging keeping this specific customer feedback in mind.”



But this keeps happening. Back in 2011, U.S. department store chain J.C. Penney got into hot water for marketing a girl’s T-shirt that read “I’m too pretty to do homework so my brother has to do it for me.”



In 1992, toymaker Mattel got raked over the coals for a talking Barbie doll who declared “math class is tough.”



How do such products still get on to the shelves?



Retailing consultant Wendy Evans was puzzled by the latest lapse.



“Truly that does look bad on Value Village,” Evans said from Toronto, where she operates Evans and Co. “The sexualization of young children I don’t think is appropriate.”



Retailers should be creating a set of values that are reflected in their purchasing guidelines, she said.



“Did they realize that’s what they were getting? I don’t know,” said Evans. “Part of it is buyer training, not to say that a few things might slip buy.”



It’s possible the chain’s buyer did not see the product, or perhaps bought it as part of a larger lot.



“Sometimes it’s left up to a supplier to provide an assortment of designs, or costumes in this case, that would be appropriate for boys and girls,” said Evans.



But University of Victoria political scientist Janni Aragon said it’s part of society’s lingering preconceptions about male and female roles.



“Even though we’re 40 years from the heyday of the women’s liberation movement or second-wave movement, however you want to refer to it, people are still socialized by a society, parents, the media around them, that depicts girls and young women about being buxom, about their looks and boys as being capable and strong,” Aragon said in an interview.



While some like Delisle might be upset, others see no problem with gender stereotyping.

Story continues