How a hero of the high street got out of its depth with a bikini

After signing off another set of polyester jogging bottoms and giving the thumbs up to some leather-effect handbags, there came a point when the question of what to do with girl swimwear was raised. The answer, it seems, was to stick to the tried and tested formula of cheap and cheerful until one bright spark presumably added: "Only this time let's make the bikini tops padded."

The coverage afforded to Primark in recent years suggested a company that could do no wrong. It has had to answer a few tricky questions over its use of cheap foreign labour following a Panorama documentary a couple of years ago, but the expos did little to halt its domination of British high streets.

Having carved out a reputation for selling designer-inspired clothes at bargain basement prices – the rush for its 9 pink stilettos has gone down in fashion folklore – Primark thought it knew exactly what its customer wanted, which is why yesterday's furore may well have come as a nasty shock.

Initially, when the row over the padded bikini looked like it might be nothing more than a storm in a C-cup, Primark kept shtum. However, calls for a boycott over the sexualisation of children continued to build and when Mumsnet – the all-powerful online parenting group – got involved, it knew the game was up. Through what seemed like gritted teeth, a statement was hastily issued.

"Primark has taken note of the concern this morning regarding the sale of certain bikini tops for girls, a product line that sells in relatively small quantities," it began. "The company has stopped the

sale of this product with immediate effect. Primark will donate all the profits made from this product line with immediate effect."

By lunchtime, it was like the padded bikini top had never even existed. All evidence was removed from shelves and the company, which says on its website: "Every girl wants to look her best and at Primark we make no exception for the younger ladies. All the high fashion trends can be found in our Girlswear section, no matter what age your are," tried

to get back to business as usual.

It might have taken more than a little moral outrage to prevent teenage girls parting with their cash, but concern is growing at the number of retailers who seem to believe that regardless of age, sex sells.

Asda was criticised recently for selling lace lingerie, including a push-up bra, aimed at young girls and Tesco withdrew a pole dancing kit which popped up in its toy section.

Following pressure from consumer groups, WH Smith announced last year that it was withdrawing Playboy stationery, including a pencil case, although it refused to say if the decision was due to criticism that the brand had been sold to schoolchildren.

While some of those who went online to register their thoughts over the Primark scandal did so with tongues placed firmly in their cheek, with one asking, "Good news about the removal of the padded bikinis, but what about Primark's codpieces for five-year-olds?", for those who work at the frontline of child protection the story demanded to be taken more seriously.

"We know from our research that commercial pressures towards premature sexualisation and unprincipled advertising are damaging children's wellbeing," said Penny Nicholls, director of children and young people at the Children's Society.

"The evidence shows us that adults feel children are more materialistic than past generations, while children themselves feel under pressure to keep up with the latest trends. We need a significant change at the heart of society where adults stand up for better values."

The removal of the bikinis was welcomed, but it didn't stop many wondering why Primark had thought it a good idea in the first place.

"The question has to be asked why it was deemed appropriate to sell such items at all," added Jeremy Todd, chief executive of Parentline Plus.

"We are extremely concerned with the early sexualisation of children through the inappropriate marketing of adult products. While explaining to children the reasons why they cannot have something is likely to be more effective than just saying they can't have it, it still causes a large amount of stress."