Gwyneth Paltrow under fire for promoting bikini line for kids

Poor Gwyneth Paltrow. One day she's the most beautiful woman in the world, the next day the mom of two is being accused of "sexualizing" young girls with an inappropriate bikini endorsement.

The actress-we-love-to-hate's lifestyle site Goop is selling a swimwear line by designer Melissa Odabash that includes a limited-edition navy ruffled "New York bikini set" for little girls.

According to the $45 bikini's product page, "We've collaborated with Melissa Odabash on several exclusive (and super cute) beachwear items for girls. Now your daughter can have a Melissa Odabash bikini too. Hers is navy with ruffles on the top and bottom, and ties on the back and sides. 4, 6 and 8-year-old sizing."

A photo of a young girl modelling the suit had been featured on the site's homepage. That photo has since been removed.

Claude Knight, director of London, England-based charity Kidscape, immediately objected to the swimwear:

Also see: Should young girls be allowed to wear lingerie?

"We remain very opposed to the sexualization of children and of childhood," Knight tells the Daily Mail. "The dangers have been discussed at length, so it is a great pity that such trends continue and that they carry celebrity endorsement."

In September, Kidscape chastised Jessica Simpson for putting her baby girl in a two-piece swimsuit.

Elizabeth Hurley's swimwear range received the same criticism for its leopard-print child-sized bikini.

"The pieces that are very adult which contribute to the sexualisation of young girls —especially in the poses portrayed — do not take account of the child protection concerns that have been well-aired," Knight said at the time.

"Why is leopard print automatically deemed sexual? How can a pattern be sexy?" Jezebel's Tracie Egan Morrissey retorts.

Also see: Gwyneth Paltrow's footwear fail

Paltrow's spokesperson calls the recent bikini criticism "absurd," adding that "two-piece bathing suits have been worn by young girls for decades."

The Daily Beast's Jessica Grose writes that the outrage over the bikinis is "misplaced."

"Though historically, I’ve not been Goop’s biggest fan, this particular criticism is borderline absurd, and if you unpack the logic behind it, it’s damaging for women and girls. Talking about the Odabash swimsuit specifically, there’s nothing especially adult about it: It covers the kid’s erogenous zones, the top is unpadded and girlish, and is a dark color," she writes.

"If you think there’s anything sexual about that child model’s presentation, you’re probably the kind of person who’s outraged by the retro Coppertone toddler. All that exposed cartoon flesh! The horror!"

Grose continues to share her concern that the message Kidscape is sending is that what little girls wear can lead to sexual victimization, therefore putting the onus on females to prevent it.

Also see: Gwyneth Paltrow named 'World's most beautiful woman'

Liz Spikol of The Philly Post also comes to Paltrow's defence.

"Paltrow’s bathing suits are sold in sizes big enough, the site says, for mommy and daughter to match. I think that’s very sweet and adorable. It’s the perfect age for it because after 11, there’s no way in hell a daughter would do anything even vaguely approaching that, so why not? But others see it as the pathway to hell."

She concludes, "It just seems preposterous to see a bikini on a child as sexual. It would never have occurred to me had Kidscape not mentioned it. What seems really perverse is an imagination that travels so easily to prurience at just the suggestion of exposing more of a child’s skin."

Paltrow seems to have a "kick me" sign on her back ever since branding herself as a gluten-free lifestyle guru — like any good girlfriend, she suggested we all pick up a $1,615 skirt to spruce up our spring wardrobes — but is this criticism going too far? She's not actually forcing you to buy these things.

Do you think Paltrow deserves the criticism she gets? Sound off in the comments below.