FridaBaby faces backlash after resurfaced packaging and captions prompt calls for boycott
A widely used babycare company is drawing fierce criticism after images surfaced showing product packaging and social posts that many say used sexualized language. The content, which users say circulated on social networks and some of which appears to have been removed, has prompted parents and public figures to demand answers and call for a boycott.
What triggered the controversy
Pictures shared online showed packaging and captions that included phrases such as "This is the closest your husband's gonna get to a threesome, " "How about a quickie?" and "I get turned on quickly. " One image set also included a box showing an infant's bare bottom beside a thermometer illustration. Another resurfaced post, dated in user comments to April 2020, featured an image of a baby with nasal discharge and a suggestive caption about a suction product.
Users who promoted the images said some posts and packaging were later removed and that negative comments were hidden or moderated on the company's public pages. The brand's staff page was also described as disabled when some attempted to view it. The company, founded in 2014 after its CEO introduced a nasal aspirator to the U. S. market, had not posted a public statement addressing the complaints at the time of publication.
Personnel, packaging and public reaction
Critics identified company personnel they said were responsible for packaging and marketing, naming roles such as director of packaging, vice president of marketing strategy and package design production manager. Those identifications fueled calls for accountability from consumers who said the language crossed ethical lines for products intended for infants and young children.
Responses in comment threads varied. Some users described the phrasing as "sickening" and "disgusting, " calling for an outright boycott. Others questioned the authenticity of the images and suggested the content could have been edited or fabricated for shock value and engagement. Several commenters who own the products said their packaging never bore such innuendo, adding to the debate about whether the examples were genuine or altered.
At least one public figure amplified the outrage by sharing a resurfaced post and urging a boycott, saying the content was "unbelievably sick" and accused the brand of sexualizing babies. That share drove additional attention and renewed scrutiny across comment sections and community forums, where users debated whether the material reflected a pattern of tasteless marketing or isolated lapses that were later corrected.
What comes next for the brand
The company has a strong presence among new parents for a range of babycare items, and the controversy puts pressure on it to clarify how those phrases ended up on packaging and who approved the language. Observers say the brand must provide a clear explanation, outline any internal review or corrective steps, and communicate what changes — if any — will be made to prevent a repeat.
Some consumers have already announced plans to stop buying products from the company unless leadership addresses the matter publicly. Others urged restraint until the company issues details that confirm whether the images are authentic and explain the context for the disputed copy. For now, the debate highlights how quickly historic marketing choices can resurface and prompt intense reaction in the social media era.
Filmogaz will continue to monitor developments and updates from the company and stakeholders as the story evolves.
