Frida Baby under fire after sexualized marketing phrases resurface
Frida Baby is facing renewed backlash after images and screenshots of past marketing materials and packaging that use sexual innuendo circulated online. The posts revived criticism of the brand’s irreverent tone, prompted calls for boycotts and led the company to remove or hide parts of its online presence while it remains silent publicly.
What sparked the controversy
Earlier this week, a wave of resurfaced images showed product boxes and social posts that paired babycare items with cheeky, sexualized copy. Examples that have drawn particular ire include a caption next to a thermometer reading "This is the closest your husband's gonna get to a threesome, " packaging that reads "How about a quickie?", instructional copy stating "I get turned on easily" on a humidifier, and an old post with wording that referenced a sexual metaphor about pulling out early in the context of a nasal aspirator.
Those images appear to date back several years, and many of the offending posts or pages are no longer publicly accessible. Critics identified current employees linked to packaging and marketing roles and noted that pages listing staff were temporarily disabled. Users also reported that negative comments were being hidden from the brand’s account activity.
The resurfaced content clashed with expectations from parents and other consumers who say sexual language has no place on products intended for infants. Within hours of the images circulating, parent forums and comment threads filled with calls to stop purchasing from the company.
Reaction, defenses and broader implications
Public reaction has been polarized. A number of parents and advocacy voices called the language "sick" and "disgusting, " urging a boycott and tighter scrutiny of the brand’s marketing practices. Others pushed back, saying they never noticed such wording on packaging and suggesting some content might have been altered before circulation.
Observers point out that the brand built an identity around candid, sometimes irreverent messaging that leaned into humor about the messy realities of parenting. That tone helped the company expand from a single nasal aspirator product into a wider line of babycare and postpartum items. For some consumers, the slogans in question were intended as tongue-in-cheek relief; for many others, the juxtaposition of sexual innuendo with infant-focused products crossed a line.
Company leadership has not publicly issued a formal statement addressing the resurfaced material. Instead, the brand removed or disabled several items of online content and appears to have limited visibility for staff listings. That muted response has done little to calm critics; absent a clear explanation or apology, reputational risk and potential sales impact remain elevated.
Two other dynamics are worth noting: first, the controversy stems largely from old material that only recently gained fresh attention, suggesting the brand’s past choices are being judged anew in a different social environment. Second, some commenters raised questions about authenticity and manipulation of images, a reminder that viral outrage can sometimes be driven by disputed or doctored content. Those debates are unlikely to quiet calls for accountability while the company remains silent.
What to watch next
The immediate developments to monitor include whether the company issues a public statement, retracts or reprints packaging, or changes personnel tied to the highlighted materials. Longer term, the episode may force a reassessment of how babycare brands balance edgy marketing with sensitivity to parental concerns and child-focused contexts. For now, the brand’s decision to remove content and limit visibility has left critics pressing for clearer accountability and for the company to explain how such language was ever approved for infant products.
