Traffic at any cost

March 10, 2010 at 4:59 am 29 comments

This was sent to me by Suzanne, a former reader at Poop on Peeps. She had posted this in the comments section of Poop on Peeps, but got no response from the great defender of children, Chicken Liver. She forwarded this to me, and while I’ve added a little commentary, the gist of this post is from Suzanne. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, Suzanne.

Tricia Haas of has posted some very disturbing posts about little girls and thongs. She actually titled her post “Little Girls…..and thongs”.

Ostensibly she is outraged by the idea that someone would let their little girl wear thongs but she actually photographed a strange child in the park, cropping to highlight the thong. This woman is running around in parks taking ass shots of children, NOT her own kids, but strangers and posting them to the internet. She said it was no wonder dirty old men look at little girls!!!

What’s worse is her follow up post in which she basically brags about how many hits that thong post got. How? Search engine referrals for freaks looking for pictures of kids in thongs!!!!! There’s actually comments from freaks THANKING her for the images, and she STILL has them up.

I think she wrote this post for NO other reason other than to get even more traffic to her kiddie porn images. And that’s why she wrote all of these:

She complains about having to deal with all the pervs coming to her site to see images of children in thongs, but won’t remove the images or the multiple lists of keyword searches. Go figure. Anything to drive traffic numbers, right?  A real class act for a woman who holds herself out to be a leader of her community of mommy bloggers. This woman has had her share of controversy but this takes the cake for me. She is knowingly participating in distribution of images that could be construed as child pornography.

Tricia Haas is no stranger to controversy, and there is at least one website out there devoted to slamming her. I hadn’t read her site before, most mommybloggers bore the crap out of me. What I did read there, I’m not impressed with.  I don’t get how mother, especially one who portrays herself as a leader, can be so crass and disgusting. Then again, this is the same blogger who caused an uproar a few months ago for making fun of underage, overweight teens on her blog, posting photos to have her devoted fans ridicule.  

Is this acceptable behaviour from a mommyblogger, a leader in her community?


Entry filed under: Blog Madness, Blogs that annoy me, Uncategorized. Tags: , , , .

Play nice Honey, Don’t Bother Mommy. I’m Too Busy Defending my Blogging. Again.

29 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Anon  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:24 am

    So you’re the new CL? Next up, exposing you. There will be a blog about you soon too I’m guessing.

    Why is what you’re doing here any better or different? It’s not.

    This was the original intent of your blog?

  • 2. Kali  |  March 10, 2010 at 8:54 am

    oh no!
    please tell me that you’re not just picking up where CL left off?
    I’ve really been enjoying her demise, and dead curious about what ended it all, and therefore enjoying your site and the comments.
    Sort of enjoying hating the haters.
    Now it seems that all her fans will just come here and continue the nastiness. what’s to stop them? how is this different?
    Is this also supposed to be “for the children”?
    If so, I missed the point, sorry.
    I was hoping that this site was more focused on exposing the haters/hatesites’ hypocrisies, of which there are so many and in my opinion they deserve to be taken down a notch. (or at least I would love to see them taken down a notch or two, as the general self-righteous tones adopted are so nauseating from these oh so perfect people)

  • 3. trisha  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    Im not a leader in any community. I blog. I have friends and family that follow the blog…but that hardly consistutes as a leader.

    I barely go on any blog trips, I haven’t been to a conference in months, and since you have never visited me before, I can tell you that I am pretty much the anti-mom blogger.

    Nonetheless, that article is pretty old.

    And yes, I blog for traffic. Any blogger that says they dont blog for traffic is a liar. But i dont write topics just FOR traffic. I am grateful if they turn into that because I can have discussions. That topic has turned into a very valuable one online and attracts all sorts of people and keeps the comments in it lively.

    Life isnt black and white. It has a lot of gray and I think we cant hide behind cookies and milk and pretend we are moms in pearls…lets talk about the subjects that rally debate.

    So thanks for the links (and the traffic?) and I wish you nothing but the best!

    btw, poop on peeps was one of our top 100 blogs of the year and she left a note on that blog post….I read all types.


  • 4. trisha  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:25 pm

    Btw, i forgot to add, the original article is over a year old…no, scratch that, 14 months old.

    I have over 2500 blog posts on my blog…..if these 4 are the only ones that offend you, I consider that a good day.

    Blogs are topics. Thats all they are….people take them way way too seriously.

    off to enjoy the rest of your blog.


  • 5. homeslice  |  March 10, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    seriously? sometimes i wish there was a punchline at the end of the blog post, saying “just kidding! fooled ya!” there never is. no, it’s not acceptable behavior. the first entry about what is wrong with people dressing their kids in thongs is one thing; the picture took it WAYYYYY over the line. i hope she feels good knowing that a million pedophiles are getting their jollies looking at a picture she posted. that’s just sick.

  • 6. Tammy  |  March 10, 2010 at 4:51 pm

    With all these young kids being prosecuted for sexting under distribution of child porn laws, I wonder if this blogger could be prosecuted too? Not naked pics but given that she knows creepos are visiting her site to view these pics, I would have thought she is just as culpable.
    When she first posted the blog I think she was actually coming from a good place and trying to make a valid point but once she realized what she had inadvertantly done she should have removed the pictures.
    That little girl is someones child. I tell ya what, if i ever found a picture of my daughter showing her underwear on some random bloggers site, you can bet that I would be knocking on her door with the police in tow.

  • 7. Tammy  |  March 10, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    I have to say there is a HUGE difference between this blog post and CL’s blogs. There is always a place for dissenting opinions and blogs should be critiqued for content and writing styles as much as any book or article out there.

    If CL ever intended her site to be about critiqueing someone elses work, the original intent was lost in a quick descent to outright hatred. We should probably also remember that the reason that site started in the first place was because CL was snubbed by some of the A list bloggers (i.e. Dooce) and it was little more than revenge. The fact that she hid her vindictiveness behind a weil of ‘saving the children’ was pretty transparent and hypocritical considering she was quick to attack the children too.

    Looks to me like QB just wanted to open up a debate about whether or not blog’s like Trisha’s are crossing a line. I don;t think the age of the post really matters if it is still out there for all to see.

    Just my tuppence worth ;o)

  • 8. The Queen B  |  March 10, 2010 at 7:10 pm

    I am no Chick. I have no intention of picking up where she left off. This information was sent to me, and when I looked at, I absolutely thought it was over the top, wrong and disgusting for ANYONE, let alone a mother of a girl, to be trying to draw traffic from pervs. Yes, the original post was thought provoking, there is too much sexualization of children. But I think that sentiment could have been explained quite clearly with words, and there was no need to plaster some kid’s ass on the web to get the point across.

    What I think is wrong about this is the follow up posts, which seem to me as if they are published for no other reason than to draw traffic. Traffic from pervs looking to get their jollies from revealing pictures of children. You don’t need a rallying cry of “save the children” to be offended by something like this. Not at all. You just need a conscience.

    This site is not in any way meant to pick up where Chick left off. I will not allow commentary like she did, and I’m not all about thinly veiled animosity. I started this blog originally to speak my mind on some of the things that really take me aback in the blogging world, and this is just one of those things. There will be many other things I’ll write about, and some may deal with mommy bloggers, some might be about hate sites and some might be about me plucking my eyebrows. It’s what I see, and find offensive enough to inspire me to take time out from life and write. But I would like to reiterate that this is not a hate site.

  • 9. The Queen B  |  March 10, 2010 at 7:26 pm

    I have absolutely no issues with you as a person, but I do think those posts cross a line of decency. It doesn’t matter if you have 2500 blog posts, it really doesn’t matter that this is an old post. It is sick, and wrong, no matter how well buried in the archives it might be. I don’t care if you go on blog trips or not. That’s not the point. And to try to claim you don’t perceive yourself as some sort of leader is ludicris. You have community forums, you pass out awards, you try to lead with your PR blackouts, whatever. Don’t be disingenuous, it doesn’t suit you. I’m not trying to attack you personally, or your blog, for that matter. Just trying to point out something that I feel is very, very wrong.

    Things are never black and white, but I think it’s the grey areas which need the most monitoring. You can debate subjects like this fully and completely without ever having to post those pictures. If you know people are landing on that shot of that poor child just to see her in a thong, then I think it would only be responsible to remove the picture. The conversation can continue and continue because you are right, it is a subject that could really be thought provoking, and eye opening. I just don’t believe pervs looking for little girls in thongs are interested in debate. They are interested in whacking off. Sorry for being so gross, but that is the only truth in this situation.

  • 10. Fran  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:11 pm

    Awww, she wrote a post about you! But she wasn’t kind enough to link back here.

  • 11. Katy  |  March 10, 2010 at 9:54 pm

    Hey Tricia,

    Just to clarify: You’re disgusting because you put pictures of children in thongs on your blog for attention, not that you try to drive your blog traffic. Leave little kids you don’t know out of your attention whoreinitis. Also, since it has been over a year, maybe you should stop exploiting those kids for monetary gain, you jerk.

    Thanks for playing, asshole.

  • 12. Kasey  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:29 pm

    CL and all things PoP aside… This Tricia character is pretty disgusting for posting pictures of children in their ‘underwear’.

    I don’t care WHO you are. That is just borderline stalkerish and not to mention PERVERTED. She is feeding all the pedophiles of the world exactly what they want, just for the sake of some extra traffic. SICK…

    And this chick is a MOM? Wow…

  • 13. Tammy  |  March 10, 2010 at 11:59 pm

    I’m posting this comment here and on Tricia’s blog.

    Tricia, Of course you blog for traffic. It is obviously your job and to earn money you need traffic. I certainly get it. But when does it cross the line? I mean seriously. You posted a picture of someone elses child with their underwear showing. You knowingly left it there even when you discovered it was being viewed by perverts getting their jollies….all to earn money.
    I wonder how you would feel if you found a picture on someone elses site (that you don’t even know) of your child..

  • 14. Fighting Hypocrisy  |  March 11, 2010 at 2:38 am

    It’s funny that Tricia mentioned to her readers that she blogs for traffic, but conveniently ignored to say the kind of topic she would use for that.
    Way to spin doctor anything to their advantage I guess!

  • 15. Tammy  |  March 11, 2010 at 3:04 am

    Sorry to be so graphic but the more I think about this, the angrier I am getting.
    That poor mother has no idea that right now her daughters picture is being used as jacking off material for God knows how many creepers.

    At least now we know why CL didn’t blog this, her and trish are obviously buddies.

  • 16. Karen  |  March 11, 2010 at 3:24 pm

    Trisha, you are disgusting. If I ever caught you taking pictures of my child and posting them on your blog, I’d sue your ass.

    You can justify your behavior all you want by saying “if only 4 posts out of 2500 offend you, I’m cionsidering it a good day.” It doesn’t erase the fact that those 4 posts are disgusting. You need mental help.

  • 17. JoJo  |  March 11, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    Hey Porn Peddler: I hope in those 14 months you’ve learned the difference between “you’re” and “your.” Maybe helping your child with grade-school homework will help you out.

  • 18. gert.  |  March 11, 2010 at 10:45 pm

    driving the RIGHT traffic should the goal. not just any traffic. intentionally generating traffic with a picture of a child in a thong is on your site makes you no better then a child pornographer. and yes, i do believe that.

  • 19. On another note  |  March 11, 2010 at 11:43 pm

    Anyone notice that Miss Britt is asking her readers to donate money so she can buy her husband a motorcycle as an anniversary gift.

    I’m sorry, but what the hell ever happened to personal pride?

    I’m fine with bloggers asking readers to donate to a cause like a registered charity, but to beg for money from your readers so that you can have the last 10th of the amount you need to buy your husband a gift? Yikes. I know readers have the free will to choose whether or not they donates, but IMO it casts a poor light on anyone who uses a blog as a means to raise cash.

  • 20. Tammy  |  March 12, 2010 at 4:09 am

    A lot of people use blogs to raise cash, they monetize them and earn money. Hell Dooce earns a fortune doing it.
    Not even sure who Britt is(?) Is she something to do with Trisha?

  • 21. On another note  |  March 12, 2010 at 4:35 am

    Sorry, I wasn’t clear. She’s asking readers to give her cash (straight up, through a Paypal donate button) for her to buy her husband a motorcycle for their 10 year anniversary.

  • 22. Nonchalant  |  March 12, 2010 at 6:24 pm

    I’d feel more mollified by Trisha’s assertion that she’s only doing what anyone else does if she would remove the photo from the blog post. I’m sure enough people have seen it by now that her point was made. I assume the parent who allowed their child to wear a thong in the first place likely could care less that a photo of it is on a public blog. If it was my kid and some blogger was using the picture without permission I’d probably be calling my lawyer, but since I don’t dress my child in thong underwear, its sort of a non-issue.

  • 23. Tammy  |  March 12, 2010 at 6:26 pm

    Good point Nonchalant. Never looked at it that way.

  • 24. Math Barbie  |  March 12, 2010 at 10:04 pm

    I have read Miss Britt on and off but lately it’s been mostly off because the self righteousness is enough to gag me but asking for donations to a motorcycle fund??!! All done.

  • 25. MaryBerry  |  March 13, 2010 at 6:36 pm

    Nonchalant, the problem I have with this whole thing is that it may not be crappy parenting that led to that girl wearing a thong. The fact that this little girl is wearing a Tinkerbell shirt tells me that her mother obviously buys her clothes that are suitable for a child.

    What if it’s her mother’s or older sister’s thong? She wanted to act like a grown up so she went through her mother’s/sister’s underwear drawer and put them on for the day. Or what if she ran out of clean underwear and her mother figured a borrowed thong, which usually fits smaller than briefs, is better than no underwear at all. (That’s debatable but if it’s a parent’s logic and it’s hurting no one, then it’s really no one’s business.) I mean, one needs to think of all the different reasons this little girl would be wearing that thing before judgments are made on the parents.

    I don’t read Tricia’s blog but I have read a few of her posts before and she always comes off like a judgmental know-it-all with zero compassion. Her little write up about Corey Haim pretty much shows her heart. Tricia says:

    “Am I the only one in the world that could give two shits if another rich, privileged person in this world killed themselves with a drug overdose? It must be so hard to be rich and famous and be in movies and eat three square meals a day and have a big house, that the only way they can get by is with drugs, alcohol, and sex addictions.”


    Did she really not read one article about his death before showing what a black heart she has? Pretty sure he wasn’t rich, privileged, famous for being a current movie star, he probably wasn’t eating three meals a day and he was living with his mother in her apartment.

    Let me add ‘uneducated’ to her long list of not so radiant traits.

    I really don’t know why she has gotten in such a huff over a child wearing a thong, when she has no idea under what circumstances that girl had it on in the first place. She sure is quick to blame bad parenting. I’m not for kids wearing thongs either but I sure as hell would let my kid wear a thong before I make them cry by lying to them that their mommy and daddy are about to die. I most definitely wouldn’t record it then post it on my blog. This bitch is crazy.

    Then her buffoon of a husband apologizes at the end to Pop Rocks because they’re child will not eat their candy. Hmm, I wonder why. Maybe because you just spent five minutes telling your child that it will blow your stomach up?

  • 26. grace  |  March 13, 2010 at 10:12 pm


    Corey Haim actually filed bankruptcy because he had over $200,000 in medical expenses he couldn’t pay. I would hardly call that “rich and privileged.” I agree with you whole-heartedly that Tricia is cold, callous, and mean.

    I just love how she comes on here and defends herself saying that it’s just one or two posts out of the thousands she’s written. And in her mind, that’s OK! She’s awful. And, she holds herself up as a pillar of the mommy blogging community – after all, she has written articles on how to make money on writing. Apparently to her, ANYTHING sells.

    Oh, and what you said about the little girl possibly sneaking in to her sister’s/mother’s underwear drawer? I can relate to that. When I was in 8th grade, I was so desperate to wear a bra, but my mom wouldn’t buy one for me because she didn’t think I needed one. I was rather flat-chested at the time. So, I snuck into her bra drawer and “borrowed” one of her bras. It didn’t fit – I had to stuff it, but I didn’t want to be teased anymore at school because I was one of the only girls in my class without a bra strap!

    The thing is, when girls are in their pre-teens and young teens (through junior high), they so desperately want to be considered older, they start experimenting with makeup, revealing clothing, etc., anything to make them appear older. I have a friend who’s a junior high teacher and she would tell me all the time how she’s have to quietly tell the girls in her classes to pull their shirts down in the back, because their cracks were showing, right along with their thongs. Low-rise jeans and thongs just don’t mix all that well.

  • 27. The Queen B  |  March 16, 2010 at 6:53 pm

    MaryBerry – I agree completely, that was one of the first thoughts that crossed my mind when I read that stupid post. Tons of kids sneak around wearing their mom’s or sister’s clothes. My cousin wore her big sister’s bra to school for three weeks – in the fifth grade! Not too different from little girls playing dress up with their mom’s high heels and lipstick.

  • 28. CP  |  April 2, 2010 at 12:56 am


    I don’t blog for traffic. I blog for me. I used to be a blogwhore like you and blog for traffic. It got old real fast.

    But never did I resort to little girls in thongs photographs.

    I would sooner slit my own wrists than walk that path in hell, thank you very much.

    What a disgrace as a mother you are. Seriously.

  • 29. Miriam  |  April 9, 2010 at 7:07 pm

    I don’t know who this person you are writing this post about is, I’ve never read her blog and I don’t want to click on the links based on what you’ve said. First I have a huge issue with people posting pictures of other people’s children. I’m hesitant to post pictures of children I know. Second, when I started reading the post I was thinking, Oh no, the pervs must be coming to the site because of the young girls wearing thongs comment, but pictures. You are only rewarding them by giving them pictures.

    I’m no stranger to weird google hits finding their way to my casual little blog. I have giant feet. My posts about wearing a size 12 shoe are my most popular ones (which I find bizarre, I’m also not a professional blogger). But posting pictures of minor’s thongs and being proud of the hits. I would take down the post the second I realized the creeps were finding it amusing and I would apologize to my readers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Add to Technorati Favorites

%d bloggers like this: