while i prefer the idea of community outreach to deal with crime, i begrudgingly accept that some people demand security, and i guess making security cute and friendly is nicer than bleak metal everywhere, i just dont see what this post has to do with environmentalism. am i missing something? are the products made from recycled materials? or are the products being used to secure endangered habitats? i really dont mean to be a troll, and i passed up this post 3 times without commenting, but nope, i have to ask, huh?

Much needed products? These are the symptoms of a sick society that's embracing classist fascism as a way of life, and of a lifestyle which is anything but sustainable.

Locks, fences, and razorwire are rendered ugly by their function, not their form -- whitewashing them to make them pseudo-acceptable socially doesn't fix anything, and instead merely adds a layer of willful sef-deceit. Helping people make the transition from "Why do they feel the need to put broken glass on their fence tops?" to "Oh, what cute glass ornaments!" isn't helping society.

Much of the use of this sort of material is as a status signifier, not answering any direct need, or to balance and answer the use of it in other places. After all, if half the houses on a block sign up for armed response security, the other half are forced to do so as well -- while the initial risk may not have justified it for anyone, once the remaining houses are bearing a disproportionately high share of the risk, they may feel forced to do so.

Wouldn't our society be better and less sick without any of this? Isn't it better to keep these things ugly as a reminder of what they really stand for?

Futhermore, what about the environmental expense of promoting this kind of needless consumption? The building industry already consumes an inordinate amount of resources; why encouourage more steel fences, more cinderblock walls, more reinforced safe rooms, when they aren't needed in the first place?

well said dymaxion! this is exactly what i thought after reading the article above.

Hi, I'm Matthias who does the Sweet Dreams Security™ security product range, brand, company and social critical art project.
Just to clarify, I'm not designing security products becaus I like them but because I don't like them! But I am very much concerned about our mental well-being when unfortunately more and more of our visual surrounding looks like as if there msut be a good reason for such harsh + ugly security measures.
So first, thank you for your critical comments because this is the first step of my objective; to get a discussion going about the paranoia and about the overusage of cuteness+kitsch which I dislike, too.
The second step is changing the way things look like in our everyday surrounding — let's speak again in a few years time...
Best, m

I agree strongly with the comments of the first two posters, and after reading the above post from the makers of the product, I can only conclude that this is a cynical attempt to get free advertisement for an unnecessary, unethical and environmentally unsound product.
The only thing vaguely environmental about it is the "fluffy little bunny" angle. Sweet Dream Security should be utterly ashamed of themselves in light of this stunt.

I'll ignore the environmental aspects at this point, because they're not all that relevant -- there's no reason these products should be any better or worse than their standard equivalents. I think I understand your purpose here -- these are more of an antiproduct than a product, and while they need to be actually realized to lend full validity to the concept, their actual consumption, except as a form of commentary or to spread awareness of the message, isn't the desired goal. While that's laudible and I agree with the sentiments behind it, I think you might be overestimating the sophistication of your target market; while I think a certain degree of irony will come across, I'm not sure that it will be read as a political statement, as opposed to simpler humor.

That said, it's an interesting concept, and there is somewhat more potential there than in simple making fences, razorwire, etc. that are aesthetically pleasing parts of the environment aside from their function. On the other hand, there's also a value in keeping ugly things ugly. Perhaps their needs to be a second line which expresses the true nature of these objects in their form, in a manner that doesn't lend itself to macho identification ("Oh yeah? Well the razor wire around *my* house has skulls on it"). On the one hand, as a designer, the idea of intentionally making something as ugly as possible, beyond the requirements of its basic function, is somewhat abhorrent; on the other hand, it might provide an equally valuable social commentary.

I'll ignore the environmental aspects at this point, because they're not all that relevant -- there's no reason these products should be any better or worse than their standard equivalents. I think I understand your purpose here -- these are more of an antiproduct than a product, and while they need to be actually realized to lend full validity to the concept, their actual consumption, except as a form of commentary or to spread awareness of the message, isn't the desired goal. While that's laudible and I agree with the sentiments behind it, I think you might be overestimating the sophistication of your target market; while I think a certain degree of irony will come across, I'm not sure that it will be read as a political statement, as opposed to simpler humor.

That said, it's an interesting concept, and there is somewhat more potential there than in simple making fences, razorwire, etc. that are aesthetically pleasing parts of the environment aside from their function. On the other hand, there's also a value in keeping ugly things ugly. Perhaps their needs to be a second line which expresses the true nature of these objects in their form, in a manner that doesn't lend itself to macho identification ("Oh yeah? Well the razor wire around *my* house has skulls on it"). On the one hand, as a designer, the idea of intentionally making something as ugly as possible, beyond the requirements of its basic function, is somewhat abhorrent; on the other hand, it might provide an equally valuable social commentary.

Oops, sorry for the double post... the comment system seems to be having some issues.