Sexism on CBBC

have you had a reply OP?

sunshineandbooks I agree with everything you have said, but I'm sure some people would make prejudgment. It's part of society. And I find it just as bad to do so as it is to tell a boy he can't play with a doll.

I see the ridiculous pink globe has gone from the ELC website - maybe they finally noticed me disparaging it on here. They used to be awful for this - everything available in either blue or pink - why do you need a pink easel or a pink globe!

H&M are good for non-blue only boys clothes - think they have some more unusual girls clothes too.

I agree this pink thing is a weird 80/90's onwards phenomenon - I was one of 3 girls born in the 70s and all our toys were just multicoloured - the girliest things we had were Sindy and even they werent predominantly pink. My brother was a child of the eighties and I don't remember the relentless blue/pink thing then either. It's ridiculous.

Mothercare, next and GAP are good with non pink girl clothes. Slightly on the expensive side though.

I have a Bugaboo Chameleon in the pink. The old really bright one, not the new pale pink. I wonder how many people made the assumption that I would bring up DD to be a wannabe princess with no aspirations and fake tan by the age of ten.

While not unheard of SurprisEs, there isn't a great deal of choice in outfits that aren't in blue or pink. There are some mail order and internet firms that make gender neutral and/or primary colours clothing, but you pay handsomely for their products, which isn't a possibility for many.

Interesting what you said about the colour of your DD's dresses - I was going through some old photos and found ones of me around age 4 and 5 wearing dresses in green, navy blue and even black print. I can't find a single one where I wore pink . . . until I was about 40! :-)

I'm only 22. DD has worn black dresses (shoot me), green, mainly blue and the last one was a light blue with a floral pattern. No pink in sight. Not unheard of.

I don't actually understand when folks say that girls "go through a pink stage," and that's just "natural." Well, was born back in the Jurassic 1960's. I've been involved in the upbringing of both girls and boys born in the 1970's and 1980's, and I can confidently say that none of the girls went through "pink stages."

Back then, you didn't have the strict gender segregation of toys, games, books or even clothes. Most children's things were in primary colours. Even if it was more common for girls to play with tea sets and boys with trucks, there were plenty more toys and games that were considered socially acceptable for both genders.

I agree that the gendering of products for children is in the hope of bigger sales - two items to a family with a boy and a girl. I don't think it's JUST down to parental or child choice though. The secret of marketing is to convince people they want to buy something they don't yet know they want or need. You create a demand for something and if enough people "bite," then you can actually change the culture of consumption. That is what I believe has happened with products divided so strictly along gender lines.

It reinforces other social messages about what girls should be like (soft, pretty, passive, servile, fairy princesses,) and what girls should be like (tough, dirty, assertive, rough little soldiers.)

And it's seven shades of hell for the kids who don't conform neatly to rigid definitions of gender, from cradle upwards. Thing is, it wasn't always like this. It's a modern phenomenon, created by marketeers. It's certainly not natural and even if it's a "phase," the pressure to conform to a specific model of femininity (and masculinity) remains.

*look not link.

DD has just put a dress on and started waving the dress telling her dad "link daddy I'm a princess". DH replied "yeah! And are you stroooong?" in a very macho voice. Couldn't help but to laugh.

But saying it sells isn't a rebuttal to SGM. It sells because most people buy into the same gendered nonsense. It IS harmful and it IS everywhere. The very ubiquity is a large part of what makes it harmful, imo. One pink globe in an equal world would mean diddley squat, but as I said above it's the cumulative effect that's troublesome.

Must read the Cinderella book, and I second Delusions of Gender. It's just like Ben Goldacre's Bad Science, except applied to gender/sex research.

SGM - I think that the gendering of toys has far more to do with making money than anything else. The idea being that you buy the pink one for your dd and then buy another one for her younger brother, rather than just passing on the toy dd used.

Some people really are mad buying into this sort of thing, though. A good friend of mine brought me a bagful of hand-me-down clothes from her children for mine. I asked her if she was sure she didn't want to keep them for her younger dd (the brothers are a bit older). "No, they're all boys' clothes, she can't wear them," came the reply. I went through them later to find green tracksuits, jumpers with animal motifs, and a perfectly good winter coat that just happened to be light blue.

Over here, I wish comments like "scream like a girl" were all we had to worry about! There is so much sexism on TV I would hardly know where to start complaining about it!

Yes it is ridiculous to have a pink globe on sale but it would soon be removed if it wasn't profitable. I find ELC a great place with plenty of variety and really don't think they have an influence on a child's upbringing, unlike the parent who chides to buy the pink globe. It sells and they want to make money.

We have the same principles AND the same strategy really. I'd never say anything to anyone who bought my kids a present except 'thank you'. But I'd never buy her a pink Disney makeup kit myself, for eg. And I educate her and say it's silly to think girls and boys like different things. But we're only her parents, we're up against the rest of the world really.

I do think the little things add up.

DH had a bit of a dilemma last Christmas with his nephew. He wanted to buy him a cash register but didn't because he was worried his BIL wouldn't let the boy play with it. Ended up buying him a tractor.

I suppose we have the same principles but we differ in the fact I would rather educate my child and hope for the best but wouldn't complain as I don't think people realise their ignorance half the time.

If you saw a girl with a Disney princess outfit and glitter on her nail in the street would you assume that's all she plays with? Because that's something I worry ( not much) about. If DD decides she likes those things will I be portrayed negatively even though she has been exposed to broad tastes?

It's not feminism that's taken to extremes though - i would think most feminists would try not to denigrate girls stuff and big up boys. My dd is into dinosaurs too - she doesn't realise they are 'for boys' yet. But look how different it would be if someone bought your DS a dinosaur and he prefered the Barbie? It's ok for girls to 'aspire' to be like boys, but a boy shouldn't 'lower' himself to be like a girl.

Variety is good and well, but it's the notion of such rigid gender definitions that's troublesome. Barbies/dinosaurs in themselves don't make much difference, it's the stereotyping attached to them But not all gender stereotypes are harmless, and I think it's a pity such young children are encouraged to accept them as fact. It becomes so ingrained. Very difficult to shake off that type of thinking s an adult woman or man.

Our daughters are of a very similar age (DD is 2.3). I also wish toys were less gender stereotyped but I just fear at times that feminism is taken to such an extreme that girls who like pink fluffy stuff may be led to feel inferior in some way. Some children are naturally that way. Isn't feminism based on the right to choose?

For DD second birthday she was bought a Barbie followed by the comment (every girl should have one). I smiled, took no offence and let DD decide if she wanted to play with it. She preferred the dinosaur I'd bought her. I make sure she experiences variety and empowerment.
Matter of fact is that companies cater for the market in front of them.

I find those comments are an amazing opportunity for me to educate DD and are a chance for discussion (not very broad giving her age)

SurprisES-

They all seem to go through that pink stage.

I hate it though, because that Disney princess stuff seems to rely on being passive and pretty. Gets them focussed on their looks at a very young age as the most important thing about them. This is hugely damaging for girls and women right through their lives. Also it's very encouraging of conformity, which is less than ideal for everyone.
And yes I do blame society, look at toy shops with their girl and boy aisles, toy ads are incredibly gendered. Most people don't analyse it much and will pick up something nice from the pink aisle for a girl, or soem sort of Construct a Monster-Destructo kit for a boy. There's no research to show that boys and girls brains are any different at that age, there's no 'innate' preferences at all, so it's totally coming from society. And by society I mean US. (My mums friend had to hide the tea set she bought for her GS from her son in law). But it seems to based on 'common sense' in the absense of any scientific evidence, and the fact that cultural norms differ in different places and times and are reflected in different behaviours & preferences. When you look t it that way it's daft to insist that a boy couldn't possibly enjoy playing with pink teaset. That's totally an adult notion.

It's a prescient question for me as DD 2.6 is showing signs of entering that phase. i'm going to let her run with it, so as not to give her the idea that 'girly' things are inferior. But ideally I'd abolish the notion of girly/boyish things altogether, and just help her accept preferences as individual quirks not determined by gender.

Slightly off topic but I think it'll help me understand things a bit better. If your daughter turned out to be a pink lover and adored all things princessy and sparkly what would you do? And would you blame it on society?

It depends on how wide your scope is though.
It's not just cbeebies presenters making the odd thoughtless comment. It's everywhere, quite literally. Grannies, shop assistants, advertising, peer groups.

Plus the fact that not every child has good parenting to fall back on, sadly.