Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think its sexist to split baby, toddler and young kids clothes into 'for boys' and 'for girls'?

209 replies

entropygirl · 02/12/2011 15:14

So obvs for older kids and for men and women there are anatomical differences that mean it is valid to split clothes by gender, but that difference does not exist for younger kids.

I think supermarkets in particular could do something better than reinforce gender stereotypes for babies...

OP posts:
mrsravelstein · 02/12/2011 17:41

so supermarkets should rearrange their entire children's clothing section to suit the tiny minority of people who want to dress their boys in fairy t shirts and their girls in brown cords and who despite this relatively unusual stance and the lack of any sanction at all for doing so, don't have the confidence to just go and buy what they want?

Original poster
entropygirl · 02/12/2011 17:43

But by dressing your sons and daughters differently you are treating them differently....and you are telling them that difference exists unnecessarily.

I mean obvs do what ever you like. But when some kid in the playground says to your daughter that they cant wear blue or play football coz girls dont like that stuff then dont come complaining of sexist attitudes...

OP posts:
Ciske · 02/12/2011 17:44

I agree. What's wrong with just ranking them as dresses, trousers, T-Shirts, PJs etc. and then mix the colours?

But more so than ranking by boys/girls, I'm annoyed by how random these choices are made. M&S stocks a pile of horrid pale/lavender dressing gowns for girls, while the boys get all the bold colourful stuff with monsters, Peppa Pig etc. Only girls get Charlie & Lola clothes, but only boys get Thomas the Tank Engine. So, at the ripe age of 2, toddlers are already being shown into their proper corners of society with very, very little justification or thought.

HelenBaaBaaBlackSheep · 02/12/2011 17:44

Girls in brown cords is 'a relatively unusual stance?' What??

Original poster
entropygirl · 02/12/2011 17:44

If supermarkets did that then maybe just maybe customers would think hey maybe I dont have to treat my kids differently according to their sex and the whole world would take a tiny step towards equality.

OP posts:
Original poster
entropygirl · 02/12/2011 17:46

Its not about confidence, its about the assumption that its okay to tell girls and boys that they should dress differently, and parents that they should dress babies differently according to sex.

OP posts:
mrsravelstein · 02/12/2011 17:47

by dressing them differently i'm treating them differently, well, yes, ok, but how is that IN ANY WAY damaging? i dress ds2 and dd in red because it suits them, whereas ds1 looks horrid in it. oh dear, what if i've given ds1 a complex, what if he needs counselling for years because he thinks he's inadequate? what a load of bollocks.

kirsty75005 · 02/12/2011 17:48

@zukiecat. Sorry, obviously I wasn't making any kind of commentary about your kids in particular, who are obviously doing very well in studies that they enjoy. My point was that many other young women seem to be discouraged from careers they might have enjoyed because they are very strongly identified as "boys things". I'm glad that this isn't the case for yours but that doesn't mean that the phenomen doesn't exist.

Original poster
entropygirl · 02/12/2011 17:49

So after saying that you prefer clothes laid out so the girls stuff is separate from the boys you are now saying you dress both sexes in the same colour? That doesnt make sense?

OP posts:
mrsravelstein · 02/12/2011 17:51

i don't think anybody HAS told me to dress my dd differently! i choose her clothes. i like putting her in fairly girly stuff, possibly as a reaction to my own upbringing of being put in boys clothes. i get pleasure from dd's clothes, and so does she.

mrsravelstein · 02/12/2011 17:52

why doesn't it make sense to say i dress a boy and a girl both in red? how is dd wearing a red jumper and ds2 wearing a different red jumper anything to do with how the supermarket is laid out?

exoticfruits · 02/12/2011 17:54

If supermarkets did that then maybe just maybe customers would think hey maybe I dont have to treat my kids differently according to their sex and the whole world would take a tiny step towards equality.

I don't think so! I am certainly dressing boys as boys and girls as girls-so that people can tell. They can choose for themselves when they are older but I am not going to miss out when I have free rein. When I was a widow I was looking for male role models in the family for my DS. He was surrounded by women, I wanted to bring him up as a boy-and I don't feel remotely apologetic for it. There was no way he was having pink dresses-regardless of the supermarket pushing them at me!

PsecretPsanta · 02/12/2011 17:55

Hang on.

There are differences, broadly speaking, between the sexes. Not just physically. There are many, many exceptions and huge overlaps, but there simply are differences. This has been proven time after time, surely?

It's not the differences that are a problem. It's people's reactions to them.

mrsravelstein · 02/12/2011 17:56

helen i used 'brown cords' as an off the top of my head example - my point is that it's fairly unusual to see little girls dressed in boys clothes, though i do have a couple of acquaintances who do it as a point of principle. so it's a minority stance in that most people do choose to put their girls in girls clothes and boys in boys clothes

Angelswings · 02/12/2011 17:58

The only time some kids get to express themselves is through dressing up at nursery where their parents cant tell them not to wear something, that is if the nursery staff don't discriminate too.

How come it's ok for girls to wear trousers and be tomboys and if boys want to wear a dress we get comments that have been on this thread :(

Ciske, agree, agree, agree!

TiggyD · 02/12/2011 18:00

And why do supermarkets have separate fruit and veg, and men's clothes sections? I like wearing vegetables! You haven't liked until you've seen me in my broccoli hotpants and carrot coat.

Must go and cook dinner. I'm on a diet so it's mostly t-shirts again. Sad

exoticfruits · 02/12/2011 18:00

They all wore the same in China at one time-it didn't work!

PamBeesly · 02/12/2011 18:03

entropy there are always good threads about genderising children in the feminist section with really enlightened ideas :)
FWIW I always believed that originally pin was for boys....a toned down version of red and blue (which was the colour of Mary's clothes in most depictions) was for girls. I'm sure Disney has a lot to do with the drive for pink for girls. Princessy, sparkly, blah blah blah....I don;t care what children wear once they are comfortable and yes the unending pink dresses for little girls is annoying!

thornton · 02/12/2011 18:06

I can't post on here for fear i may get cross, but Tiggy your post made me laugh. Alot. Grin

mrsravelstein · 02/12/2011 18:09

i agree that kids who aren't allowed to dress up may well be getting negative messages about gender at home. as are the little girls who aren't allowed to go on the slide in the park in case they get their dress dirty.

but MOST people aren't like that, or at least not in my experience, and most people will be wanting their children to have positive ideas about men and women, regardless of what they are wearing.

my dd will i hope continue to have lots of strong role models in her life encouraging her to achieve whatever she wants to. i think it's very peculiar to worry that my dressing her in largely girly clothes is going to have any sort of negative impact on her.

kirsty75005 · 02/12/2011 18:12

@PsecretPsanta. Yes, that's certainly true. But if I remember rightly (don't have a reference to hand) the studies I've seen suggest that innate differences in ability and psychology between the sexes could reasonably explain away gender imbalances in (for example) choice of university courses of up to 60% men / 40% women, or vice versa. Not 90%/10% which is what we frequently see on certain courses.

kirsty75005 · 02/12/2011 18:14

I'm aware that I'm talking about stuff that is miles from the OP.

Original poster
entropygirl · 02/12/2011 18:18

Yup have also heard (on QI) that pink used to be for boys and blue for girls....so clearly the problem is not the actual colour but the discrimination....

erm how can I say this politely...vegetables and clothes are very very different things...but baby boys and baby girls really arent that different at all. If we want equal treatment in later life we should start out with equal treatment as babies....clothes may be a small step but its still a step.

OP posts:
Original poster
entropygirl · 02/12/2011 18:20

kirsty I dont know why you keep trying to distance yourself but why shouldnt it be relevant to gender segregation of jobs that by the time kids are toddlers they have specific ideas about which clothes/toys are for boys or are for girls?

OP posts:
PsecretPsanta · 02/12/2011 18:20

Thanks Kirsty, that's really interesting.

My point of view is that attitudes to sex is more important than outward appearance etc.

I would rather challenge someone's attitude to feminity or masculinity than make my child neutral.

DD does have boys' clothes in her wardrobe. She picked them out herself because she liked the pictures. I have no problem with it, obviously, but also have no problem with her having a pink dress too.

Swipe left for the next trending thread