to be bothered by all these references to girl's names and girl's clothes and toys and etc.....

[quirrelquarrel]

I can't shrug it off, I can't take it lightly. Maybe I need to grow up and grow a thicker skin but it really bothers me! Why is it even an issue for boys to wear tights? Why can't girls wear little tops and things from the boy's section? Why do we keep asking these basic Qs over and over? And WHY on earth do people keep making links between sexuality and gender when you're talking about CHILDREN. Never mind later on, how can a little boy in pink even have his sexuality (which is set in stone from bloody birth) magically switched because of the colour he likes, or someone else has put him in.
Wearing a dress = traditionally feminine. Liking boys = traditionally feminine (not necessarily, even!). Why people would even think that one thing, one "concession", would lead to a slippery slope, I don't know.

I'm putting this all very clumsily but I don't know. I don't want to answer threads re: these sorts of topics because I do find it upsetting. I would really like to hear reasons for having distinct boy's/girl's names, that's the most puzzling thing. Anyone?

I was shocked at this news about the sea?!

'You could call a girl Benjamin, or a boy Joyce, but what benefits do you think it woukd bring?'

It would be quite nice to be able to use a name that you really like for any DC. If you really love the name Elizabeth, or always wanted a child named after your mother but only have boys.

I sometimes think though that we are getting to the point where little girls aren't allowed to be 'girly' (sorry couldn't think of another word), it annoys me just as much when people refuse to put girls in pink as when someone always puts them in pink, I think both extremes are just as strange.

My dd was dressed in all colours, grey, white, yellow, red, orange (she looks good in orange) and yes pink and purple, her toys have been all colours, so now she has a pink scooter and wants her room painted blue, I like to think she has no hang ups about colour.

It's the same with toys, I've never gender specified toys and she's had alsorts from garages to dolls. She now loves her dolls, they are her babies and she looks after them excellently (even breastfeeds on occasion) but for Christmas she wants a skateboard.

However she does like wearing dresses and will wear these over all other types of clothing, I do buy her jeans/tee shirts but they don't often get worn.

But whatever she likes/doesn't like I think she has found her own way there without me pushing her towards or away from certain things/colours.

MrsKwazii has hit the nail on the head - it was a PARENT that judged the "boy's tshirt"

it's parents who need re-educating.

and naughty Zelda - don't put those barriers in your DD's way.

I would to be called Kevin though.

hate.

there are plenty of names that cross the sex divide.

Joyce is one of them.

Hilary, Lesley (okay the boy's way is normally spelled differently, but it doesn't have to be), Beverly, Sam, Jordan, Taylor, Cody, Jody, Andy/i/ie, Jan, Alex, Morgan, Bailey, Cameron

some of these are diminutives, but that's allowed these days too, so why not?

my own name is a girl's one in this country, but in Italy, it's a boy's name (Juventus had 2 of them in their team on Wednesday)

You could call a girl Benjamin, or a boy Joyce, but what benefits do you think it would bring?

My point is not that it would bring some great breakthrough for gender equality, but more than the situation as it is limits personal choice- and really, isn't feminism just as much fighting for one woman as for us all? It aims to improve the lot of the individual. If a mum likes the name James no matter what, she's always loved it, and she has a girl....she should feel proud of the name she picks.

Oo....I would never inflict the name Joyce on anyone! poor little boy.

The names one is difficult. We live in a highly gendered society. Even our language is gendered. Try talking about a person for any length of time without identifying their gender - even our pronouns categorise. Imagine if we had different pronouns for different eye colours? Giving your child a 'male' name for a girl (as opposed to unisex) does mean you are making the decision on their behalf to fight against preconceptions and put up with all the incorrect assumptions. And that is quite a responsibility to place on your child rather than to take on yourself (eg. changing your own name to James).

I was having a discussion the other day though that, actually, I have it easy as a mum of girls. It's 'ok' for a girl to wear boy's t-shirt, etc. Try dressing a boy in a dress and see what a strong reaction you get. I have long felt it is interestingly addressed in the quote from The Cement Garden (as used by Madonna) - "Girls can wear jeans and cut their hair short, wear shirts and boots, because it's OK to be a boy, but for a boy to look like a girl is degrading, because you think that being a girl is degrading." That is the essence of it for me - heaven forbid your boy should be mistaken for a girl. It is offensive in a way the reverse tends not to be.

My dd 4 just told me pink is for girls as I bought my ds a pink tommee tippee sippy cup, I don't know where she gets it from, she says her teacher, I really hope not.

''You could call a girl Benjamin, or a boy Joyce, but what benefits do you think it woukd bring?'
they'd become good fighters very quickly

Is sexuality set in stone from birth? The science on this is complicated and it seems that there might be genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences.
However, I don't imagine dressing a boy in pink would be one of those influences.
As for names, I guess it is for convenience. OP, what interests me is why you find it upsetting. I'm not sure the argument of personal choice convinces me because everyone has the choice of non-gender associated names... River, Sky, Yellow, Whatever. Why would you want a traditional boys name for a girl?

I'd say that sexuality is a spectrum, but that people are generally encouraged to pick one end or the other (and depending on the society in which you find yourself you could be strongly encouraged to pick only the "acceptable" side regardless of your actual feelings)

Very true Trills

I have noticed other European countries' kids toys & clothes don't do the pink and blue thing, or not nearly as much. Roll on the day IKEA starts a kids' clothes line.

I also read some research (possibly it was in Freakonomics) that stated that when little girls are given names that could be either gender, the names then eventually become girls' names only, for similar reasons to it being socially acceptable for little girls to be tomboys but not the other way around.

It is purely up to them. I cried when my mother tried to get me to wear my brother's shorts because 'they were no different' - I refused. My DSs wouldn't wear tights - end of story. Not anything to get het up about.

I think the difference between girls and boys clothing is deeper than the colour though isn't it. I wouldn't have a problem with the boys wearing a pink jumper or whatever if they wanted to, but the cut and the style of clothes is different for the different sexes.
I posted on one of the other threads about girls/boys clothing as DS2 would love cat clothes and DS1 would like horse clothes. But they don't want pictures of cats/ponies adorned in ribbons and little hearts and frills, because they don't like them. They want a hardwearing t-shirt that they can use to climb trees and dig in the dirt (surely some girls would also want a t-shirt with the same functionality, I don't know, my nieces hate getting muddy).

DS3 is 4 and I sometimes buy him pony magazines but it upsets him that every picture in them is of girls mooning over horses, pink ponies etc. At 4 it is trying to be pushed into him that only girls can like horses and that he is odd that he does. Why can't the magazines even if they have to be pink have pictures of boys in.

see, that's the main problem, LittleMiss - the fact that the manufacturers/designers have decided for the children what they want.
so, yes, you get ridiculously frilly, glittery tops with horses and cats, or bland, grey/blue tops with trucks/trains/cars on.
There's no choice.

so, if a boy liked pink, he'd be hard pressed to find a top that was just pink, no glitter/frills/ribbons.
that's a lot worse than a girl having to wear a blue top with a truck on it.

It is the general assumption that a girl is lesser than a boy, so why aspire to wear things that girls would wear?

the choice should be there for both sexes - you should be able to get plain tshirts in all colours, you should be able to get animals motifs on plain-shaped clothes and transport on plain-shaped clothes.

Why, just because a tshirt is Blue should it have a truck or a slogan "i'm daddy's little man!"?
why because the cloth is pink should it have puffed sleeves and ribbons all over?

I've been given clothes that are a nice, sensible shape and colour, but they've got a pink ribbon at the bottom of the leg, just so that you can't say "oh, yes, that's unisex"
or leggings that would work for both sexes have a pattern that's flowers or hearts. (nothing wrong with flowers or hearts, but why is on every single item of clothing?)

in M&Co, which is slightly better in terms of glitter and stuff, every single one of their girl's clothes for summer had at least one pink flower or heart on it. even on the clothes that were blue, or red, or green.

and they had this bird design, right, on normal clothes, ones that could be unisex. No! because every time you thought "oh, yes, that's unisex", they'd put a little slogan on ascertaining that the clothes must be worn by a girl.

I so agree - it's impossible to buy girls clothes without something on it indicating it's for girls - even on the plainest of white pants, there is almost always a little ribbon somewhere. I know because my daughter absolutely won't wear anything she thinks is aimed at girls. I am now buying more and more from surfing/moutaineering/climbing type shops for her as they seem to have more unisex stuff - and it's usually quite hard wearing too and therefore great for her, my little tree-climber!

ELC don't do the pink globe anymore.

They discontinued it yonks ago before they sacked me.

Marketing ploy, pure and simple. I just bought DD a pair of bright orange cords and they have a huge label at the back that proclaims 'GIRL'.

The genderisation of names is interesting because it only really works in your own language and other languages that are familiar.

Try reading a list of names in a language that you can't even guess at, it does change your perspective.

Many of the early feminists picked up on this and ran with it, changing their names to make them gender neutral - often using plant names.

Gets right on my pip. I was told a one year old boy shouldn't like Peppa Pig because it's 'for girls'

boys in dresses used to be totally the norm - go round many National Trust properties and you can see them in the family portraits. Likewise pink was sometimes considered a boy's colour: pinkification. So all those people who think that boys liking pink/ wearing dresses will 'get the gay' are ignoring/ ignorant of our own recent history.

Marketing of toys, clothes and books has a gender bias from a very young age.
Children are aware of this gender marketing from a very young age.

There is a massive gender gap growing in our society, and marketing and adverts are to blame.

Much of the marketing targets girls in a negative way.

"Girls can wear jeans and cut their hair short, wear shirts and boots, because it's OK to be a boy, but for a boy to look like a girl is degrading, because you think that being a girl is degrading." That is the essence of it for me - heaven forbid your boy should be mistaken for a girl. It is offensive in a way the reverse tends not to be.

^This.