To think gender colour coded lucky dip is unacceptable?

[asharah]

Helping out with the PTA I discovered kids were being asked to bring in lucky dip prizes, wrapped pink for girls and blue for boys. I was really shocked. Surely our kids should be encouraged not to discriminate and play with all toys? When I shared my concern that this reinforced unhelpful gender stereotypes some parents came back saying they didn't want boys to be upset or teased for receiving pink fluffy toys, or vice versa? I've never come across gender separated lucky dip before, and encountered hundreds. Is it normal?

Why a pink comb? Why offer that to the girls only? And vice versa?

Why do pink glittery things always get labelled as "tat" "rubbish" or other negative type words?

Hula I mostly agree with you that they shouldn't be labelled tat, but the very overtly pink, fluffy and looks like a unicorn shat on it stuff does seemingly tend to proliferate in cheaper shops and often be cheaper/poor quality stuff.

No idea what that says about the world.

"A couple of years ago, I bought them both identical toy Santas for Xmas. My ds picked him up and another toy and pretended they were fighting each other. My dd sat the Santa on the floor and made a tea party for it. How would explain this?"

a) coincidence of temperament of two children, that just happens to conform to your hypothesis
b) conditioning already taking effect (it begins from babyhood)

And surely glittery stuff and barbies could be on sale where those who want them can choose them. Leaving lucky dip for smaller items with broader appeal.

For all that is holy please do not give whistles and harmonicas out has prizes.

I have never seen a pink glittery article of high quality Hula.

I would call most cheap, poor-quality plastic toys 'tat'.

snowflake

Football rattles?

It is a bit dispiriting that from 1985 to 2015, the only progress made is that if I was 8 years old now at your fete, I would be allowed to pick from the BOYS tub with no fuss.

And I would agree with you. As I said, I did start off with one tub full of just "stuff". It was changed due to the amount of times I had to let a child rummage through, squidging parcels in the process, to find something more "boy" or "girl".

I was mainly explaining why a school might run their lucky dip that way TBH. Not saying that it was necessarily ideal.

Maybe grooming female children to be bimbos is the problematic choice

Grrr, that really annoys me. I did the whole gender neutral thing when I had dd. She's obsessed with all things girly. Loves dressing as a princess, glitter handbags etc.

I am not raising a bimbo. I'm raising a completely normal 4 year old girl. There's nothing wrong, with glitter and the colour pink.

Maracas maybe, that's it, maracas!

But you can easily buy quality stuff that is pink and glittery.
Likewise, go in any cheap shop and you can get cheap, poor quality stuff in blue, green, etc.

I just think the whole gender thing is starting to tip over too far to the other side IN SOME CASES.

There is nothing wrong with children playing with any toy at all.
And if a girl wants to play with something pink and glittery then they should be allowed to, if it is their choice.

I just worry that we are ending up with people now just condemning anything that is pink, glitter. fluffy, etc as rubbish regardless of anything else.

Why is a toy train deemed to be a better toy than a doll? Because for some people, it is. And that is just as much as a concern as anything else.

StrawberryTeaLeaf yes only because I have always wanted to try one of those .

Maybe grooming female children to be bimbos is the problematic choice?

giving children a coloured toy doesn't make them a bimbo - your views are really offensive and sexist. I cant believe anyone would say parents are raising their children as bimbos because they like pink.

pink glittery stuff is often something to make the person look good

is it? why would a pink train make someone look good? or why would a pink purse make someone look good? why would pink pants make a 3yr old look good?

I wouldn't compare or euqate pink glitter with train TBH

since when have toys been functional only? toys are there to stimulate children and use their imagination - they don't have to be realistic. maybe only people who want to be train drivers should play with trains?

StrawberryTeaLeaf Yes but only if she uses them at daddy's house haha

StrawberryTeaLeaf - well, I can assure you some of it is around and pink quality toy around. And generally no harder to find than toys in other colours.

DD had toys in a range of colours. The majority were of good quality. Some were pink..

Grrr, that really annoys me. I did the whole gender neutral thing when I had dd. She's obsessed with all things girly. Loves dressing as a princess, glitter handbags etc.

That's not a lucky dip scenario then? You're saying that's her own free choice? So quite different from the scenario under discussion here.

DD had toys in a range of colours. The majority were of good quality. Some were pink.

AND glittery?

snowflake

vuvuzela?

giving children a coloured toy doesn't make them a bimbo - your views are really offensive and sexist. I cant believe anyone would say parents are raising their children as bimbos because they like pink.

It's not just the colour. It's never just the colour.

There will be glitter and feathers and beads and sequins and an emphasis on self-adornment and appearance and daintiness and domesticity and caring for people and feeding them and looking after animals.

The so called 'boys' toys will not have those characteristics.

Well, some of the wooden blocks she had did have glittery on - and other textures. Not all were pink and glittery some were blue and glittery, etc. The pink glittery ones were no different in quality to the other colours.

The Sylvanian Families stuff she had were often pink/pastel colours and some parts had some glittey bits on - I would consider SF generally of good quality.

Her pink teddy with glitter on was of the same decent quality as the other glittery and non glittery soft toys she had.

Her dolls/dolls clothes that had pink and glitter on were of the same decent quality as the non pink and non glittery ones she had.

Yes but only if she uses them at daddy's house

AuntieStella those could be acceptable as they would be classed as "world music" by my DD school.

I have quite a nostalgic soft spot for Sylvanian families. It's a posh LD that includes those

If you google party bag fillers, girls stuff is decorations - bracelets, fans, hair things, and boys stuff is things to do - balls

This thread made me remember a little boy who used to attend a Nursery I worked in. One day his Dad came to collect him early and was furious that his son was in the Role play, wearing a dress and pretending to do the ironing and out clothes away, apparently if her turned out gay then he was going to sue us! You could almost see the steam coming out of Dad's ears as he was so angry. Little boy looked confused as to what he'd done that made his Dad so angry with him and the staff. The little boy didn't play in the role play Corner again after that day because his dad told him it's for girls, which was sad because the little boy absolutely loved dressing up.

Dd isn't the biggest fan of "girls" toys, I have three nieces who are Disney princess mad, four nephews who love football, wrestling etc and I've noticed tha none if the children give a toss, it's the adults who comment on dds choices, it's adults who tell her she should be wearing nice dresses and not jogger bottoms, that she'd be so pretty if she styled her hair. She hates being called a tomboy, because it implies that a girl not liking pink etc needs another label and can't just be a "girl" Shes really confident in herself and stands her ground when an adult insists she can't possibly want to be an inventer, but I do worry that as she gets to secondary school, she may feel pressure to conform.