to think MNHQ should know better than to feature photos of babies in headbands (preumably to denote female) on this site?

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

Of all places!

Come on HQ. Pull your finger out!

And boys can wear handbands too, yunno

HQ are behind Let Toys Be Toys aren't they? Why not Let Bald Baby Heads Be Bald Baby Heads?

Perhaps you should stop telling MNHQ what they should and shouldn't do.

I have never been on a website where so many posters feel like they can pull up the owners on every little decision they make if it goes against what they believe to be a very important issue.

It's a stock photo. Many people put girl babies in head bands, it wasn't for me but many people do. It really doesn't matter that there is a small photo of two babies in headbands. MNHQ haven't done anything wrong.

How do you know they are female babies?

Of course you can put a headband on your baby girl if you must Hobnobbing.

I'm complaining about HQ here, not you.

HQ is not against gender stereotyping if they were they wouldn't run clothes adverts with dresses or have a style and beauty section

U2 don't be so reductive. Gender stereotyping is a really important issue (not a bee in a bonnet) and I understood (although clearly am wrong) that HQ were firmly against it.

Well clearly the person who put that photo up doesn't really care.

No doubt they will take it down now though.

How do you know the other babies are boys?

I agree, gender stereotypes are bad, but are we now supposed to dress our children in gender neutral clothes? etc. etc.

ami, that's very true! You're the one stereotyping at the fact that headbands are for girls, OP! They may be little boys! Can you see in their nappy? No.

Least important complaint I've ever seen raised against MNHQ, and crikey that's saying something!

I'm willing to bet there are far more people who quite like babies in headbands, than people who don't.

Either that or there are far more people who really couldn't give a shit either way.

They probably just can't be arsed to post about it.

Really??

Would you have been equally irate if two of those girls had been wearing little dresses?

What about babies who need them, as I said? Should I have let my daughter have hair in her eyes to prove a point?

This is such a non worry.

I think they're boys because the 2 babies in the centre are dominating the conversation. One baby with the headband is just watching and the other baby is trying to point something out but is probably being 'explained to' by the other boy.

More interestingly about that photo, is that the child in control of the keyboard is probably a boy as they have no headband on.

So, while the little girls were being titivated with their headbands, the boys rushed in and got conrol of the computer, leaving the girls to helpfully hold up the lid and peer around the sides, being supportive as it were.

There is a life lesson in that photo.

Babysplaining

salem I'll rephrase.

Headbands on babies who have no hair are stupid. MN should not champion them.

Babies with full heads of hair are cute and can do as they like

Better?

I have never been on a website where so many posters feel like they can pull up the owners on every little decision they make if it goes against what they believe to be a very important issue.

Agreed. Not to mention how rude some people are to them.

"Come on HQ. Pull your finger out!"

It's as though some people (and I don't just mean the OP), think HQ are their own personal staff.

If they're "staff" we should probably tip them as it's Christmas Worra - fiver each from the 20zillion users..

I think those headbands are pretty naff but not sure I can agree with the argument here. Would you be up in arms if there was a picture of a girl in a skirt and a boy in a pair of trousers? Probably not. I don't see how this is any different. They are wearing an item of clothing associated with femininity, so what? Nothing wrong with a bit of frill it doesnt need to have any negative connotations. And,as someone already said, maybe it's the boys in the headbands? You've not had a peep in their nappies

If you google "Let Toys Be Toys" the word Mumsnet comes up in nearly every search result. It started here.

Guardian article.

I am sure there have been lots of threads about baby headbands before Worra. I find them totally hideous (obvs) whereas others clearly haven't given them much thought, or like them, or even love them. However, I think Mumsnet really need to be fine tuned to this sort of lazy gender stereotyping.

Who honestly gives a fuck?

ALl of them could be girls or boys despite the headbands and pink socks.

Do those people on here moaning have daughters with long hair who wear dresses? How is that really any different?

I'm not a fan of headbands really but I don't have aright to tell other people how to dress their child regardless of their motivation. the only exception being if what they are doing is dangerous or could cause a child harm.

However, I think Mumsnet really need to be fine tuned to this sort of lazy gender stereotyping

But again - how do you know they are girls? Is it because they are wearing headbands?

OP, you're the one who is assuming they're girls...? Are you saying boys can't wear pink or headbands??? You're the worst one here!

As the babies are not wearing clothes, there is no need to point out their sex! The point is they are just little humans in nappies.

Gah! I had a similar reaction to that awful twin donkey pushchair with one blue side and one pink side. It screams wrong to me. Let babies be equal and treated the same as each other, at the very least.