dd is only going to use gender neutral stuff for her dd?

[ioliverielinor]

hiya,

just looking for views really. is this the new modern parenting? dd2 is expecting a dd herself and has said she would only like gender neutral gifts, i was a bit upset because i think there are some lovely girls clothes, i said will she never put her in dresses, she says no. im a bit surprised really, but yet she is happy to have her hair long, etc.??

just curious if this is the norm now? i have never really heard of it before, dd1 has 3 dc different genders and never had an issue buying them boys and girls items.

im not judging, but think its slightling strange? aibu?

However, most little girls will beg for pink, frills and glitter when they are toddlers. Not all, but most girls love girly stuff. I teach at secondary level, and most of the girls still love things like pink stationery etc

That is however, learnt and not innate behaviour.

Re it being "modern"
My ex mil bought gender neutral colours for her son aka my STBXH (for the same reason as I did for dd).
Someone actually asked her "yeah but how can you tell what it is?" It being baby STBXH 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

isn't

It's funny this isn't it? You ask if this is the norm now, but I think it used to be quite normal. I grew up in the 80s in tracksuit bottoms, jeans and (oh yes!) shell suits. I was always wearing trainers or sensible leather sandals or wellies. Yes, I had the odd dress for Christmas or special occasions, but otherwise didn't really wear them and neither did my friends. It makes me sad for the little girls you see at playgrounds these days climbing around in pumps, tights and skirts/dresses. When did that become normal?
In short: good on your daughter.

It's not 'the norm' as such, but it's not totally weird and out there either - it's your DD's choice. People do treat babies differently based on whether they perceive them to be a girl or a boy. I think dressing a baby neutrally has something to be said for it - and that it's more important to be supportive of your DD as a new mum than it is to get upset about her not liking exactly the same baby things as you.

What was the BBC programme

"No more Boys and Girls" Well worth a watch.

We did this. I think it was nice that my daughter wore lots of different colours. All the 'girls' stuff is pink! So dull! Now she is older she wears a mix of dresses and leggings and some stuff from both sides of the shop. Please allow your daughter some space to decide this for her child.

@puddingpen - I'm assuming they are talking about no more boys and girls: it's really good and eye-opening.

I did pretty much gender neutral as we hoped for two children so lots of cream/ white/ brown/ green. Yellow cot bedding, brown pushchair etc. Worked out fairly well. However I now have a 3 year old daughter (first was a son) and despite my gender neutral approach she will now only wear dresses and is a pink-a-holic, mad about princesses, unicorns and glittery stuff.

Actually that's a good point dahlietta - most of my clothes were pretty gender neutral in the 80s too. Babygros in primary colours when I was a baby. Then lots of jeans, tracksuit bottoms and jumpers in plain colours, trainers for every day and so on. Dresses were for parties mostly.

It's not 'new modern parenting'

It's traditional parenting, as before the era of consipicous concumptiin, people expected items to last through several DC and so were suitable for either sex.

All very sensible if you ask me.

I grew up in the 80s dressed like a China doll and told to keep my patent leather shoes tidy on a gravel playground. Thank god my brother came along and my mother was to knackered to keep that shit up.

I doubt she's requested beige only! Lots of lovely rainbow stuff available (e.g. Jools' Little Bird range.
OP, it's fine - lots of beautiful gifts /clothes you can still buy your new granddaughter without annoying her mother, who will likely relax her no dress rule in due course. For now, I don't think it's worth upsetting her over.

Great, I hope my DD's do similar.

Dresses on babies and toddlers are ridiculous. There are plenty of nice clothes that aren't overtly pink and flouncy.

I'd like to think there is some middle ground, so never putting a daughter in a dress is further than I'd take it, but to my mind there is too much 'pink or blue' around at the moment, with limited choice of other options for babies. I was recently given a huge bag of second hand baby clothes from a friend's little boy really lovely stuff but all of it is blue! I'm veering toward not finding out the sex of my little bean at the mo, and I'm sure it's partly because it might stop people ok MIL getting the pink/blue obsession! Not saying this is you at all OP, just that it seems to have polarised into the pink/blue brigade versus the completely neutral brigade. I'd quite like my child to wear nice things in a variety of styles and colours!

I think the having 90% of small children's clothes in blue or pink is a "new" thing - 90s at the earliest?

You don't have to buy beige. Just not pink and frilly. They can have lots of nice practical pastel babygros when they're tiny, and then lovely bright dungarees as they get bigger.

This is what I would do if I was having a baby now. Lots of red, orange, yellow and lime green (my favourite colours).

There are some great unisex kids clothes. Mini rodini, Duns, frugi, little bird at mother care, John Lewis does some nice bits. Love dressing my little boy in bright yellow, green, etc. Can't stand the whole thing of girls all in pink, boys in blue. Really dull.

I think refusing to ever put her in a dress is a bit silly. My personal preference is for bright neutrals but if people gave me a gift of a dress she would wear it at some point. I'd feel horrifically rude telling someone 'thanks for the dress but we're doing gender neutral here doncha know'.

I chose not to find out the gender of either my babies so it was neutral stuff all the way. I think k it was nicer really, I had lots of bright cheerful clothes or natural looking beige, cotton or white which was lovely old a newborn.

I can't stand the idea that Girl = pink, frilly, chintzy stuff and Boy = blue, stripes, cars and well, boredom.

Hard to stick to though.

I chose not to find out the gender of either my babies so it was neutral stuff all the way. I think k it was nicer really, I had lots of bright cheerful clothes or natural looking beige, cotton or white which was lovely old a newborn.

I can't stand the idea that Girl = pink, frilly, chintzy stuff and Boy = blue, stripes, cars and well, boredom.

Hard to stick to though.

jelly my eldest boy was born in 1988 and did have quite a lot of blue clothes bought for him. Though we did buy him other colours like red and bright turquoise.

It's not a new thing - people have been rejecting colour coded stuff for kids for 40 years or more. I think I've now said this 10 times on similar threads - pink for girls was a marketing ploy from the 1920s - before that it was red/pink for boys (more expensive dye) and blue for girls (esp in Catholic countries).

And it doesn't mean beige - you still have all the spectrum to choose from. My DCs loved yellow and red and blue. Dresses are a huge nuisance for toddlers exploring.

Have you watched the programme www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09202lp/no-more-boys-and-girls-can-our-kids-go-gender-free-series-1-episode-1

In brief, they dressed a male toddler in pink and a girl toddler in blue. They were treated by both men and women minders according to the "accepted" colour - boy in pink encouraged to cuddle dolls, girl in blue treated less gently and encouraged to explore, play with tactical toys (lego etc).

We are all on a spectrum from ultra-feminine to ultra-masculine, with most of us around the centre. But at an early age, is it really necessary to encourage an emphasis on one extreme or the other? It can reduce confidence and exploration in girls and emotional continence in boys. They'll find their place on the spectrum eventually but on their own.