To think the cheaper the kids clothes the more gendered the clothing?

[howmuchtoomuch]

DS needed some new tracksuit bottoms for nursery today, so I popped to ASDA. I hadn't realised quite how prolific their gendering of kids clothing was, slogans everywhere!

On the boys side:
‘The louder the better’
‘A bit of dirt never hurt’
‘Rad like dad’

And the girls:
‘Smiley happy dreams’
‘Mummy’s little flower’
‘Giggly and cute’

And the two crimes against fashion I've attached here.

A recent trip to Sainsbury's saw similar results. Whereas a trip to Polarn O Pyret (which I can't afford!) didn't. Not a slogan in sight in PoP!

So why is it that cheaper clothes tend to carry gendered stereotypes? Is it market driven?

I agree with op the trend does appear to be the cheaper the clothing the more gendered it appears to be.
I'm studying a psychology module at the moment on sociocultural issues and how they affect mental health. It's really interesting. One of the aspects is gender and how if you don't fit into what's considered the 'gender norm' your mental health and sense of self can suffer as a result.
It's important that these messages our children receive subconsciously through things like clothing are challenged.

Sainsburys used to be good for baby clothes in bright colours 5 years ago - now they seem to have gone boring blue/pink again. Older kids clothes can be okay, still a shortage of bright colours though (I like to dress DS in stuff that makes him easier to track down when he decides it's time to play hide & seek).

I tend to rate clothes shops by how possible it is for me to find something in the girls section for DS that isn't pink&frilly & so cheap shit it's see through. H&M rates best on this scale - which means I can buy him stuff with cats on!

(Yeah, cats - because small boys are only supposed to like dogs, or wolves. Maybe lions or tigers at a push, but definitely not kittens, bunnies, or butterflies. )

My DS1 has chosen to grow his hair long and is sometimes mistaken for a girl.

It’s been a shocker how differently he’s treated depending whether people assume he’s male or female. We’ve all been really surprised (including him!).

Completely disagree with pp who say this is no big deal, it’s everywhere and it’s damaging.

Why is "boys will be boys" dangerous and worrying?

The only way you can think so is if you think that being male is a bad thing.

We love poloran o pyret they are very good quality and love all the colours for my little boy just wanted to let you know if you have a local POP shop they have really good 50% off sales we get loads of my little boys stuff in the sale. He's got a pair of pants with a multicoloured dinosaur pattern on we have had them for 18 months and gets compliments every time he wears them as they still look new they where 10 in sale.

JanDough—because that saying has traditionally been used to minimise or excuse cruel, rough and anti-social behaviour ranging from fighting to sexual assault. ‘Girls will be girls’ is not much used, but is generally not permission for much more than glitter nail varnish.

YANBU. Sainsburys TU clothes used to be good, but once DD had grown out of the tiny girls stuff she had the choice of boys clothes or grown woman in a nightclub clothes. DD has refused to wear anything that she thinks is 'for girls' since she was about 2.5. The difference in quality between the boys and girls clothes was really marked too; girls trousers were really thin and skimpy on fabric. I think Next are getting better, but still not getting it quite right.

Why is "boys will be boys" dangerous and worrying?

These two articles give some examples of why it’s such a grim, limiting phrase:

www.psychologytoday.com/blog/gender-and-schooling/201403/the-danger-boys-will-be-boys

everydayfeminism.com/2016/05/boys-will-be-boys-harm/

The only way you can think so is if you think that being male is a bad thing.

With respect, that’s utter nonsense. Reducing boys to stereotypical male behaviour reinforces really awful ideas of what it means to be a boy or a man.

I want more for my boys, and frankly I expect more from them than some of the behaviours I see brushed aside by ‘boys will be boys’.

How can you say it's nonsense followed by, "Reducing boys to stereotypical male behaviour reinforces really awful ideas of what it means to be a boy or a man."

Is stereotypical male behaviour awful?

You want more for your boys than being boys?

Total non issue how much .. Remind me who's forcing you to buy this stuff?

Is stereotypical male behaviour awful?

Sometimes, yes. I’m not a huge fan of aggression, suppressed emotions, treating women as objects, or many other ‘boys will be boys’ style behaviours (as shown in the links, it’s used differently as boys get older but the sentiment is the same). I worry about what it is about the way we raise boys that contribute to high suicide rates among young men. I want to raise boys to become men like my husband, whose parents never excused aggressive behaviour, lack of household skills or other behaviours with ‘boys will be boys’.

You want more for your boys than being boys?

I want more for my boys that being confined to narrow, often toxic ideas of masculinity.

I want them to be able to be who they are, not feel they should conform to bullshit outdated ideas of what it means to be a boy.

I’ve been trying to think of non-negative behaviours ‘boys will be boys’ is applied to. The only thing I can really come up with is getting dirty and muddy while playing.

But what’s the message to girls of describing that at ‘boy’ behaviour?

Pretty shit any way you cut it.

There really are very few ways that gender stereotyping is positive for either gender. Fuck knows why people want to plaster their kids in narrow stereotyped slogans.

"toxic masculinity" - do you have a list of words and phrases you copy and paste?

Why are you so against male behaviour and the way boys and men have learnt to behave over millions and millions of years of evolution?

"‘boys will be boys’ style behaviours" which you say are apparently all bad. Feel sorry for your boys.

I agree with pp about Sainsbury’s. I don’t have children, but buy for my niece now and again, and the stuff in there is either pink, frilled and covered in bows or blue, sludge grey and covered in cars. Why can’t there be bright, plain t shirts in yellow, green and red?

Polarn o Pyret (how do you pronounce that, btw?)

Nearest English would be ‘Po-larn (like the po in Poland) the o is like a cross between a short o and an uh and ‘peeret’ but the y is a bit like an uh crossed with a short y

Other OK scandi brands are Duns, småfolk, maxomorra, and lindex. Lindex are probably the cheapest (and somewhat more gendered than the others.) clothes here on Sweden are HORRIFICALLY expensive - we have no supermarket clothes sections, it’s H and M or PoP prices basically, so think yourselves lucky grumble grumble... I always stock up on our trips back to the uk.

"toxic masculinity" - do you have a list of words and phrases you copy and paste?

No. I have an ability to read and actually engage with arguments. You may care to try it.

Why are you so against male behaviour and the way boys and men have learnt to behave over millions and millions of years of evolution?

Because many stereotypically male behaviours aren’t good for either gender. Because we have silly ideas of ‘girl jobs’ and ‘boy jobs’. Because some men are denigrated for taking on caring jobs and responsibilities. Because groping and lower level assault it too often excused as ‘boys will be boys’. At the extreme end, because two women a week are killed by their male partners.

Because young men kill themselves at far higher rates than any other demographic.

"‘boys will be boys’ style behaviours" which you say are apparently all bad.

Well, I said clearly above that there was at least one I can think of that isn’t, but I get that asking you to actually read what I wrote is unreasonable. But it’s early, I have to had coffee, I may be missing all the other amazing, positive behaviours that people apply this phrase to. What are all the other brilliant things that people say ‘boys will be boys’ about?

Feel sorry for your boys

Why, because I want them to be able to be who they want to be, and not buy into stereotypes? Without feeling pressured to conform to narrow, agressive, emotionally fucked up ideas of what it means to be a man? Because I think kindness and caring are as much natural boy behaviours as hitting and yelling?

Yeah, poor loves. Imagine having that sort of freedom of choice. Imagine living with someone who wants to celebrate you and your gender without the help of slogans on a shirt that tells them what their gender is supposed to be.

I always think when I read threads like this one that we must have won the equality battle if we have to scratch around to find such non-issues as this to make a fuss over.

Hmm. In terms of colours and patterns, I think it’s the designer, not the price. So my guilty pleasure is www.alexandalexa.com - lots of it shows that money cannot buy taste, but some of the things are gorgeous. And there is a very clear difference in terms of colour, sparkles, design etc.

But in terms of actual slogans - yes. I wonder if it’s because the George designer can’t exactly slap “sainsbury’s“ on the front, whereas D&G or Marc Jacobs have no such qualms!

To illustrate...

Does it really matter? some girls like to wear 'girls clothes' and ditto boys it's good to still have a choice

What does the phrase 'boys will be boys' mean, really? I'm asking the people that don't seem to have a problem with it.

Why are you so against male behaviour and the way boys and men have learnt to behave over millions and millions of years of evolution

I’m a scientist and this always annoys me. Humans have not evolved as some sort of monolithic single bloc, nor have we ever really had sustained periods of ‘man bring mammoth home, drag woman to cave by hair.’
Humans have evolved in many different cultures, in many different landscapes and we are an adaptable bunch who are able to change our lifestyles to suit.
The most common life type seems to have been small band hunter gatherers who (from what we can see of modern groups who still do this) aren’t big man types at all. More structured societies allow hierarchies to form and that’s when you get a ruling class. Even then, there’s no automatic ‘men in charge’ stuff - look at Stone Age and modern Scandinavian societies and you see that while there was a shit load of violent death, the women were dishing it out too and were very equal participants. Other societies are more patriarchal.

The point is that it’s a total cop out to just simper ‘boys will be boys!’ And ‘evolution, innit’ as an excuse for male violence. We are not living in ancient Mesopotamia nor in caves. We have agency and free will and we are responsible for our actions.

If you want to live an authentic life as per our average evolutionary history I suggest going out the woods, forgoing the central heating and dying of tetanus at 24...

The gendering of clothes is shit. Have ole ty of oink hot girls by all means, but when the ONLY option is pink vs blue or the ONLY option is ‘daddy is my superhero vs I’m a superhero’ then there’s a problem. There’s no issue at all with dinosaurs on boys clothes, just put some on the girls too? And there are problems if most of the girls shoes are uncomfortable and/or unsuitable fit active outdoor play (Clark’s a while back.)

No one is saying we all have to dress our kids in neutral clothes 100% of the time, what they’re saying is that when the ONLY options are heavily gendered and/or force girls to stop climbing trees etc then there’s s problem.

Yes I’ve noticed this too.

Cheap kids clothes are more blue boy pink girl than higher end.

I find it very hard to buy ds clothes that don’t have dinosaurs or a method of transport on them!

Oh and another issue - the girls selection generally has thinner fabrics, lower quality and skimpier cuts.

I have boys and don’t find it a huge problem to find plain stuff, stuff in bright colours or fun dinosaur t shirts - but when I’m looking in the girls section I’m always struck by just how crap a lot of it is.
When did this start? I look back at my 70/80s childhood photos and there is very little pink and zero frilly froth, just practical clothes in various colours.

Wow, there is some wilful dimwittedness on this thread. It's not about saying that children can't choose to wear pink sparkles or dinosaurs. It's about stopping the message that boys must wear one kind of thing and girls another. And, at the very least, stopping emblazoning children's clothes with shit stereotypes. How can anyone think this doesn't matter? It affects who children think they are! And as for the trans thing, maybe not so many young people would feel traumatised by their gender if they hadn't been led to believe in unnecessary and untrue norms about that gender.