To think that nothing is going to change for women while girls are still targeted with this bullshit?

[WinterTrees]

In Sainsburys this morning. In the boys' clothes aisle I noticed tops with the words UNLIMITED and UNSTOPPABLE printed on them. Took a quick detour down the girls aisle to see what similarly empowering messages were being directed at them...

I just don't accept that it's ok to blame the customers. These massive companies have a responsibility. Their influence in society is HUGE and they have to be held to high standards about how they use that

But the public had to take some responsibility for its choices. Some people (not myself) like these clothes for their children, and yes it's not a good message and yes it helps perpetuate the wrong message, but that isn't all on the supplier of the goods.

It's like having sweets at the checkouts. Presumably that was an easy cash generator for supermarkets and loads of people (parents especially) succumbed to the pressure and temptation to buy them just because they were there. Supermarkets didn't remove them because customers stopped buying them, they removed them because of pressure from Public Health England who did studies into the harm caused by obesity and poor nutrition, in which impulse purchases of sweets played a small but significant part

Yes and how sad that government had to step in to stop parents buying unnecessary sweets and making them obese, people have to take responsibility for their choices. These facts are not hidden, everyone knows we have an obesity crisis in our kids, as a nation we should be embarrassed we have to be nannied like children and have things "hidden" from us to take away temptation.

Wouldn't it be nice to see the same interest and the same commitment to change applied to the harm caused to women and girls by misogyny and sexist stereotypes?

It absolutely would, 100% but we can't just keep pushing the blame on others, we are responsible for our choices as well. I buy for my niece, she wears non of these logo tops, but I do (and did) still manage to shop for her (she's 6) without these ridiculous clothing items.

So yes lobby for that to happen and take the choice away from those who make bad decisions.

@Porcupineintherough You need to pipe down and lose the attitude. You have no idea how much or little "effort" people are making. Some parents work long hours and have limited time and a limited budget. They buy what's available and affordable in the shops most accessible to them. Because frankly, the colour or pattern of the clothes is low down on the priority list.

I think it would be well worth an approach to Sainsbury's Diversity & Inclusion people. Explaining that their highly gendered clothing is undermining their message and implies that they hold deeply sexist views.

Maybe flag the message that stay home T-shirt sends in the wake of Sarah Everard's murder and the focus on violence against women and girls.

Ask them to specifically request their suppliers create a range with strong and positive messages for girls as well as a unisex range.

**
Yes and how sad that government had to step in to stop parents buying unnecessary sweets and making them obese, people have to take responsibility for their choices. These facts are not hidden, everyone knows we have an obesity crisis in our kids, as a nation we should be embarrassed we have to be nannied like children and have things "hidden" from us to take away temptation. **

By this logic we may as well remove speed limits and sell alcohol and cigarettes to minors as people always make the right choices...

By this logic we may as well remove speed limits and sell alcohol and cigarettes to minors as people always make the right choices...

Absolutely not, they should not be removed, I never stated they should be, but people who put their children and others at known risks, should be embarrassed by their actions, and they are held responsible for their actions once they have made those bad decisions. Not passed the blame to others for producing fast cars.

But I think manufacturers and retailers do have a responsibility.

Dont produce sexist stereotyped clothing for our children nor cars that have ridiculous top speeds etc.

This problem is multi faceted. Therefore requires change from many sources.

But I think manufacturers and retailers do have a responsibility

As do I, which I said to lobby to them, but let's not just blame them, let's also accept that the public also need to play their part , take responsibility and stop buying the clothes .

Dont produce sexist stereotyped clothing for our children nor cars that have ridiculous top speeds etc

Yes, we agree on that, but again the public need to take responbokity and stop buying them

But they don't have to be "ridiculous top speeds" to break the speed limit? And people have personal responsibility for those bad choices?.

This problem is multi faceted. Therefore requires change from many sources

Yes, that is what I said, it's not just one bodies responsibility.

Yes and how sad that government had to step in to stop parents buying unnecessary sweets and making them obese, people have to take responsibility for their choices. These facts are not hidden, everyone knows we have an obesity crisis in our kids, as a nation we should be embarrassed we have to be nannied like children and have things "hidden" from us to take away temptation.

Yep, very sad. Very sad that there are parents who aren't educated adequately in health and nutrition and who don't reward their kids with rice crackers and goji berries. Very sad that there are parents who are struggling to get through the day, juggling jobs and caring responsibilities, trying to stretch impossibly tight budgets, dealing with poor mental health and lack of support and children with additional needs and who grabbed the smarties at the checkout because they just couldn't deal with the incoming tantrum on top of everything else. Very sad that their children will also suffer because their stressed-to-the-eyeballs mum 'didn't bear responsibility for her choices' or think of the nation's obesity crisis before she fell right into the brightly-packaged sugar-coated trap the supermarkets laid for her.

Thank christ the government did step in to stop boosting the profits of Sainsbury's (annual turnover 28.6 billion) and lining the pockets of its CEO (annual salary 1.32 million) at the expense of harassed parents and the NHS.

^^ agree with that @WinterTrees

Very well said

@WinterTrees

Yes and how sad that government had to step in to stop parents buying unnecessary sweets and making them obese, people have to take responsibility for their choices. These facts are not hidden, everyone knows we have an obesity crisis in our kids, as a nation we should be embarrassed we have to be nannied like children and have things "hidden" from us to take away temptation.

Yep, very sad. Very sad that there are parents who aren't educated adequately in health and nutrition and who don't reward their kids with rice crackers and goji berries. Very sad that there are parents who are struggling to get through the day, juggling jobs and caring responsibilities, trying to stretch impossibly tight budgets, dealing with poor mental health and lack of support and children with additional needs and who grabbed the smarties at the checkout because they just couldn't deal with the incoming tantrum on top of everything else. Very sad that their children will also suffer because their stressed-to-the-eyeballs mum 'didn't bear responsibility for her choices' or think of the nation's obesity crisis before she fell right into the brightly-packaged sugar-coated trap the supermarkets laid for her.

Thank christ the government did step in to stop boosting the profits of Sainsbury's (annual turnover 28.6 billion) and lining the pockets of its CEO (annual salary 1.32 million) at the expense of harassed parents and the NHS.

So a government who causes all these problems for women...you are expecting to care about a message on top.

They dont give a shit.
But yes people also need to take on board they have a responsibility to themselves and their families health.

In reality, Expecting this government to care enough to change this is ludicrous. Should they...probably...will they...not a chance !!

I'm absolutely not suggesting the government should care or have any involvement at all in the slogans displayed on Sainsburys clothing. I think you're conflating two arguments.

But I do believe that Sainsburys as a business have responsibility and should take it seriously. The fact that they don't appear to suggests that, for all their corporate virtue-signalling for other groups, they're not bothered about addressing systemic sexism and misogyny.

No institution or corporation or branch of government is going to care more about a child than its parents. The parents who buy this stuff arent doing so die to mental health crisis, or the pressures of work, or whatever fanciful excuse you choose to dream up. They are buying them because they either agree with the message it sends, or dont care about the message it sends, or dont see the link bw the messaging on clothing and the big stuff they do care about.

I think that there’s little understanding of how low level stuff builds up to big problems.
The constant messaging that girls are pretty, kind and not good at maths has an impact.

I'm absolutely not suggesting the government should care or have any involvement at all in the slogans displayed on Sainsburys clothing. I think you're conflating two arguments

No im not conflating the issue. you gave a list of suggested reasons on why these parents are buying these tshirts, and all those reasons are related to our governments failings.

And by the way, as a side note, our government should care, it should see this as a problem and it should want it stopped, it doesn't give a shit though.

But I do believe that Sainsburys as a business have responsibility and should take it seriously. The fact that they don't appear to suggests that, for all their corporate virtue-signalling for other groups, they're not bothered about addressing systemic sexism and misogyny.

Shocker...no they are not. They care about profit, end of and its niave to ever think otherwise no matter how much they pay for their PR to show you differently. So it comes back to, they don't care so won't change until they are forced, the people who can force them dont care, so won't 🤷 so lets make the option to print and sell them not a financially viable one by not buying them, thus giving them no profit, thus them stopping production.

Over the years this gendered marketing aimed at children has become increasingly blatant.
My 2 DS are now 20 and 17, I did buy digger tops and dinosaur tops when they were into that stuff but there was no obvious slogans as in the ops first post.
When I was young in the 70's there were no pink, glittery aisles for girls and super hero aisles for boys, we are going backwards with this gendered bullshit.

As an aside I was talking about this with friends all around my age, they had never given this any thought and were aghast when they actually thought about it.

When I was young in the 70's there were no pink, glittery aisles for girls and super hero aisles for boys, we are going backwards with this gendered bullshit.

There were gendered toys and clothes - Sindy vs train sets etc, dresses for girls... but there wasn't so much of it, and it wasn't in supermarkets. I'm not sure when the technology for printing logos onto t-shirts was invented but afaik it simply didn't exist then.

I seem to remember things were very gendered in the late 70s / 80s though? For instance, I was only ever allowed to wear dresses (dint think I had any trousers even) and when there were friends’ birthday parties, all the girls used to go in long dresses the mums had made out of old curtains or nylon bedspreads something. This is what happened.

Was this just us?

Also, the only toys I had were soft toys, a dolls house, toy mops and brushes, Sindys and a Sindy car, the ‘Girls’ World’ make -up thing, various dolls and a plastic carrycot and a pushchair.

I remember my cousin got something called ‘crash cars’ one year and I really wanted that. I was told I couldn’t have it as it was for boys. Also, does anyone remember Evil Kenevil toys? Really wanted that as well, but no .... it was for boys.

In the 80s, I remember when the boys in the streets were getting Raleigh Burner BMX bikes. They were all doing tricks on those. I really wanted a red one - I thought they were so cool. But I got a flowery shopper style bike because... you’ve guessed it... BMX bikes were boys bikes and only boys play in the streets like that.

I think my family were mad looking back.

Also, the Lego was mainly space Lego at that time. My mom said, “You can’t have that boys’ lego.” But I was fascinated with space.

@readwhatiactuallysay

I'm absolutely not suggesting the government should care or have any involvement at all in the slogans displayed on Sainsburys clothing. I think you're conflating two arguments

No im not conflating the issue. you gave a list of suggested reasons on why these parents are buying these tshirts, and all those reasons are related to our governments failings.

And by the way, as a side note, our government should care, it should see this as a problem and it should want it stopped, it doesn't give a shit though.

But I do believe that Sainsburys as a business have responsibility and should take it seriously. The fact that they don't appear to suggests that, for all their corporate virtue-signalling for other groups, they're not bothered about addressing systemic sexism and misogyny.

Shocker...no they are not. They care about profit, end of and its niave to ever think otherwise no matter how much they pay for their PR to show you differently. So it comes back to, they don't care so won't change until they are forced, the people who can force them dont care, so won't 🤷 so lets make the option to print and sell them not a financially viable one by not buying them, thus giving them no profit, thus them stopping production.

readwhatiactuallysay you win the most ironic MN username today

In the post I think you're referring to I gave a list of reasons why parents bought sweets at the checkout, not clothing, hence saying you were conflating 2 arguments. (Quick c&p: "Yep, very sad. Very sad that there are parents who aren't educated adequately in health and nutrition and who don't reward their kids with rice crackers and goji berries. Very sad that there are parents who are struggling to get through the day, juggling jobs and caring responsibilities, trying to stretch impossibly tight budgets, dealing with poor mental health and lack of support and children with additional needs and who grabbed the smarties at the checkout because they just couldn't deal with the incoming tantrum on top of everything else. Very sad that their children will also suffer because their stressed-to-the-eyeballs mum 'didn't bear responsibility for her choices' or think of the nation's obesity crisis before she fell right into the brightly-packaged sugar-coated trap the supermarkets laid for her." ) Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

My original point was, and remains, that in the same week that the sentencing of Sarah Everard's killer and the murder of Sabina Nessa, when questions are being asked about how we can make society safer for women, we could start by looking at the messages we give to children without even being aware of it and the difference in the messages given to boys and girls.

shimmyshimmycocobop I'm really glad you had that conversation! It's pretty stark when you compare the slogans side by side isn't it? I guess that's how change will happen, by gradually spreading awareness. (Also, your username is giving me an irresistible urge to rewatch the film )

5cats I remember Evil Kenevil! My brother had one. I still remember the noise it made as you wound it up. None of the 'girls' toys I had contained anything like that level of engineering!

My sister had him too. And all the action men - got we loved the helicopter! We also had space 1999 ships.

(The loathed) Barbie and Sindy dolls (hand me downs from out older sisters) and our mecano guillotine (yes we really did) were an inevitable disaster....(again, yes we did).

Let Clothes Be clothes Twitter feed has responses from Tu Clothing amd Sainsburys saying their clothes haven't been labelled boys and girls for "many years" followed by people replying with photos of their actual stores with massive Girls signs and screen shots of the actual website with girls and boys sections. Tis total bollocks.

Even if they didn't have different sections, they're still only putting the stay home/be kind messages on the 'feminine' styled and coloured items.

I saw that girls house top online and didn't buy it because I don't like slogans, but thought the house drawing was quite sweet.

Hey girls, just seen this exact article on MyLondon! They spoke about our discussion on here! It's good to get stuff like this out there to end the discrimination. I have had enough of it. It is the same every shop I go into!! www.mylondon.news/whats-on/shopping/sainsburys-blasted-furious-parents-after-21822584