To be annoyed by SIL making these comments towards my DD

[nhd]

SIL is very much a feminist, very woke etc but to the extreme. My DD is 3.

DD is the first grandchild to ILs and first niece / nephew to my SIL. (I think) she wants to remain child free at least for now, so she sees DD as her closest small person. SIL and PIL want to take an active part in the upbringing of my DD which I'm not necessarily against - the more loving people a child is surrounded by the better in my view. SIL and I aren't very close but we have a good relationship in that we get on when we are together but wouldn't choose to hang out as a 2 without my DH or wouldn't share deep personal secrets. All this is to say that SIL is a nice person, loves DD and doesn't make these comments maliciously I think, but they still really really irritate me and I think they're harmful.

Comments that she will make:
Eg1. We are discussing schools and I mentioned in passing mixed / single sex secondary school and dating boys. SIL instantly comments "or girls if she chooses to date them!"
Eg2. SIL comes over and DD shows her some biscuits that we made that afternoon whilst DH was at football. SIL "you know, just because you're a girl doesn't mean you need to stay home and bake. You could have gone to football with Daddy if you wanted" (DD was excited to bake, she has never expressed any interest in football).
Eg3. I am helping my daughter to put on a dress (gave her a choice of 2, she picked this one) before we go to a family function. SIL comes in (we don't live together but we were driving her there so she came to our house first) and DD runs to hug her but as we've got to leave, after a few mins, I say "come on, let's finish getting dressed, you'll look so pretty". At this point DD is wearing a stained vest, PJ bottoms and one sock. SIL "that's okay, you don't have to look pretty for anyone. You look how you like! Would you like to go like this?" I'm all for giving kids choices but surely I can at least encourage my daughter to wear clean clothes and dress up for occasions? Of course I'd let her wear something else if she didn't like a dress but why put ideas in her head?
Eg4. And the "you don't have to look pretty for anyone" is an ongoing thing. I was once putting on make up before heading out for date night, SIL came over to babysit. DD started copying me, pretending to put on make up, then came up to the mirror and said "wow so pretty, like mummy!" SIL once again said to her "but remember, you don't have to ever try to put on make up or change yourself to impress a man"

It’s not a question of being allowed it’s a question of options and emphasising she’s “allowed” to do anything be that stereoptypical or not non-stereotypical.

It’s not the same though. Because one is reinforcing gender stereotypes, the other is seeking to counterbalance- so to offer an option. It’s like the difference between racism and positive discrimination .

right... so, because she's three, I should continue taking her to football just because she can go to football, even if she asks instead to bake at home

Not at all, that’s not what I said/ meant .
i just don’t think you should read too much into that one event the idea that she likes baking and doesn’t like football. Just continue to offer her a range of options and be aware of / seek to balance the harmful effects of unconscious gender conditioning.

Yes. Yes it IS about giving women choice. People like the OP's SIL are why a lot of women do not want to call themselves feminists. Your idea of feminism is very old fashioned and I think it is reductive.

The SIL was pushing the non girly options, though. How is that any different to what the pro-SIL people are saying that the OP is doing?

The word 'work' does not imply remuneration IMO. Work is work. I do agree that childcare should be remunerated, but that is a complicated conversation.

@VanityDiesHard "The SIL was pushing the non girly options, though. How is that any different to what the pro-SIL people are saying that the OP is doing?"

She wasn't "pushing" the non girly options. She was making sure the child knew they existed. Girls don't have to emphasise being pretty-despite what the whole weight of society/ media tells them.

Team SIL

She was pushing them. Instead of acknowledging the child's pride and pleasure in her baking, she immediately brushed her aside and started saying she should go to football. When the little girl admired her mother in makeup and started playing with it, the SIL went on a rant about not needing makeup to attract a man. The child wasn't thinking about men, the SIL was.

What on earth makes you think that OP, the engineering graduate, isn't already making it clear to her daughter that there are non-girly options in existence and that they're open to her?

That's what would get my back up in OP's situation. She already has this under control, but her sister is acting as though she's not giving her daughter those options. And yes, she's undermining her to her child instead of having an adult conversation about it

I don't consider myself to be "woke" at all, however I see absolutely nothing wrong with these comments. From the title and the first paragraph I expected to roll my eyes at your SIL but I'm actually left questioning why this would bother you!? I regularly say similar things to my son age 2!

I think that it is a lot harder to 'condition' a child than the team SIL posters are implying. If conditioning were that easy, I would be a carpentery nerd who loved working on cars and building things (my mother's interests) rather than a fashion and cookery nerd. Well, maybe I was conditioned to like the things I like, but my love of them comes from my father, who was a very sharp dresser and also a chef. Neither of my parents would have been impressed if some woke virtue signaller had started rabbiting on about women's empowerment, as they believed in leading by example, not endless talk.

@VanityDiesHard "When the little girl admired her mother in makeup and started playing with it, the SIL went on a rant"

You made that "rant" bit up.

I'm struggling to see how the posters who are so pro the SIL wouldn't find it grating to be constantly undermined. However much we all agree that being gay is ok, and feminist ideals are good, would we not really all prefer to bring our children up how we see fit?

@saraclara "What on earth makes you think that OP, the engineering graduate, isn't already making it clear to her daughter that there are non-girly options in existence and that they're open to her?"

Great if she does. Why does it matter if the child's aunt does too?

SIL needs to have a day off.

By consistently undermining her?

For one thing, it isn't the aunt's business. Unless there is abuse, I think that it is inappropriate for outsiders to try to parent: I'm not a fan of 'it takes a village'. For another, the aunt's message is very dated and lacks nuance.

But it’s not different lifestyles; more like constant sniping. How come SIL wasn’t at the football with her brother?

Nah, I’d be irked by her. Can’t disagree with her but she sounds a bit full on.

I'd wager that pretty much everyone on earth - male or female - likes to believe that other people find them attractive. There is nothing wrong with telling any child that they are pretty, nice-looking, whatever. As I said before, the problem is when a cohort of children - girls - grow up believing that being attractive is their main value in life.

@CurlewKate It matters because in one example she undermined the instruction that OP had given her daughter, and in another she ignored her niece's achievement in order to make a point that she didn't need to. The child had already been offered football.
And the last example was a really not so subtle dig at OP allowing her three year old to play with makeup. Because it makes no sense at all as a genuine conversation to have with a three year old.

If a MIL had done the same, the sister's cheerleaders on here would be making entirely different posts.

@VanityDiesHard I'm interested that you think the message is outdated and I don't understand. Do you think that there aren't still societal/commercial pressures on children to conform to gender stereotypes?

@SouthLondonMum22 The answer to child care = women isn’t to expect women who want to be at home with their kids to stop it and do something they like less- the answer is to drive home the idea that it’s it’s vital and valuable work, therefore it doesn’t involve a loss of ego for men if they do childcare.

Expecting women to do something they don’t want to and doesn’t make them happy, in order to try and make it better for other women is playing into the stereotype that women exist to sacrifice their wants and needs to the betterment of everyone else.

No one would expect this level of collective thinking from men- they are allowed to do what suits them best.

There are possibly still some pressures, yes, but there is also a great awareness of the need to not conform to stereotypes. Plus, there is more acknowledgement now that beauty and fashion is an art form in itself, it isn't just a tool for catching men (which is what SIL assumed that it was)