To get “girls” stuff when I search for “boys”

[Cocobeau]

This is so fucking annoying.

I get this problem on so many websites. I specifically select the “boys” category and then results show a load of clothes clearly aimed for girls.

This example is from M&S. My exact actions;

Kids tab > 3 for 2 on kids Clothing > Boys (the options are view all, view boys or view girls.

These are the very first results that display. It’s clearly all designed with girls in mind. I get you’re allowed to dress your boy in pink and animal print, but I’d prefer not to for now. He can wear what he wants when he’s old enough to choose.

You might say this is a fly in the system but I have also frequently had this problem previously on Next and H&M.

I messaged Next once about it as I thought it was a glitch on the app. Their response was to tell me to use the web version, which had the same issue.

This is very much first world problems but it’s soooo bloody annoying!

Me too, like when men say they’re women because growing up they wanted to do dance and wear pink.
If only it had been more acceptable for them to like dance, wear pink and still be biologically male huh…

So go in the search bar and type in t-shirt (for example) then go onto the categories and select sizes from both the girls and boys and it'll filter for both.
I do this as I'm a size 3 shoe so always looks at kids trainers and I think boys feet must grow faster as there are often almost brand new 'boys' trainers.

Whoa! No wait, I've just tried and it didn't work! It definitely used to!

Like if I'm looking for a birthday gift for a 9 year old girl e.g. my niece or God daughter, and I have no idea what 9 year old girls like, having a section on their website could well be helpful!

I totally agree. I have a DS and a DD. However when I'm looking for a gift for e.g. my niece and I don't know what sorts of things she likes, having website filters that aid in the process can be very helpful!

You could just ask them?

Would you not just ask their parents?

I have a daughter and what she likes is cars, Thomas the Tank Engine, Bluey, dragons, witches, cats, dogs, the beach, gardening and so on. Would that come up in a "girls" section?

Call me old fashioned, but occasionally it's helpful! If I'm looking for a section of e.g. girls backpacks on smiggle, I can't sort by the "stereotypically girlie" designs and it's just annoying having to filter through all of the UFOs, footballs etc... when actually all I want to do is pick from the designs that are cupcakes, unicorns, etc! Which I think is what OP was trying to get at... Sometimes you can just want a category that shows you what you want to see, and if 'boy/girl' is the closest label for that category then so be it.

I didn’t realise people thought leggings were a ‘girls’ item? My son has pink, lilac, and peach leggings. They happened to be the ones in the sale.

I have absolutely no idea what ‘gender-based’ toys are, what are girls supposed to play with that boys can’t?

The options you've given in your OP are either
a) available in multiple colours or
b) plain leggings, essentially or
c) available in tiny toddler/baby sizes when babies don't generally choose their own colours.

If you care that much about the colours you are shown then select the colours you DO want.

They will call you old fashioned. I belong in the 1950s because my boys don't want to wear butterflies 🙄

What's going to happen if you dress your toddler boy in pink leggings? Will his willy drop off? Will your MIL explode? Will he turn gay?

Once they start to object, that's the time to differentiate, until then, buy what you like.

I don't particularly like frills and found dresses impractical but both my DCs wore pink when they were of an age not to get a choice. Both went off pink, DD has just about decided she likes purple but DS is still anti-purple despite loving it as a preschooler.

I don't think anything is going to happen, never said I did. But most people don't dress boys in pink leggings. If you want to, or your kids want to wear them, go for it. But most don't, so the filters are helpful for the majority.

But they don't help lots of people. I'd be looking for tie dye for both DCs, paint splatters, cats and Mario for DS, and unicorns and Alvin and the Chipmunks for DD.
DS likes black, yellow, red and orange and DD likes dark blue, purple, red and rainbows (proper rainbows).

Stereotypical categories don't work for the majority of people. Girls are definitely not supposed to like blue and boys REALLY aren't allowed to like cats.

Only girls are allowed to play with dollies and toy kitchens, and then we wonder why so many men are terrible at doing their fair share in the home despite ingraining it into their heads from birth that those things are ‘for girls’ 🙄

I think some websites are just shit. I was on M&S and searched for “women’s socks”, got results for men, boys, girls and literally no women’s. Also sometimes if you click on Womens outerwear on Next, you get results for little jackets for dogs🤔

So true. And the idea that girls like “pretty things” - like pink, fairies, unicorns and boys like “cool”, dangerous, sporty stuff like dinosaurs, footballs. Then we wonder why women are judged/ valued by their looks, while boys have greater freedom to pursue adventure, enjoy physical activity and generally take risks in life.

Where do you draw the line though?
When my DS, who is now 12, was a baby if you filtered by "boys'" you didn't get any leggings. I liked leggings for him, they are practical and not as hot for a baby as joggers. You also didn't get any spotty clothes and he LOVED spotty clothes. No cats, he loved animals. No unicorns or rainbows, which a lot of toddlers like.

Or is the girls' section ONLY pink leggings and everything else is under "boys"?

Why do YOUR preferences not to put your boy in pink leggings trump MY preference to put pink on both my children, leggings on both my children, dresses on neither, and all animals and shapes on both my children?

They don't have to wear butterflies. But why does that mean they should be only available in the "girl" section?

They're an insect. No human idea of gender needs assigning to them. If a boy likes butterflies, fine. If he doesn't, fine. Same for a girl.

My 19 year olds favourite shorts are a pale lilac colour which he wears usually with a darker purple t-shirt. I haven't seen him naked for many years, but I suspect he'd have told me if his penis had come off!

This whole "pink for girls and blue for boys" thing has got a bit ridiculous, hasn't it? It seems the OP's issue with M&S's website is more operator error than "gender-neutral wokery", but I really wish more companies would just sell "children's clothing" and "toys" instead of "boys' clothing/toys" and "girls' clothing/toys".

When I was little in the 80s, I'm sure plenty of kids just wore clothes, and played with toys. I remember lots of tough, practical designs like Oshkosh dungarees, and chunky homemade knitwear, and designs from Clothkits (plus cheaper versions of the same kind of thing). Of course, clothing was generally more expensive, and so hand-me-downs were a big thing, which probably accounted for parents' preferences for more neutral/reusable designs.

I really love these Lego ads from the late 70s/early 80s, which show just the sorts of designs I remember:

Vintage Lego Ad - Sociological Images (thesocietypages.org)

Another Blast from Lego’s Past: Gender-Neutral Vintage Ads - Sociological Images (thesocietypages.org)

I'm not saying they should or shouldn't be able to wear anything. I'm just being realistic about what 99% of people will be looking for when shopping for their boys, and it's not pink leggings and butterfly tops.

Exactly. Same issue with cats with my DS. He liked them as a small child (still does), but boys aren't allowed cats on their clothes.
Much easier to have a general children's category (and you can look for "trousers" if you don't want dresses) than one for "cat lovers" one for "camo", one for "diggers", one for "blue but not pale blue past the age of 2", one for "frills", one for "rainbows WITH purple", one for "rainbows WITHOUT purple" etc.

Anyway, how do we get caterpillars if no butterflies are boys?

Actually I think it's pretty good that finally large retailers are cottoning on to the fact that their idea of what colours each gender should wear is probably contributing to the issue, and trying to fix it (if that's what they're doing)

Then why bother having a boys and a girls section? Surely it would make more sense to just have it sortable by age?

Judging by the comments on here it seems more like 99% would be looking for that for their boys. However, in real life (mine anyway) I don't know anyone who would be looking to buy that for their boys.