surrounded by "princesses" please help!

[bigtalksmalltalk]

My eldest daughter is almost 2.5 yrs old and the other mothers I know are starting with the pink princesses, dolls, spangly shoes etc etc - are all women doing this? Please tell me that there are women out there who don't want this for their daughters? They have also started saying how everything is pretty and beautiful and starting the process whereby their daughters will judge themselves by their apperance (I never hear people saying such things to boys!). I keep quiet about my views as it is not for me to comment but I loathe this stuff so much!

My DTs (boy and girl - 2.2yrs) have all the same toys and one of DS's fave toys is his pink buggy. It's one of DD's fave toys too. My BIL turned his nose up at DS having a pram - I thought well more fool you for not buying your DS one because he would probably love it.

One of my DH's aunts told my DD not to play with a Thomas Tank toy because 'that's for boys' .

Both the DTs love to put my shoes on - but DD is much better at it. DS is not so dexterous. They really are very similar even though they are a boy and girl, altho DS doesn't like putting the pink tutu on .

"I was in Toys R Us recently and my senses were assaulted by a vast aisle of glittery pink stuff - dresses and Disney princess tiaras - alongside zillions of 'domestic play' stuff - little ovens and hoovers and buggies and tea sets - all in the Girls Aisle.

The boys aisle also had some shitty gender stereotyping - trucks and cars and swords and pirates - but it also had all the fun stuff - the sports equipment and the science kits and the lego and meccano."

Toys R Us where I live doesn't label their aisles 'boys' and 'girls'. The trucks are with the trucks, the sports stuff with the sports stuff, the baby dolls with the baby dolls. If you went to buy an oven for your ds it would be with the domestic toys, not the lego, if you went to by meccano for your dd, it would be in the construction section with the megablocks etc, not with the barbies. The science kits aren't labeled 'boys only' and the toy irons aren't labeled 'girls only'. The only thing I've ever seen a gender label on is pritstick and sainsbury's fancy dress. I honestly don't understand the boys toys are more fun arguement, you are allowed to buy sports equipment, science kits and lego for girls too. Imagine the fuss if science kits started being manufactured in pink so girls would be 'allowed' to play with them.

Lots of children like gender stereotyped toys. A boy playing with a truck might just be having fun, regardless of it being a shitty gender stereotype.

smallwhitecat, my ds does that too! He has an obsession with gloves (usually just one ).

My dd (3) adores pink. DS (6) favourite colour is blue. Certainly there are more boy favoured toys in the house, dd just wants to play with whatever he is.

She is fully versed in power ranger / tractors etc. But she does it wearing a pink fairy dress and my pretend make up etc.

I think its more about them as fully rounded individuals rather than the colour they prefer to wear. Am convinced its an age thing etc.

But.. I do secretly love the fact she adores her ballet classes.

My DD1 was never dressed in pink as a baby. But like others have said, at age 2 something happens and they convert themselves to pink sparkles. So I went along with it - it won't be for many years she'll be this girly.

DD2 wore pink sometimes as a baby, but about 22 months started getting very excited by pink. She's now 25 months, and although we're not head to toe pink (yet), if theres ever a choice of colour anywhere she has to have the pink one if the older girls don't get it first.

Just go with the flow. No doubt they'll be goths soon (no offence to goths what so ever, just another colour scheme).

I think if you don't limit what your children do by their gender then it doesn't matter what they wear. DD1 had a fairly short pink phase but DD2 would do everything with a tiara on if at all possible (and at 17 probably still would). In the scheme of things its more important that girls (and boys) believe that anything is achievable with enough hard work and that the world is an exciting place to be growing up in.

Both my DD's also went through a phase at about 7 of wanting to be hairdressers, primary school teachers and nurses (not that they are bad things to be but I think they saw them as girls jobs). Now at 19 DD1 has just finished the first year of a science degree and DD2 will be applying to study maths in the autumn. The most important thing is the role models in the home.

Tethersend - Great posts here. I agree wholeheartedly.

If you focus on the pink stuff you run the risk of heightening awareness of appearance to the same extent the princess mums seem to be doing.

Let your DD have a few limited choices (based on suitability for the weather and the occasion) about what she wears and don't undermine her when she picks something. 'Go with the pink flow' if that's what her preference is. The point is not to second guess her or have her thinking too much about her personal appearance in terms of comparison to others. And don't ever criticise what other girls are wearing, to your DD -- don't roll your eyes at the pink sparkly stuff or make remarks to her. It's just clothes.

My daughbters are very physically active and not 'princesses' in the slightest. DD1 (6)wants to be a policewoman and DD2 (3)an 'underwater delivery girl' Dd3 (1) wants, I suspect, to be a chocolate button tester.

But they all like a bit of sparkle.

I think that there are layers in this whole debate. What really interested me was the assertion that it is unhelpful to tell your child they are 'beautiful'. I do this. I grew up with a very low self-esteem, and I am still haunted by it today. I rarely, rarely look in the mirror and see a pleasing appearance. Yet, my husband says he finds me attractive. When I was a teenager, I felt scared to try and experiment with makeup, because I thought people would laugh at me and say that I was too ugly to wear makeup.

So I tell my girls that they are beautiful. They are. I also tell them that they are funny, kind, generous, clever, etc. Surely as long as the whole focus isn't on appearance as defining the person, then it can be part of encouraging a healthy self-esteem?

It's a fine line to tread. I wish my mother (who encouraged a love of learning, independence and self reliance, a sense of adventure) had given me some indication of how attractive I was as a teenager/young woman. It would have helped me avoid getting into a few tricky situations. For years, it didn't cross my mind that anyone could fancy me!

My DDs (4.5 and 2.5) are girly girls; they love pink (DD1) and yellow (DD2) and play mums AND dads all the time. They are learning about caring and being kind and sharing and social interaction - can't say I disagree with this side of their play. They also play at "nursery" and "dancing" - the things they have the most exposure to tends to spill over into their roleplay.

DD1 talks about "boy toys" and "girl toys" but plays with both equally. I don't see the benefit or equality in steering them away from the "girls'toys" yet pushing them towards the "boys' toys". They can choose. Period. She loves sparkle and pretty things but also loves her skinny jeans and black "Rockstar" T-Shirt.

Oh and she wants to be a doctor and a scientist. My husband is a deputy head and a physicist. She loves to "learn" about science and spends hours drawing pictures, not of fairies but of animals and writing. Her most exciting moment on holiday in Wales at Easter was going to a hydro-electic power station with DH to learn how electricity is made. But when we went to Disneyland Paris she was most excited about meeting Cinderella.

I guess what I am trying to say is that they are balanced normal happy kids. It's not what they play so much as what they are acting out in terms of the way they play when they role play; the places that their imagination takes them - often to a "den" under the table where the dragon is......

I hate the fact that ELC do either blue or pink toys so I don't shop there. I shop at Toys R Us where like another poster they don't segregate into boys' and girls' but into dolls, home role play, lego, meccano, craft etc etc etc.

I think that by making a big deal of gender stereotypes you enforce them even more. My girls are healthy happy and intelligent kids and I don't think they will turn into Barbie just because I let them wear pink and dress like Minnie Mouse sometimes.

And yes I tell them every day that they are beautiful and kind, because they are, I can't see how these words will be detrimental to them. I was never told that as a child and have the most appalling self esteem now. I also tell them that they are clever and strong and that I love them several times a day.

We're TTC #3 - if it's a boy then he may well end up with pink things too if that's what he chooses to have............

"In the scheme of things its more important that girls (and boys) believe that anything is achievable with enough hard work and that the world is an exciting place to be growing up in."

YES! That's what we want for our 2 (we have one of each). We try to expose them to everything so they can choose their own path. If DD wants to be a scientist, or DS wants to be a ballet dancer, well why not?

We let DD choose what to play with and so far she is very balanced (and very active, which we encourage). I'm glad she likes construction-type toys as they help develop maths skills. I usually prefer the unisex-coloured versions just because they look nicer - pink ones are all pink whereas the others are often blue, green and red. But I don't ban pink, sometimes if the pink one is all that's available I'll get that - recently the ELC till, and a paddling pool.

The only things that are 'banned' in our family are slogan t-shirts ('naughty rascal', 'little princess' - ) because they're tacky, and toy swords/guns (yes, I know they'll end up playing with them when they're older, just don't see why we need them at home)

Have you seen the car shades with 'Princess on board' - absolutely gross ...... why do some parents buy these? Its the attitude of encouraging your DD to think she is a little princess, rather than wearing a bit of pink, that I think is so offensive.

At the risk of getting flamed - is it really that important??

I'm a mum of 3, ds 1 is 21, ds2 is 19 and dd is 4 - so have had all sorts of phases over the years, and they are just phases.

Mine have all been allowed to play with pretty much what they want, and all 3 of them are stereo-typical, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Both my boys have left home, and they're fantastic oh's now, helping round the house etc etc. I don't think playing power rangers all day either helped or hindered.

On the other hand dd (at 4) is into everything pink, princessy and sparkly, but she loves to do other "non-princessy" things too. Just another phase..... can't wait to get shot of the Barbie's though !

Pink doesn't = bad.
Pushing a child into only liking pink/glittery/sweet (or if a boy into trucks/trains/mud) = bad.

DS loves football and playing with his tractors, also loves playing with his pink plastic toy kitchen and does the whole mummy's handbag / bracelets thing.

If he just wanted to play with 'boys' things, fine. If DD, when she's old enough, just wants to play with 'girls' things, fine. It's just about not forcing them down a certain path.

I think the 'path' thing is important in other ways too, not just about gender stereotyping. It's cruel, IMO, to push DC down a particular path before they're ready to choose for themselves.

I remember seeing 2 brothers on TV, gifted at maths, saying they wanted to be a very specific type of investment banker, work in the city and make lots of money. Made me really - FGS they were so young (maybe 8 and 6ish) they shouldn't even have heard about all this stuff. It was just the dad telling them they wanted to do it.

This is the subject for a whole other thread I suppose, I just really feel strongly that DCs choose their own career. I love maths (obviously ) but it's my passion, and while I hope my DCs will be good at it (because struggling with maths can make school horrible) I don't want them to think they have to adore it, more than any other subject, too.

I've only skimmed most of the thread, but wanted to pick up on tethersend's first post, and I think a couple of her subsequent ones.

When I was a child my mum was very down on 'girls' stuff'. The pink wasn't quite so prevalent then, but I definitely picked up the message that my little ponies etc. were frivolous and climbing trees and playing with technic lego was far superior. I enjoyed climbing trees and playing with lego, but it left a very strong feeling that to be of value you had to be interested only in boys' things and traditionally masculine subjects. A pretty unhealthy message to be giving to young girls.

I have one dd and expecting another, I will be following their lead with what they are interested in. I do not want to make them feel ashamed for being a girl.

I'm more concerned by the fact that my 6-y-o DD's favourite outfit is a nylon football kit. Ugh.

She had a pink phase when she was about three. It didn't last. I didn't care either way. I did tend to dress her in blue when she was a baby because she had blonde hair and blue eyes. I'd generally go with the flow.

Relax. They all like a bit of glitter - don't push it and don't ban it. My ds loves dd's pink handbag and ponies.
Dd loves glitter, fairies, pink... and rolling in the mud. She's not much into cars etc but copies ds when they're playing together. Ds loves pretend food, cooking, fixing, cars etc.
They both play with barbies.

Just so long as they have a wide interest and range I doubt that anything matters much.

I've found this thread very interesting.. although we have taken a slight deviation from where the OP cast her first post..
She has been criticised for the "pink" comment but remember that she wasn't only talking about a colour.. it was more the whole "princess" theme, which we have lost at various points along the way..

And just to throw another one argument into the ring...
Has anybody else noticed how little girls being dressed up in pretty dresses etc can discourage them from getting involved in the rough and tumble (potentially dirty) type play? I think this is really sad..

yes that annoys me too mamsnet. girls wearing posh/pretty clothes (and shoes especially) to the park and being told not to get dirty... FGS just stick 'em in a pair of jeans and an old t-shirt!

I've recently been given loads of beautiful clothes for DD, and I'd love to send her off to nursery looking gorgeous and trendy but what's the point, she gets covered in paint and dirt and that's the way it should be!

We have deal in this house that DD can wear all the pretty stuff on special occasions, lunch at Granny's etc but if we're going to be doing anything active and fun, Mummy chooses appropriate clothes. She accepts it fine now.

The point that struck me about the OP was about the mothers actively embracing all the princess stuff on behalf of their DDs. I think trying to actively influence DC down one path (whether that be promoting 'pink and fluffy' or denigrating it) is wrong. If DC2 turns out to be a girl I certainly shan't be encouraging her to wear pink, but neither would I try to dissuade her if she saw her friends doing it and wanted to join in.

My parents were left-wing pacifists and refused to buy my brother toy guns or soldiers, yet when he was given a set of soldiers by someone else they turned out to be his favourite toy for years, and my parents ended up buying him tanks, battle sets etc. DB is now a left-wing pacifist himself!

BTW - sorry, this is off-topic - re lack of women in science - I think this is a more complex issue than just what toys are played with in childhood. IMO it has a lot to do with the environment in academia - single-minded and competitive (between colleagues as well as other institutions) - tends to appeal to more men - rather than co-operative and inclusive - tends to appeal to more women. Just a personal theory, based on seeing say 40% of fellow BSc students, 20% PhD students but only around 5% of teaching staff being female.

My dd doesn't like wearing trousers so I don't force her. She seems to manage climbling trees and playing in the mud just fine. Clothes don't have to be unfeminine to wash well. Lots of pretty skirts and dresses are just as practical as jeans. She really hates trousers and I feel it would be as bad to force her to wear them than it would to force ds to wear a skirt.

On the subject of pushing them down a paticular path, there is a boy in dd's ballet class who sobs through every lesson because he hates ballet. He is only just 4 and his mother is determined that he will do it. He started in September and hasn't danced for more than 10mins in that whole time. His mother thinks she is being daring or breaking down stereotypes but she is just being mean. I don't believe she would have put a ballet hating girl through all that.