I regret not giving my DCs unisex names

[darleneoconnor]

do other feminists?

After reading some stuff on how exam markers/recruiters discriminate based on perceived gender I feel like I've let my DC down.

DD does have a kind of strong sounding name but it's no Morgan.

I think we should support the DC we have.
My cousin is 4 yrs older than me. I loved going there as a DC because she had beautiful dolls, untouched-she had never sat still long enough to play with a doll. I loved them.
My aunt was worried about her going to the 'rough and tumble' of a state school where she would have been 'one of the boys' so she sent her to an all girls, private school. It made not one jot of difference-she hasn't changed. She does however have a 'girly' DD so my aunt is a happy grandma!!!
DCs grow up despite their parents IMO-we think we are so important but we are not really.
Identical twins brought up apart turn out to be remarkably similar. My guess would be that if you had identical twin girls, gave one all pink, lots of dolls, pretty dresses etc and the other one was brought up in a house of brothers, playing with their toys etc -you would end up with 2 young women who were remarkably similar. You can't change nature.

I will say it again - pink is not genetic.

Some things may be genetic, but "liking the colour pink" certainly isn't!

Try telling that to the DD who likes pink when her mother hates it! I liked pink-I can't think who or what influenced me. I liked pink. I love turquoise-I just happen to like it, society hasn't conditioned me. I just happened to like pink.

I generally like the opposite to what I am 'supposed to like' just to be difficult-same as a DC.

There is no gene for pink.

The child has certain innate tendencies that under those circumstances led to her liking pink girly stuff. Another child with the same influences might not have liked pink, or the same child but in different circumstances. "Mother hates pink" is not the sum total of a 3 year old's life experiences.

A child's likes and dislikes are not inevitable, but they are influenced by a lot more than just what the parents believe they are teaching.

There may perhaps be a predisposition to wanting to be a conformist, but there can't be a genetic predisposition to liking pink in the current form, because the everything in pink fashion has only been around for one generation.

I could easily believe that being a conformist, or being more influenced by peers than by adults, could be inherited characteristics.

Exactly Milly, there certainly wasn't when I was young. Baby girls tended to wear pink cardigans and that was the extent of it. I liked pink.

I liked blue better! Just happened to like pink in addition.

I like cats and DH hates them. Is that nature or nurture. His brother loves cats. I dare say cats are not genetic in the same way pink isn't.

I like cats. So does DP. Pink is OK, it's just another colour.

Liking cats is not seen as very acceptable for a single man though, did you know that?

It could also be that some people have a genetic disposition to be more socially attracted to members of the same sex, members of the opposite sex, or like both equally. That could play a part in people opting for female, male, or neutral behaviour within their own culture.

I didn't know that about cats-had better tell my single son!

Upsetting isn't it?

Single man with cat = gay, single woman with cat = mad old spinster. (couple with cat = baby substitute)

We need a cat-lovers defence league! :o

Luckily I pay no attention at all-it had never crossed my mind until you mentioned it. I don't know where it leaves my married friend with 4 DCs and 5 cats!

MillyR - I'm not strongly invested in the idea that liking pink is more predominant in girls, but I don't think it is necessarily thrown out of the water by your argument that it is only recent.

The 'girls like pink' thing may be like cheesecake, or mumsnet, a recent invention that becomes popular because it manages to press our buttons.Cheesecake combines fat and sugar, crunchyness, juiciness etc..in a form not found in nature, but many people find it irresistable because it combines loads of hard-wired tastes. Mumsnet is a recent invention, but its addictiveness comes from its ability to meet human needs for contact, recognition, love of gossip etc.. which are all innate etc...

Personally I think liking/noticing pink (rather than say grey or green) is likely to be innate for most people, and may be marginally more predominant in girls rather than boys, who knows.

The companies selling pink stuff for girls have maybe stumbled on a way to make money rather than invented it out of nowhere. My experience as a parent is that my boys liked pink, until they realised at school they 'weren't meant to'.

I think a lot of perceived differences between girls and boys, males and females may be like this marginal differences in frequency of a trait one way or another, amplified by social forces.

We can play "make up an evolutionary reason" if you like - everyone likes pink because reddish colours signify ripe fruit, so people who noticed red colours more were better gatherers back in hunter-gatherer days.

Pink used to be the colour that boys were dressed in. It's just fashion, allied to a very strong sense of conformity when it comes to bringing up children (linked to homophobia I suspect - the fear that if you treat your boy in a slightly 'feminine' way they might end up gay).

All children are individuals and should be treated that way, but as a group we don't do that. There is lots of evidence to suggest that little boys are actively encouraged to be into rough and tumble and girls to do quiet things. Then we say of course boys are active and girls are passive, disregarding the messages we've given them.

That's not to say that all children conform to those pressures, but an awful lot of them do (we are a social animal after all). Personally I hope to celebrate both my son and my daughter's individuality but I know that there are a lot of preconceptions that they may need at times to rail against as they live their lives.

I just forget about it all and treat them as people!
I don't think that you need to spend a lot of time analysing it.

Himalaya, yes I agree with your last sentence. I think the marketing and social forces are extremely important. I agree there could be marginal differences in a trait, and then to bring in Trillian's point, others without that trait but who are predisposed to conform would select that preference as well.

I just think pink is mainly marketed, because one shade of pink is marketed at younger girls (Disney Princesses, Barbie), and purple is marketed at tweens (Hannah Montana, Bratz). Many girls going into tweens then start to dislike pink and want everything in purple, because all the things aimed at them are purple, and this carries over into choices of clothes colour etc.

So when DD asked for a purple bedroom, I refused. Because I know that in a year or two when she hits the next age group, everything will be marketed at her in turquoise, black and back to pink, just a hotter shade of pink than when she was little. And she will suddenly decide she is too 'old' for Hannah Montana purple.

exotic - You can think you are ignoring it as much as you like but experiments have shown that you are almost certainly providing some cues to your children based on their sex (amoung other factors) not their individual characteristics. And other people are doing it too.

Why wouldn't you want to analyse that if you are at all interested in women's liberation?

Life is too short SuchProspects.
As a single woman I was actively trying to get my DS some male role models-I thought it important.
I think that boys get a raw deal-you only have to read MN to see that girls the favoured sex to have as DCs-as far as I can see- because they are pretty, can have nice clothes and hair, are far more biddable, are quieter, don't involve as much mud, will get on wonderfully with their mother as 'best friend' and will be someone to go shopping with etc . I find that the really depressing thing-girls being liked for the 'traditional female' things.
I have never seen a thread with people being upset to have a girl and taking days to get over having one.

Well given all the missing girls in India and China it's a little disingenuous to suggest that couples are always overjoyed about having a dd. Abortions of girls may happen less in the UK, but I would imagine that there are as many people disappointed with having a girl as there are those who were hoping for one. Plus all those people that are saying they want a girl so they can treat her like a dolly isn't exactly a good thing.

You know one of the reasons why I am a feminist? Because of shit like "because they are pretty, can have nice clothes and hair, are far more biddable, are quieter, don't involve as much mud, will get on wonderfully with their mother as 'best friend' and will be someone to go shopping with etc . I find that the really depressing thing-girls being liked for the 'traditional female' things." If people weren't so wedded to the idea of stereotypical traits for boys and girls than this stuff would be less likely to happen. I was none of those things as a child. Luckily, I have parents who weren't rigid in their gender expectations of their children.

Did you read this link that I posted earlier, exoticfruits?

Im a bit of a lurker on this board and the re-occuring thing I see is a very positive view of woman (obviousl) but a really negative one of males ? Like 'positive' discrimination just seems wrong that we are promoting woman but stamping on men to do it ?

Sorry off post but just wanted to ask.