The Usborne Cookbook for girls

[startail]

Why on earth do you need to categorise a kids cookery book by gender?

Presumably because they can then release one 'for boys' as well, to maximise sales. It's about money. The fact that they are encouraging stereotypes and segregation is, as far as they're concerned, an inconsequential side-effect.

I was about to say, do boys not cook?

Pretty sure I had DS making fairy cakes with me over the weekend...

They have a Cookbook for Boys too which apparently is "...a fantastic new no-nonsense, no-frills cookbook written with boys in mind.!" so I suppose the girl's one will be full of nonsense and frills

Even food has a gender now :(

We have the Usbourne Cookbook for Boys . It's never occured to me to think of it as sexist in any way double . It's quite good actually, lots of basics in there. I wonder if the girls' one is somehow different???

Hmmm. Have just looked up the girls' one. It seems more adventurous. I suppose the message is that boys just need to know how to make a few basics because they don't really like cooking whilst girls do so will make more interesting and varied food.

But double hmmm cos all the top chefs types seem to be men.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Obviously only the boys are aspiring to be on Master Chef, only the girls one is going cheap in the book people's leaflet.

But is it neccessarily a bad thing to 'package' traditionally 'girls' things towards boys, IYSWIM. Despite my very, very best efforts DS6 is starting to come out with 'that's what girls and ladies do' (although he does love cooking) and I could see if he was a bit older having a book that says 'no, look, boys do this too' could be helpful. Genuine question by the way - is it always bad to segregate when it can be helpful to encourage boys or girls to try something new. Would a 'Girls guide to mechanics' inherently be bad if it actually encouraged girls to try something outside their comfort zone?

Disclaimer - I do know it's really about what sunshine said about sales...

"Would a 'Girls guide to mechanics' inherently be bad if it actually encouraged girls to try something outside their comfort zone? "

I suppose it depends how it's done. I have visions of pink and sparkly internal combustion engines which would enforce stereoypes (i.e. girls will only be interested in something if it's pink and sparkly and dumbed down for their pretty little brains)

It's just lazy marketing though isn't it? It's easier to do one pink book for girls and one blue book for boys rather than design a book that would interest and engage all children.

I've just read the blurb for the Cookbook for Girls "A great book for any girls who are just starting to develop an interest in cooking, The Usborne Cookbook for Girls provides ideas for delicious food for every occasion, from sharing snacks for parties to comfort food for a quiet night in."

Anyone else bothered by the "comfort food" thing? That's not a great message for children is it, to eat when they are upset? Or am I over-reacting?

what does the blurb on the boys book say?

giving children the idea of "comfort eating" is a bad idea agreed

Usborne do this a lot - boys and girls books. I spotted their action hero sticker book in Waterstone's this weekend and felt quite sad, actually. Only boys are action heroes it seems. DD really wants to be an astronaut.

Cookbook for Boys blurb "This is a fantastic new no-nonsense, no-frills cookbook written with boys in mind. It contains recipes for complete beginners and budding chefs alike; from making toast and boiling an egg up to roasting a chicken and baking muffins. The recipes include sandwiches, burgers, pasta, curries, apple pies and smoothies and each contains suggestions for alternative ingredients and methods for cooking to encourage innovation and fun in the kitchen. Each recipe is explained in step-by-step instructions and accompanied by clear illustrations."

Utterly ridiculous to sterotype into a boys and girls book, I agree it is highly likely a skewed marketing ploy to sell more.

My boys favourite recipe book is my old faithful Bero book which belonged to my Gran! So pooh-ha to you Usbourne

The "comfort food" and "quiet night in" are very grown-up concepts aren't they.

I would hope that young children are always having a quiet night in TBH

Is it just me, or does the blurb from the boys' book sound much less loaded than the girls'? Girls are feeders (party snacks) and eaters (comfort food), boys just know how to make food...

Born take your point on the girls' book of (glittery) mechanics, it would just be covered in pink shit so their fwuffy brains could understand. But I still think that if it could be done well, maybe role-model led, it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

I can't even imagine "The boys book of crochet patterns" or similar...

That's the difference isn't it.

It's not just you Wilson, the language is also snappier and technical.

The blurb I found on the bookpeople website is a bit longer then the one posted earlier.

''The Usborne Cookbook for Girls is bursting full of simple and jargon-free recipes that will encourage girls of all ages to experiment with food for every occasion. Covering everything from sharing snacks for parties to comfort food for a quiet night in, the hardback cookbook also provides ideas for sweet treats and healthy snacks galore. The book is full of clear step-by-step instructions and stunning colour photography that is sure to help build the confidence of young girls when it comes to cooking.''

Girls - this book will help build your confidence when it comes to cooking
Boys - this book will show you that cooking can be innovative and fun

Pretty stereotyped messages imv.

And! - sweet treats or healthy snacks - lets get that bulimia going girls! Can't food just be food? Why does it have to either be skinny food (because that's what they mean by healthy, isn't it?) or a sweet treat?

Oooh good point, it's setting the ground work for that 'being good' 'being naughty' mentality that so many grown women have to food. I was good today, I had a salad. I was a bit naughty last night, had a whole box of chocolates to myself.

Comfort food? WTAF??

Is it Usborne who provides the 'blurb' or Amazon/thebookpeople/whoever?

I own both the books. AFAIK, "healthy" snacks mean snacks that are home made and nutritionally balanced, rather than our usual perception of snacks being processed, high-fat, high-sugar, high-salt crisps, cakes, biscuits, Gregg's sausage rolls, etc - which is what we want for all our kids, isn't it? And both the girls and boys Usborne books have a sweet treats section. I just read treat as something that nobody wanting a healthy diet should eat all day, every day - again, a sensible message for both boys and girls. Sadly, food can't just be food for children, because the British diet is, on the whole, dreadful, so you have to start early with a truly healthy eating message - everything in moderation.

I'm not claiming that for these books, like, but I do reject the notion that any cookbook for children containing healthy snacks and sweet treats is fast tracking them to an eating disorder - it's common sense. And balance.

comfort food
sweet treats
healthy snacks

= language of the food-obsessed= unhealthy relationship with food

The dichotomy between "healthy" and "treat" is a disaster for people's perceptions to do with food and sums up unhealthy thinking fostered in people - especially females - for a lifetime.

Note the boys just get to have different types of food. No need for emotional connotations with them.

The idea that women need special food to "comfort" themselves with when having a night in is bizarre. Like the women in the chocolate ads practically orgasming over the stuff, being all secretive about it, being "naughty" by eating it. Just plain weird.