Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Would anyone like to join in an effort to convince retailers to stop categorizing toys by gender?

999 replies

OneHandWavingFree · 19/11/2012 00:06

Following on from this thread and similar ones, a few of us are interested in discussing ways to send a message to retailers that it is not acceptable to designate 'boys' and 'girls' toy aisles which reinforce the message that science and adventure are "boys stuff", while girls should be primarily occupied with looking 'sexy' or practicing for domestic drudgery.

The first steps might be to draft a letter and identify a few retailers to target for an email campaign. Other ideas of how to get the message across are very welcome too, though.

Would anyone like to join in?

OP posts:
Himalaya · 23/11/2012 22:46

Equal play - I like that :-)

MurderOfGoths · 23/11/2012 22:50

I can't take credit for Equal Play, that was DH Grin

ConsiderCasey · 23/11/2012 23:38

I think the new survey is great and i like how you can tick more than one box for the layout question.
Was thinking about Hobbycraft (my mothership!) and how the craft toys are in both explicitly signed boys' and girls' sections but are very different in their content. The craft toys for boys are building vehicles whilst the girls kits are for making beauty products and jewellery. Stuff like that can be put in the comments so I think all bases are covered.

I'm happy to start tomorrow or wait a bit if people want. I'm just really excited that we're actually going to do something and big thanks to Himalaya and OneHand for getting us into gear. If we decide to wait I think I'll just take some photos of blatant offenders to upload to the Facebook page.

Oh and Equal Play sounds fab btw, although I do like the message behind "don't gender my play" ie that were not trying to force our gender politics on our DC (as people will accuse us of) rather we are trying to free them from the current gender politics that is foisted onto them IYSWIM.

MurderOfGoths · 23/11/2012 23:48

Just wanted to say, I'm fairly good with web design/graphic design, so if we need anything done in that direction I'm happy to help out. Possibly might be an idea, once we get the results of the survey, to put together an infographic summarising it all? It's a good way of getting the information out there, seems to be a slightly more effective way to get people sharing the information with others.

aufaniae · 24/11/2012 00:25

OK, I'm going to point out things I think might be difficult to understand or need changing. I hope I don't sound like I'm nitpicking, just trying to help!

In the Sofa surfer's edition (great name btw :) ) the following isn't clear: are all questions meant to apply to both the website and the catalogue, or are some specifically for the catalogue and others just for the website? So, if question 2 is just for the catalogue, that needs to be stated in the question, for example.

I also wonder whether you really mean toys for 5 and up? DS is 3.10 and has been playing with toys for a while which are often in the "gendered" sections (craft sets, dress up clothes, a buggy from your list).

aufaniae · 24/11/2012 00:27

I think we could do with asking for a bit more detail about the websites. The store one is quite thorough: reading the results you would get a good idea of what the store was like.

MyNameIsInigoMontoya · 24/11/2012 00:44

How about Fair Play? If it hasn't already been used for anything else. That also gives the message that it's about fairness (allowing all children the same opportunity to choose what they want to play with) rather than some sort of "forced" equality which some of the status-quo-supporters seem to think we are pushing for. Nobody is saying girls shouldn't be allowed to play with pink kitchens, just that they should be choosing them (if they want to) based on their OWN preferences rather than being pushed towards them!

I wrote a reply earlier when you were asking for input on the survey but it's a bit out of date now as the thread moved on before I got to post it. But it was along the lines that as someone mentioned naming/shaming the worst offenders and praising the best places, maybe the survey should focus most heavily on the places with labelled aisles (the worst) and those with everything totally organized by function/type (the best) so that you can target those. Plus, in between is such a huge grey area that it would be hard to make distinctions between the different gradations. Not had a chance to look at the updated survey yet though, so I may have some different comments later.

aufaniae · 24/11/2012 00:49

I like Fair Play :)

The double meaning works well.

OneHandWavingFree · 24/11/2012 01:01

aufaniae please don't apologise for nitpicking! I think this needs to be as much a collaborative effort as possible - the more input and improvement before launching, the better.

Himalaya I hadn't even been thinking about press coverage / Christmas when I posted the OP, but I suppose that's just because I didn't expect so much enthusiastic interest straight away! :)

You're right though, since we have the momentum, if we could do something in the lead-up to Christmas, that might be a good opportunity. I still think we should take the time we need to get broad input from MNers, though - the constructive feedback this evening has been really useful, and I'm sure others might also have good ideas we'll want to include.

I like "Equal Play" because it sounds like "Equal Pay", which underscores the link to career paths, fostering aspirations, etc. But I also like "Fair Play" a lot, and I think it might be catchier.

Re: the updated survey, I think it's getting better and better. Three outstanding issues for me:

  1. Where did the 5 and up focus come about? I missed it on the thread if it was discussed / debated, but I don't think there's any reason to be prescriptive about the age range. Something interesting might come out about how early this stuff starts, if we just leave it open to all toys.

  2. Question 5, Points 1 & 2 really need to be separated out to ask whether the gender is indicated on the package or on the shelf, rather than treating those two things as the same. One (the shelf) is in the power of the retailer to change, the other (the packaging) is not (at least not directly).

  3. I think there should be a comment box under Question 3 on the sofa surfer's edition.

I'm so, so delighted that this is taking off :) :)

OP posts:
OneHandWavingFree · 24/11/2012 01:09

Speaking of nitpicking...

In Question 4, can we delete "Large" from the "Large display signs saying boys/girls"? I think if there's a sign, there's a sign, and we don't want people not recording it because the sign is small!

Also, in the list of iconic toys, can we please, please, please include "Image/Beauty items marketed as toys (e.g. makeup, mirrors, hairbrushes". I know it will be 100% in the girls' section, but that point needs to be made.

OP posts:
OneHandWavingFree · 24/11/2012 01:12

Unless anyone objects, I will set up a Facebook page around this time tomorrow, so people can upload photos even before the survey launches.

I'm just giving it a day so people can have a say or make further suggestions re: the name.

Equal Play and Fair Play seem to be the early frontrunners.... all views welcome!

OP posts:
RiaOverTheRainbow · 24/11/2012 01:57

Brilliant idea.

Himalaya · 24/11/2012 08:20

OK edits made

  • took out preschool, left in exclusion of baby toys, as these are usually not gender segregated.
  • took out packaging altogether from Q5 to keep it simple.
  • took out 'large' from sign.

Edits i don't think should be made:

  • add sports gear and games consoles - in all but the smallest stores these are merchandised seperately in the sports and electronic equipment depts.
  • add 'racing' to cars - not necessary i think. We should choose the most generic categories.
  • add image/beauty toys - no. I have tried to pick items which are associated with boys/girls for no good reason. i.e. where we can say "isn't it ridiculous that science toys are packaged, marketed, merchandised as if they are only for boys". i don't think that works for image/beauty toys.

There will always be some toys that are for girls (or at least not likely to be interesting to boys) - princess dress up, make up stuff, barbie and some that are all pink e.g. 'hello kitty'. I think the thing we are trying to get at is not that it is wrong to sell this stuff, but that there is no good reason to cluster it all together with crafts and domestic role play and segregate it from things with wheels, construction, science and bloody connect 4!

I hope the surveys will capture that.

Himalaya · 24/11/2012 08:22

aufaniae - i did add in one more Q for the websites. I couldn't think of another one that would apply to all sites - websites are designed in more diverse ways than shops.

ConsiderCasey · 24/11/2012 08:33

Morning all! Aaagh I am now also caught between Fair Play and Equal Pay. Am kind of coming down on the side of Fair Play for reasons OneHand said- it's catchier and it's a phrase people use a lot. But maybe we could have a section called something along the lines of "equal play to equal pay" showing the link between the two because that is one of the main thrusts of our argument.

Also the word "equal" when it comes to women's rights often produces negative eye-rolling as "anti" poster up thread demonstrated with the wise nugget that you "can take equal rights too far"!!! Big fat lol at that one!

Well that's my early morning musings. Off to charge phone in prep for zapping photos on our shopping trip. DS is very excited about our project as he too gets annoyed about the things that he is not "allowed" to play with. The signs, the colour, the peer pressure. FFS!!

ConsiderCasey · 24/11/2012 08:36

Thanks Thanks Thanks Himalaya

Himalaya · 24/11/2012 08:37

I do think the survey is ready to go folks!

We could tinker for ever, but remember, the point of the survey is not to uncover something deeply mysterious and hidden from sight. It is obvious to 4 year olds that most toy shops/departments are organised into boys and girls sections.

The point of the survey is just to get some comparable data on the extent of toy segregation in different shops, to have a clear scale by which we can identify who the worst offenders are, and who are the best.

Then - as Murder of Goths says we need to come up with some communications around it to get people thinking about it.

I like the idea of linking with discrimination in careers. Not necessarily saying there is a causal link (which would be hard to prove), but just getting people to think "if it is wrong for an employer to say - this job is just for men - why is it ok for a toy retailer to give out the same message"

I could imagine a series of pairs of images saying 'if this is wrong, why isn't this?'

e.g. a teacher in front of a black board that says 'a woman's place is in the home' vs if you want to buy a toy stove, Tesco says go to the girls section

A job advert for a scientist that says only men need apply vs If you want a chemistry set 8 out of 10 retailers say look in the boys department

A sad baby and a sad dad not playing - vs The Entertainer says only girls want to play with baby dolls

A picture of picasso's dad telling him to stop messing around vs If you want arts and crafts materials at Hamleys go to the girls department

etc.....

Himalaya · 24/11/2012 08:38

Fair play makes me think of sports (just saying...)

Himalaya · 24/11/2012 08:42

I do like equal play... but i see your point about 'equal' getting people's hackles up

duchesse · 24/11/2012 08:48

Sorry, haven't time to read the entire thread but count me in! This is one subject guaranteed to make me grind my teeth into tiny stumps.

OneHandWavingFree · 24/11/2012 08:55

Himalaya thanks for making those edits. Sorry but I feel really strongly that there needs to be some reference to items marketed as toys that are focused on image / beauty. It is a big part of the problem and one if the main points that people responded to early in the thread.

In the same spirit that we've agreed to collect more info rather than less, let's add it in and decide later whether what we collect is useful. If every store we survey sells beauty to girls but not science, that is a pint that we should be making.

Can we have other people's views on that?

OP posts:
OneHandWavingFree · 24/11/2012 08:56

A point, not a pint :)

OP posts:
ConsiderCasey · 24/11/2012 08:59

That sounds good re. the pictures. I always remember the look on my DNs face when he had spent ages making a beaded bracelet and then DB came along and laughed at him.

Also we could gather some quotes from our own kids about the things they would like to play with and what they think about the whole thing, to show retailers that children would like more choice IYSWIM.

ConsiderCasey · 24/11/2012 09:05

OneHand I tend to agree with you as there is so much gearing girls to appearances. It's not that liking fashion and beauty is inherently bad, but just that there is so much of it, it's only available to girls and its not offset by other things.

Even the science kits for girls are beauty-related FFS, as if girls wouldn't be interested in science for its own sake. Grrrr...

Himalaya · 24/11/2012 09:07

Onehandwavingfree -

But what is the ask? That they shouldn't sell 'beauty' toys, or that they should market them to boys? I'm not sure it fits into the "don't categorise" campaign IYSWIM?

Where I do think we can make the point is where girls science = make perfume, bath bombs etc...