The "girls want pink glittery princess stuff" thing is really ingrained.

[fuzzpig]

In a big Disney Store at the weekend as I'd decided to go there for new lunch boxes for DC. I'd already decided to get a Sully one, I thought I'd get it for DS. DCs were at home so I was choosing by myself, as a surprise for them. I don't normally buy character brand stuff BTW (except at Xmas) so this isn't something I think about that often.

So, I picked up a Sully one straight away but then I was all in a flap about what to get DD - the obviously-for-girls ones were all pink/purple and very sparkly and I didn't really like them (generally don't like the Disney Princess brand for the usual FWR reasons although I don't ban anything)

I found a Planes one for little DS and so eventually decided to get the Sully one for DD (just turned 6). But I was WORRIED. Why? Because I thought she would be sad/disappointed that I hadn't got a pink sparkly princess/fairy one.

This is in spite of knowing that my DD spends plenty of time playing with cars, trains, dinosaurs,nknights etc as well as pretending to be a princess or whatever. Pink/purple is not her favourite colour (loves yellow) and hasn't been for well over a year. Not to mention that her previous, now-falling-apart lunchbox was a Dalek FFS. And of course when I got home and presented her with the Sully lunchbox she was over the moon.

This is just a silly rant really but I am quite surprised and disappointed in myself for feeling so worried. Don't get me wrong, she definitely would've loved a princess lunchbox too. But I KNOW my DD, I know that she is happy with a wide range of toys and clothes - and that she loves Monsters Inc - and generally I am happy that we are a pretty balanced home in terms of gender roles etc. And yet the "girls must have princess things" is SO ingrained that I still worried that I was doing something wrong by not buying into it. WTF!

Sorry, that was a ridiculous amount to write about a lunchbox

You're not silly OP. I feel exactly the same when buying presents for my friends' kids. I worry that if I don't buy according to gender I will be seen as too political!

The pressures are not just on the kid to conform but on the parents not to go against what we all have been taught to see as natural.

Yes, it is ingrained.

And it works the other way round too. I have some friends who were painting their ds's room when he was about 5 and he begged them to let him have it done in pink. They have no personal problem with him having a pink room but they were worried he would get teased and in a year or two he would turn round and decide he didn't want it pink after all and they wouldn't be able to afford to have it redone, so they made him choose another colour.

I totally understand why they did that but the result is the same as if they'd done it for sexist reasons.

sorry, that wasn't exactly relevant....

Some girls do want pink glittery stuff and some boys just want cars. Its just the way it is.

If you don't think your daughter would like something then dont buy it. I dont see an issue tbh.

I have a son who loves cars, trains and typical boy things but he also has a doll and a pram and likes dressing up in my jewellery. If I went to the shop and saw things he wouldn't like I wouldn't feel like I had to buy them. That's weird tbh.

Just buy what she likes.

Dd has a skip hop owl one and it's blue and red. I would say it has a girlie feel but not in your face pink and sparkly. I let dd choose it and usually she likes the pink stuff.
I also have twins who are id - one lives ask things pink and one chooses anything that isn't pink. Be led by the child not the manufacturers.

But it is a relatively new phenomena as when I was growing up there wasn't this array of pink and I had a lot of 'boy toys' as well as Sindy. I can't remember when it all started...

I think what Tunip is saying is relevant.

You have spent ages dithering over which lunchbox your dd would prefer. With your ds, you went straight to "neutral" (sully) and then changed your mind to "boyish" when you saw a planes lunchbox.

Maybe that is a reflection of your children's tastes or maybe it is ingrained in you, it is very difficult to make a call on one example.

However, I know loads of girls who are encouraged to have a broad range of interests from princesses to football. I know few boys who are actively encouraged to have "girlish" interests and I know several boys who are positively discouraged from having "girlish" interests. "you can't have a play kitchen, it's for girls", "you have to have your haircut, you don't want long hair like a girl" etc. Sexism works both ways.

Using "girlish" like that isn't sexism both ways, it's a manifestation of sexism against females as females are seen as lesser so it's bad to be "like a girl". Whereas the OP was worrying her dd would be disappointed, not ridiculed.

Actually I didn't explain that too well, as there are different strands there.

Yes, there is sexism against boys & men, perpetrated and perpetuated by the patriarchy, who see women as inherently inferior.

Just usually when people bring up sexism against males it's argued as done by women. Like there must be "an opposite" whereas it's often just another manifestation of misogyny.

Anyway, as to the OP's point!

I don't think it's a ridiculous amount to think about a lunch box. One of the accusations frequently levelled at people who start to question/think about things is "thinking too much". But as you've encountered, it isn't thinking too much if you can see that it still has such an effect even if you're making an effort.

It's a constant bombardment though if you consume any media. They are all passing on the same message.

To clarify, I was not considering buying something (princessy) that she wouldn't like just because of her gender (I agree SP that would be weird). She would've been equally happy with either. The point was that despite the fact that I knew she loved sully equally, I thought she would still be disappointed, because it wasn't Belle or Rapunzel or whoever!

DD likes lots of different things, but I know that she often feels like she should go straight for the sparkly stuff even if longer term she would end up playing more with something different. So if it's something where I'm making a choice myself, I will usually go for something more neutral or 'boyish' - she gets plenty of uber-girly stuff from others at Xmas etc so we have a really wide range of toys, colours etc at home.

BTW I got DS the planes one when I saw it because he specifically loves planes, rather than because it was a 'boy' thing IYSWIM. He would have loved the sully one as well but vehicles are definitely his obsession favourite.

I agree that girls are encouraged generally to have a wider range of interests but boys often aren't. DS plays with a wide range just like DD does. This may change when he starts school and becomes more aware of gender and fitting in - he is an August born and has a speech disorder, he already gets teased for being a baby :(

TBF I do overthink a lot anyway, and things like this are an example of how I sometimes don't trust my own judgement (like last Xmas when I worried DD would be disappointed in the playmobil castle because it wasn't the pink one... I was wrong, her face was a picture... and same with Lego instead of Lego Friends) which is really rather daft. I know my own children, and I am confident we are doing the right thing by not buying everything along gender lines, and yet I still let cultural pressure worry me

Sorry I waffled again

Tunip - I've had this too. When DS was about 3 he really wanted a pair of sparkly pink Lelli Kelly shoes. There's a little bit of me regrets refusing to buy them (he did for a while have a pair of pink sandals from Clarkes though - amazing how many older children commented on them in play parks).

I had an interesting conversation with one of DS's schoolmates (girl, aged 6) in the park the other day. She was explaining that she much preferred "boy" things. Now I was a tomboy as a child, and still have what society would class as very masculine interests. At the same time, I don't want to attach labels of "boys' stuff good", "girls' stuff bad" to activities, especially not to a small girl, because I feel I'd be sewing the seeds of cognitive dissonance ("everything to do with boys is better" versus "I'm a girl and girls are as good as boys")

But I want gender neutral language to express what I think is a genuine difference in the toys and activities available to the two genders, because what's acceptable for boys to play with often is more interesting. I found myself really struggling to explain (especially in an age-appropriate way) that I agreed that the stuff she was interested in was intrinsically more interesting - climbing trees is more fun than stringing beads, football is (biased here, years of 5-a-side and women's Sunday league) an intrinsically better game than netball, being a knight is more fun than being a princess. But that's not because the "boys" stuff is better, it's because the "better" stuff has been co-opted and reserved for the male sex.

For the record, DS had a dolls pram which he loved, and has a dolls house - my childhood one - which we both enjoy playing with. And I don't like putting gender divides into toys when there shouldn't be one - why the lego city range with its massive and annoying focus on cops and robbers, versus the lego friends range in its pink and lavender awfulness? Couldn't we have one range that had police vans, vets' surgeries, hospitals, miniature swing parks, firestations, etc, with mini figures of both sexes, on the grounds that that's what the real world is like?

Lurcio - I'm with you up to a point. But I do think that a lot of things are devalued because they are linked with women.

So from your examples, in what way is netball an inferior game to football? I'd say it is a fast moving and exciting game which has more interest in it myself.

And I wouldn't agree that stringing beads is inferior to climbing trees - I would think that most people might potentially enjoy both at different times depending on their mood, state of health, the weather et al.