Am I wrong to let my daughter enjoy being girly then?

[pictish]

DD is four - she will be five in Feb. I have two sons as well.

I have never encouraged or acknowledged a marked differentiation between the sexes, regards their interests and clothing. I always steered away from that stuff, letting them make their own minds up.

However, dd has embraced girliness wholeheartedly. She loves pink, and dresses, and My Little Pony and all things sparkly. In the interests of autonomy, and cultivating her own tastes, I don't mind it in the least.

I am starting to feel though, that through reading MN, unless she is playing football in bovver boots, I am doing her a disservice.
My mil (who is lovely really) is rolly eyed about all things pink and girly, and can't resist from making little comments about it. "Oh that's a very fancy dress" (sarcastic).

I have explained that the girliness is her own choice, and just what she happens to like, but I think it goes over her head...mil wants to think it's me pushing this onto her. It isn't.

I sometimes wonder if, in the quest for equality, we sometimes go too far the other way, and heap scorn upon girls who want to be girly? I feel the need to defend my dd's right to love pink and sparkly, as it is now heralded as so deeply uncool.

I thought it was all about offering choices...but nowadays (particularly on MN) it seems as though a girl being girly is a failure.

Anyone?

[tethersend]

I think we have to be careful- like it or not, (and I don't), in our society, pink and sparkly does signify 'girls'; pink in particular is used to denote gender.

In addition to this, there are activities traditionally associated with girls- hair plaiting, making daisy chains, skipping, handclapping etc.

What I am noticing more and more, particularly on MN, is a 'climbing trees' mentality- by this, I mean, climbing trees, getting messy and playing with trains is seen as the best form of play and something which all children should do. It is often used almost as a badge of honour by posters describing their DD's play. Where does this leave all the play traditionally associated with girls? Is getting muddy and climbing somehow better than skipping? Or do those activities have a higher status because they have been traditionally associated with boys?

I think we are in danger of inadvertently communicating the opposite message to the one we are trying to when combatting gender barriers: pink=girly and girly=bad.

We should not be encouraging our girls to eschew any form of play, colour or toy- instead we should be encouraging boys to play with pink sparkly things too.

[20wkbaby]

I think the problem really lies with anything traditionally female being perceived as a 'lesser' thing. Being a mother, cooking (rather then being a chef), sewing etc. All things that are seen as 'female' and all arguably as useful as anything 'male' - they just traditionally have a lesser status.

Denigrating a love of pink, as so often happens, could easily send a message to little girls that their opinion doesn't matter. Little boys are just as likely to be influenced as girls so perhaps we should try and work on bringing them up to see the value in 'female' things.

There have been a couple of occasions where I have been shocked to see very young little boys displaying contemptuous behaviour towards little girls their age and younger and I wonder where that is heading in a few years time.

[WoTmania]

tethers - I would say that is an argument made frequently on the FWR board (that rather than stopping girls from doing 'girly' things boys should be allowed to do both too. And it is a case of allowing as many parents/Gparents try and steer their boys away from the 'girl' toys) but unfortunately it's not accepted in many other places.

[WoTmania]

Interestingly I also have two boys and a girl and have definitely noticed a difference in the toys DD is given by relatives and different behaviour expectations. DD isn't overly pinkified but she's definitely been pushed towards it by other people and has had access to it in a way my DSs haven't (well, apart from from me)

[pictish]

Tethersend I could not agree with you more!!

[FreshCucumber]

Tether I think you have explained much better than me what I am trying to do with my boys.
Instead of focusing on 'protecting' girls and women to get equality, I want to teach my boys what being equal means and that starts with the fact doing 'girly' things such as cooking is a good thing to do.
And also for me to avoid vying into the 'boys are strong' paradigm.

[FloraFox]

tether "It is often used almost as a badge of honour by posters describing their DD's play."

If you're talking about FWR, I would say not more so than that DSs play with dolls, reject guns etc. Feminists challenging culturally-imposed sex-based stereotypes which, relation to toys and childhood, are getting worse. Who'da thunk it?

[grimbletart]

I believe that as girls and women are getting more independent, free and able to choose their lifestyle the stereotypes have got stronger. It was hardly there when I was a child, not bad when my DCs were little (they are now in their 40s) and, to my mind, pretty horrific now. It's not that there is anything intrinsically wrong with pink (it's just a colour) or camouflage (for boys for that matter) is just the sheer amount of the stuff in many stores and the way slogans on e.g. T-shirts are directed in a sex specific way. Even toddlers' books are coming in pink or blue covers FFS.

It's almost as if there is a backlash against children just being children and society (or more probably marketing) deciding it's time we put girls (who are getting far too uppity for their good) and boys back into their boxes.

[ErrolTheDragon]

TBH I'm not sure that it was deliberately driven by an anti-feminist agenda - just that we live in a more consumer-driven society with (up till relatively recently) credit/excess income that allowed people to buy toys in pink and blue, lots of impractical/'fun' clothes rather than what a kid needed (if s/he wasn't mainly clothed in hand-me-downs anyway).

[FreshCucumber]

The thing with marketing is that it is in their interest to do gender specific stuff. It does put consumers into boxes very early on and these consumers are then much easier to talk to because they are so stereotyped.

And tbh it's working. Everything is getting gender specific, not just with children but also with adults.

[ErrolTheDragon]

The Radio4 comedy on at the moment is Bridget Christie who was just now satirizing bic's biros specially designed for women. Catch it on Listen Again.

[WoTmania]

I've just finished listening to her too Errol (was coming to post on here, again, about a R4 programme) she was brilliant.

[FloraFox]

Making everything pink or blue also makes it more difficult for families to reuse or hand me down clothes or toys from boys to girls or vice versa. Most families are smaller now and could very conceivably only buy one set of most stuff and reuse most of it. There are lots more selling opportunities if everything is divided into "for boys" or "for girls". This is expanding into things kids don't even interact with like pushchairs and nursery furniture, all of which would "need" to be replaced if DC2 is the other sex.

[BasilBabyEater]

What it is is beautiful

[Janet12345]

I say let her follow her heart and go with whatever she likes to wear :)

Although I do agree with bonsoir's first post.

[FloraFox]

Weren't you advocating banning gossip mags on another thread?

[5madthings]

If she was that is relevant how exactly?

Pictish you know how I feel on this issue, the whole girl/boy divide in otys, clothing etc really pisses me off!

The kinder egg thread is relevant to this, some of us trying tlk explain how oi think this culture of pink/blue is actually damaging to our children, stereotypingy them and putting them in a box, as you know my ds3 likes all things pink, purple, sparkly and fairies, he still plays with them etc and wears his purple t shirts etc but he has def moderated himself and even tried to make himself play football etc as he feels the need to fit in. Thankfully he has a few good friends who are not 'stereotypical' boys iykwim and he so freidns with lots of girls as well, but as heahs got older its been a niggly issue and he knows we think the gender marketing etc is crap but like most children he wants to 'fit in'.

Ds4 at five is has very muched swalowed the whole pink is for girls and will say that so girly or that is for boys, despite us telling him NO that is not the case, it started at pre school but def by the end of reception he had got the pink/blue message loud and clear :( dp thankfully agrees with me and the other evening when ds4 kicked up a fuss about having a 'girly' plate at dinner time, he made a point of using a pink, flowery plate himself (those plastic kids plates, we had some nice rainbow ones but mil bought pink, flowery ones for dd...)

My dd is too young to be bothered to much by clothes but she has recently got really into dolls and carries one about with her and there have been lots of comments about how she is 'such a girl'..no she is a toddler, who likes dinosaurs amns train track and dolls and crafty stuff, very similar to her brothers at that age, but so many people have said to me how girls innately like dolls. It will be interesting to see how her own taste and choices develop as she gets older, I get comments from how she will be a 'tomboy' as she aha four brothers, to people saying she will be a real 'girly girl' for the same reason.


Pink/sparkly etc is fine but it needs to be fine for boys as well! Yet time and again on mnet you get posters asking as they a re concerned their five yr old son wants a 'girly' bag or lunch box and poster say encourage him to have something diff so he doesn't get picked on etc, and we should not let them like it or steer them in other directions so they don't get bullied... NOO we need to deal with the bullying.

It baffles me that at a time where we have equality laws and we are supposedly moving forward and vale equality ie in the workforce etc we have actually gone backwards with regards to our children and these outdated stereotypes are being reinforced on our children more than they ever have been. It's got worse since I had ds1 (14) there was not so much of the pink/blue divide when he was little.

I guess you keep on as you are, letting her k ow she can choose and giving her a variety of choice and making sure as she gets older she understands your views.

[Spiritedwolf]

Right pink dinosaurs we can do, certainly in the states and for a bit more money than I'd like to spend, but they do exist, maybe there are UK sites like this one? www.amightygirl.com/clothing?clothing_themes=156

I'd personally not get the "Girls Like Dinosaurs Too" one myself because its a bit about making a point rather than just having a pink dinosaur but there are others.

I loved dinosaurs as a child, I loved all kinds of animals. I find it a bit weird that bugs/dogs/dinosaurs apparently for boys, and butterflies/cats/owls for girls. Meh, I like them all and I'm certainly going to encourage my child/ren to as well.

My DS is just small (14 months) but I try to think about these issues now to best support him in a variety of interests and to let him choose from as many colours as possible. :)

[Threalamandaclarke]

I agree with tethersend and others who suggest the problem lies largely (on MN and in RL tbh) in that "conventionally female" products and activities are seen as "lesser" (20wkbaby).

Also, the consumerism thing is true IMHO. Retailers can sell mo of a doll/ kitchen/ BBQ if there are two versions (pink and blue) of the same thing.
It's a tough one for parents (well, for me anyway) because it is complex. And I think the fact that I am an older mum (in my 40s) means I'm possibly more influenced by the old fashioned ideals of the 70s.
My DS is older than my DD. she wears lots of his clothes. Some ppl have remarked how it's ok "that way round" but that if if he had come second, it we, it wouldn't be ok for him to wear her old clothes. I find myself both agreeing with and being troubled by these statements.
So much of this is about "choosing" from the available. I am prty "feminine" My clothes are definitely a woman's clothes but I don't wear pink jeans and pink coats. I don't have a pink car or a pink televisioj.
I think there's a real difference between a sparkly pink party dress or tutu and a pink law mower (well, apart from the obvious, that they are different things entirely). Some things a sort of meant to be sparkly and pink.
Anyway I am waffling. Sorry.
We can only choose from what's available. And also, my DCs are a bit young to choose freely in a shop (although ds has chosen a pink car as his favourite recently, which was fine of course) It would take some real deliberate determination to go to the girl section to pick him out some clothes to choose from, and vice versa for my dd.
I admit that when I see a little girl who is always and entirely deluged with pink, all the time and seems unable to have anything that is not pink I do find it a bit.... Contrived? Icky? I don't know. It doesn't sit well with me. Because I don't truly believe that all those things are her choice, other than her choosing to choose the girly thing.
A pink and glittery BBQ is in some ways "lesser" than a grey or black BBQ because it sort of says "this is for a girl, it needs to pretty"

[Threalamandaclarke]

Oh, and please could someone recommend some powerful princess type stories I can introduce my DCs to?

[noblegiraffe]

Zog by Julia Donaldson has the princess becoming a dragon doctor, and refusing to be rescued.

[Threalamandaclarke]

Thanks noblegiraffe

[pictish]

The Paper Bag Princess. Zog and The Worst Princess are all good empowering story books.

5Mad - I agree entirely. I think it is dreadful shame that boys are not encouraged to indulge sparkle and fancy and shake off tradionally boy expectations, in the way that girls are urged to shake off traditionally girl things. It is most definitely the case to my mind, that the pinker side of life has become somewhat of a taboo. That is why I started this thread.

I thought equality was supposed to be about choice, not social trends.

[FloraFox]

I don't think women's liberation is about equality or choice.

Equality is false if (e.g.) equality is about sameness which leads to women should not get maternity leave because men don't get it or "why can't I punch a woman if I can punch a man?".

Choice is false because it is constrained by our cultural, social and personal expectations and obligations.

We make choices based on what is presented to us (pink vs. blue for kids) and also based on things outside our personal benefit, particularly when it comes to our children and family.

pictish this thread annoys me because I don't think we're necessarily that different in thinking that children should be free to be themselves but you seem to be positing that feminists/feminism is the problem and can't accept that.