Gender Sterotypes In the cHildrens Fashion Industry

[Amy1996123]

Hello everyone,

I posted the other day a few question on this subject but I am now just looking for your overall views and thoughts on gender stereotypes in children's fashion. I am a 20 year old student currently studying Printed textiles and surface pattern design at Leeds Art University. I'm going in to my third year and am starting my dissertation. I am righting about gender stereotypes in children's fashion and would be very grateful if any mothers or father would be able to spare a few minuets to share their views on the subject. This would be very helpful in aiding my research for my dissertation.
Discussing if as a parent do you feel the fashion industry has stereotyped your child by clothes they are selling? In the high-street their is very little girls clothes with typical boy motifs on them such as dinosaurs, robots, vehicles and football and vice versa. Girls can like the same things that boys do but are felt they cant because of being told that its a "boy" toy or only boys can like football.

Does the typical idea that blue is for boys and pink is for girls seem dated and unfair? How is this affecting children?

If you have a space moment I would really appreciate if you could just share a few of your thoughts and ideas.

Thank you very much and your time will be very helpful and appreciated.

Amy

Everything designed for girls from babyhood up is a little bit prettier, often a little more uncomfortable. Shoes are less sturdy, skirts less easy to run in. Most girls things have bows and are pretty, this encourages the owner to keep them nice, clean. Girls slogans encourage passive, nice behaviour. Contrast with boys where hair is short and clothes are comfortable and you have a problem.

We train the sexes into their future roles.

My dd wore dungarees, comfortable clothes and when she was old enough to choose, she wore what the hell she wanted. This was commented on a lot, there was tutting, lot's of tutting.

The borders between girl and boy are policed, this is increasing not decreasing. Now if children step outside their box and choose clothes from the other box they may be labelled as the other biological sex.

This is dangerous and we have to keep fighting sex stereotyping. Clothes are a great place to start.

If you need answers to set questions can you seperate them out.

If not- yes it's extremely infuriating that girls fashion to condition them or socialise them into typical sex role stereotypes. Clark's shoes are a good one. The sexist names they used, and how gurls shoes are totally unsuitable for jumping in puddles (the bar strap that leaves part of foot exposed)

Yes the pink and blue is infuriating. As are the pictures on many girls clothes. And often it is sexualised far too young- bikinis for little girls that have the triangle top with ruffles on to give the impression they have breasts. I saw a girl of about 7 with ripped jeans shorts where the designer rips were all the way up her backside. She had rights underneath but that's not the point, it's sexualising little girls for male pleasure. And yes this has an effect. It teaches girls their role is to look good, and that their bodies are for men. And the pracibility of girls shoes, jewelry for tiny girls, those silly head bands for babies, are not practoble for climbing or playing in mud it all the other developemental activities that boys are able to access.

I agree that if you could post again with specific questions (or write an online survey) that might be easier, but general thoughts:

Yes babies' and children's clothing is incredibly gendered in cut, pattern, motifs, style, the names of the products (shoes, as mentioned above, with names like Award Blaze or Tri Dash for boys and Softly Lou or Mariel Wish for girls), everything.

Clothing and shoes for girls is prettier and more fussy. There's more embroidery, more fabric and more embellishment, all of which make things 'nicer' which must be kept nice. A kid drawing all over grey tracksuit bottoms vs a kid drawing all over her broiderie anglais dress, for example. Dresses are harder to crawl in, climb in, move in. This is restrictive- it can physically hold girls back. Girls are decorated (headbands which serve no purpose other than to look cute) from babyhood.

I have children of both sex. When my sons were babies I specifically chose clothing that was bright, colourful and could be used for a girl (financial requirement of hand me downs). This was quite tricky at times, and I despair at the sludge colours and camo prints aimed at boys. Scandi brands were great, as their clothing features bright cheerful, loud prints children love in unisex cuts- no capped sleeves for girls or fitted t shirt shapes. It's pricey though.

It's bad news for boys too- their options channel them towards dinosaurs, pirates, space and monsters. One of my sons loved ponies, rainbows and unicorns. But because 'girls stuff' and anything feminine is seen as weak and pejorative (versus the 'tomboy' which is often viewed affectionately), boys can come under serious flak for liking it. It takes guts to choose pink crocs and a unicorn water bottle for school, and some children will be steered well away from that sort of thing altogether.

It's frustrating, but I think gender is becoming more talked about and certainly there's greater availability of bright, colourful gender neutral baby clothes. Boden (really terrible for gender stereotyping in my view) featured some dinosaur prints on their girl's clothes recently and a few space themed items as well. Still no unicorns, rainbows or cute animals on the boys' clothes though...

I think it's much harder to dress a boy in "girls" clothes than vice versa.

I was arguing about this very subject 30 years ago when my DC1 was born. Babies tops; the girls one has a pretty colour and a bow on it while the boys one has a "smart" colour. Why? I can still remember taking DS2 then 8 months out in his sisters passed down pink PJs and getting all the "pretty little girl" comments. He wasn't pretty; he was a real bruiser of a little boy. But he was wearing pink, ergo he was a girl.

But 30 years ago Mothercare sold jogging trousers, matching T shirts and tops in a range of colours. My DD had an aqua blue set and a bright yellow set. 10 years ago shopping for DD2 and the choice is now pink or nothing. Having said that, DD2 now 10 has the Boden space patterned dress and a dinosaur one. But her male friends couldn't wear her unicorn T shirt without comment.

Before they go to school you have a free rein in dressing them. Once they are at school, no matter how liberal you try to be your child will be told by all the other children that they have a "boys" waterbottle or a "girls" bag. Most kids just want to fit in and will start adapting to how their friends expect them to dress. Which is downright frustrating.

That should be COLLAR. proof read error.

Exactly. My dc go to a very small school which is very friendly and encouraging of children to express themselves (very loose uniform, etc) but there's been a definite tailing off of my unicorn-loving son's preference for my little pony and 'girls things.' The desire to fit in and like what you're supposed you is very strong.

If you post a link to an online survey Id be glad to answer.

I have DS5 and DD2. For ds I could always find decent quality reasonably priced clothing. However anything with Anna and Elsa on it is pink. Nothing is in green which is his favourite colour. Everything is pink. He has pink frozen socks and a baseball cap.

For DD its nearly impossible. Swim suits in particular are always tiny. The underwear in h&m is seethrough. We ended up with boys lego batman pants. Everything is pink and frilly. Nothing is cotton! Only female characters. She loves Thomas the tank engine but there is nothing.

I just want a CHOICE. I dont want my children to be pigeon holed. I want characters of both genders on clothing of all colours. I want the clothing to be fit for purpose.

Thank you all for your responses so far it has been extremely helpful to hear your comments and views.

I have made a online survey and if you have a spare moment it would be very much appreciated if you could fill it out fr me? it should take no longer than 5-10 minuets.

s.surveyplanet.com/Bkz0J83_Z

Thank you again

Op you might want to link it on the paw patrol thread in aibu also. Exactly same issues being raised about children's clothing there also

Oh and re tomboys- they are only seen as cute until puberty. Definitely seen negatively after then.

I do agree it's harder to dress boys in girls clothing, but I think that reinforces that girls things, and therefore girls, are lesser and it's embarrassing to want silly girly things. Why big girls blouse and sissy girl are insults but tomboy a compliment.

Filled it in, there was no option for having both boys and girl children, or multiple ages, so I had to tick 'prefer not to say'

Best of luck with your work!

In addition to the above, girls' clothes often fasten at the back (dresses, blouses). This means they can't dress themselves and therefore can't be as independent as boys.
Clothes become something that is done to the girl, as she continues to be dressed up as she gets older. This extends to adult clothes and jewellery. We often need to be dressed and embellished by a second male? person.

Hmm fruitlovingmonkey that's a really good observation

Girls' clothes are often require special cleaning, which feeds in to subtle pressure on girls not to do things that mess their clothes up.

Sticking a delicate, handwash-only party outfit on a little boy is rightly seen as foolish. It's normal for girls.

I cannot think of any boys' clothes that require particular underwear either, apart from some sportswear for older boys. Boys just wear pants and that's the end of it. Girls' pants might be seen under a skirt and are subject to various rules (see the threads about under-skirt shorts on here). That's before we even get to horrid scratchy net petticoats and skirts, or tights when trousers would be easier and more practical. Even tiny girls sometimes get put in icky ruffled knickers for adults' amusement.

Done.

Does the typical idea that blue is for boys and pink is for girls seem dated and unfair? How is this affecting children?

Amy: I had my children in 1969 and 1972. Clothes for babies and toddlers then was much less gendered. Yes, there was pink and blue but I recall their babygros and clothes being all sorts of colours and jeans and cordoroys were very common for girls. Not sure if it fits in with your research but I believe children's clothes and toys are much much more gendered now than then.

I have been saddened and surprised at the way little ones today are firmly squashed into their pink and blue boxes!

Hi Amy,

Just a small point, but won't your research be a little biased by collecting your results from a forum for feminists? Or netmums for that matter. This is being discussed all over netmums so people will have been influenced by other posts they have read.

Hi Missymoo100

Thank you for your point. I realise that mumsnet alone would spark a biased opinion but i have also sent my survey around friends, colleges and friends of friends etc. Including a range of results from fathers as well.

Thank you everyone for your input, i really appreciate it!

HiAmy
Like whoput i had my 2 ds a while ago! I agree totally that clothes were much less gendered then with a lot more choice. Although when dc2 was one i dressed him in a pink all in one outdoor coat thing given to me by my cousin who had dds. I couldnt afford to buy him a 'boys' colour coat but the fact it was pink didnt bother me at all. At toddler group everyone who didnt know us assumed he was a girl! He had longish curly hair too.Just to be mischevious I let them assume but then after a while he had his hair cut and I dressed him in traditional 'boys' type clothes and folk at the toddler group were really surprised he was a boy. I noticed he was treated very differently by the mums after that too. Just like as we've seen on tv, given different toys different expectations of his behaviour and so on. Good luck with your studies

Have done the survey. Interesting to think about. I get pissed off that leggings in lovely bright colours/patterns are considered girly while the boys' equivalent of tracksuit bottoms are usually grey marl or navy. My middle boy (5) picked out some great 'girls' leggings from Tu recently including a blue pair with heart motif and some in rainbow stripes. He calls them his 'happy jumping higher' leggings!

Can't understand why clothing for babies needs to be gender specific. If you want to dress your baby in blue or pink, that's fine, but we don't need separate sections in a store that tells us what we can and can't dress our children in based purely on their biological sex. A baby won't care what clothes they are wearing as long as they are practical and comfortable.