The pink used to be for boys notion

[ALittleBitOfButter]

I've just seen on that gender neutral baby clothes thread, once again, that someone has mentioned the oft repeated idea that in the olden days pink was for boys and blue for girls.

While this does reveal and confirm the fickle nature of "gender identity", I wonder how widespread it actually was as an idea? People keep putting up a quote from some 1920s newspaper but this is the only evidence I've ever seen used.

I don't believe it really, based on literature. I.e. Milly Molly Mandy had her candy pink striped dress, Laura Ingalls had pink, Judy in Seven Little Australians had her iconic pink frock.

Does anyone else question it too?

Ann of Green Gables deperately wanted pink and wasnt allowed because of her red hair... later insisted her (red head) daughters wore pink. God, i loved those books.

I do realise this is not exactly peer referenced academic evidence!

I think most babies in ye olden days were dressed in white because people didn't have the money for gender type fripperies. It had to be able to be worn by the next baby.

Well Laura wore pink as it went with her brown hair, her sister wore blue as it went with blonde hair
I don't know about historically, but I can remember as a child going to countries where the reverse was true even 25 years ago.

No it's not, but I think that 1920s newspaper snippet that occasionally goes viral on fb from buzzfeed or whatever is not sound evidence either.

I forgot about Anne, too. That settles it.

Yes Laura's hair determined her clothes, but it was never implied she got the masculine option. Carrie had pink too I think.

Look round the National Gallery and the National Portait Gallery and you'll see plenty of example. It's mainly 17-19th century. The swop was well under way by the 20th.

Aah yes, and grace was it had some feather Cape thing in white. Must re read it.
I think all I can say is this pink thing may have been in place for a while but it has hugely intensified during my life

The wikipedia article on pink pigment has a whole section on pink being worn by boys in the late 1800s and early 1900s, and there are several external references you can check in the footnotes if you're still not convinced.

Here is a picture from the page of a boy wearing a pink frock in the 1800s
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink#/media/File:American_School,_Young_Boy_with_Whip,_ca._1840.jpg

Well if I look around the NGV there is no evidence. Sure, there's girls in pink but there are no boys in pink. There's a boy in a red sailor suit in a famous Australian impressionist.

Gender identification by color began in the early 20th century in the Western world. Before this, pink and blue did not hold any gender specific connotations and there are numerous examples of men wearing pink outfits and girls wearing blue; one French author, Xavier de Maistre in his work, A Journey Around My Room published in 1794, even recommended that men choose to paint their rooms pink and white to improve the mood.

Just google 'men and pink' there are tons of examples.

Portrait of a boy from 1840.

It wasn't so much a reversal, but different cultural ideas for acceptable dress.

Perhaps it was different in the colonies.

www.jennifer-wu.net/jenniferwu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/epf-1_the_arbour_fox.jpg

Here is your evidence...... why are you so skeptical?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink#The_19th_century

The picture posted by a user here of the boy in a pink dress is the same one I linked to earlier.

All your examples are far too late, pink was for boys much earlier than Laura Ingals.

Men are often in pink in paintings. Eg. Shearing the Rams. Just not boys.

Further example -formal portrait of Charles I and family

Father in black, mother in blue (colour of Maryan virtuous motherhood), eldest boy in pink, girls in yellow, infants in white.

Stop looking at paintings for your evidence and actually read the facts here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink#The_19th_century

I am having problems posting pix. Hope it works this time!

Here's another

But the evidence people always cite is from the 1920s

I looked at the wikipedia page and i think the evidrnce that pink was masculine is rather tenuous. I tend to think that the colour was more neutral in regards to gender stereotypes.

Happy to be corrected. I just wanted to discuss the idea.

here is a good article

www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/10/pink-used-common-color-boys-blue-girls/

In 1927, Time magazine printed a chart highlighting gender-appropriate colors for girls and boys according to leading U.S. retailers. Filene’s (in Boston), Best & Co. (in New York City), Halle’s (in Cleveland), and Marshall Field (in Chicago) all advised parents to dress boys in pink and girls in blue.

Gosh - someone on the internet is wrong!

Just because they're making a wrong citation, it doesn't follow that the proper evidence does not exist.

I don't know why people get their knickers in a twist over pink so much.

Of the four people in this house, DH wears the most pale pink. He has several work shirts in that colour and really suits it.

From: www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls-start-wearing-pink

"For example, a June 1918 article from the trade publication Earnshaw's Infants' Department said, “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.”

There was a really interesting book serialised on Radio 4 recently all about history of colour. Sorry. Can't remember what's it's called but sure s search will find it. Anyway, yes, blue was for girls and red and pink was for boys 300 years ago. Changed about 150 years ago,