Please could someone help me articulate an email to Asda regarding these pyjamas?

[Acunningruse]

First post here so please be gentle.

I was looking for Christmas pyjamas this morning for DD age 3 and 7yo DS. Ridiculous I know in September but last year I left it too late and everywhere sold out.

I was just about to buy the red pyjamas from Asda below for both of them when I happened to notice the pyjamas were in the boys section. Intrigued, I looked in the girls section and found these pink so-called Christmas pyjamas.

Now I am very sleep deprived due to said 3yo not sleeping ever. So I don't know if my initial horrified reaction is OTT. But just WHY??? Why are there pink ones for girls? The universal colours of Christmas are red and green not insipid pink! Why do there need to be separate girls and boys ones? It just seems so unnecessary but at the same time sending a message as ever seems to be the case that girls and boys should be treated differently. My DD is already one of the strongest fiercest people I know and I don't want that changing any time soon but with stuff like this how can it not??

Excuse tired angry rant, if anyone else thinks I am not BU pls could you help me form a coherent email?
Thanks

I think it’s all a ploy to make people buy more stuff. I.e. people with a sons and daughters feel they can’t hand everything down.

That's exactly what it is. Gender has become a tool of capitalism to coerce us into buying more kid's stuff.

I complained to Clarkes when the camouflage canvas trainers my daughter wanted were only available in the 'boys' section as a wider width and not normal/ narrow width, which are present in the 'girls' section.

I remember ages ago reading a business paper on how companies were producing ‘pink’ items which were sold for more than other coloured ones - it gardening tools, pens, etc. It was just a business decision then.

BolloxtoGender The issue is not that pink pajamas exist, but that they are always needlessly designated as for girls.

Let children's clothes be clothes: they don't have substantially-different body shapes until puberty so why not have a "children's clothes" section instead of "girls' clothes" and separately "boys' clothes"?

Have you got nothing better to do?
Just buy the red ones.
Too many people worry about whether things are for boys or girls. It doesn't matter.

Whilst this particular example isn't the worst I've seen I did get annoyed this week with my local Asda coats.

Boys coats - waterproof / warm / hooded and weather appropriate

Girls coats - warm only. No waterproof, no weather appropriate hoods.

So whilst I've been irked with design and colour previously I was so annoyed that my daughter couldn't buy a coat to wear on a rainy day but the boys could

I saw a T-shirt on twitter that someone was having a similar problem with - it has a tractor on it with something like ‘when I fly grow up I’m going to drive a tractor’. This was put side by side with a pink girls one that was not brilliant to be honest (ooh I found it).

I really want the tractor one for my sister - who did grow up to drive a tractor. She also has boots class and sass (and lots of horses) but I like the tractor one better.

Oh for gods sake invest your energy in something worthwhile.

I agree entirely that we shouldn’t be defaulting to girls in twee pink be kind pyjamas whilst the boys get all the dinosaurs, but the retailer is just trying to find a practical place to stick things on shelves. It’s that or go “non-binary” for all childrenswear and we know that these boards won’t stand for that either.

I’ve got one of each. If my son wants princess sophia pyjamas I know where to find them, if my daughter wants diggers I know where to find them.

It’s you that holds the power here, Asda aren’t part of some great conspiracy to maintain the patriarchy they are just putting stuff on shelves. The alternative is they put the pink and the red in both sections and that’s just not practical from a merchandising perspective.

Vote with your wallet. But the colours that you choose - or that your children prefer.

Fekko It's called the pink tax. Once we hit puberty and need clothes to be in female-specific shapes and shoes to be in narrower widths, we can't avoid paying any more.

There's examples of this everywhere: ever since Feminax had the hyoscine removed, there's no difference between it and generic caffeinated co-codamol tablets, but they charge a premium by marketing it as being for periods.

@bd67th

But that’s the case for all medication. Branded, non branded. Premium charged, it’s not unique to that medication.

Fair point about the shaping though.

It’s that or go “non-binary” for all childrenswear and we know that these boards won’t stand for that either.

Actually, I literally just advocated for that: why not have a "children's clothes" section instead of "girls' clothes" and separately "boys' clothes"? Nice straw feminist you're beating up there.

Because some people (mainly girls but some boys) like pink. Why shouldn't i be able to but my daughter pink Christmas pjs? There are so many more important things in the world to loose sleep over, this really isn't one of them.

I don’t see the big deal

I would personally buy both the pink and red for my DD as I find them equally appealing. But what you want to buy and move on

Part of how it is perpetuated, is what I meant to say.

Oops my first post has now disappeared....

bd67th - I meant literally same items in pink. Just a slap of pink paint on a plain black pair of scissors and they found a higher price would be paid. Bloody weird.

Don’t get me started on ‘lady’ razors!

You can get drills and other tools in pink too.

Yes because they make drilling soooo much more enjoyable and easier for us wimmin!

This is how socialisation works. A million tiny messages insignificant in themselves, taken together have enormous weight. And because they are individually insignificant it is easy not to notice them or to think that it doesn’t matter or there are more important things to worry about. And that is how the stereotype is perpetuated. I mean if we saw a giant billboard that said “boys you are tough strong powerful and active. Girls you are fluffy cosy glittery and sweet” we would presumably all object? But by marketing boys’ shoes as suitable for climbing trees and girls’ as pretty and cute, that is the exact message just more subliminal.
By all means have glitter and pink available for everyone but let’s not kids ourself that the marketing and stereotyping doesn’t have an effect.

I complained to Asda a couple of years ago when I was looking for a sensible warm raincoat for my daughter in a hurry, and not a single one of their girls coats zipped up, or was rainproof, or had a hood. They were all glittery, practically see-through, and didn't even have zips or buttons so they would close against wind and rain.

Nobody ever replied. Tweeted them, nobody ever replied. They're not arsed.

They’re both hideous IMO but if you feel really riled up by it then vote with your wallet and get the red ones.

I was in America recently and looked on the Kennedy Space Center shopping site. They have a section called 'Just for girls'. All pink.

It's just a pair of pyjamas. I can think of bigger world issues really.

It’s not. It’s the gender separation from an age where children are very vulnerable and open to suggestion. It’s diminishing the value of girls. These type of situations never have pale, pastelly colour as “boys” or the string deep colour for “girls”. It’s pandering to, and encouraging, artificial sex and gender expectations.

There is no reason at all why clothes for prepubescent children need to be separate for boys and girls.

I was in America recently and looked on the Kennedy Space Center shopping site. They have a section called 'Just for girls'. All pink.

About 10 years ago, I wrote to ELC to complain about the globe they were marketing for girls, with pink oceans.