M&S gender and staff/customer confusion

[DtPeabodysLoosePants]

I went to M&S today to get Dd1 PE items and bras, and dd2 socks. I got the jogging bottoms off the rail and remembered dd2 needed new PE tops too so grabbed those. One the side facing me as I approached the rail it said "Girls' Sportswear" so I figured both sides was for girls. Mum pointed out in mild horror and confusion that I'd picked up boys' jogging bottoms. I didn't see any other displays so figured they were unisex and gave her the "we don't subscribe to sexist stereotypes and gender roles" talk (again). Then I noticed the rail said "Boys' Sportswear" above where I'd got the bottoms and T-shirts.

As we were chatting one of the staff came over and asked if we needed any help (yes, please an alternative place to shop that doesn't throw women's safety out of the window) and I checked that the items were unisex.

She explained that the staff have been told that things must not be "segregated by gender" now and must be all mixed together. Staff have been covertly watching customers and have found them baffled. Her example being a mum looking for trainers for her son. She was faced with multiple rows of all sorts from the flowery to the plain black and it took her a while to locate what she wanted and was quite exasperated by this and approached staff for help. Mum braced for me launching into a feminist rant but was relieved disappointed that I didn't.

So off I went to look for the socks dd had picked out. Spotted the socks but couldn't find the pack she wanted. All the socks were not together but separately, displayed rails apart into stereotypical themes of flowers and unicorns vs football and dinosaurs 🙄 Hmm so obviously not mixing everything around, just the shoes.

I noticed that this philosophy of being gender neutral (oh how I hate that phrase) did not extend to the rest of the store. Boxer shorts and y fronts (or whatever) are on the far side of the store; bras and thongs etc. on the other. Now, surely it should just be one big section for underwear if M&S policy is not to segregate? Maybe it's early days and they are starting with the kids and are playing it safe by starting with footwear?

Oh and things are to have nice neutral yellow tags now, not blue or pink.

I'm wondering how sales would be affected if they did just lump items together by garment type? I imagine it would be a nightmare trying to find what you're looking for and trousers designed for the female body would not be right for the male and vice versa. They'd have to decide which side shirts and coats button up too.

Maybe kids stuff works because puberty has not yet struck and given different shaped hips and waists and chests etc?

I'm thinking out loud I know (it's the painkillers, sorry) but where are shops going with all this? I'm all for wear what you want (ds has long hair and likes his toe nails painted in the summer to match his sandals-he's 5) but surely there needs to be a system of some kind to allow shoppers to find what they are looking for?

Sorry for rambling

[MadameJosephine]

I’d much rather children’s clothes were all in one section, it would save us having to look round two different departments. DD isn’t bothered and often prefers the colours and designs in the boy’s department, especially at the moment because girl’s clothes seem to be covered in unicorns which she doesn’t like, but I could see why some children might not like buying something which is labelled as being for the other sex.

[MadameJosephine]

@Barbararara totally agree about the shorts. We went to primark recently for shorts for a holiday and they had exactly the same skinny denim shorts in both sections but the boys were turned up and ended at mid thigh level but the girls had been cut off much, much higher!

[ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings]

I'm confused by this thread to. It sounds like they've made a bit of a jumble of it, but if the clothes were logically organised (by type as pp suggested) then I think mixing the "boys" and "girls" together (and labelling them all as being for both) is a good idea. My son is only 3 but I dress him in quite feminine clothes sometimes (he has some unicorn pj's, as well as some robot ones, a flowery cardigan as well as a construction themed one, a hello kitty backpack as well as a dinosaur one etc etc). Some of these he chose for himself, some I chose for him, and some were hand-me-downs from his older female cousin. So far he loves feminine clothes, books, and toys as much as masculine ones, and I want to encourage that as much as possible in this brief window before social conditioning and peer pressure become a factor. When the time comes for him to choose his own stuff I'd rather he had a selection of everything to choose from, presented in a neutral way, rather than seeing something he likes but feeling like he can't ask for it because it's in the "girls" section. Maybe it'll put some parents off shopping there or take a while for the organisational teething problems to resolve, but I think this is a positive move in general.

[ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings]

My theory about girls clothing and pockets is that its a "given" that men won't buy or carry bags so they need proper pockets for their stuff. Women and girls on the other hand don't need pockets because they just looooove to carry bags, and anyway, putting things in their pockets would disrupt that perfect sillouette. Pockets full of change don't really work on tight clothes either. So you see you can't give women and girls pockets because then you wouldn't be able to sell them bags as well and they'd start choosing looser more comfortable clothes instead of tight sexy outfits. Unthinkable! As for girls clothing being made from thinner material - why would they need thicker fabrics? Or fabric that isn't white/cream/pale pastel? I mean, it's not like they're going to be playing rough and tumble games in the woods where having thick dark clothes might be more practical! No, that's just for boys. Its all part of the same sexist package.

[DtPeabodysLoosePants]

Sorry, I did waffle For me it's the lack of consistency across the children's range and the store in general. It's like they are trying to be all woke with footwear but have perhaps realised that it just wouldn't work for everything. I struggle with inconsistency (ASD) and I found it confusing.

Pp who mentioned about colours-dds needed grey or brown or black tops for a school play and they didn't have anything at all because everything they had was pastel colours at age 6. They very much liked pink when little. Now Dd1 is all about black and would die before wearing pink. In public anyway

[FemiLANGul]

Last summer I was buying shorts and all the boys shorts were knee length and I struggled to find shorts for dd that covered her butt cheeks when she bent over.

I had similar trying to find shorts and bottoms for my DD who was 6 months old at the time. The baby girl shorts were little more than knickers to go over a nappy. I ended up buying them from the 'boys section' as they were longer and came in lots of plain colours. Same with trousers and joggers - I just wanted something plain to put her in that I could mix and match with plain tops. A lot of girls stuff seems to come as a set these days - if you buy the bottoms then you need a specific top to go with it too.

[Babieseverywhere]

I buy unisex shorts from mountain warehouse for my girls. Thicker material and decent length.

Totally hate that girls clothes means fitted and short. Where as boys clothes are practical and more comfortable.

What a message for our young girls.

[TimeLady]

M&S have always had a strange policy with children's wear. I remember asking staff thirty years ago what self-respecting 12 year old would want to wear the same dress style as a two year old.

[PhonicTheHedgehog]

I’d love for the kids stuff to all be in one place. But I gut that the OP was saying the problem was finding anything.

There was a rumour a few years ago that John Lewis were doing away with the sex segregated sections. It wasn’t true but didn’t go down well with the public.

I’ve always shopped the whole store for my DD. She’s generally worn boy's clothes as they’re less fussy.

[lazylinguist]

Yes, they need to be consistent. It surely wouldn't really work with adults' clothes though. Unisex trousers and tops aren't going to be a very good fit, what with women and men largely being a different shape. And multiple racks of trousers which don't specify what sex/fit they're for would just be annoying and confusing. It's different for pre-pubescent kids though - unisex is fine.

[MamaGee09]

Why do people let trivial things like this bother them?

For me I’m glad they are segregated when my dd was younger she was a very girly girl, going straight to the girls department is much easier than trailing through a huge big department with a mixture of clothes, for her heading to the pink or purple section was easiest.

For me I don’t want to be trailing around a shop that has men and woman’s clothes all combined, if I’m looking for jeans I want to go to the woman’s section and head straight to where the jeans are I don’t want to be picking through men and woman’s jeans to find the ones I want. if shops were to end up like that I’d be doing my shopping entirely on line.

[ValancyRedfern]

It's not trivial. Girls' and boys' clothes teach children from birth that boys are meant to be practical and adventurous and girls are meant to be frilly and decorative.

Adult clothing is completely different and mixing men's and women's would make no sense as men and women are different shapes.

[ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings]

Agreed, it would be irritating to mix clothes for men and women as we have completely different bodies. Obviously there's some cross over (no reason some skirts wouldn't fit men, or "mens" t-shirts fit women etc) but I can't imagine the cross over (or demand) is great enough to warrrnt mixing them.

Maybe clothes for kids could be organised by colour? Although I think type is better. You'd want to avoid a situation where boys looking over to the "pink" section saw only girls, and it became the defacto girls section anyway. Organising by type guarantees a mix of girls and boys in each section, giving it a neutral feel for GNC children, even if in practise most people are still buying gendered items.

[karencantobe]

I wear some men's clothes. T-shirts for example.
I don't care if they are mixed together as long as they are easy to find.
Women's clothes are already arranged in ranges. So smart stuff in 1 place, flowery feminine blouses somewhere else, practical casual stuff elsewhere. If it was by ranges it would be fine.

[PhonicTheHedgehog]

Until recently, when my menopausal hips expanded, I always wore men’s trousers and jeans. Better cut, better pockets, better material and cheaper than womenswear. Boy’s clothes in age 16 were even cheaper!