Inferior microscopes and telescopes that are pink for girls!
I saw something on this earlier today. My girls both think it's disgusting and insulting. BTW, my daughter got one of the better microscopes pictured for Christmas.
The whole pink thing amazes me. Is it really just something that pervavise it's been ingrained into our subconscious? I see little movement and perhaps even more growing acceptance of it's gender divide. But I do wonder why it's a problem sometimes. I can definitely see the problem with the ad but wondered if anybody had some kind of reading I could look at on the big picture of these roles we create, ideally in relation to colours.
I'm with you, RevolutionPlease. The whole notion of colours having assigned genders is just too far out there for me. I happen to like the colour pink but I refuse to wear it.
Thanks for posting this. Unfortunately, I'm not surprised.
I stumbled upon Toys "R" Us's website a few weeks ago while doing some online gift shopping. The front page had a huge banner advertising toys for girls and toys for boys. Of course, they were offensively stereotypical. Toys for Girls: Baby Dolls, Houses, and Castles. Toys for Boys - Electronics, Trains, and Action Figures.
I guess the Toys for Boys and Toys for Girls advertising is pretty standard for the company. I just checked back to the site now and basically if you have a young girl who doesn't like Barbies, the girl's section isn't for them: "Stewardess Barbie", "Nurse Barbie", "Teacher Barbie" and "Potty Training Pup Barbie" are just a few of the choices. Gender stereotyping at it's finest.
Yuck. I wish I were surprised. Like Timebandit, we can choose to just purchase the better microscope. But, when the gendered labelling is all there, children will internalize it. What would be wrong with just having Toys for children?
I am currently expecting my first child and will not know whether it is a boy or girl until the first day. I am sure no one here will be surprised by how this just perplexes and annoys some people. "Well, how will you know what colour to paint the room?", "How will we ever know what kind of clothes to get?", etc. ,etc. I actually live in a province that will not tell you the baby's sex (due to several lawsuits in the past which is probably evidence of this same attitude), so I would have to pony up $200 at the private ultrasound clinic to find out anyways. I just keep telling people that the room will be a nice calming blue either way, boy and girl babies have nearly identical needs and levels of awareness and I am hoping for health only.
I greatly respect your choice not to find out the gender of your child, Ghislaine. (And congratulations, by the way!)
While my partner and I aren’t planning to have children any time soon, we’ve discussed in length the decision to not find out, or at least not tell others if we’re having a boy or a girl, simply because of the sea of pink or sea of blue that will inevitably accompany such information.
I follow the Globe and Mail’s Stephanie Nolen on Twitter, and she posted about this decision a few months back, saying that she and her partner were hunting for “works-for-either names” because they wanted a surprise. She tweeted “the kid has the rest of its life to have gender constructed for it, am trying to give it 40 wks of shelter fr that.”
I didn't find out the sex of either of the wild girls until they came out. I wanted to get a sense of personality first anyway. My first was such a mover and shaker that we knew we'd need a strong name and I had a sense of someone who would be in constant motion and very reactive - didn't matter if she was a boy or girl. And we love surprises. Knowing beforehand would have been less exciting, may have led to some preconceived notions.
While gestating kid#2, I found it very annoying when people, knowing I had a daughter, would ask me if we were "trying for a boy". Growing up in a daughters-only household, my attitude has always been that, other than dad teaching you to piss your name in the snow, there's not anything that I can think of that you can't do with a girl anyway. I was pretty much the son my father never had, in addition to all the girl stuff.
My wild girls are well-rounded people - they do martial arts, play classical music, ride motocross bikes. One minute they're dressing girly and the next they're up a tree. My little one had to pick just the right earrings to go rock wall climbing yesterday (she made it up 30 feet, too better than any boy in the pack!), loves sparkly things and dresses and wants to take a cow's heart to school for show and tell. Let 'em be who they are! Help them explore! Enjoy the journey! And you don't need any stinkin' sub-par pink accessories to do it!
Marketing certained coloured (ex. pink) toys to girls is very common but we can fight against it not only through our pocketbooks. About a year ago Dell started marketing overpriced for the quality pink laptops to girls. Enough people complained that they removed the ad from their website. If we disagree with this practice then we should be contacting Toys 'R Us and complaining as well as not financially supporting these types of products.
I work in online advertising.
We will design and display banners in a variety of colours.
For some reason, the pink banners perform better among the young female demographic.
Having had a boy, I haven't dealt much with the Sea Of Pink Crap at the toy store. But what really bothers me is that it puts a message into boys' heads too. THAT stuff is girl stuff. THAT stuff is stupid (because it IS stupid), therefore, stupid stuff is meant for girls.
It really ticks me off.
You're absolutely right, Rebekah.
Here is the contact info for Toys R Us.
Here is the contact info for Edu-Science.
"Growing up in a daughters-only household, my attitude has always been that, other than dad teaching you to piss your name in the snow, there's not anything that I can think of that you can't do with a girl anyway."
I've known a few girls who could still do this 
Well my brand new mini Bacchus will not be buying into that crap. If she wants GI joe she will get it (tho not really, too militaristic and jingo-istic for me) and if she wants barbie she can. But its sexist totally though unfortunately it will take a lot for marketers not to do it because it pays dividends as keystone pointed out
interesting
I think pink is reinforced as a 'girl's colour' by the Barbie culture. I was watching "Dinner: Impossible" on the Food Network, and the challenge was to create a meal worthy of Barbie's 50th anniversary. The cars used by the corporation for Barbie promotions were all pink - and I mean a really gross pinkish hue.
Excuse me if I'm being ignorant here but I'm disappointed that close to half of this thread has been dedicated to complaining over the colour pink. Girls and boys are different, I don't think that it's necessarily harmful if society promotes different colour schemes for genders as long as the scheme isn't promoted to the point that children who don't follow it are punished.
What I do find objectionable is the fact that corporations are exploiting this cultured preference to over charge and foist inferior goods upon girls. I'm sure that explicit intention is simply to exploit a market preference but as stated above, the broader social message that such an act reinforces is pretty clear and very disturbing. Thanks for posting those contact links Michelle, I'll try to write to them when I have the time.
Having had a boy, I haven't dealt much with the Sea Of Pink Crap at the toy store. But what really bothers me is that it puts a message into boys' heads too. THAT stuff is girl stuff. THAT stuff is stupid (because it IS stupid), therefore, stupid stuff is meant for girls.
It really ticks me off.
Heh. My nearly-four-year-old boy loves pink. Much of the time, the only remaining piece of clothing (winter boots or leggings) or equipment (snowshoes!) is pink, which works out quite well for us. We certainly didn't plan on this (neither of us liking that colour in the first place), but it's been quite helpful.
Excuse me if I'm being ignorant here but I'm disappointed that close to half of this thread has been dedicated to complaining over the colour pink. Girls and boys are different, I don't think that it's necessarily harmful if society promotes different colour schemes for genders as long as the scheme isn't promoted to the point that children who don't follow it are punished.
What I do find objectionable is the fact that corporations are exploiting this cultured preference to over charge and foist inferior goods upon girls. I'm sure that explicit intention is simply to exploit a market preference but as stated above, the broader social message that such an act reinforces is pretty clear and very disturbing. Thanks for posting those contact links Michelle, I'll try to write to them when I have the time.
The issue I have with pink in general is that in our culture, pink has come to mean weakness and inferiority. The reason it sells so well to young girls is that we've programmed them to think that that's okay.
My daughters both wore pink. They both went through that phase where everything was pink and came out the other side. It was part of that identity-forming process, I suppose, part of being a girl in this culture. But you can't deny that the Barbie and Disney princess aspects of the pink thing grind into girls that femininity is passive, it's waiting to be rescued, that pretty is more important than competent or strong and "Math is hard!" We dress little girls in clothing that's less fit for active play, regardless the colour, than we do boys. Compare the active girl who can run circles around the other kids on the playground with the passive, shy one who likes frilly dresses and guess who gets the most approval? It's not about pink per se, but the expectations that pink has come to represent in our culture. And I guess we're skewing them toward the foo-foo microscope because it's not like they're going to do REAL science... Just dabble while they work on obtaining that MRS.
I've worked very hard at combatting the programming, and really wish that we could have spent less time on that particular aspect of raising our girls.
I think pink is reinforced as a 'girl's colour' by the Barbie culture. I was watching "Dinner: Impossible" on the Food Network, and the challenge was to create a meal worthy of Barbie's 50th anniversary. The cars used by the corporation for Barbie promotions were all pink - and I mean a really gross pinkish hue.
Was the food plastic and proportionately distorted? That would be fitting... ;)
It was served in ridiculously small portions. Probably the worse episode of that particular show, ever.
Pink and Blue were not always girl/boy.
http://bing.search.sympatico.ca/?q=pink%20gender%20Victorian&mkt=en-ca&setLang=en-CA
"Most people who study the matter attribute the pink and blue gender assignment to the 1950s, which featured a virtual color explosion, not only in clothing, but also in things like appliances and furniture. Dressing children in pink and blue to specifically denote gender suggested the rising middle class and above. In other words, people who could afford to make the gender assignment did so, since many infants appear somewhat asexual when first born.
."
Yes, that's true. And in the Victorian era, boys and girls alike wore smocks/dresses and long curls until they were 2 or 3 years old. Try doing that now!!
So it all started with people being annoyed at answering the question "Is it a boy or is it a girl". Now colour has become the master helping the genders join the system and assume their roles.
Makes me think of the Iran thread where someone (can't remember) proposed that all colour titled revolutions were manufactured by the CIA. Perhaps they are behind this also. hmm...
I have 2 great nieces, and 3 great nephews. The girls are younger than the boys. The older niece prefers pink and purple right now (at 9), while the other at 5 now has always preferred turquoise and shades of blue. I do wonder, tho, how much of the older ones preference is linked not because pink is girly and she is a girly girl, but more that with 3 older boys around all the time, that pink is something she can "own" all to herself and no one else is going to want any of her stuff. Ever.
In addition to this, and more on topic of colours of toys in stores, I have been in wholesale giftware for a while. The products available to us for babies (baby items, frames, birth plaques, etc etc) ONLY come in pink or blue. There are no non-gender specific options, even just yellow or green. And so I have also dealt long enough in the retail side as well that woe to the parent (or grandparent or auntie) of a pre-teen girl who does not show up with a pink or purple item (preferably sparkly), but instead tries to go non-genderfied colours like red, yellow or green. 
In the past, when I made or bought items for new babies, I chose bright primary colours rather than the stereotypical pink or blue.
In the mid-1960s in Ottawa, there were two distinct groups of teenagers at the high school I attended (Merivale): the Yohawks (inspired somehow by the Beach Boys...) and Greasers. Yohawks wore tight white jeans, and pink mohair sweaters were popular as well, and desert boots. Greasers were all blue jeans and black leather jackets and black boots.
Timely article on the topic:
[url=http://www.thestar.com/living/secretlifeofgirls/article/748405--pink-a-s... A shockingly butch cultural history of the world's prissiest colour[/url]
It drives Abi Moore more than a little bit mad.
Moore, along with her twin sister, Emma, created Pinkstinks in 2008, a web-based social enterprise aimed at combating what they call the "culture of pink" by actively promoting healthy role models for girls. Last month, Pinkstinks targeted ELC by launching a Christmas toy-buying boycott of ELC stores. The "pinkification" of girls' toys, and the prettification of gender roles for girls (princess dresses etc.) had burrowed under the twin's skins. "We're not attacking pink as a colour," says Abi Moore from her home in southeast London. "We've been hideously misrepresented in the British press saying that we want to ban pink and all this kind of nonsense."
Instead Moore poses this question: "Why is it so powerful this pink? ... How has it become so ingrained within us that we think it's natural and that it personifies everything about us as women and girls?"
In Semiotics: The Basics (this book may not be on every nightstand), David Chandler cites an excerpt from a trade journal called The Infants' Department: A Monthly Magazine of Merchandising Helps for the Infants' Wear Buyer. In June, 1918, the journal pondered pink - and blue - as symbols of girlhood and boyhood. "Pink or blue? Which is intended for boys and which for girls? ... There has been a great diversity of opinion on this subject, but the generally accepted rule is pink for the boy and blue for the girl. 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."
So then what happened? Smocked pink Polly Flinders baby dresses were popular for girls in the 1940s, as little boy blue sailor suits were for boys. So there's that. In the 1950s the pinkification of the female gender got a big boost from the post-war consumption boom and the birth of an aspirational middle class. I cite here the 1955 launch of the Dodge La Femme, a two-tone pink and white car for the ladies. ("By appointment to her majesty - the American woman.") On the other hand, Life magazine declared 1955 "The Peak Year for Pink," referring to a spread of male fashions. Barbie, introduced in 1959, initially had a discerning and sophisticated fashion sense and took her time becoming pinkified in her pink tricot peignoir.
Feminism? "It's weird," says Abi Moore. "My mother is 60 years old. She was a feminist fighting for women's rights. About five years ago she bought my niece an enormous pink princess castle."
Moore, the mother of two boys, decries the retailer's "pink alleys" of such toys and girl gear and the tens of billions of dollars poured into the marketing of pink stuff. "Why do we have to signpost and genderize everything for our children from the day they were born?" she asks. Why? Because it's easier for marketers, that's why.
It's all quite unfortunate, really, given both the colour's hale and hearty history and its modern-day appeal when worn by those men who appreciate how handsome they look when they sport a pink shirt.
Maybe that's the ticket. Maybe it's time to turn back the clock. Men, take back the pink.
And here's how LEGO has changed it's advertising to girls over the past few decades.
From this:
Fairies, and princesses, and castles -- oh my!
It's so obnoxious.
And Lego itself is obnoxious anyhow. It used to be that lego sets were tons of different sized building blocks that you'd use to create whatever you wanted.
Now, even the stuff aimed at boys comes in kits that only build one thing - the structure on the front cover, like a car, or an action figure or whatever.
Lego used to be so cool.
I know! I spent hours and hours playing with lego when I was a kid. We had a huge collection of the miscellaneous packages, etc. I don't buy it for the wild girls because it's so expensive and they've specificked the creativity right out of it.
I have to disagree on the Lego point. My son is a huge Lego fan, and is pretty damn creative with it. Yes, they're getting more specific with their pieces, and yes, it's to force you to buy as many of their sets as possible just to get a piece which only appears in that set. But it's still a very creative toy, and my son has made some amazing things.
One of the things I love about it is when he has other boys over, they build Bionicles together, and make big threatening looking critters to fight each other. When his 13-year old female babysitter comes over, they build detailed house interiors with big screen TVs, bunk beds, sinks and bathtubs. He's a fascinated with their new architectural sets as he is with the ones with lots of guns.
I have no experience with LEGO whatsoever, but I grew up building Meccano sructures from kits, including an operating crane that fed a O gauge Lionel train set.
Pink Ouija Board Targeting Girls Riles Critics
It doesn't seem as though it's an inferior Ouija board, however.
I worked with a couple who came from China. She's a wiz with math and computers as is he. I must say she was one of the top five most talented software developers then at the little r&d company of about a hundred people in Eastern Ontario. Nortel scooped her up after our outfit went bankrupt.
Womanist Musings tackles the issue of the pink microscopes and race.
My office is a sea of pink for a baby shower right now. Barf.
We have a baby shower upcoming here later this month. Hopefully, that colour will not ubiquitous.
I'm just thinking, and I don't think I've made the connection before, but my office holds "bridal" showers for women in the office who get married and for women in the office who are expecting babies, but it never holds them for men getting married and rarely for men welcoming children. Is this typical of an office environment? Sorry, thread drift ...
This shower without a doubt means I'm going to spend the afternoon being asked when I'm going to get married and have a baby.
The problem with pink is someone always thinks it's cute, like these.
http://www.jaycar.com.au/products_uploaded/productLarge_11081.jpg
http://www.jaycar.com.au/products_uploaded/productLarge_10120.jpg
This is more my style
http://icepice.blogspot.com/2009/12/classic-steampunk-pc.html
Very classy and I just happen to own a Predicta TV that works
I'm just thinking, and I don't think I've made the connection before, but my office holds "bridal" showers for women in the office who get married and for women in the office who are expecting babies, but it never holds them for men getting married and rarely for men welcoming children. Is this typical of an office environment? Sorry, thread drift ...
That's not drift, that's progress.