Hi, welcome to String Revolution. I'm Léan, I live in Dublin with my husband and two little boys, and I am a dangerous stringy subversive.
My job is to radiate my creative truth, and to help you radiate yours. I create, without exception, every day. I write here when I have something to say.

(learn more about me).

Dispatches from the Gender Ghetto

T-shirt of the Feaster's with egregious Boy slogan

It’s always illuminating to look at how we present things to children. We tend (in the West, anyway) to portray the world to them in a kind of sanitised, round-edged, Technicolor version of how we believe it to be – or perhaps how we would like it to be – which says a lot about us.

I’ve been thinking recently about children’s clothes.

Clothes, of course, are practically a language all of their own: what we wear screams out information to the world (and this goes double if there are actual words on our clothes).

Do you buy children’s clothes? Have you noticed how insanely gendered they are these days? In some of the online circles where I hang out, it’s a commonplace almost no longer worth alluding to: if the fashion world had its way, girls would drown in a sparkly ocean of pink and lilac; boys would be engulfed in a tidal wave of blue, muddy shades, and military chic.

The colour thing is law, by the way, to an extent I don’t remember from when I was young. Nowadays, unless you colour-code your girl-child with pink or lilac, or other “feminine” talismans (talispersons?) (heartsflowersbutterflies), or a girly hairstyle, she will be assumed by strangers to be male. Yes, this really happens. Often.

And colour is, in many ways, the least of it. If you really want to get riled up, pause for a few moments to consider the words. Here are some real-life examples:

  • On a blue top: My travel diary – African safari – Tropical island
  • On a T-shirt: Little adventurer – Explorer club
  • On a brick-red T-shirt: I’m travelling around the world with my friends
  • On a yellow T-shirt: I’m the boss
  • On a red, navy and grey top: Taxi – Police – Air Rescue
  • On a grey, navy and green top: The big city – Swoosh! – Air rescue (illustration: helicopter)
  • On a navy and grey top: If you think I’m cute you should see my daddy!

So far so good, right? OK, perhaps a touch of white privilege, but nothing too horrible (apart from the last one, which makes me feel queasy). Now, check these out:

  • On a white top: No. 1 baby (illustration: flowers)
  • On a white T-shirt with pink trim: Sunshine (embellishment: abstract flower motifs)
  • On a pink T-shirt: Rosie’s secret garden (illustration: girl in a dress surrounded by floral motifs)
  • On a white T-shirt: Good toes, naughty toes, good toes… (illustration: pink bow with suspended ballet pumps)
  • On a navy and white top, in gold embellished script: Heritage
  • On a white T-shirt: Follow the line to help baby elephant find his mummy (illustration: elephants and other animals, a dotted line)
  • On a frilly turquoise T-shirt: Princess in training … almost perfect (embellishment: sequins, stars, hearts)

I take it you do not need me to explain which set goes with which gender? No? Good.

These examples are all from Mothercare in Dublin: I stopped there one afternoon a few months ago and wrote down everything I could see, because the contrast was so egregious. I haven’t shown you everything I wrote down, but this is a broadly (as opposed to statistically accurate) representative sample.

The Boy message is all about action, adventure, agency, while the Girl message is all about appearance, passivity, being the object of judgement.

The Boy tells us that he’s travelling around the world with his friends (who are African animals, as far as I remember), in a presumably carefree manner. The Girl is instructed to follow the line to help baby elephant find his mummy: to take responsibility, in other words, for minding a male child and sorting out a pretty serious, grown-up issue.

In general, the Boy gets to speak – “I’m the boss” – while the Girl is labelled – “No. 1 baby”. (Look out for that one. It’s a depressingly common distinction. I once saw a pair of gendered T-shirts reading “I’m the cutest!” (Boy) and “Cutie Pie” (Girl) – took me ages to work out why they annoyed me.)

Embellishment and illustration are ubiquitous in the Girl section, less so in the Boy section. (I didn’t note all of the illustrations in the Boy section, because they didn’t particularly strike me. Bad researcher, no biscuit.) This underlines the message that girls are decorative and looking at them is proper and pleasurable.

In the Boy section, there is nothing approaching the jawdropping world of WTF we see in the Girl section. (Heritage? What?) The message of Good toes, naughty toes, good toes… is that there is a paradigm of judgement, to which the wearer is subject. The same goes for Princess in training … almost perfect, which also encourages aspirations that can never be fulfilled (contrast Explorer, Air Rescue, which actually could feature in a child’s future).

Girls are pressured to strive for perfection – which as far as I can see is defined as community approval. Boys aren’t. My afternoon in Mothercare didn’t yield any examples of the “Boys are delinquent, unsanitary sociopaths, and we (women/mothers) love them anyway” meme, but look out for it – it’s everywhere (e.g. the picture at the top of this post, of a T-shirt belonging to the Feaster). Best example I can think of, spotted in the same Mothercare branch last year and neatly combining delinquency, militarism, and the glass ceiling: Trouble Squad: Team Leader.

But let us – with some difficulty, at least in my case – tear ourselves away from the sexist imbalances for a moment. The overarching message of these slogans, supported throughout this society by adult purchasing power, is basically, “Hey, look, here is the world. Regard it in all its teeming richness and beauty. One day, you will hold sway here. But remember – this is really important – you have to ignore this half over here. It is not for people with genitals shaped like yours. Focus exclusively on this half. Here is the arena in which your ineluctable destiny is to be played out. The other half is not for you – repeat: NOT for you. Because look! In your pants! See?”

Don’t you think that’s weird?

In the spirit of David and Goliath (or even, dare I suggest, a female version of the same trope – any suggestions?), my Zazzle shop provides a few alternative messages. These ideas have been kicking around in my head for a while; more will follow as inspiration strikes. (Meanwhile, if inspiration strikes you, it’s dead easy to start up there.)

I ordered an “I’ll be a post-feminist in the post-patriarchy” T-shirt for the Feaster last week, in pink with lilac writing. I got myself a “miles to go before I sleep” top as well, for good measure. I’ll let you know when they arrive.

I always welcome comments, but I’d particularly like to know what you think of this post. I hesitated for ages before publishing it – it’s quite a departure from my usual crafty subject-matter.

But then, clothes and fashion are definitely within the remit here, and there’s plenty I want to say about them. Like it or not, we live in a political soup: everything is touched by it. Plus, this blog is called “String Revolution”, so it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise when I wax polemic.

I’m probably overthinking this. What’s your verdict? Should I stick to the crafts, or would you welcome more of this sort of thing in the mix?

40 comments to Dispatches from the Gender Ghetto

  • More of this sort of thing. Hands down.

  • Lisa


    I was absolutely appalled the first time I went into Mothercare for this very reason: I spent my 70s childhood wearing clothes that were a mixture of fairly unisex and unmistakably girly clothes (dresses etc.), but they were in all sorts of colours – red! blue! purple! orange! pink! green! brown! Now if you have a girl-child it seems to be remarkably difficult to find anything that isn’t pink and foofy and embellished with THIS IS A GIRL, A GIRL I TELL YOU, NOT A BOY slogans/motifs, without spending a fortune. Ditto boywear that isn’t festooned with trucks. You’d think that buying non-aggressively-gendered kidwear was tantamount to conducting some kind of radical gender experiment and never telling anyone whether your child is a girl or a boy. I mean, it wasn’t the case when we were kids, so why now?

    I am fighting the good fight re: the future offspring by knitting them things in a selection of bright colours (and buying tragically expensive Danish babywear, where obviously there is less of a fear of infant transvestism).

    Oh, and the most egregious thing we spotted in Mothercare was a set of toddler reins: they came in blue with “Driving Mum Crazy” written on them, and pink with “Mummy’s Little Princess” on. Bleeuuurrggghhhh.

  • I applaud! I applaud with vigor!

    (But… a footnote: “good toes, naughty toes” is a chant that is sometimes used in ballet lessons for young children. “Good toes” are pointed forward; “naughty toes” are flexed inward. Alternating between the two is a common exercise for the feet for ballet classes; they do it in adult classes too, without the chant. Of course the T-shirt doesn’t come with that context pre-loaded…)

  • I think you’ve heard me on why this stuff is getting, it seems, worse: because it’s a way of putting children in their place *before* they seek to access their legal rights. We condition them not to ask to get out of their gender box, so that we don’t have to forbid them to.

  • My mother routinely dressed me and my brother in pretty much the same stuff as small children. I also had a short back and sides because it was more practical. EVERYONE thought I was a boy, and thought it was weird that this didn’t bother my mother any. I had no interest in pink stuff then anyway, preferring to play with monster trucks in the sand pit.

  • Last summer I was helping a friend pick out a birthday card for her 9-year-old daughter, and was absolutely blown away by the very same phenomenon. It’s not just that the cards are rigidly segregated into separate section and colour coded; it was teh messages on the cards that really got to me.

    Even in cases of branded cards that took their subject matter from TV programs (in the rare instances where the programs themselves were not heavily gendered – who knew they were making “just for boys” and “just for girls” CARTOONS these days??!?), the Boy version of the card would have a male character engaging in some dinamic action pr aggressive aspiration whereas the Girl version would feature a different character being passively observed, and often judged along the “good/perfect girl/princess” axis.

    I was sickened, utterly shocked. I have no children so for me it was a very rude awakening to just how endemically deep the backlash against feminism is, how poisonously it has colonised even the supposedly innocent land of six year old children. All power to you and other crafty people for staging a fightback; I hope you start a trend!

  • Deirdre

    There are serious reasons why I knit baby stuff in Green and Yellow…

  • leannich

    Wow, thanks for all these great comments! I love my readers 🙂

    @Ailbhe: I’ll see what I can do… (Part of my reluctance: I’m not sure I can dee-livah this sort of thing on a regular basis.)

    @Lisa: I know – I was similarly shocked. H&M is sometimes OK – O and F have lovely cords from the Girl section (green and purple respectively), which ONLY have heart-shaped knee patches (and a heart-spattered waistband lining). Du Pareil Au Même is also reasonable, and very pricey. That part is infuriating: the richer you are, the less gender stereotyping you have to subject your kids to. Whoopee.

    @Katherine: Ah … ballet: that bastion of gender equality. Interesting to know that, but I’m not sure it counters my overall point. There’s still an arbitrary paradigm of judgement being established, and it’s very much in Girl territory (boys, as we know, never do ballet).

    @Kate: Argh, yes, of course! I hadn’t thought of it in quite this way before. Thank you for pointing out that I haven’t actually got angry enough about this yet 😉 Fucking shite on a stick, is what it is. Care to stage a coup with me?

    @Actionreplay: That was the way in the 70s, wasn’t it? I think the attitude was a sort of “gender-blindness”, which was good in many ways but also entailed wholesale devaluation of the less privileged perspective (i.e. girls were encouraged to act “like boys”, for some value thereof, but never vice versa).

    @TheLady: Don’t even get me started on greeting cards. Ugh. It IS shocking, isn’t it? And it’s weirdly invisible, too, because it’s “only” children’s stuff. Plus, it starts at birth. Take a look at newborn gear some time: it’s all there. By the time we (mainstream feminism, I think I mean) start to pay attention, it’s far too late, and the marketers are able to claim – even demonstrate – that they’re simply responding to demand.

    @Deirdre: Green and yellow used to be a kind of safe haven from the blue/pink tyranny, but unfortunately I see signs that that’s weakening. Even in the five years since the Oyster’s birth, there’s been a noticeable polarisation.

  • Fifi

    It is very hard trying to find kids clothes without this bizarre gender bias…I often end up buying my mates kids ‘cool’ tee’s with band slogans and stuff from Retro and Top Shop and websites like hairybaby.com which have similar funny slogans for both boys and girls for the most part. That’s not ideal for everyday wear obviously but better than whats on offer in most places

  • Deirdre

    Oh yeah, I have had some complaints or comments and my sister wanted to know if the navy baby blanket was being knit in navy because I knew the baby was male. She was shocked when I said that no, navy was a practical colour and a yarn I had an good supply of and washable. She though that it would be important.

    I also find it terrible how a lot of girls clothes isn’t designed really for active play but for being passive, easily dirtied and not as durable.

  • It bears mentioning that girls’ clothes are also a very different shape – trousers are in general lower-rise, and more apt to fall down and expose butt-crack. Shirts and tshirts are shorter and more likely to expose potbellies. Sleeves have less space for biceps. Knickers are higher-cut, which on my children means they ride up more. That sort of thing.

    Perhaps it evens out after the 5-6 range. Doubt it though.

  • Lupin

    I found your blog through Jane Brocket’s – so I was expecting something crafty. But this entry was a fascinating read and I would love to know more of your thoughts on this. I haven’t read any of your other stuff yet (but I shall!) and just skimmed over your personal detail – and what strikes me is that you are a mother of two boys and you have such concern about the sexism that is thrown at them… although (I think) you would agree that is is to their advantage.

    I have three girls – so I am naturally concerned about how these sexist attitudes could adversely affect them. I generally steer clear of anything with a message printed on it – for various reasons but mostly because those sentiments only work when you are in the right mood- and you can be in such a spectrum of moods when wearing the same thing. I still feel very uncertain about how to go about changing it and making it better. I have read a couple of books and found a few useful, practical ideas. Maybe I should order one of those t-shirts!

  • Great post Lean.
    I like the mix of crafty/opinion/life. And I love your t-shirts on Zazzle too. The colour-coded ones are particularly good. They are definitely a breath of fresh air.
    Yes, it is incredibly annoying.
    There is so little middle-ground also.
    Velour tracksuits were the order of the day in my family – we were both girls, but that made no difference to which colours we wore. If we’d been boys I think we would have had the same clothes (except for the dresses…) Mind you, we both turned into total tomboys then, because we both rejected the crapness of being a “girl”… how shit is that! Already rejecting the gender sterotypes, but also throwing out any permission to be in any way sensitive or gentle with it.
    I had a partner once with a 7 year old daughter who only dressed in camoflage and skater jeans. Again, anything pink was totally rubbish to her and seen as weak and shit. How much more polarised can you get.

  • I am not a regular visitor, but I came here BECAUSE of this post, so I think that tells you something. 😉

    I have a 4-year-old daughter and a 1-year-old son, so I am painfully familiar with the gender divide in the clothes. Here in North America there’s an added dimension of licensed characters on most children’s attire. Dora and Disney Princesses for girls, Spiderman and Cars for boys. More messaging, especially from the Disney Princesses.

    As my daughter has gotten older, I’ve struggled with this more because she has a definite preference for the girly. She won’t wear green or yellow clothes I buy her, because they’re not ‘girl colours’. When she sees Cinderella on a pair of shoes she begs for them. She wants to be ‘pretty’ and ‘cute’ and she knows that being that way wins her attention from strangers.

    My problem, at this point, is how I balance my own views with hers. It feels a little heavy-handed to completely forbid her to wear pink sparkly things when she wants them so much. But I am sometimes tempted.

    As for my son, I have fewer fears. Right now he thinks his big sister is the coolest, so he’s likely to be seen sporting a pink feather boa and tiara. Having an older sibling of the opposite gender sort of levels things out a bit, and I’m a little bit grateful for that.

  • This is good stuff, you know. Made me realise how little I’ve questioned this, even though I’ve noticed it.

    I like your detail – really looking at the messages the clothes tell, not just the colours.

    An artist friend of mine did an project where she put together all the stuff she could find for adult women that was pink.


    Adult men don’t have things in baby-blue.

    Thanks again – made me think!

  • leannich

    @Fifi: Yeah, it’s hard – and I kind of resent having to move so far from the “mainstream” kid shops before I find anything even vaguely OK. Thanks for the hairybaby.com recommendation, by the way! They have some cute stuff. (I’m dithering between being pleased that their Christmas collections for boys and girls are apparently identical, and being annoyed that they STILL feel the need to put them behind gender-segregated links.)

    @Ailbhe: Oho, yes. Anything I’ve got O and F from the Girl section has tended to be flimsier and less generously cut than their Boy clothes. Every little helps, of course – as we hang and fold our little girls’ skimpy, delicate garb we get to reflect on how frail and precious they are.

    @Lupin: Thanks for stopping by! Yes, I worry about the sexist messages that are thrown at my boys, but I can barely imagine what a shrieking harpy I’d be if I had girls. My boys will grow up to be beneficiaries of the patriarchy, and as long as I can teach them to be aware of that, and not to be entitled arses (often), I’ll probably feel relatively OK. Which doesn’t help you, of course! I thoroughly recommend reading Ailbhe’s blog (linked above), by the way: she has two girls, and is very wise.

    @Caro: Yeah, I got the wholesale rejection of Girliness too. I think it was a byproduct of 70s feminism. It’s harder to make a case for valuing the unvalued than it is for allowing greater access to the loci of power, innit.

    @Amber: I have the dilemma of how to react to my sons’ desires too, but in the other direction – the Oyster is big into swords and bows and arrows. I have a strong reaction against weapons of any kind, but I feel that if I banned them, they’d gain cachet and mystique. Plus, I remember enjoying playing with a bow and arrow when I was a kid. So I talk myself around. (Guns are another question. I don’t know the answer to that one; fortunately, it hasn’t arisen yet.) It helps that he loves pink and purple, and has been thoroughly brainwashed by my rants about the designers of children’s clothes 🙂

    @Andrew: Oh, the infantilisation of women is a WHOLE other cauldron of rageousness! It’s all about boxing in – as Kate says above. If you start young enough (and they DO), the chances of people challenging their conditioning are lessened.

  • Lupin

    Hi Léan- I forgot to mention that what drew me to look at your website was your Irish name!I livein Dublin too – and my name is Leanne.

    It’s good to know that there are some people who think for themselves on this little island welive on. Thanks – I will have a look at Aibhe’site.

  • What a great discussion on a topic that is near and dear to my heart. I am the product of role reversal, where my mother worked outside the home and my father raised my and my 2 sisters. Color coding, making each child aware that there is an “other” trains our kids early on to discriminate, to see each other as opposites.

    In a way it’s almost a forced ghettoization. We are branded from a very young age, a time before we are able to fight back. Terrifying.

    Like you, I think craft leads to greater topics. I spend a lot of time writing about the broader implications of craft in our everyday lives. It’s a meaty topic, so I hope you continue on with posts like these. Will you? Let me know!

  • Lucy

    I think this post is great, and have finally got round to subscribing to your blog via Google Reader.

    It’s particularly interesting to me because I’ve watched this stuff in action while being a helper with Brownies (seeing the variety of things the girls wore when not in uniform, some totally unsuitably sparkly or frilly) and because I have an 11-year-old step-sister (I’ve known her since she was 8) who’s into some stereotypically girly things and not others. It’s good to be reminded to think carefully about these things and to consider what messages I reinforce to the children and young people I’m in contact with.

  • leannich

    @Lupin: Hey, name twin! (OK, nearly.) That’s so cool. I bet we’ll run into each other before too long – Dublin’s like that.

    @Lydia: The ghettoisation is terrifying, isn’t it? What really sticks in my craw is the way advertisers can say, with total accuracy, that this is what kids want – as if those desires hadn’t been carefully manipulated from before they were born.

    @Lucy: Yay, a subscriber! I’m really interested to hear about your step-sister, because of course the notional girl imagined by the product designers presumably doesn’t exist – everyone chooses some aspects of what they’re offered and rejects others. But the stereotypes are still harmful, I think.

  • Deirdre

    Only reading this now! I am much more conscious of this now since having my own O; I am dreading the thought of getting piles of pink or piles of blue once the baby arrives and reveals its all-important gender to the dozens – or hundreds – of people who have asked whether I know ‘what I’m having’. Thank God for the minority who give books – having a family’s worth of hand-me-downs from my sister, we really don’t need clothes, and I feel slightly guilty that there are several dresses that we received as presents and that O never wore as I regarded them as slightly uncomfortable/totally impractical/not conducive to the way she plays – or moves….

    • leannich

      @Deirdre: I know – isn’t it striking how people want to stuff babies into gender boxes even before they’re born? Also, girls’ clothes are impractical; boys’ generally aren’t. And how twisted is it to (a) push the message that showing your underwear is intensely shameful, and (b) routinely dress half the child population in skirts and dresses! Argh.

  • Jani

    I work in a large public library in Canada, there are girly books and boy’s books, many linked to disney movies and/or TV shows.

    Love your blog, came across it reading a review of women’s work by Barber, but i can’t find your review.

  • Enjoy the post. Maybe men’s punk pants source may guide someone there.

  • leannich

    @Jani: Don’t even get me STARTED on children’s books. Really. Don’t even.

  • steven l

    Right lets start off with a couple of simple points rather than reading a pointless rant that seems to consist of nothing more than hot air and bile which i persume is more than likely due to a lack of sexual satisfaction than based in fact.
    Point 1, the audacity you have in considering yourself a researcher by spending one afternoon in Mothercare actually beggars belief. Do you have grandoise images when you type your posts or perhaps you are so small minded and inept in your own life you feel the need to exaggerate your own importance?
    Point 2, where is the empirical data that has lead you to these sweeping conclusions or once again did you just blantantly lie to make yourself seem important?
    Point 3. These spurious and unfounded conclusions are based on an individual and not as , lets see what you deigned to call it, ah yes a sample representative. A sample of one, my god your lack of intelligence is an offence against god and nature.
    Point 4, in contrast i am a researcher and i am more than qualified to carry out and interpet statisical information correctly which unfortunately seems to be beyond your abilities in this lifetime, maybe as an amoeba during your next.
    Point 5, starting to get irrate and dealing with an infantile human being with a personality of a gnat. The fact you are posting to the web should make you feel ashamed of yourself. You have a duty to confirm and publish statistical data and include your sources so they can be cross checked.
    In ending this, i have to state my disappointment lies in the fact that you seem to hate men so much that you feel the need to insult all men without fear of reprecussions or reprimand.
    Next time you publish please make sure you do so with facts and not with your own twisted,sickening view of the world today.

  • Jacwac

    Love your post, Léan, and some others I’ve read tonight. I’ve found myself tutting and harrumphing in Next, Mothercare, etc on many occasions: the one that increases my blood pressure most is’Here Comes Trouble’ on the blue and red t-shirts.

    But then, maybe I’m just suffering from a lack of sexual satisfaction. WTF?

    I can’t describe how funny it is to read someone like the venerable Steven bemoaning your lack of intelligence.

    I’m now going to have a look at your t-shirts.

  • steven

    Ah thank you for your response i found it entirely thought provoking and just what i expected from what i now perceive to be nothing more than a small minded little goldfish in a big pond,do me the courtesy of replying in a manner that has some sort of constructive content rather than simply stating wtf!obviously someone’s school reports must have stated “must try harder”

  • Ailbhe

    I’m not totally sure I should be laughing out loud here. But I am.

  • @Steven

    Point 1: Your lack of punctuation and proper sentences makes your comment look even more like a pointless rant full of hot air. The bile makes it look full of bile. I’d enquire about your lack of sexual satisfaction, but I don’t see how anyone’s sexual satisfaction is relevant to the topic. However, “a pointless rant that seems to consist of nothing more than hot air and bile which i persume is more than likely due to a lack of sexual satisfaction than based in fact” appears to be referring to your own comment, so you can stop presuming your own sexual dissatisfaction, do your research, and see if statistically you are sexually dissatisfied.

    Point 2: The only time she used the word “researcher” it was preceded by “bad”. Not so grandiose. Where is the man hating? Where are the insults to men? A “representative sample”, not a “sample representative”. Jacwac is not Léan. What made you think this blog post was pretending to be a scientific survey or paper? I hope your interpretation skills are much better when it comes to statistics.

    Point 3: Have you made your interpretation of her personality, intelligence, maturity, etc from a sample of one post? And then posted your sweeping conclusions on the internet? Are you ashamed of yourself?

    @everyone else: Yeah, I shouldn’t feed the troll. But his comment was so self descriptive that I couldn’t resist. Perhaps it is performance art?

  • Gideon

    Sometimes it is just so tempting to feed the trolls, though – however bad or pointless it might be.

    (Not that this puny specimen seems particularly challenging, mind you.)

    I’d say that nothing you said above was even remotely controversial.

    And while one person’s anecdotal evidence may not carry a huge amount of weight, it is by no means automatically incorrect – or inherently worthy of such ill-mannered disdain.

    But then, there is a vast and well-documented catalogue of data (going back decades) that backs up your observations; and this sort of colour-coding and role definition and not-so-implicit gender stereotyping is certainly something I remember from when I was a child.

    Léan’s article was well-expressed, succinct – and patently true beyond all reasonable argument. Which is possibly why the only dissent is coming from someone who, if genuine, could best be described as a frothing loon.

  • leannich

    @Jacwac: Yes, the “Here Comes Trouble” strand of the message really gets me too.

    @Ailbhe: Quite!

    @Mollydot and @Gideon: Thanks for your reasoned defence – I appreciate it!

    @Steven: The tone of your remarks really isn’t how we speak to one another around here. If you choose to comment here in future, please do so with civility and respect.

    I have no problem with commenters voicing dissenting opinions, but if you fail to be civil and respectful on my blog, I will delete your words.

    I wish you peace.

  • steven

    I am sorry you find my tone offensive for that was not my intention!quite liked the term frothing loon.
    i know you and the other contributing members of this website have issues around children’s clothes,that of itself is not at issue.obviously you have gathered like minded individuals to your site.
    can you tell me what parent generally buys children’s clothes?
    the mother!
    how to companies know what style of clothing will sell during any particular season?
    test groups of mothers up and down the country according to their socio economic status are surveyed to see what they would like to see their children in.
    if you don’t like something then write a letter of complaint to that organisation.
    as you have obviously gathered i do not agree with your opinions.all i can see from your like mined group is the beginnings of people who are extremist in their views,what next,book burning because the content or the book cover somehow offends you?
    your views should be shared in a closed forum and not inflicted on the world

  • steven

    You have every right to express your views,its the how that offends me and you threat of censorship reminds me of another individual in the 1940’s,i think his name was adolf hitler who in the beginning had his countries best interests at heart,as the famous adage goes “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”
    on a final note and final post,which you are no doubt are relieved to hear!
    36 things you didn’t know about me?
    i am sorry but what a self indulgent diatribe.you have stopped short of declaring yourself a living saint.you are not some fairy tale intellectual princess! there is no need to force feed that utter drivel on the world!your friends and family already know who and what you are!why did you feel the need to publish that?
    try honesty instead,you will end up with a more balanced view. again i do not mean to be insulting but no doubt i will once again will be called a frothing loon!

  • kanadelf

    AH AH AH!

    Génial ce type, vraiment une caricature de troll! Bravo Léan, you really scored!

  • You are so right about the messages implicit and explicit on the clothing. For both boys and girls.

    I guess you haven’t looked at the shoes for little girls yet? Takes the mindset to a whole ‘nother level — high heels for six year olds! As a parent I found that trend so disturbing: early sexualization, plus imposing learned passivitity through inability to move freely, stand tall with good balance/posture, run, jump, play hard. bleck.

  • Steven: again i do not mean to be insulting

    Then perhaps you need to work on your language skills? Because you’re certainly coming across as insulting, and as that isn’t your intention, and you’re obviously upset about how your unintended use of English has conveyed insult, I suggest you take some communication classes which will teach you how to convey your reasoned disagreement with a point of view without also conveying insult.

  • Totally agree with your post! I bought my daughter lots of boy clothes, initially, that I considered neutral. But slowly gave in to buying girl clothes, she loves pink!

    I am not mad on pink and hate lilac with a passion, and thought all the slogans were stupid. you analysed the differences nicely!

    Have you seen the PINK globe in the early learning centre? blue and earth colours for boys, shades of pink for girls, sickening!

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>