Click to gender

That’s it. My relationship with Early Learning Centre has been strained for some time  now (see previous post on the pink/blue issue), but I’ve finally decided to end it. You see, it’s the “filter by gender” thing. Yes, I know it’s been there for a while, but today I’m trying to buy a tea set for Secondborn’s second birthday, and this time, it’s personal.

“Dressing up and roleplay”
Items for girls: 118
Items for boys: 73
Items for both: 72

“Learning and books”
Items for girls: 212
Items for boys: 203
Items for both: 201

“Cars, trains and construction”
Items for girls: 81
Items for boys: 122
Items for both: 81

I particularly like the cases where “both” is fewer than the smaller of the “boys”/”girls” options. You can’t just add them together. Some of that pink stuff is so toxic it can cause penises to spontaneously drop off. And, yes, imaginative play and reading are for girls, while spatial skills are for boys.

ELC is exclusively for kids under 5. At what point, with what evidence, will people figure out that “natural” gendered preferences could be fully explained by this shit?

It’s not just them, of course. Loads of sites offer gender-filtered search, or boys’ and girls’ categories, particularly when it comes to imaginative play or dressing up toys. There’s something odd about parents/ other toy-buyers not being trusted to perpetrate gender stereotypes themselves, isn’t there? Anyway. I’m boycotting. It’s over between me and ELC, but also all those other crappy infant gender programming sites.  Boycotts’r'us.

Things that are pink and blue

Um, yeah. A bit of a hiatus there while I figured out what I want to do with this blog. But I’m back now, and since it’s December, I want to talk about Christmas shopping. Specifically, Christmas shopping for things for kids.

This is a thing for girls. It says “Ideal for a child‘s room”, but it has a glittery pink stand and a picture of a girl on the packaging.

This, however, is a thing for boys. It says so right there on the packaging. Which is a shame, because Firstborn would love these toys.

These are things for boys and things for girls. The picture’s a bit blurry (sorry), but there are tape recorders and electric keyboards, identical but for colour and decoration (pink with flowers; blue with circle-y things). The packaging on each shows girls and boys respectively; posed almost identically in what is clearly the same set. Look here for a nice clear illustration.

The final proof comes at the checkout, by the way. It might be “Cool Keyboard – blue” on the website, but take it to the cash desk in the shop and I’ll guarantee it comes up as “keyboard boys”. I know because I bought Firstborn this easel once.

This one’s interesting, though: the pink is a “Winter 4 piece outfit” while the blue is a “Boys 5 piece outfit.”

This relates back to the earlier stuff, doesn’t it? Stuff for girls only needs a girl on the packaging or a pink element to be off-limits for boys. But stuff for boys, like the Tonka toys, needs to be explicitly labelled, because “boy” isn’t as untouchable for girls as “girl” is for boys.

[Personal anecdote breakout: while people always assumed Firstborn was a boy when she wasn't dressed in pink (which she pretty much never was), I never had anyone modify her blue clothes by force. Secondborn, when wearing faux-leopard-print bootees with pink lining, has had total strangers on the bus pull his trousers over the bootee cuffs to hide the pink.]

I’m sure I’ll return to this topic soon. I’m very sure, because I already have more shoddy camera-phone pictures to share.