Printer-friendly version
Author:
Taxonomy upgrade extras:
The attached link to the Daily Mail is about a campaign to boycott 'pink' toys for girls, they claim stereotyping has held girls and women back for generations.
Personally, I'm more concerned about sexually objectifying young women - but what do I know?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233779/Parents-urge...
Comments
Have they seriously looked beyond the colour?
They claim the Early Learning Centre is one of the worst offenders. Really?
"Pinkstinks argues that, while toys for boys encompass 'every avenue imaginable - construction, science, adventure, role play, physical and educational', in the ELC's ‘pink alleys’, the choices for girls are 'much more limited - and limiting'."
http://www.elc.co.uk/GiftFinderResults.php?filter=filter&gen...
On the first few pages:
Science - check. Sand and water table. Cash registers x2.
Adventure - check. Wooden playhouse.
Role play - check. Plenty of dolls houses.
Educational - check. Duh - it's the ELC - everything's educational!
Construction - check. Complete with picture of girls playing with it.
And for comparison purposes:
http://www.elc.co.uk/GiftFinderResults.php?filter=filter&gen...
There's actually quite a lot of crossover between the two lists.
--Ben
As the right side of the brain controls the left side of the body, then only left-handers are in their right mind!
I haven't read the article but...
Has it occurred to those geniuses to ask the little girl in question what she would like? Of course, I think all of us here agree that if a little boy wants a pink dolly, it's perfectly OK to give him one, too -- and it's also OK to give a little girl a baseball glove or GI Joe if that's her preference.
Ooh! You can't do that!
You can't ask the little girl! Don't you know that she's been indoctrinated from birth by that big bad male of a father and that downtrodden, undervalued, brainwashed mother of hers? No! You know what's good for her better than her parents do!
Sigh. I thought it was people like us who had a problem with reality. It seems there are people in the world who have much greater problems with reality than we do.
Penny
What?
This is a stupid article. These "avenues" are marketed towards girls because many girls like that sort of thing, I fail to see how liking the colour pink negatively influences development. I played with barbie dolls up until I was around ten years old and pink was my favourite colour until I was around twelve. That didn't make me want to stay out of the work force and raise children for someone.
If a child wants pink and "girly" toys who are they to stop them? *That* isn't progress. If anything it sounds like they're further restricting girl's choices: "...boycott 'pink' toys for girls..." Not boycott pink toys, period. It seems like some people don't think about their choices before joining a "progressive movement". Almost 3,000 supporters from a population of 61 million? At least the average voter seems to have some intelligence.
It's the Daily Wail. What do you expect?
Bear in mind the paper's editorial policy is akin to Chicken Licken.
They think society is deteriorating, crime is getting infinitely worse (regardless of what the statistics say), marriage isn't respected or promoted any more, nobody cares for "traditional" values, we're all being taxed to the hilt and getting nothing in return (all the money is apparently going on paying civil servants huge sums of money and their gold plated pension pots)...
Oh yes, then there's http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/
"Help to make sense of the Daily Mail’s ongoing effort to classify every inanimate object into those that cause cancer and those that prevent it."
According to that paper, things as strange as aluminium, artificial light, bubble bath, bras, false nails and even Facebook cause cancer!
--Ben
As the right side of the brain controls the left side of the body, then only left-handers are in their right mind!
Heck, what are they going to do about Breast Cancer?
It's the official colour of a world-wide campaign.
http://ww5.komen.org/
Seems a bit late...
Cheers,
Liobhan
-
Cheers,
Liobhan
Given...
...the ChemoCaps I crocheted in October, made out of Bernat's campaign-special "Pinky-Stripes" yarn, I sure >hope< people have a bit more sense. ^^;
-Liz
-Liz
Successor to the LToC
Formerly known as "momonoimoto"
Think Pink!
Pink?
lets think about this for a sec.
Pink is a color.
A color can not cause what they are claiming. It is not the color but the mentality behind it. the only thing this will do is cause the retailers and Manufacturers to think twice next time they think about putting out another product in Pink. what they want to do will have no worth while affect tward their goals.
Just my humble opinion by the way.
Hugs to all,
Aspin
I remember
that a while back a prison in the States somewhere redecorated all the cells in pink, and made all the inmates' uniforms pink, on the basis that it would have a calming effect on them. I also seem to remember that this worked reasonably well.
There is plenty of evidence around to show that different colours affect humans in different ways. In the large, that is, I'm not suggesting that every person reacts to a particular colour in exactly the same way.
However, the original argument given in the article is just hogwash. I can definitely hear axes grinding.
Penny
Oddly enough...
Pink was once the popular colour for baby boys, and blue seemed more appropriate for girls, because pink was thought to arouse too much excitement in the child, whilst blue was soothing and calm, perfectly appropriate for the delicate sensibilities of young girls.
The popularity of rotogravure reproductions of Gainsborough's painting, The Blue Boy, and another painting, Pinkie, by Lawrence, switched around the colours in the space of a few years.
The Blue Boy
Pinkie
BBC: Should we not dress girls in pink?
Cheers,
Puddin'
-
Cheers,
Puddin'
A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style
pink
If I remember correctly, in the old days of the cold war the Daily Mail was considered somewhat pink itself.
pink was considered too strong for girls
in history blue used to be for girls because pink was considered to be a shade of red and red was not a femme colour
it is only in the last 100years or so that the switch was made.
I like blue and pink;
does that make me some sort of in-betweeny? Maybe even (shock, horror) transsexual?
Ugh!
Susie
It might just make you lilac or lavender
...to absolutely gorgeous colors I'm totally convinced you could carry off just fine!
She was born for all the wrong reasons but grew up for all the right ones.
Possa Dio riccamente vi benedica, tutto il mio amore, Andrea
Love, Andrea Lena
Have these people even DONE
Have these people even DONE their research? As I recall, pink for girls didn't start off until the end of the Victorian period. Prior to that, pink was considered a 'manly' colour, and blue was considered more of a 'feminine' colour.
BW
I'll get a life when it's proven and substantiated to be better than what I'm currently experiencing.
O_O
I would say just let the kids like whatever color they like. Just as long as you raise your children to be strong independent confident people, you hopefully wont have any problems mew ^^ It IS true about the patriarchy and the oppression of young girls, but let's not base it on a color. I'd be more concerned about children's growing sexualization of their clothes. I saw a toddler mini skirt and halter top in a store and almost threw up. NOW THAT is freaking wrong ><
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know who I am, I am me, and I like me ^^
Bisexual, transsexual, gamer girl, princess, furry that writes horror stories and proud ^^
I know who I am, I am me, and I like me ^^
Transgender, Gamer, Little, Princess, Therian and proud :D