Pink pressure.
Following Jon's post...
As aforementioned 'interpid co-author' (I want a t-shirt with that on!) I thought I would elaborate a little on what I found most distressing about pretty much every high street baby store I tried. (And I speak as someone who *loves* going into baby stores and cooing over every tiny item).
The pink/blue divide was, as Jon says, absolute and undeniable. And I'm not buying (literally or metaphorically) any of the biological determinism that would have us believe that little girls just prefer pink. The truth is babies couldn't care less what colour they are dressed in, busy as they are concentrating on milk and mummy and all of the rest of the wonders of the world. In fact, not so long ago it was the boys who were presumed to be naturally pretty in pink, and some arguments suggest that we have Hitler to thank for the current situation, after he associated pink with homosexuality and femininity during the Holocaust.
The thing is, we *teach* children that certain colours are and are not for them, which might not be such a big deal were it not for the fact that we sneak some pretty dubious attitudes along with the colours. Those tiny pink t-shirts sporting slogans like 'mummy's little princess' and 'daddy's little flower' are training girls for a life of decoration and fragility while the boys are off being 'little explorers' or even 'little monsters.' Neither sex gets a particularly good deal out of this.
And pink can take on an even more sinister hue according to the lovely people at Pink Stinks (check it out), who argue that the princess culture trains little girls for a lifetime of sexual objectification. It would take someone far less cynical than me to argue that the fluffy bunny ears of the playboy stationary brand are pink by mere co-incidence. Or that their Barbie hue is irrelevant to the pre-teenaged girls who fall for them because they are 'cute and girly'.
Don't get me wrong. Like Jon, I like pink. It's a pretty colour. But is has been horribly used and abused and appointed puppet ruler for all kinds of attitudes and ideas about what it means to be a girl. The pink and blue divide begins in babyhood but it doesn't have to be this way. If we stopped teaching babies how to be boys or girls we would have more time to teach them to be human beings.
As aforementioned 'interpid co-author' (I want a t-shirt with that on!) I thought I would elaborate a little on what I found most distressing about pretty much every high street baby store I tried. (And I speak as someone who *loves* going into baby stores and cooing over every tiny item).
The pink/blue divide was, as Jon says, absolute and undeniable. And I'm not buying (literally or metaphorically) any of the biological determinism that would have us believe that little girls just prefer pink. The truth is babies couldn't care less what colour they are dressed in, busy as they are concentrating on milk and mummy and all of the rest of the wonders of the world. In fact, not so long ago it was the boys who were presumed to be naturally pretty in pink, and some arguments suggest that we have Hitler to thank for the current situation, after he associated pink with homosexuality and femininity during the Holocaust.
The thing is, we *teach* children that certain colours are and are not for them, which might not be such a big deal were it not for the fact that we sneak some pretty dubious attitudes along with the colours. Those tiny pink t-shirts sporting slogans like 'mummy's little princess' and 'daddy's little flower' are training girls for a life of decoration and fragility while the boys are off being 'little explorers' or even 'little monsters.' Neither sex gets a particularly good deal out of this.
And pink can take on an even more sinister hue according to the lovely people at Pink Stinks (check it out), who argue that the princess culture trains little girls for a lifetime of sexual objectification. It would take someone far less cynical than me to argue that the fluffy bunny ears of the playboy stationary brand are pink by mere co-incidence. Or that their Barbie hue is irrelevant to the pre-teenaged girls who fall for them because they are 'cute and girly'.
Don't get me wrong. Like Jon, I like pink. It's a pretty colour. But is has been horribly used and abused and appointed puppet ruler for all kinds of attitudes and ideas about what it means to be a girl. The pink and blue divide begins in babyhood but it doesn't have to be this way. If we stopped teaching babies how to be boys or girls we would have more time to teach them to be human beings.
posted by Kate | 18:07
|
1 Comments
