Somewhat in relation to the J Crew ad that is sparking controversy, this article addresses the social roots of what created the "regulation" that boys and girls need to adhere to certain societal standards such as wearing blue and pink, respectively. It is interesting how the article starts by saying that couples "have" to know the sex of their baby at first glance because is is very true that our society must know the sex of a baby before they know how to treat and talk to it. For example, when people see a boy baby for the first time, they usually use words like "handsome," "strong," "curious," and "prince," while girl babies are called "angelic," "sweet," "cuddly," "cute." Studies have also demonstrated that boy babies are treated a lot differently than girl babies in the ways in which they are held, talked to, etc. If people do not know the sex of a baby they don't really know what to do or how to treat it. Our gender roles for even babies is so structured that many people can only react based on the societal notions of what each gender is supposed to be.
The article states that separate gendered colors did not come about until just before World War 2 "and even then, it took time for popular culture to sort things out" pointing out what we know all too well, that pop culture is a huge determinant in deciding how girls and boys are supposed to act and dress. With mass communications what they are today, pop culture is spread around the world in a matter of seconds.
The article attributes prenatal testing to the rapid change in keeping boys and girls clothes separate. As soon as parents could learn the sex of the child they could go shopping for merchandise that was perfectly suited to their boy or girl. Of course merchandise companies are providing these necessities and encouraging the behavior with commercials and marketing geared directly at such parents and eventually for children as they become impressionable and easily marketed to with television commercials and children's show characters.
Something else to keep in mind is that fact that “gendered colors” are completely cultural. Granted, given the mass export of Western cultural norms, blue for boys and pink for girls may be what is considered acceptable in many parts of the world. However, as I observed was in Kenya, buying bright pink clothing for a boy baby only seemed strange to other Westerners. Someone explained that because a new baby is cause for celebration and happiness, bright colored baby clothes were considered the perfect way to express these emotions. And what is happier and more celebratory than neon pink? With this particular mindset, pink is the ideal color for any baby and a way of sharing in the new mother’s joy.
ReplyDeleteI've never thought about the origins of gendered colors mostly because it is so pervasive in our Western mindset nowadays. As the article mentioned, little boys once dressed very feminine and kept their hair long and pink was a perfectly acceptable color for a boy to wear. For Westerners, but Americans in particular, we observe these gendered colors from birth, when girls are wrapped in pink blankets and boys in blue. I think this color scheme is also used so people can avoid embarrassment if they aren't sure whether a baby is a boy or girl. In our society, if a baby has pink ribbons in her hair or is dressed in "girly" colors, people automatically assume the baby is a girl, whereas boys wear the 'boy' colors and usually have superheroes or sports on their clothing. This pink vs blue gender dichotomy is mostly an American phenomenon. As the previous comment mentioned about boys wearing pink in Kenya, I also experienced this in South Korea. The little boys in my classes would fight over the pink scissors or the pink piece of construction paper. This idea of gendered colors is not a part of their culture. It is interesting to consider how this socialization of gendered colors or lack thereof, affects the style choices for different sexes in the years to come.
ReplyDeleteI also had not really thought about the origins of colors until I read that article. I looked into it a little more and I think it is interesting that pink used to be associated with men for being a strong color and blue was for females because it was more calm and subdued. One article said that blue was associated with the Virgin Mary and that’s why girls wore blue.
ReplyDeleteThe article also makes me think about children as consumers and how they now have gender specific baby clothes. Parents buying more clothes for their children and instilling those values creates a cycle of consumerism. The media plays a role in this too by showing commercials, and advertisements telling children that they need certain types of clothes. There is a great book by Sharon Beder called This Little Kiddy Went to Market: The Corporate Assault on Children that looks at what corporations do to create more consumers and how they sway their brand choices.