Debenhams drops 'sexist' toy labels...

py2006

Ok this kind of nonsense drives me mad.

Debenhams has dropped gender labelling from its toy departments amid claims of ‘sexism’, it emerged yesterday.
The High Street chain began removing ‘girls’ and ‘boys’ signs this week following a ‘sustained’ campaign from a parent-led action group.
Let Toys Be Toys campaigns against gender stereotyping in children’s toys and has already won a pledge from Toys R Us to be more ‘inclusive’ in its marketing.

Source

This political correct/feminist nonsense drives me up the wall. These suppliers are not saying you are a boy you must buy this and you are a girl you must buy this. Research has gone into this. Generally speaking girls like certain toys and boys like certain toys. Hence the use of certain colouring, fonts, wording etc to appeal to those. Sectioning toys makes it easier for parents to find specific toys etc. Apple did research recently which they found that mostly males went for the dark grey iPads and a greater percentage of women went for the brighter sparkly coloured ones. Yet neither were marketed towards any gender.

This nonsense of trying to get rid of genders is ridiculous. And lets not kid ourselves, the complainers probably don't give a rats ass about boys wanting to play with prams, its about the whole area of girls toys and how that is sexist blah blah blah.

What is next? No Fathers or Mothers day? No male and female toilets and changing rooms? No condoms targeted at men? Men allowed to have the time of the month too because selling maxi-pads to women is sexist? FFS

We will all be wearing grey clothes with the same hairstyles and we will remove the male genitalia because women don't have them or we will have to give them one.

We are both human but we have our differences and that is what makes us appealing and interesting to each other!!!!! :mad::o:p

Right, back to bed.

py2006

py2006 wrote: »

Generally speaking girls like certain toys and boys like certain toys.

Maybe not everyone wants to live by a generalisation.


I don't think labelling does much harm, but if it doesn't do any good and it annoys people, then it's no loss really.

And lets not kid ourselves, the complainers probably don't give a rats ass about boys wanting to play with prams, its about the whole area of girls toys and how that is sexist blah blah blah.

Must be nice being able to read minds though. I'd like that.

wazky

I would love to hear from the 4 year old that claimed he/she was being discriminated against because they read the label and seen that Action Man/Barbie wasn't meant for them.

Feathers

Candie wrote: »

I don't think labelling does much harm, but if it doesn't do any good and it annoys people, then it's no loss really

In this case though, it sounds like a vocal minority that are getting things changed. I'm sure there are plenty of people buying toys for kids that might be a bit removed from them (grandparents, godparents, etc) that would be glad of a label to steer their decision a bit.

Feathers

Feathers wrote: »

In this case though, it sounds like a vocal minority that are getting things changed. I'm sure there are plenty of people buying toys for kids that might be a bit removed from them (grandparents, godparents, etc) that would be glad of a label to steer their decision a bit.

I agree, it's just one of those things where someone is always going to have something to complain about.

It probably does the kids no harm to feel they have more to choose from than just the ones labelled 'Boys' or 'Girls'. If a little fella wants to play with a craft set but it's in the girls section, it might be enough to discourage him.

OneArt

We need more movements like this.

The next thing you know, people will be using those new e-cigarettes to download paedophiles and beat children to death with sexist toys!

The King of Moo

What's the problem?
People can still buy whatever toys they want for their kids. Nothing has changed.
This is just another case of frustrated or angry people getting worked up over nothing, creating imaginary "PC" bogeymen as a target.

Seaneh

I read an article about a trial a group of sociologists did with 9 kids from a nomadic tribe in the middle east.
These kids were raised without tv or internet, all between 3 and 6, they would have no clue who barbie or woody from toystory were.

The dropped a bunch of toys in a room all in one pile, mixed boy and girl toys.

Without fail, when let into the room one by one, the boys played with the "boys" toys and the girls with the "girls" toys.

And when let into the room all together, the same. the girls played with the dolls and tea cups and the boys played with the action figures and cars.

Maximus Alexander

If this was a law I'd have a problem with it, but in reality it is just retailers responding to a campaign by their customers. Nothing wrong with that.

_Kaiser_

People buy toys in the over-priced "up-market" Debenhams?

Smyths (or places like Amazon) all the way

Savoir.Faire

A starter shotgun is gender neutral.

phasers

I agree that taking down the signs is a silly overreaction but this:

No condoms targeted at men? Men allowed to have the time of the month too because selling maxi-pads to women is sexist? FFS

is just stupid. Those things are to do with biology.

Femme_Fatale

The King of Moo wrote: »

What's the problem?
People can still buy whatever toys they want for their kids. Nothing has changed.
This is just another case of frustrated or angry people getting worked up over nothing, creating imaginary "PC" bogeymen as a target.

Usually I'd agree, Moo, but, ah... I think removing "Boys" and "Girls" is a bridge too far and an example of (it pains me to say it)... political correctness gone mad.

/washes self

I don't think this will change anything - certain stuff is seen as for boys, certain stuff is seen as for girls.

Femme_Fatale

Seaneh wrote: »

I read an article about a trial a group of sociologists did with 9 kids from a nomadic tribe in the middle east.
These kids were raised without tv or internet, all between 3 and 6, they would have no clue who barbie or woody from toystory were.

The dropped a bunch of toys in a room all in one pile, mixed boy and girl toys.

Without fail, when let into the room one by one, the boys played with the "boys" toys and the girls with the "girls" toys.

And when let into the room all together, the same. the girls played with the dolls and tea cups and the boys played with the action figures and cars.

Although they were still probably socialised some bit in terms of gender differences, but there is something in it.
To take it further: I saw a documentary featuring baby chimps, who were let into a room of toys. Girl chimps went for dolls, boy chimps went for toy cars.

Gendered behaviour is possibly nurture to a point, but also nature.

GorillaRising

Candie wrote: »

Maybe not everyone wants to live by a generalisation.


I don't think labelling does much harm, but if it doesn't do any good and it annoys people, then it's no loss really.

Doesn't do any good?? The only way 'it doesn't do any good' is when idiots get offended by such things.

The type of people who look for things to be offended about.

I think they OP has outlined quite clearly why toy areas (not toys themselves) are labeled so.

These morons just want an easy target. Why don't they head down to Matel or whoever and give out about pictures of girls instead of boys on the packaging of toy kitchens?

What's worse are the people who pander to this nonsense with the same of 'I'm so liberal, what's wrong with you rhetoric'.

Bar a tiny percentage of people who ARE different to 'the norm', boys and girls will always like much different things and respond to marketing etc differently. There's nothing wrong with highlighting that when selling to genders.

For the rest, well that's were actual parenting comes in.

Feathers

Candie wrote: »

I agree, it's just one of those things where someone is always going to have something to complain about.

It probably does the kids no harm to feel they have more to choose from than just the ones labelled 'Boys' or 'Girls'. If a little fella wants to play with a craft set but it's in the girls section, it might be enough to discourage him.

I would've though it would be peer pressure getting kids to conform though, rather than labels. If a kid will get slagged at school for playing with a barbie, that's what needs to be changed - removing dolls for a girl's toys section but no other action will have very little affect.

py2006

If you go into any pharmacy or chemist or look at the cosmetic section in a supermarket. The male products stand out as they are all darker colours with more dramatic names (fusion stealth power etc lol).

Walk into any pharmacy and 95% of the hygiene products are female targeted (which is fine) but if they were to sprinkle the male products throughout this it would be a nightmare for men to find things. Hence we get our little section of dark blue gels, shaving foam etc.

razorblunt

I, for one, welcome the day when Menswear and Womanswear are done away with!! Grey ill fitting cloaks for everyone!!
And while I'm in the subject kids wear is discriminating against small people that can fit into some of the clothes.

What a load of crap.

The Pheasant2

Seaneh wrote: »

I read an article about a trial a group of sociologists did with 9 kids from a nomadic tribe in the middle east.
These kids were raised without tv or internet, all between 3 and 6, they would have no clue who barbie or woody from toystory were.

The dropped a bunch of toys in a room all in one pile, mixed boy and girl toys.

Without fail, when let into the room one by one, the boys played with the "boys" toys and the girls with the "girls" toys.

And when let into the room all together, the same. the girls played with the dolls and tea cups and the boys played with the action figures and cars.

Interestingly they did the same test with young Chimpanzees and noted the exact same results. Young female chimps have also been documented to treat sticks like dolls

EDIT: ah I see Femme fatale made this point already!

GorillaRising

GorillaRising wrote: »

Doesn't do any good?? The only way 'it doesn't do any good' is when idiots get offended by such things.

The type of people who look for things to be offended about.

I think they OP has outlined quite clearly why toy areas (not toys themselves) are labeled so.

These morons just want an easy target. Why don't they head down to Matel or whoever and give out about pictures of girls instead of boys on the packaging of toy kitchens?

What's worse are the people who pander to this nonsense with the same of 'I'm so liberal, what's wrong with you rhetoric'.

Bar a tiny percentage of people who ARE different to 'the norm', boys and girls will always like much different things and respond to marketing etc differently. There's nothing wrong with highlighting that when selling to genders.

For the rest, well that's were actual parenting comes in.

Cool your jets there and reserve that self-righteous wrath for something you got right.

Read the bit right before the 'doesn't do any good' bit that's upset you so much. I said:

I don't think labelling does much harm, but if it doesn't do any good and it annoys people, then it's no loss really

Balance, it's a good thing.

The King of Moo

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Usually I'd agree, Moo, but, ah... I think removing "Boys" and "Girls" is a bridge too far and an example of (it pains me to say it)... political correctness gone mad.

/washes self

I don't think this will change anything - certain stuff is seen as for boys, certain stuff is seen as for girls.

It depends for me on how much effort they went to to get rid of the signs. As you say, most people associate certain toys with genders, so it won't make much difference.
I've never noticed signs like these before anyway. Sure, the traditionally gendered toys were kept together, but I've never seen "boys" and "girls" signs.
Ultimately I don't think removing these signs will do any harm to anyone. It could only be beneficial, like for my nephew who loves cooking, and might be put off by seeing a little kitchen in the "girls" section.

Duggy747

I played with my sister's Barbie dolls once and I turned out OK.



*Pulls up tights*

eviltwin

If it stops people calling me a bad mother or telling me my son will grow up to be bullied or gay just because he sometimes likes to bring a pink teddy bear out with him then I'm all for it.

My daughter was a tomboy growing up and played with a lot of toys that would have been traditionally male..not a problem. My son though so much as looks at a doll or something in pastel colours and all of a sudden his sexuality is called into question. He's 3!!!

The King of Moo

razorblunt wrote: »

I, for one, welcome the day when Menswear and Womanswear are done away with!! Grey ill fitting cloaks for everyone!!
Pans while I'm in the subject kids wear is discriminating against small people that can for into some of the clothes.

What a load of crap.

Could you post a link with details about these plans? They sound outrageous!

Feathers

Feathers wrote: »

I would've though it would be peer pressure getting kids to conform though, rather than labels. If a kid will get slagged at school for playing with a barbie, that's what needs to be changed - removing dolls for a girl's toys section but no other action will have very little affect.

If all toys are just 'Toys' rather than 'Girls Toys' or 'Boys Toys' then the peer pressure to choose one or the other would surely be reduced, no? Kids won't feel they have to avoid the 'wrong' ones?

In the case of a toy kitchen it'd probably work, but it's too late for Barbie, she's never going to be gender neutral

py2006

Candie wrote: »

In the case of a toy kitchen it'd probably work, but it's too late for Barbie, she's never going to be gender neutral

Sure didn't they have a Ken doll? But that was mainly bought for girls?

py2006

py2006 wrote: »

Sure didn't they have a Ken doll? But that was mainly bought for girls?

You don't expect a babe like Barbie to be single, do you?

py2006

Candie wrote: »

You don't expect a babe like Barbie to be single, do you?

I suddenly want a barbie doll...

If Barbie was real...

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45543000/gif/_45543032_barbie_comparison466.gif

Amirani

It's a retailer making this decision, not any Government. People equating this with "typical PC crap" is nonsense. What do you expect a retailer to do? Not seek to maximise their revenue?

py2006

NiallSparky wrote: »

It's a retailer making this decision, not any Government. People equating this with "typical PC crap" is nonsense. What do you expect a retailer to do? Not seek to maximise their revenue?

I agree to a certain extent, but they are pandering to a minority.

Anyway, signs are not needed. Toys are visually separated.

Links234

It amazes me that anyone could have a problem with this

Pushtrak

py2006 wrote: »

This political correct/feminist nonsense drives me up the wall. These suppliers are not saying you are a boy you must buy this and you are a girl you must buy this.

Of course it isn't. It's telling parents "this is what you should probably buy your child". Though even with the labelling of toys gone, it will make no difference. The big issue at hand here isn't about what the labels say, it's about the cultural attitude, the way people bring up kids with what a boy or girl should be doing.

I often see parents saying to their kids they shouldn't be playing with *toy not suited to their gender*. It's also common to see children using this information as insults towards other children. Could there be a connection here I wonder?

This is one of many factors in why I'd rather not have children. The culture is fucked, frankly. Not just in this. In so many little ways.

Research has gone into this. Generally speaking girls like certain toys and boys like certain toys. Hence the use of certain colouring, fonts, wording etc to appeal to those.

Why might that be? I'm sure if you were to do the research say 200 years ago, the research would show very different things. Might it be about the attitudes of the time, how the children are brought up? Or do you think the boys like blue, girls like pink is innate?

This nonsense of trying to get rid of genders is ridiculous. And lets not kid ourselves, the complainers probably don't give a rats ass about boys wanting to play with prams, its about the whole area of girls toys and how that is sexist blah blah blah.

There are a lot of people who go by the feminist label who, if we were to talk would have no time for each other whatsoever. Your assumption here, though, as a blanket statement is wrong. Simple as that. To confirm, talk to more people. It helps.

What is next? No Fathers or Mothers day? No male and female toilets and changing rooms? No condoms targeted at men? Men allowed to have the time of the month too because selling maxi-pads to women is sexist? FFS

See kids, don't do drugs.

Well, the only point worth addressing here is the toilets/changing rooms. Why would changing that be bad? If you had one big place for toilets, you could fit more stalls, same with changing rooms. Privacy can be assured as everyone would have room with privacy to change. Were you picturing some free for all where everyone walked around naked?

We will all be wearing grey clothes with the same hairstyles and we will remove the male genitalia because women don't have them or we will have to give them one.

More FUD, wonderful.

We are both human but we have our differences and that is what makes us appealing and interesting to each other!!!!! :mad::o:p

I can't imagine you are interesting to many.

Frosty McSnowballs

Someone needs to hound the RDS to rename "toys for big boys" and "girls day out" events.

rock_dinasaur

The King of Moo wrote: »

What's the problem?
People can still buy whatever toys they want for their kids. Nothing has changed.
This is just another case of frustrated or angry people getting worked up over nothing, creating imaginary "PC" bogeymen as a target.

well now in this instance , you can hardly call it an imaginary PC agenda being pursued

Pushtrak

eviltwin wrote: »

If it stops people calling me a bad mother or telling me my son will grow up to be bullied or gay just because he sometimes likes to bring a pink teddy bear out with him then I'm all for it.

Candie wrote: »

If all toys are just 'Toys' rather than 'Girls Toys' or 'Boys Toys' then the peer pressure to choose one or the other would surely be reduced, no? Kids won't feel they have to avoid the 'wrong' ones?

No, not in the short term. Nothing will change in the short term. It'll take a few generations to catch on. Your kids will see there is no harm, but most others will cling to the old ideas, and your kids would have to pass on the there's no harm until it is closer to the consensus. This labelling isn't going to really change anything.

SpaceTime

I wouldn't be in favour of just trying to force gender neutrality but it can be a little worrying when you hear something like a parent complaining (as I did on the radio in the UK) about her little girl wanting to play with a toy train and a lego set and that that might somehow turn her into a lesbian. I nearly crashed the car! I really thought such attitudes died out in the 19th century sometime.

Then we wonder why there aren't as many female engineers and scientists as there ought to be when you've parents with attitudes like that.

I'm a guy and I really couldn't give a damn what kids play with as long as it's not sharp / toxic or dangerous.

We were chatting to some cousins of mine about what they wanted to be when they grew up and some of the responses were kind of worrying too.

Two of them seem to think that 'princess' is an actual career choice.

I think the toy / kids media companies are completely over-doing the princess nonsense and the sleazy pop tart career option too.

There's nothing wrong with a bit of non-reality but, I think there's way, way too much of this crap being pushed at girls. That and sleazy-looking clothes that are completely age-inappropriate and are quite frankly a bit weird to put it mildly. Kids are meant to be kids, not some kind of runway models or mini versions of twenty-something celebs.

I'm less worried about what's being pitched at guys tbh, although some of the uber-violent video games are a bit much at a young age.

Femme_Fatale

SpaceTime wrote: »

it can be a little worrying when you hear something like a parent complaining (as I did on the radio in the UK) about her little girl wanting to play with a toy train and a lego set and that that might somehow turn her into a lesbian.

Ugh. :mad:

And back in apparently less enlightened times she would have been viewed as a tomboy and that would have been the end of it.

SpaceTime

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Ugh. :mad:

And back in apparently less enlightened times she would have been viewed as a tomboy and that would have been the end of it.

Even viewing her as a tomboy is a bit stupid in my opinion.

I'd be fairly disappointed if my kids male or female were being encourage to be technophobes tbh!

Links234

Great post spacetime, but on the point of violent games, kids shouldnt be playing those anyway, they're for adults. There's a problem with ignorance of parents who think that any game is ok for a child.

Pushtrak

SpaceTime wrote: »

I wouldn't be in favour of just trying to force gender neutrality but it can be a little worrying when you hear something like a parent complaining (as I did on the radio in the UK) about her little girl wanting to play with a toy train and a lego set and that that might somehow turn her into a lesbian. I nearly crashed the car!

What follows the but there is an example of not being in to gender forcing. That parent has a clear vision of how genders should be, as I'm sure most people here are, and are going to be sure that will be part of their parenting strategy, as is their right. It gets to the negative side when the parenting style becomes the norm the child has, and is a runt to anyone who isn't acting within the norm.

Cianos

This girl has a more mature view on the issue than some people in this thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CU040Hqbas

Amirani

A question to those who are complaining about this move - who exactly is this measure harming? Seems like nobody to me.

SpaceTime

Who ever decided that cooking's somehow 'girlie' ??

Thankfully that myth's finally been challenged. A huge % of top chefs are male yet guys are kept out of the kitchen as kids by this kind of stereotyping.

There are a good few ridiculous nonsense type stereotypes that persist for both genders like that.

Also, guys are expected to have absolutely no interest in anything 'caring' as kids and seen as weird (by some) if they play with dolls. Apparently we're supposed to be off shooting things or something. Then suddenly when they hit their 20s are supposed to be wonderful dads.. How does that work?!
Something of an incongruity there.

py2006

Pushtrak wrote: »

I can't imagine you are interesting to many.

Ah the old 'put up and shut up' response. Don't criticise as we are the ones in the right. Well done!

I chose exaggerations to make a point of highlighting some of the ridiculousness of a pc society.

And nobody really cares who you find interesting or not.

Pushtrak

NiallSparky wrote: »

A question to those who are complaining about this move - who exactly is this measure harming? Seems like nobody to me.

People have a parenting style, and it's a commonly accepted thing that children who stray the norm are going to get bullied. It's the number one reason brought up to people who suggest not going with the norm - "but they'll get bullied'.

Well, of course they will if people allow such nonsense from their kids. I wonder is it accepted in their kids, or just not really thought about and tolerated.

hatrickpatrick

This is the rabid "social justice" movement making a lot of noise on the internet and managing to scare companies into complying with their demands.

By trying to force everyone into an extreme "genderless" society, they're every bit as bad as those who try to push traditional gender roles, IMO. Spend any amount of time on Reddit and you'll encounter tons of them.

Pushtrak

py2006 wrote: »

Ah the old 'put up and shut up' response. Don't criticise as we are the ones in the right. Well done!

I chose exaggerations to make a point of highlighting some of the ridiculousness of a pc society.

And nobody really cares who you find interesting or not.

A discussion forum isn't at its best when this is the best caliber of response you can come up with.

Femme_Fatale

SpaceTime wrote: »

Who ever decided that cooking's somehow 'girlie' ??

Thankfully that myth's finally been challenged. A huge % of top chefs are male yet guys are kept out of the kitchen as kids by this kind of stereotyping.

There are a good few ridiculous nonsense type stereotypes that persist for both genders like that.

Toy kitchen stuff is marketed at girls. It's ironic though, because male chefs are depicted as really macho in popular culture!

Pushtrak

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This is the rabid "social justice" movement making a lot of noise on the internet and managing to scare companies into complying with their demands.

By trying to force everyone into an extreme "genderless" society, they're every bit as bad as those who try to push traditional gender roles, IMO. Spend any amount of time on Reddit and you'll encounter tons of them.

False equivalency.

Czarcasm

NiallSparky wrote: »

It's a retailer making this decision, not any Government. People equating this with "typical PC crap" is nonsense. What do you expect a retailer to do? Not seek to maximise their revenue?

Sums it up in a nutshell really. Most parents don't give a crap about this "gender stereotyping" malarkey, but for parents that do, retailers will appease them, they'll buy more toys, everybody's happy.

The worst I've seen are some parents who try to force "anti" gender stereotyping on their children by buying boys barbie dolls and then wondering why they don't want to play with them, or buying girls cowboy outfits or whatever when they want princess dresses.

Actually just my own personal opinion on it is I can't stand parents who use their children as tools with which to make social commentary or a statement, almost as if their children are a disappointment to them if they want to play with toys their friends play with.