Debenhams drops 'sexist' toy labels...

py2006 · 02-11-2013 12:29PM #1

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.

02-11-2013 12:31PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:36PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:37PM

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.

02-11-2013 12:40PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:41PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:41PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:44PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:46PM

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_ · 02-11-2013 12:46PM

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

Smyths (or places like Amazon) all the way

Savoir.Faire · 02-11-2013 12:47PM

A starter shotgun is gender neutral.

phasers · 02-11-2013 12:47PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:47PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:51PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:52PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:52PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:55PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:55PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:55PM

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!

02-11-2013 12:56PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:59PM

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 · 02-11-2013 12:59PM

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

*Pulls up tights*

eviltwin · 02-11-2013 01:00PM

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 · 02-11-2013 01:03PM

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!

02-11-2013 01:07PM

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 · 02-11-2013 01:08PM

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?

02-11-2013 01:10PM

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 · 02-11-2013 01:12PM

Candie wrote: »

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

I suddenly want a barbie doll...

02-11-2013 01:15PM

If Barbie was real...

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

Amirani · 02-11-2013 01:21PM

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 · 02-11-2013 01:23PM

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.

Debenhams drops 'sexist' toy labels...

Comments