My boys have always had access to a wide variety of toys which has meant I have had to play with dolls (something I never did as a child) and all sorts.

I do find that the increasingly rigid distinctions between boys and girls to be absolutely vile! Just have a look in the toy sections of the Argos book – apparently girls do art and craft and boys play with lego, but obviously not pink lego.

This is the point of the distinction – toys and clothes cannot be passed down through a family if you have children of different genders so all the more money to retailers. It is also a brilliant tatic to disable our daughters with high heels and other clothes that bind them to a passive role. Why the hell should they think they can do what boys do anyway, what dissapointment they would have in store then they grow up!!

This thread is as much about parenting as feminism. And men are parents too, so their opinions count. Incidentally, my final paragraph was addressed to Hannah (woman, singular noun) not women (plural form of noun).

And if there is contemporary evidence connecting feminisation and sexualisation, I’m happy to review it and my own opinions. By evidence, I mean studies conducted in the last twenty five years that associate unusual sexual behaviour in young women with a “girly” background.

BTW, PaulG, if I apply your analysis, you are not qualified to define women as “an oppressed group”.

Indeed we need kids who can make their own decisions good ones for them, not just follow anyone blindly.

“My point is, assuming that children aren’t so easily influenced by other factors around them at such a young age is incredibly naive. Is it a wonder why corporations spend so much money advertising at childrens channels?”

We train them to be influenced by us, many see that as an important part of parenting and in a way it is, but the risk is that they will be equally influenced by others if they don’t have enough opportunity to make their own choices and learn how to make good ones for themselves.

Choosing to wear pink might not be a bad choice.

I have a girly who loves pink, I do believe it is influenced by the society but is also an expression of who she is, she is individually pink believe me, she pairs it with red, wears a tiara in the street, but sometimes dresses like a “normal girl” for fun , she asks questions about why Dad’s work more than mums “well usually they do” she says and wonders is there something we can do to change that seriously she does, she’s 4… Nothing wrong with wearing pink if you use it to challenge convention. Part of wearing ping was to rebel against those organic beige things mum bought!!

There is nothing wrong with being influenced by the society if you choose your influences and make them work for you, it’s about helping kids to be descerning we can’t expect them to get it right all at once unless we impose our views in an authoritarian way and why do that because we migth be wrong, it leaves no space for correcting errors. Risks attached to that approach are here http://www.curi.us/blog/post/1386-tcs-basics-3

Pareting Well in a Media Age by Gloria deGaetano is a good book on the subject, except that in her argument you should protect you kids from cultural and media influences by imposing your influences and allowing “some” autonomy. So you train them to do as you say, when you are not there any more they will need someone else to tell them what to wear and how to be. You need to bring them up to make good rational decisions themselves, so keeping pink or sugar or whatever out of the house till they go to school won’t work imo

Our kids are a little more evolved than we are so we need to protect and guide them in a way that supports their development not to impose our thoughts or ideas about what’s good or bad, we must certainly share them and if we are right we will convince them. So we might think pink is bad for the reasons Hannah gives, we might be right for some girls we migth be wrong for others.

Actually my 4 year old is tiring of pink I had to stop in the middle of this to play this punk dog dres up game http://www.dressupgames.com/punkdog/

Have a nice trip; I (sincerely) hope you enjoy it.

Oh dear, I’ve not heard such naive claptrap on here for a while. Though chavscum does try his best on a regular basis.

A child has the freedom to develop but a child is also constantly absorbing from the world around them for clues on how to develop and what direction they should take. If you don’t even understand that then I despair for your kids.

Part of that process is to give her the self-confidence and the self-awareness that are necessary to develop her own opinions and hold on to them in the face of disagreement

Sure, but how is that mutually exclusive to a situation where you try and get your kid open to influence from a wider range of perspectives, rather than being forced into narrow stereotypes (messages from other sources) of how a girl and a boy should behave?

You seem to be arguing against yourself. Or, you just want an argument for its own sake.

I wouldn’t normally nitpick like this, but if precision is so important…

And as for being a teenager … I wish!

>>> “maybe I am, but so are you!” responses

I don’t think that either of the nuggets of wisdom were validly applied to my comments. It simply struck me as surprising that in my first visit to this site, two people make completely misguided criticisms of commenter’s views, then made barbed criticisms under the veil of sanctimonious “advice” – criticisms that applied equally to their own comments.

Is this routine here? Are you trying to debate issues, or just have an ego trip? Because no-one seems to have seriously challenged the point that Stu and I made, which is that it is quite possible to allow a child the freedom to make their own choices in life, within appropriate limits, while educating them as to how they should proceed to reach their opinion. Do you think this is fundamentally wrong and that such freedom should not be allowed? Or do you accept the broad structure while asserting that the devil is in the extent of the limits and the nature of the education?

I didn’t say you have taken away your daughter’s girly toys – your comment (and the original article) clearly implied that you felt her playing with girly toys is a bad thing, and I was saying that it isn’t. If we’re talking about logical fallacies, I haven’t yet met a parent who gives their daughter ‘girly’ toys “to the exclusion of all else”. I’d probably call that a Straw Man, but then I wouldn’t know, being male and all.

I would actually think that most parents are more likely today than in any other age to have no problem at all with their girls playing games that would previously be considered overly masculine. Until the the second half of last century the very idea of little girls playing ‘masculine’ games, or even wearing trousers would have been ridiculous. Now it’s the norm. Harper Lee won, and yet you’re still unhappy.

I don’t see why there’s any need to worry about the social implications of a 5 year old’s behaviour at all, since it’s unlikely that other children their age have a full understanding of either the sociological impact of their words nor the effect that their behaviour has on the wider world. Hence my comment that it’s not worth worrying about in comparison to whether or not your daughter is happy.

Well done on the ‘maybe you just don’t like sex’ comment by the way; surely it’s only a matter of time before I’m accused of ‘being jealous’ of the women portrayed in magazines?

Also, if you can stomach a bit more free advice: when you start engaging in the debating equivalent of “maybe I am, but so are you!” responses to EVERYTHING, it;s not the person you are responding to who looks childish. Especially when you refuse to follow grammatical convention and capitalise your name because it’s SO rebellious, like every teenager for the past fifty years.

Above, you criticise women’s magazines for depicting thin women and you criticise men’s magazines for publishing pictures of women with large breasts.

So, to try to be a good citizen, I am going to attempt to find fat women with small breasts attractive. Not quite sure how I will achieve this yet but I thought maybe you could help. Perhaps you could give me electric shocks while I watch Pamela Anderson videos. Or maybe we could go straight to the face cage and the rat?

Anyway. If it works for me we could set up a programme to fix the rest of the male population and you would then have the kind of magazines you would like to read.

Sound good?

Stu is commenting on an article that, in effect, says that such toys are not beneficial for a young girl. That being so, his comment seems reasonable.

I’m also amused by your rather stupid assertion that one can EITHER worry about the wider social implications of one’s child’s behaviour, OR their happiness, but not both.

He doesn’t say that. He recommends reducing one type of worry and increasing another. In no way does that imply that there is a causal or other connection between the two.

Both of your responses to Stu’s comment descend into a nitpicking textual analysis that avoids responding to his point by attempting to develop inconsistencies that aren’t there. This doesn’t advance a debate, nor does it make you look especially clever.

Still, do keep patronising people and using fallacious arguments, since that’s CLEARLY the best way to engage people…

Gosh – even more good advice! (see my discussion with Sunny Hundal, above)

Stu, I like the way you assume that I have taken away my daughter’s girly toys (I haven’t) or even that I have made any comment TO HER on her sudden liking for them, rather than just noticing it and mentioning it on the internet. (I haven’t)

I’m also amused by your rather stupid assertion that one can EITHER worry about the wider social implications of one’s child’s behaviour, OR their happiness, but not both.

Still, do keep patronising people and using fallacious arguments, since that’s CLEARLY the best way to engage people…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/apr/15/equality.gender

That’s because what looks good full dressed can often be a bit of a let down in a swimsuit. Girls can easily deceive with flattering clothes, but once they are bouncing on the diving board you get a different perspective.

I think the perception of pressure to look attractive is directly related to the declining standards of fitness in women (therefore making that perfect image less attainable). The addiction to tv, glossy mags and chatting on the phone is probably related to the decline in female competitive sports and institutions such as the girl guides. The sort of things targeted by lefties. There you go, its all your fault.

If your daughter is affected by being told by peers that she shouldn’t do things because they aren’t girly, the solution is not to take away her Barbie but to help her gain the self-confidence and the ability to assert her own will required to give the offending lad a kick in the shins and get stuck in with the games. Figuratively speaking, of course. Alternatively, are you sure her new-found interest in ‘girly’ play can’t be as much to do with finding new female friends to play girly games with? What if she’s simply discovering her femininity through engaging with her female peers? I think children are much more complex than

Stop worrying about the sociological implications of your child’s behaviour and start worrying about whether they’re happy or not. That’s what really matters.

P.S. Complaining about the sexism of society, but then dismissing a comment (from Charlieman) offhand because it’s from a man? Not exceptionally clever, I would say…

Based on the majority of men’s magazines ‘a bit more to get hold of’ seems to mean large breasts which isn’t any more helpful or inclusive in my opinion. It’s still bringing the whole argument down to what’s ‘acceptably attractive’ and giving the impression that this is what really matters about women. Poor self esteem and obsession with appearance doesn’t just come from women’s magazines – although since they’re pushing the ‘this is what men want’ agenda more than ever now they don’t help.

How do tyou explain then that the suppsed ideal female weight is very much lighter in women`s magazines than in men`s where a bit more to get hold of is de rigeur . Men seem to like `em curvy

Yes, I can thank you.

What you fail to understand is the difference between giving a child the freedom to develop into the person they want to be, and directing and controlling them so that they develop into what you think they should be. I try to allow my daughter the freedom to become her own person while protecting her from things that will clearly harm her. Part of that process is to give her the self-confidence and the self-awareness that are necessary to develop her own opinions and hold on to them in the face of disagreement – precisely so that if she meets “a bad crowd” she has the nerve to to say ‘no’ to them. If I teach her that others (me, for example) are responsible for directing her interests and her activities then she becomes more vulnerable to such external influence, not less.

So, she is allowed Barbies and pink toys because that is what she wants to play with. At the same time, she sees her father cooking, cleaning, helping around the house and respecting her mother. If she sees dubious assumptions on TV or in real life, we discuss it and question it. In this way, we try to allow her to make choices (within safe boundaries) but inform her understanding so that she chooses wisely.

She is in fact developing into quite the little feminist – albeit a very feminine one, so maybe you would still not approve.

For your information, she has already met elements of “a bad crowd” although at a level appropriate to her primary school rather than at the level you postulate. I am extremely proud of the fact that, in the face of physical bullying, she gave as good as she got to the (male) aggressor. As a result, he now keeps well clear of her. I’d say that was a (small) vindication of her upbringing and plan to continue in the same vein.

For you to suggest that because I think she should be allowed to make her own choice of toy without interference implies that I must therefore ipso facto permit her to choose between taking crack cocaine or not taking crack cocaine without interference is therefore frankly ridiculous. Your “analogy” is not misunderstood; it is based on a misunderstanding.

If you don’t even get what I’m driving at, then perhaps its best not to bother replying because it just comes across as rather foolish.

Excellent advice. I suggest you heed it.

Thanks for letting me know what I ‘should’ be concerned about though.

I’m not criticising anyone else who follows the same process, but most parents don’t, do they?