It wasn't until the 19th century that it began to matter what children looked like. According to Paoletti, children were dressed for many years in “white dresses and white diapers” regardless of gender. Gender stereotypes are based upon a person’s birth gender. Gender stereotypes have specific traits or characteristics about how that that gender is supposed to behave and look to be seen as “acceptable.”
In the mid-19th century pink and blue colors were not assigned to a specific gender. The first account of blue and pink being assigned to genders came in 1918 with Earnshaw's Infants' Department article which gave out their perspective on the way blue and pink should be worn by who and their reasons. “...accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls.” Pink seemed to be a more “stronger color” which for them was more “suitable for boys” to wear. As for girls their color was blue, because the color was to seem more as a “delicate and dainty,” which was more suitable for girls. Girls and boys were now viewed differently. Girls and boys were expected to act a certain way, and in a way their clothing was supposed to reflect. Boys were expected to be strong, while the girls were expected to be dainty, or “small and pretty.” It wasn’t until the 1940s, according to Jeanne Maglaty, that “baby boomers were raised in gender-specific clothing.” Young boys dressed like their fathers and young girls dressed like their mothers.
This article gives an explanation to how it is that “toys were targeted specifically at boys or girls” However; this was only the start in the 1970s. As when it comes to some toy ads that were advertising their toys, the companies did not set the toys to be gender specific. For example ”...depicting girls driving toy cars and airplanes and boys playing with kitchen sets and dolls.”
In the year 1975 sears presented in their ads “...less than 2 percent of toys were explicitly marketed to either boys or girls.” Giving that they had in store a good amount of toys to which children could grab a toy and it would not be specifically targeted towards their gender. In the 60s the way most girls were targeted for their toys were that “...girls’ toys focused heavily on domesticity and nurturing.” However, as it comes to the gender of boys “...toys [were focused more on] preparation for working in the industrial economy.
People have been becoming more aware at avoiding these types of stereotypes. Martine Zoer, founder of Quirkie Kids, an online campaign of “Gender Neutral T-shirts for Kids” has been seen as the “reminder” that “boys can wear pink and still be a boy.” Martine Zoer also says raising boys in a time like this is hard when they are told to “man up” or “suck it up,” and she has started a twitter hashtag called”#StillABoy. Zoer made these hashtags after people started to criticize her business saying she was “robbing kids of their gender.” Moreover, according to the article “The History of Pink and Blue,” as the Women’s Liberation movement began, girls no longer dressed in pink clothings, and “began dressing them up in a more masculine clothings.” Women believed that “clothing [should be] constricted [to] being equal to males.” Women stated that dressing their girls “like boys and less...frilly little girls [would give them] more options and feel freer to be active.”
Today the way children’s toys are now set in a manner to which they can be set in different groups concerning gender of boy or girl. For example in the article of “The Atlantic “...[the] difference from what we see today, as business categorize toys in way that more narrowly forces kids into boxes.”3. To which children can be given toys,however, the toys in which they will have will be set based on their gender sending the child to a specific “group.” Comparing this to years in the past the article also says “...in the 20th century, roughly half the toys were still being advertised in a gender-neutral manner.”3. Meaning that children before did not have the choice on most of their toys to whether the toys were to fit their category of gender.
In the mid-19th century pink and blue colors were not assigned to a specific gender. The first account of blue and pink being assigned to genders came in 1918 with Earnshaw's Infants' Department article which gave out their perspective on the way blue and pink should be worn by who and their reasons. “...accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls.” Pink seemed to be a more “stronger color” which for them was more “suitable for boys” to wear. As for girls their color was blue, because the color was to seem more as a “delicate and dainty,” which was more suitable for girls. Girls and boys were now viewed differently. Girls and boys were expected to act a certain way, and in a way their clothing was supposed to reflect. Boys were expected to be strong, while the girls were expected to be dainty, or “small and pretty.” It wasn’t until the 1940s, according to Jeanne Maglaty, that “baby boomers were raised in gender-specific clothing.” Young boys dressed like their fathers and young girls dressed like their mothers.
This article gives an explanation to how it is that “toys were targeted specifically at boys or girls” However; this was only the start in the 1970s. As when it comes to some toy ads that were advertising their toys, the companies did not set the toys to be gender specific. For example ”...depicting girls driving toy cars and airplanes and boys playing with kitchen sets and dolls.”
In the year 1975 sears presented in their ads “...less than 2 percent of toys were explicitly marketed to either boys or girls.” Giving that they had in store a good amount of toys to which children could grab a toy and it would not be specifically targeted towards their gender. In the 60s the way most girls were targeted for their toys were that “...girls’ toys focused heavily on domesticity and nurturing.” However, as it comes to the gender of boys “...toys [were focused more on] preparation for working in the industrial economy.
People have been becoming more aware at avoiding these types of stereotypes. Martine Zoer, founder of Quirkie Kids, an online campaign of “Gender Neutral T-shirts for Kids” has been seen as the “reminder” that “boys can wear pink and still be a boy.” Martine Zoer also says raising boys in a time like this is hard when they are told to “man up” or “suck it up,” and she has started a twitter hashtag called”#StillABoy. Zoer made these hashtags after people started to criticize her business saying she was “robbing kids of their gender.” Moreover, according to the article “The History of Pink and Blue,” as the Women’s Liberation movement began, girls no longer dressed in pink clothings, and “began dressing them up in a more masculine clothings.” Women believed that “clothing [should be] constricted [to] being equal to males.” Women stated that dressing their girls “like boys and less...frilly little girls [would give them] more options and feel freer to be active.”
Today the way children’s toys are now set in a manner to which they can be set in different groups concerning gender of boy or girl. For example in the article of “The Atlantic “...[the] difference from what we see today, as business categorize toys in way that more narrowly forces kids into boxes.”3. To which children can be given toys,however, the toys in which they will have will be set based on their gender sending the child to a specific “group.” Comparing this to years in the past the article also says “...in the 20th century, roughly half the toys were still being advertised in a gender-neutral manner.”3. Meaning that children before did not have the choice on most of their toys to whether the toys were to fit their category of gender.