Jenna Burk is a freshman journalism major at MU. She writes about feminism and social justice for The Maneater.
There was practically a Barbie in my hand before I was born. I grew up with much older sisters, who left a pale basket full of plastic women with painted smiles in my room.
Had the doctor identified a boy, I would have never inherited those dolls. They probably would have ended up in an incinerator. And because I was the last daughter, they are likely reduced to ash by now.
There is something eerie about distributing products to children according to their biological sex. Which, at such a young age, has nothing to do with hormonal difference and everything to do with genitalia. We should not base the identities of our children on sex.
The demand for boy-girl toys could be on their way out. A global survey revealed public distaste for gendered toys, causing LEGO to reduce this sort of labeling on its products.
In pledging to remove gendered labeling, LEGO laid the foundational blocks of a structural change we have never seen in advertising. Historically, advertisements and products have reflected the way we view gender. Many old advertisements play on the insecurities of men and women, encouraging them to fulfill gender roles by purchasing a product.
Because capitalism heavily reinforces gender stereotypes through advertising, it is the responsibility of individual companies to recognize and change aspects of products causing dissatisfaction — or risk losing customers.
A new California law doesn’t leave room for corporations to drag their feet in the mud. By 2024, large retail stores must have a gender-neutral kids’ section or face fines. Because the bill expands the regulatory power of California’s government, pushback was sure to follow.
Some conservative groups argued that the government should not define the way parents shop for their children.
For those afraid of the government encroaching on the sacred children’s aisles of Target and Walmart, be not afraid. I’m optimistic that these changes will take place ‘naturally,’ in lieu of federal regulation.
The California bill was inspired by a staffer’s daughter who asked: “Why are some toys off limits as a girl?”
In 1981, LEGO released an advertisement that perfectly showcases how diverted gender roles have become. The advertisement features a young girl wearing a striped shirt, blue-jeans and a pair of sneakers.
The advertisement did not cause controversy, because the fashion of the young girl wasn’t performative. It was an accurate representation of what kids wore.
The visual is very different from the LEGO commercials that I grew up with. “LEGO Friends” was a product that targeted girls. The commercials clearly marketed toward stereotypes. They used fashion and shopping to appeal to girls. Meanwhile “LEGO City” products marketed toward male stereotypes and involved practicality, encouraging participation in the workforce.
Stereotypes regarding beauty, fashion and industrial labor are weird, but some markets are even weirder. Harsher gender roles are obvious in the strangely large market of automatronic dolls that need to be nursed, comforted and even changed.
All the most common conglomerates sell these toys. If you are looking for a “Baby Born Surprise Magic Potty Surprise Purple Eyes – Doll Pees Glitter and Poops Surprise Charms,” look no further, Walmart has you covered.
Target and Amazon carry similar products with similar keywords. If all the stores are stocking these products, there must be demand. This has me wondering what sort of parent gives their baby a baby.
There are some clear consistencies in baby doll products. The dolls come with traditionally girl names and cllothes and are carried in the girls’ section. Occasionally, these products are advertised as potty training dolls. But boys potty train too, so we know the intention isn’t to brainwash kids into accepting toilet etiquette.
The agenda is more likely to condition girls to be caregivers, to make sacrifices and ultimately to embrace domesticity. No way — not in the modern world. Haven’t we progressed past the feminine mystique frustrations of the 20th century?
Brands are trying —- maybe too hard — to associate themselves with modern feminism. But brands don’t have a political motivation; they don’t care to dismantle the patriarchy. Brands will attach themselves to whatever movement will make them money.
Today, LEGO commercials go out of their way to be “woke.” In early October, a commercial was uploaded to the LEGO YouTube channel. The commercial portrayed “Get the world ready for girls” in bold font as young girls used LEGO products practically and creatively in the background.
While heading in the right direction, the advertisement failed to be gender neutral and emphasized differences between boys and girls.
It reinforced gendered language and made a clear distinction between girls and boys. This inflates the stereotype that women and girls need to be reminded that they are empowered, while boys do not receive such heavy-handed messages.
By only referencing girls, the ad insinuates that boys are intrinsically practical and creative and do not need a reminder. These are prevalent messages of toxic masculinity that have been embedded in many of us since birth.
All of us have been conditioned to some degree to be integrated into a gender-obsessive society. Sometimes it is hard to look outside of cis identities that others imposed on us.
Gender identity is not a consensual agreement between a parent and child. But is gender really so intrusive that we should completely eradicate it?
It would take a collective change of consciousness to experience a world beyond gender — we aren’t quite there yet. However, we must eliminate the most intrusive stereotypes that inhibit young people from growing into themselves.
Now is the time for parents to make reasonable decisions for the well-being of their children. This takes being conscious of gender stereotypes and roles that have historically defined men and women.
Parents have more control over the marketplace than they perceive. Companies that do not conform to the changing social standards will fail. Reevaluating the status quo has to be a collective consumer effort.
It may take some analytic thinking for adults to examine the subliminal messages they send their children. Take Barbies, nursing dolls, Nerf guns, military and other action figures for instance. These products are not inherently bad, but the toys themselves reinforce traditional gender roles, especially when sorted by gender at the store.
Once a child is able to verbalize their preferences, toys and clothes should be interest-centered and less focused on adults’ preconceptions.
Nothing is innate about gender. Forcing children to abide by gender roles they do not identify with results in discontent and negative self-perception.
I remember growing resentful of the dolls I had as a child. I ended up cutting their hair, marking them with red nail polish and taking them apart. Maybe it was a sign I was growing up, ready to quit playing with toys.
Or maybe I was deconstructing a concept I had no control over. A concept that had a great deal to do with my identity.
The Maneater encourages all readers to commit to the fight against domestic abuse and donate to Futures Without Violence. “Futures Without Violence is a health and social justice nonprofit with a simple mission: to heal those among us who are traumatized by violence today – and to create healthy families and communities free of violence tomorrow.”
https://www.futureswithoutviolence.org_
Edited by Sarah Rubinstein | srubinstein@themaneater.com