Yeah, I saw that commercial and thought "Goddamn, WHAT year is it again?"

When I have children, I am purposely not going to mention the gender to my family so I avoid gendered gifts like this.

On that note, anyone know of any good unisex names?

I remember playing with Tonka trucks when I was a kid. Apparently this was in direct opposition to Tonka's mission statement and they've taken steps to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Good idea, MaryB. I am 38 weeks pregnant and we know we're having a boy. Even though everything on my registry was yellow and green, 90% of the clothes, towels, pacifiers, etc. I received as gifts were blue or had a sports theme.

Yeah, how DO you gals learn to walk anyway, being deprived of Tonka trucks as you are?

I'd love to know how toy guns would be advertised these days, if they were....

Haaaate this commercial. Fuck Tonka.
If I ever get pregnant I'm keeping the sex a secret because I won't tolerate receiving heavily gendered baby gifts. ...Though the gendering would begin the moment after birth. Sigh.

While I strongly disagree with drawing gendered behavioral lines, it's kind of nice that it's a departure from boys are the implied norm and girls are "different".

Gender neutral names:

Taylor
Devon
Morgan

I got an e-mail forward this morning called "If Women Ruled the World." It contained a number of photos of things that had been "girlied up"- like a bowling alley with flowers along the sides, a computer mouse that opened into a make-up case, and a hammer and screwdriver set containing a high heeled show and a knife.

Isn't sexism funny?

Kinda like that cute litte boy who will grow up believing he's "built different" (read: stronger and free to pull up whatever flowers or knock down whatever furniture he pleases!). Isn't he adorable?

I agree with the previous poster; I won't be informing anyone in my family what the gender of my child is and will be purposefully requesting "gender neutral" gifts.

My sister's having a baby soon, and when she told everyone it was a girl, they flipped out and started buying all this frilly shit.

I can't watch the video...can someone give me a rundown?

Gender neutral names-
Drew
...that's all I've got right now.

Corydalus, girls learn to walk by pushing strollers! Don't let them enjoy childhood, make them mothers before they can even understand the concept of motherhood!!!

Ugh.

I saw this commercial last night. I was torn though, because at least their being upfront and honest about their sexist marketing schemes.

Once again.

Ugh.

Any gender neutral names that don't sound like horrid yuppie last names? My apologies if you've saddled your own kid with one of those, but JesusGod.

I want the Tonka truck thing to have a Paul Harvey construct: "... and that little destructive boy grew up to be... Timothy McVeigh!"

In the extended version of the commercial that I saw on TV, it shows that the toddler has tracked mud into the house when he gives his mom the flowers with the roots. When I wrote about this on my blog, I said that this has got feature the youngest version of clueless-male ever in the "gee, men are just clueless about the house" genre of commericals

Soooooo, Tonka believes that boys are "built different" than girls, and therefore only boys need to learn how to sort colors and walk?

Unisex names-- Sam, Nicky/Nikki, and Jay are all nicknames that work for either gender, but names like Ryan, Bailey, Alexis, Casey, Dana, Jamie... there are whole lists that work for each gender.

That said... While I plan to get onesies and baby toys that are gender-neutral so they can be handed down, when my kid gets to be a toddler I will buy them the kind of toys they ASK for, not the ones I think they should have to fulfill some agenda. So if my son says "No, Mommy, I don't want a doll, dolls are for girls" I won't make him get a doll just to prove a point. I know a guy with a very feminist mother who did that to him, and he had the most miserable childhood imaginable because she raised him "like a girl" and he was tortured by the other boys for it.

Don't raise children they way you think children in an ideal world should be raised. Raise them to survive and be happy in the REAL world.

Though men who get upset because their TWO-YEAR-OLD sons like dressing up in sparkly clothes or playing with dolls drive me NUTS. And toy trucks are fun for girls too.

I've never had a problem with names like Taylor, stuff like that.

http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/imagingthebody/Handouts/alexander_2002.pdf

Check this journal article out re: gender construction. Probably caused by gender specific names and blue or pink nurseries right? Gender neutrality is a naive fantasy, and a blight on feminism.

Darn, I sent you guys an email about this about a month ago; thought I'd get a shout out.

Thanks for posting about it, though!

Betty Boondoggle -- That's EXACTLY what I said when I saw the commercial!

Eh, my child's going to rely mostly on toys s/he has made, like little houses made of sticks or painted things. I want to try and keep my kid imaginative and creative, and I think the current crop of "Do all your thinking for you" toys is probably dooming the newest generation as far as imagination goes.

Plus books. There will be as many books as my baby wants. you can never go wrong with books.

Darwin, *you* are a blight on the human race.

That journal article admits that children receive cues re: "appropriate gender expression" at a very young age, and subsequently follow those norms while rejecting the opposite sex's.

In the midst of a thread in which every other poster objects to imposing sex roles on children, why did one poster feel it necessary to lecture us about... imposing sex roles on our children? I didn't see anyone with a problem here.

Ugh. There was a little pamphlet in some magazine I received awhile back with showing all the fun "BOYS" could have with Tonka trucks.

Which is funny, since my girls LOVE trucks. I threw the bloody thing out before my oldest had a chance to notice there were no girls on the page.

We're fairly gender neutral with our daughters and the result is amusing-one loves any kind of disgusting bug or animal, but LOVES pink, while dressing "boyish". My younger daughter loves princesses for no apparent reason, and yet is obsessed with cars and anything mechanical. We don't foist either side on them, and it's incredible to see what they gravitate to without any pressure.

Crap like this coming in through the TV and the mail infuriates me. It's hard enough raising daughters.

Daughters don't count, thordora! ONLY SONS. MANLY SONS.

Good lord, with all of the female truck drivers out there, you'd think Tonka would have noticed them by now.

And yes, boys are built differently, but when was the last time you saw a guy drive a truck with his dick?

Because raising children (okay, it's mostly a problem for boys) to be completely gender-neutral, in our world, is interpreted as raising them to be "feminine." Thus, by trying to completely eliminate gender roles you are actually imposing them.

You can't avoid gender roles. No child is raised in a vacuum. And by trying to make kids gender-neutral, some parents do more harm than good.

Tonka is part of the Playskool brand who...dum dum dum...are also the creators of the Rose Petal Cottage. You know, the toy that lets girls entertain their imaginations by doing laundry.

*Crosses off another company to stay away from For-ever.*

My goodness, my first thought upon seeing the ad was also, "what year is this?"

Eh, my child's going to rely mostly on toys s/he has made, like little houses made of sticks or painted things. I want to try and keep my kid imaginative and creative, and I think the current crop of "Do all your thinking for you" toys is probably dooming the newest generation as far as imagination goes.

I agree, a lot of the modern-day toys are awful. All flashy lights and buttons and plastic, so gender-stereotyped and living little to the imagination. Kids are by nature very creative and good at making up games with simple things. I think the best pre-made toys are construction toys (blocks, legos, etc.) and simple mathematical toys (counting rods, items to sort by shape, size, and color, etc).

Plus books. There will be as many books as my baby wants. you can never go wrong with books.

I agree, books are wonderful AND important! But you do have to be careful with books as well; children's books can promote gender stereotypes just as much as toys.

I should clarify my previous posts-- for some reason, girls don't suffer when you gender-neutralize them (a victory for the feminists). Only boys. Which is sexist and it sucks, but if you want your son to be happy and successful, you have to let them have SOME gender roles.

Also, SarahMC, why did you feel that disagreeing with darwin66 meant you needed to insult her or his worth to the human race? I'm seeing that a lot here and I find it worrisome. You can say you think someone is wrong without saying they are worthless scum or a misogynist.

Basiorana,

There is a theme in many of your posts that I read as follows: "Yes, but how is this YOUR FAULT?" of "But women are bad too!" or "I have one anecdote that illustrates the following anti-feminist stance."

Were you aware of this?

Haha, I know books can do bad things too. But there are a ton of really good books as kids grow up, too. I mean, I'm an odd one? As I grew up reading The Hobbit when everyone else in my class was doing "Hubert the Hippo Goes to School"... and I'm hoping to raise my kids the same way.

Granted, it's meant some bad things too, but i know my kids can be both social and readers, like I am.

DARWIN - "Check this journal article out re: gender construction. Probably caused by gender specific names and blue or pink nurseries right? Gender neutrality is a naive fantasy, and a blight on feminism."

As an evolutionary psychologist, I find that to be a really interesting article. Basically, male monkeys seemed to have a sensory bias to prefer items in motion (e.g., balls) while females had a preference for dolls. This fits with interesting studies showing that female monkeys of some species show intense interest in infants - which certainly would be an adaptive feature.

Could this partly explain why there is a sex difference in toy preference in humans? It could.

But the question is - what to do about this socially? One option is to build up a really strong social system that reinforces and celebrates these differences. That is what the Tonka ad does - that moving active toys are for boys and not for girls.

I think that strategy is objectionable, however. First, even if there is a sex difference, there is likely a large degree of overlap between the sexes - many girls would have an attraction to the moving toys as well. Creating social messages that trucks=boys excludes girls from an enriching play experience.

Second, if our goal is to balance out evolved sex differences, this would suggest that it is MORE important to provide girls with socialization encouraging the use of active toys and MORE important to provide boys with socialization encouraging play with dolls.

In other words, even if there is a kernel of truth to a stereotype, that doesn't mean we have to embrace and celebrate it.

So raising a child in a gender neutral way does more harm than good? How does it do them any more good to raise them under stereotypical patriarchal gender roles?

It doesn't mean that I would force my children to play with toys that they didn't like, but I would avoid buying stuff that I found offensive. As a parent, it would be my prerogative. I can't honestly see myself buying the latest Bratz doll just because my kid *really wanted* it. Just like I wouldn't let my kids eat all the candy and junkfood they wanted either.

Nowadays, even simple LEGOS are gendered! Try going in the Lego store some time and see what they have for boys versus girls. Basically, the "boy" sets are more complex and have more dragons and/or construction equipment. The girl sets are made of simpler, pre-molded pieces, are mostly pink, and consist of fairies and princesses. It's disgusting.

I agree with one of the posters above who wants just basic handmade stuff or simple toys for their kids. One of those flashy toys-that-do-everything are fun for a few days, but an actual imagination can last a lifetime. Kids can have just as much fun in a box with some markers and stickers.

Basiorana, if gender neutrality benefits girls, it can benefit boys too. Saying that machismo / stereotypical "masculinity" must be instilled in little boys is sexist and demeaning to girls (and boys).
Nobody *has* to force gender roles on anyone.

If strict gender roles were inate or essential for survival, we wouldn't have to drill it into children's heads. It's just *be* there.

If a boy wants to play with a truck, fine. If a girl wants to play with a truck, fine. If a boy wants to play with a tea set, fine. If a girl wants to play with a tea set, fine. What's the problem?

Basiorana,

I'd like to see the evidence or research indicating that raising boys to be gender-neutral makes them "suffer" or impacts their life in a negative way.

I really have a hard time believing that, and I think SGZAX is right when he/she notes that your comments often infer a kind of anti-feminist, "boys will be boys" type attitude.

I'm not expecting, but have talked over the options for unisex names with my husband. There weren't many I liked and virtually nothing that both of us liked. If I go unisex, I think I'll just make up a name or adopt a word from another language as a name.

I know I'm a little one-sided but that's because someone else has already mentioned the other side of the story. The truth is, women ARE bad too, which many people seem to forget. And as for the "How is this your fault" bit, no one person can change the world, but they can change themselves. Saying "Oh, that's terrible" doesn't help anyone, but often there are things the individual can do to help.

I cite anecdotes because no one cares about or believes in data. "Naturally scientific data will be skewed unless it agrees with me!"

I'm not anti-feminist. I just think that getting rid of gender roles isn't as valuable to society as, say, educating and empowering women in third-world countries, providing access to birth control, and setting up support systems for victims of domestic violence or rape.

Basiorana:

why can't we do all of those things at once?

Look, I've worked with children, and boys are CRUEL to the lowest boy on the pecking order. Girls don't get that until later, once most of them can already pick and choose what parts of their personality they will show off to certain people. You raise boys to be gender-neutral and they will be picked on and abused by the other boys who think they are effeminate. Unless you can change other people's kids too, you can't prevent that.

And honestly? I don't see anything WRONG with gender roles, as long as they can be broken if the person chooses. I just don't think society is ready to abolish them all together, and it's too hard on the kids to do it in increments.

Basiorana, what do you mean by "women are bad too"? That seems like an awfully negative world view.

I think that getting rid of gender roles is *crucial* to enabling the other things that you say are more valuable. As long as we teach boys/men that they need to be aggressive, hide their feelings, be the provider in the family, that they have a *right* to women's sexual services, etc., we are going to have a hard time eradicating gender violence and women are going to have a hard time gaining access to education and empowerment in third-world countries. When children learn gender roles, they learn not only their own role, but the role of the other gender as well. When a boy learns from the ad above that "boys are different and therefore they play with trucks", he is also learning that "girls don't play with trucks".

Gender neutrality benefits both girls AND boys AND all of society by encouraging all people to follow their own interests, be true to themselves, think outside the box, and question the gender stereotypes present in society.

Okay, so, we should raise boys to be little masculine paragons of gender roles because it's -easier- on them?

Childhood isn't easy on anyone's kid. It wasn't easy on me as a girl, it wasn't easy on the boys in my class who weren't in sports, it wasn't easy on anyone I knew except one girl-who is getting all her hard shit -now- and doesn't know how to deal.

Gender roles are not what makes elementary school or childhood an easy thing.

Basiorana:

"I cite anecdotes because no one cares about or believes in data."

I care about data and I believe in it; in fact, I asked you for data and you haven't provided me with any.

1. I do NOT include teaching boys that they have a right to women somehow to be part of gender roles. They once were, perhaps, but that was wrong.

2. It's all, always, about balance. Teach them to be aggressive but not physically, and they will be successful (also true for girls). Teach them to hide their emotions but share them in a relationship and they will be successful and happier.

And most boys today manage to accept the fact that while boys and girls are different, and boys play with trucks, girls can do boy things too. The media is good about enforcing that. The major thing is teaching boys that as boys, they MUST learn to hide their feelings from people outside their immediate family, and soon. Because of the other boys.

And by "women are bad too," I'm saying that it's not always a case of "men are the cause of all problems and women are the poor victims." Men can be victims and women can cause problems.

The Slant-- when I don't have a lab report due in two hours I will research and link to some. Unfortunately it's challenging to find anything that doesn't have a bias one way or the other, so it will take time.

pachakuti-- Parents should do whatever is neccessary to prepare their children for life. A truly hard childhood, like that which "sissy" boys (as determined by other boys) face, doesn't teach a kid how to face problems, it teaches them that the world is evil and cruel and leaves them bitter.

No... no, that's just childhood in general.

I started yelling at my TV when I saw this commercial. And then yesterday I saw this in a store window, and I flipped again. Girls can be pretty princesses, but they still aren't free from kitchen duty! Ugh.

Good comment, sbsanon.

So what you're saying, Basiorana, is that it's OK for girls to take on "masculine" traits and hobbies, because "masculine" things are superior to "feminine" things. So OF COURSE girls might want to "act like boys," but if a boy "acts like a girl" he must be a self-hating freak (because girl stuff is inferior & silly).

You seem to be open to the progress feminism has made re: women's roles, acknowledging that attitudes have, and will continue to change. But when it comes to the world's view of "masculinity" it's impossible and not a worthy effort?

I shudder when I see some of the boys being raised to be little assholes by parents who think they're doing the world a favor. I love encouraging children to explore their interests and aptitudes while encouraging them to be empathetic and considerate of others. I think this can be accomplished with children of both sexes. If we allow girls to explore all aspects of their personalities but continue to shut boys off from aspects of theirs we will only be solving half of the problem and nothing will ever change. I'm sorry, I'm not cynical enough to participate in raising a boy with a blighted soul just because it will make things easier for him.

As long as we're discussing child-raising strategies, what do y'all think of homeschooling as an option? I'm strongly considering this when I have children, remembering the hell I went through as a smart girl in school.

I saw a whole bunch of trick-or-treaters while I was walking my dog last night, and more than half the little girls were dressed up as princesses. Meanwhile, the boys' costumes had a lot of variation.

I was never a princess for Halloween. The constant "PRETTY PRETTY PRINCESS" message was definitely not being spread when I was little (80's). I remember my mom making me into a jack-in-the-box when I was about 2 or 3, being a cat, an Egyptian, a witch...

Exactly, SarahMC and sgzax.

Eh, I'm not bitter. I didn't realize life sucked until Bush was in office. My childhood taught me that the world is a beautiful place, and the people in are inherently good, whatever their actions may be.

If a child NATURALLY acts in a way that doesn't fit into traditional gender roles, then there is no problem. If you're specifically ENCOURAGING them, though, then the problem arises.

And girls don't get physically and emotionally abused for doing "boy" things. You can't start with children without seriously hurting them long-term, you have to start by changing adults.

I guess what I am arguing is not so much that you teach boys to be boys in the most traditional way, but simply that you teach them to hide their emotions and feelings, a traditionally male thing. If they can hide the parts of themselves that don't fit in, they can play with dolls all they want. This may also be true for girls, but not at the same level or age.

Basiorana, I agree that one role of parents is to prepare their children for life. But that should take the form of raising a child who is self-confident, a critical thinker, and has the resources to handle whatever life will throw at them. This does NOT equate with making sure that the child fits the status quo.

I was a sissy boy. I read books a lot (about 15 years above my reading level, typically). I wore matching (even hot pink) clothing. I hated sports. I played musical instruments. I sang. I was one of the three lowest boys on the pecking order (and the three of us were pretty mean to each other too). And yeah, I don't have found memories of elementary school.

But those experiences helped teach me *not* to treat others like that, and they really helped empower me based on my *own* motivations, not societal expectations, and sped up my emotional and moral development light years beyond my peers.

Ultimately, they helped turn me into the liberated and confident individual I am today. They built character.

Grade school is 12 years at most. Compared to the rest of my life, that's nothing.

I was so mad the first time I saw this commercial, 1. for obvious reasons and 2. b/c it was on PBS when I was watching Sesame Street with my daughter. I put it on mute, and said to her that thankfully we don't have to believe everything the tv says, b/c girls like to play with trucks and boys like to play with dolls and while boys and girls are different genders, they can totally like the same things. After Sesame Street we listened to Free to Be You and Me.

Baisorana, you're lying. I got physically and emotionally abused for eleven straight years in school for not being "feminine" enough or a "normal" girl and for doing "boy" things.

And guess what? I'm fine.

When you teach boys that they must hide their feelings you are creating an emotionally blighted adult. When you teach boys that they must hide their feelings you are creating an adult who will see expression of emotion as weak-willed and hysterical.

Please, whatever you do... do the world a favor and don't give birth to a boy.

I plan to do the world a favor and raise a boy who can think for himself, as well as a girl who could run anything she wanted.

Nick-- you are stronger than most, I think. For some, childhood struggles might "build character," but I know of many others who are left hating their mothers and the whole feminist movement for putting them through that.

sbanon-- Would I be a bad parent simply because I would not want to see my son come home with black eyes? Better to fit into the existing mold than to require a hospital visit.

I can't really stay around, and I feel bad about monopolizing this comment thread anyway. If you wish to continue talking to me about this subject, I set up a post on my own blog . I will be on later to check it.

I agree with thordora--It's a delight to see what children are interested in when they have real choices. My kids (2 boys and a girl) are exasperated by kids who talk about "boy" and "girl" toys/colors/activities. It is hard for them to constantly challenge the real world. My son asked why people thought he shouldn't wear nail polish. I explained the best I could about why people want to bifurcate gender (no I didn't say bifurcate to him) and then said he should wear nail poish if the pleasure he got from doing it was more that the annoyance he got from teasing. He stopped wearing it. Recently I bought some black nail polish, which he felt would be masculine enough to wear to school, which he has done with no ill effects. I hope my kids can feel good about themselves in the world but work for change at the same time, but I never want to force them to carry out my political agenda.

I will never buy a Tonka truck again.

By the by, Jordan is a nice gender neutral name.

Yes yes yes sgzax!

Of course it's easier for a boy/man to be inconsiderate of others' feelings, to take other people for granted, to be an asshole with reckless abandon because he's male and that's what we expect from men!
But that doesn't mean raising a child with this attitude ON PURPOSE is right.
And it's NOT easier for a boy/man to go through life bottling up his emotions until he either has a heart attack or shoots up his workplace. I'll never tell a son of mine he must keep things inside. What a recipe for high therapist bills later in life. There's nothing wrong with men who don't fight to solve problems. There's nothing wrong with men who appreciate literature or treat animals kindly (stereotypically feminine). I'm sick of men avoiding certain beneficial, enjoyable activities & hobbies just because girls and women have begun to take an interest in them as well. That's why there's a (very overstated) "boy crisis" in schools and higher education. Now that girls have an equal opportunity to learn in this country, and are performing well, it's no longer "cool" for boys to pursue intellectual stimulation/success. 'Cause "that's for girls!!"

fremontmama, yay for Free to Be You and Me! I loved that tape and book when I was little! :)

And as a matter of fact, one of my favorite songs from the tape was "William's Doll", which has wonderful lyrics and is quite relevant to the discussion at hand: http://www.guntheranderson.com/v/data/williamw.htm

pachakuti-- last comment, promise-- I'm sorry. All statements I make are generalized and do not apply to everyone.

And sgzax, SarahMC--I would teach any child to hide their emotions from all but those they trust most, because those who hide their emotions are the most successful in this world. That's not saying they would be inconsiderate of others, simply that they would hide their own.

Now, farewell.

Ah, yes. Teaching children that they should hide emotion from those outside their family essentially teaches them that there is something wrong with having emotions. I was raised by the mom that did that!

Which probably explains why I'm an emotional cripple when it comes to telling people how I feel in public.

"Please, whatever you do... do the world a favor and don't give birth to a boy."

I think the fact that Basiorana works with kids on a daily basis is even more concerning.

Basiorana-- Wow. If you enjoy hard data as you seem in infer, you might want to read up on studies about "traditional gender roles" which you seem to think are automatically ingrained in a child at birth. This is nonsense. Gender roles are just that - roles that we learn to play. As children we are influenced by our parents, our peers, our teachers, the media, and by society as a whole that being a male means ABC while being female means XYZ. Attempting to go against these forces does not endanger the child or make the child suffer; in fact, it helps the child realize that individuality is important, and that conformity is not always in your best interest.

Girls aren't teased or tormented for not being feminine enough? Ohhhhkay!

And Basiorana, it's telling that instead of turning their anger and resentment at THE PATRIARCHY (which is the gender role enforcer in the first place), boys/men aimed their anger at feminism (which seeks to give individuals MORE freedom of expression).

When little boys are actively discouraged from doing the things little girls are actively encouraged to do, they grow up with the sense that "female" traits are negative while "male" traits are positive.

Girls are so emotional! God how annoying!
Girls express their feelings, ughh!
Girls like to hug and kiss one another - barf!
And so on and so forth.

Enforcing strict gender roles is a recipe for creating a misogynist.*

*Some turn out OK :)

"Do the world a favor and don't give birth to a boy"... wow. A bit harsh, I think. How about instead of discouraging Basiorana from parenting completely, we encourage her to learn more about feminism? Point her in the direction of some great literature, which I'm sure you know of, which addresses feminist concerns for both genders? I think Basiorana is genuinely here to learn, not to troll and inflame.

I know most of you know much more about feminism than I do. I'm just a dabbler. Some of you have studied this for years. What are some good works to read on feminism and masculinity?

"And girls don't get physically and emotionally abused for doing "boy" things."

I did. My Dad has and had some fairly rigid ideas for want girls should be like, despite raising me in a rather masculine fashion. I had a fairly narrow area of acceptable as far has he was concerned. More so, I was tall 5'10" by 8th grade. Through out my childhood I got teased for by other kids for being big, for being smart, for not being girlish enough. It happens. Girls and women are frequently punished for being bitches, for trying to act like men, for trying to play with the big boys.

When I was a little girl, I wanted construction truck toys. I loved digging in the dirt and building things.

I only ever got stuffed animals. =(

"When little boys are actively discouraged from doing the things little girls are actively encouraged to do, they grow up with the sense that "female" traits are negative while "male" traits are positive."

Ding ding ding!! We have a winner!

Here's the link to the "email us" at the Tonka site. They make you jump through one hoop (they ask for an address, but that's an easy sub if you don't want to give it to them). Here's the URL:

http://hasbro.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/hasbro.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=

And here's my letter to them:

Boys are built different. Okay. Aside from the obvious physiological differences, I shall infer that you would prefer that I never again purchase any Tonka products. After all, you wouldn't want to sully my pretty little girl-head with products built for boys, nor would you want me to spend my inferior girl-dollars on your products for my children, my nieces, or the daughters of my friends. Good to know. That saves me time.

For the record, my favorite toy as a child was a Tonka truck that I pestered my mom to buy for me. Back when they were made out of metal. I still have it. Perhaps I should rethink that. Since I'm a girl, you know, and I know how to think.

And obviously, I think your marketing stinks.

DrkEyedCajun: Although it's not about masculinity per se, I think Gender Trouble by Judith Butler serves to stick some dynamite in this topic and blow the sucker up.

Boys are built different, but this toy aids in the boys' first steps? I don't think there's anything keeping all girls from walking . . . .

As a mother of a 20-month-old daughter, I've been seeing these TV commercials, and the print ads in magazines... SO offensive. My daughter loves trucks, motorcycles, dolls, nerf balls, kitchen tools, etc. She's a kid! And, I take such offense to the notion that boys are 'built differently'.

Thank you for posting this.

Gender neutral names that I love:

Madison
Kennedy
Taylor

Basiorana:

What works for one person isn't going to work for everyone, obviously. But just like some posters have pointed out we can't force children to play with certain toys, you also can't make generalizations about how some degree of gender roles are right for all boys. You know some guys who are unhappy that their parents tried to raise them gender-neutral. Fine. I know some men who are non-stereotypically masculine, and are no less happy with their lives than most other people I know. (And some of them are hella successful with women too, especially if they belong to a noncomformist subculture like the arts or activism or something).
So would you take away these men's ability to appreciate the human condition as the great complexity it is, and to relate to men and women both?

And then there is the perspective of well, while gender roles can hurt men and women both in different ways, there is certainly still a lot of validity to the idea that boys feeling a need to be boys actually hurts women more than it hurts the boys (b/c of a culture that says boys are the strong ones, boys are powerful/overpower/outcompete others, etc.) So what's wrong with wanting to raise boys to be more sensitive for the benefit of their female classmates, as well as the boys themselves?

Finally, I was a girl who was raised fairly gender neutral. I always thought boy toys were way cooler (I had a car collection, and action figures, and everything). I was harassed majorly in grade school for not being conformist enough -I would say it started in kindergarden, and got particularly bad in third grade. Grade school sucked, sure, but I, like Nick am glad for the things I learned, and for the fact that I never had the idea I couldn't do certain things b/c they were "boy things". I think it allows me to be more intimate/better friends with males as well than I would be otherwise. However, I always hella resented being told that things I liked to do were "boy things" (I still get them some now, actually). If there weren't the idea of gender roles for boys, there wouldn't be the idea of restrictive gender roles for girls either. Since our culture currently views male/female as opposites, you can't have one without the other (the way you seem to think you could have it for boys, but not for girls).

Okay, I haven't read all the comments because I don't have time right now. And first of all, I HATE marketing like this, I think its horrible. And me and my sister both had tons of tonka trucks when we were younger. And tons of barbies.
But how many of you actually have kids? I have a 4 year old son. We don't have TV, he hasn't seen marketing like this. When he was younger I encouraged him to play with dolls, gender neutral toys... etc. He has been OBSESSED with cars, trucks, heavy equipment, etc. since he was about 6 months old. His first "word" was BBBRRRRRRMMMMMM. (car noise). He's fascinated by anything that moves or explodes or drives or smashes. He's been raised by me, alone, since he was 5 months old. For most of his life he lived with women (me, my mom, roommates, my aunt). But he loves to smash and break and take things apart, and could care less about all the dolls and the cute little (gender neutral) firehouse I got him with dolls and furniture. I realize there are girls who are into the things he's into, and there are boys who are into dolls and more gentle play. However, I also have two like minded friends of boys, who totally agree with me... that our sons have been into this "boy" stuff since they were TINY. In fact, my friends sons favorite color is pink. He loves glitter, and a lot of his clothes (she buys him what HE likes) are pink or have glittery pink designs on them. I think that's awesome. But he has also been into smashing and cars and very traditionally "boy" activities. And both of us have tried very hard to raise our kids in an environment without stereotyped gender ideas.
Anyway, the commercial clearly sucks. This is one of many many reasons my son doesn't get to watch TV. He does watch movies (without commercials, that I pick!!) and that's not perfect either but overall I feel like he's going to grow up learning that boys and girls are equal. Yesterday I took him to the doctor and I was so happy that the doctor was female and the nurse was male. and he goes to an amazing ananda marga preschool where there are about as many male as female teachers. But... he still thinks smashing things and driving cars and wrestling with his friends it the most fun ever. And so yes, my opinion on this issue has changed because I really do think that as a whole, little boys are more into that than little girls. take away my feminist card! I just think that even without preconceived gender roles and stereotypes.... boys and girls, as a general rule, are into different things. We just shouldn't try and assume that they will be into X or Y because they are one gender or the other.
and yes, that commercial is a piece of shit.

Thanks for the link to Hasbro. I left feeback.

When it pressed for my address (why is this necessary?) I said I was Ms. Ann B. Davis at 123 Brady Way in Bradyville, CA.

Okay, I haven't read all the comments because I don't have time right now. And first of all, I HATE marketing like this, I think its horrible. And me and my sister both had tons of tonka trucks when we were younger. And tons of barbies.
But how many of you actually have kids? I have a 4 year old son. We don't have TV, he hasn't seen marketing like this. When he was younger I encouraged him to play with dolls, gender neutral toys... etc. He has been OBSESSED with cars, trucks, heavy equipment, etc. since he was about 6 months old. His first "word" was BBBRRRRRRMMMMMM. (car noise). He's fascinated by anything that moves or explodes or drives or smashes. He's been raised by me, alone, since he was 5 months old. For most of his life he lived with women (me, my mom, roommates, my aunt). But he loves to smash and break and take things apart, and could care less about all the dolls and the cute little (gender neutral) firehouse I got him with dolls and furniture. I realize there are girls who are into the things he's into, and there are boys who are into dolls and more gentle play. However, I also have two like minded friends of boys, who totally agree with me... that our sons have been into this "boy" stuff since they were TINY. In fact, my friends sons favorite color is pink. He loves glitter, and a lot of his clothes (she buys him what HE likes) are pink or have glittery pink designs on them. I think that's awesome. But he has also been into smashing and cars and very traditionally "boy" activities. And both of us have tried very hard to raise our kids in an environment without stereotyped gender ideas.
Anyway, the commercial clearly sucks. This is one of many many reasons my son doesn't get to watch TV. He does watch movies (without commercials, that I pick!!) and that's not perfect either but overall I feel like he's going to grow up learning that boys and girls are equal. Yesterday I took him to the doctor and I was so happy that the doctor was female and the nurse was male. and he goes to an amazing ananda marga preschool where there are about as many male as female teachers. But... he still thinks smashing things and driving cars and wrestling with his friends it the most fun ever. And so yes, my opinion on this issue has changed because I really do think that as a whole, little boys are more into that than little girls. take away my feminist card! I just think that even without preconceived gender roles and stereotypes.... boys and girls, as a general rule, are into different things. We just shouldn't try and assume that they will be into X or Y because they are one gender or the other.
and yes, that commercial is a piece of shit.

damn sorry about the double post!!!

girls don't get physically and emotionally abused for doing "boy" things.

Tell that to Hillary Clinton.

A truly hard childhood, like that which "sissy" boys (as determined by other boys) face, doesn't teach a kid how to face problems, it teaches them that the world is evil and cruel and leaves them bitter.

How will teaching them to mask their true selves in favor of phony, affected "machismo" not teach them the world is evil and cruel and leave them bitter?

The fact that naturally "sissy-ish" boys are teased and tormented IS proof that the world is cruel! That's why our masculinity standards have to change! The solution is more feminism, not more patriarchy.

iheartben:

You just got me thinking about how the things that kids expose other kids to might make a pretty big difference in what tiny kids like.

For instance, all the guys I know who grew up with older sisters and no brothers, did a lot of playing with "girl" things like makeup and dress up and dolls when they were little.

That being said, my personal opinion is that "boys toys" -things that move and smash, are just way more fun in general. I wouldn't be surprised if /most/ kids, male and female, would like those toys, unless they were sent a message they shouldn't. But I could be told about a kid that didn't like those things, and I'd be a little surprised but I'd have to believe it, b/c the fact is we all like different things, and it's so hard to separate the affect of environment from genetics, etc.

One other thing... he also went through a phase where he wanted to paint his nails and liked me and my sister to put his hair in pigtails and ponytails. I let him. It was very cute. If I have a girl, I will raise her the exact same way I've been raising my son. She can do whatever she wants. But I won't be surprised if she's totally different than my son and wants to color and play with dolls (when my son "colors" it mostly involves smashing the crayons and stabbing the markers all over the paper...) I think the important thing is that you not tell kids that what they like is wrong because of their gender.

Moral of the story:

"I think the important thing is that you not tell kids that what they like is wrong because of their gender."

"What are some good works to read on feminism and masculinity?"

The best book in my opinion is "The Masculine Self" by Kilmartin. It reviews how gender roles influence men, how they create strain on men, and the negative consequences of these male gender roles for both men and women. It's often used in Men's Studies / Psychology of Gender courses.

It's exspensive ($35), but you can buy used versions of previous editions for like 4 bucks.

2006 version: http://www.amazon.com/The-Masculine-Self-STUDENT-EDITION/dp/1597380059/ref=sr_1_2/103-9750555-7070245?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193937732&sr=1-2

1999 Version:
http://www.amazon.com/Masculine-Self-Christopher-Kilmartin/dp/0073035327/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-9750555-7070245?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193937732&sr=1-1

Yeah well the fact is that overall, on average, little boys are more physically active than little girls. I know in like chimpanzees, for instance, little girls concentrate better, and are able to learn termite fishing skills at younger ages than the boys do.

So maybe this would translate into the idea that toddler males run around and wreak havoc slightly more than toddler girls, and little girls are somewhat more likely to have patience for something like coloring (the difference is far from black and white though, obviously. Ask my mom who had 3 rambunctious, aggressive girls). Also in humans this difference in energy and concentration ability evens out more once kids get to be older.

However, anything as specific as "boys are naturally more inclined to like trucks and technology" though, is wear the heavy load of B.S. starts, as far as I'm concerned. It's not like monkey boys are more likely to enjoy trucks than monkey girls. And I've known chimpanzee males who loved their stuffed animals. No, when you get something like "doll" or "truck" most of how we interpret and understand it is cultural.

Gah, I hate that commercial.

I hate toy commercialism in the first place. Whatever and whomever they are selling too. My daughter has an ENTIRE room filled with toys. ANd she'd rather play with the playdough I made for 50cents and some crappy cookie cutters. Or the box that came with our barbecue that we made into a car for her. Or the other box that is a house (and the things she has in that house!). She doesn't touch her barbies, Bratz dolls, or the cars. she does love her duplo.
WHat the hell happened to the lego sets that were JUST LEGO PIECES and you built whatever you wanted out of it? I want those back, because the duplo blocks are too large to get enough to build something decent out of.

I hate toy commercialism in the first place. Whatever and whomever they are selling too. My daughter has an ENTIRE room filled with toys. ANd she'd rather play with the playdough I made for 50cents and some crappy cookie cutters. Or the box that came with our barbecue that we made into a car for her. Or the other box that is a house (and the things she has in that house!). She doesn't touch her barbies, Bratz dolls, or the cars. she does love her duplo.
WHat the hell happened to the lego sets that were JUST LEGO PIECES and you built whatever you wanted out of it? I want those back, because the duplo blocks are too large to get enough to build something decent out of.

wow. I honestly can't believe someone thinks it's a good idea to teach that emotions need to be suppressed to protect them. This is a recipe for a mal-adjusted and unhappy person, and like someone mentioned above, I can just imagine the years of therapy that will ensue.

P.S. I love the "moral of the story" summary.

A few thoughts on the topic:

1. I freaking hate that commercial with the burning loathing of a thousand fiery suns. The Rose Petal Cottage, too.

2. A gender-typing anecdote of (to me) extreme cuteness. My son has always been obsessed with swords. He was seriously born several centuries too late. However, when he was very small he loved baby dolls, too. When he was about 2, he called out to me, and I went into his room. He handed me his baby doll, and picked up his sword. He said 'you stay here'. Then he threw his stuffed six foot long snake out of the room, closed the door and wailed on it with it his sword. He came back in and took the baby from me and said 'Nake dead, baby safe', and then I was shooed out. He was wearing his sister's pink nightgown at the time, and there was a time not too long ago when every time he was in a funk, all it took to cheer him up was makeup, glitter, and fairy wings, which he'd wear down to the creek and get grubby playing in the mud.

3. I believe ALL CHILDREN of any gender/gender expression should be actively encouraged to be fearless risk-takers. To me, there's nothing sadder than a boy OR girl afraid of his or her own shadow, afraid of catching a ball, afraid of every passing animal, afraid of living and getting dirty and working hard and getting sweaty and messy. Fearlessness has been co-opted as a masculine gendered trait, and if I as a parent have to pick my battles (which, believe me, you do), then that's the first and foremost one to fight, IMHO. So if the boy wants a sword and the girl wants a doll, or vice versa, whatever. I roll with it. But to me, the battle that's paramount is raising kids who aren't afraid of interacting fully with their world.

But... he still thinks smashing things and driving cars and wrestling with his friends it the most fun ever.

The question is, why must this be considered a "masculine" activity? Some girls like this stuff too, and some boys don't like it at all. Children like what they like. They don't assign gendered labels to their behaviors and interests. Their parents do. How strictly they enforce the roles depends on the parent, but I think the ones who make less of an effort to enforce them produce children who grow into better-adjusted adults.

Even if it's true that more boys prefer cars and more girls prefer dolls, there will always be a broad area of overlap between the sexes. We're more alike than we are different. Rather than labeling "sissy boys" and "tomboys" as exceptions to the "rule" we should try to see them ALL as just kids having fun doing what they like.

Indulging stereotypes like "All boys like X" or "All girls like Y" is as foolish as believing any other stereotype about gender, race, sexuality, etc. is true for all members of that gender, race, etc. I understand why the human brain creates stereotypes, and why it needs to do so, and I understand that children begin to forge their identities in part by "othering" in order to determine what they're not, but it's so frustrating to see how much these behaviors limit our thinking and perceptions when we encourage them too vigorously, or fail to grow beyond them when we get older. There's just no easy way around it.

Fortunately a lot of parents are determined to make the effort anyway. Good on them!

Um boys are built different, but only between their legs. Every other part: the legs, head, arms, feet, are built exactly the same. Fuck Tonka.

I don't know- I do actually have kids, a 3 year old girl and 1 year old boy, and they both pretty much like the same things. They play with megablocks, stuffed animals, dolls, books, etc... They both like to take baths and play dress up and have their nails painted, but they also both like to play outside, roughhouse and race cars. The biggest difference I have found is that my son is a bit more rambunctious than my daughter, but I wouldn't say significantly so. In fact, my son is currently walking across the room with a doll on his head and my daughter's kid tough camera in his hand and my daughter is singing a song she learned at school and trying to make herself a shirt of headbands. I pretty much let the kids pick out their own toys and yeah, the family members usually gender the toys they give for presents, but they both play with each other toys and have a grand time doing so. I agree with Aieli though... at this point I'm first and foremost concerned with raising kids who aren't fearful, who are open to new experiences and who have compassion for other people.

i saw this on tv, too! most commercials today are more subtly sexist.. some even try meekly to do the whole "daddy can do housework, too" thing... but i saw this and was really appalled.

asrai:

WHat the hell happened to the lego sets that were JUST LEGO PIECES and you built whatever you wanted out of it?

Duplos are for 4 and under. They still make regular LEGOS, although, apparently they are gendered now too. It's been years since I had to buy LEGOS (my 17-yr nephew was a Lego nut) but I remember that it was difficult to find anything other than the sets in the stores. I would recommend shopping around online (check-out LEGOS website, they sell in bulk). They make a bucket of LEGOS - seems like it would be right up your daughter's alley.

Good gender neutral toys - BRIO train sets with the rearrangeable wooden tracks and big wooden blocks. I think BRIO actually sells the blocks too. As a little kid (and now, if I can get my hands on them), I found the plain wooden blocks to be the most fun. Your kids can be creative too. The blocks are pretty cheap, or you can make some if you have some good hardwood and someone able to cut it evenly and sand it down. They're too big to fit in a kid's mouth, so I think they're good for any age too.

Good gender neutral name: Casey or Cayce (either one for either gender). I like Sam too.

As far as homeschooling goes, it's a LOT of work, but you probably know that already. My cousin did it with her kids for a while. Most areas with substantial populations have homeschooling networks where some families collectively hire subject teachers for a group of home-schooled students so that they don't have to hire language tutors individually, for example.

Pickleberry, that homeschooling idea sounds neat.
When most people think of homeschooling they imagine fundie Christians sheltering their children from the evil secularists, but I would consider homeschooling my own children because public schools are not intellectually rigorous enough these days - what with NCLB and the ever-increasing focus on anti-scientific bullshit being taught in science class.

I'd want my children to grow up learning in a completely different way than most kids learn in school these days.

No "Let's celebrate Columbus Day! Oh yeah and February is black history month."
The primary focus in history, lit and civics classes is on the white male perspective. I'd want my kids to have a more liberal, hippie-ish education.

Well, I got back a form letter -- so they've obviously gotten enough complaints that they've issued a form letter! It's written like it came from dir of marketing Angie Salem (shudder!) but the email had the tag at the bottom as being sent from a Veronica Donofrio. Here's the letter: I'll let you dissect it; I have too much work to do:

Hi Halfmad,

Thank you so much for your recent inquiry about our marketing strategy on Tonka. As the mother of a 3 and a half year old girl, I can certainly understand the fun and wonder when a little girl or little boy breaks "stereotype" and plays with non-traditional toys. My daughter is totally into Spiderman, and I LOVE IT!

As a family organization we are committed to finding exciting and appropriate play experiences for boys and girls of all ages, and if you log on to our website at www.hasbrotoyshop.com , I am sure you will find many toys that are both gender neutral as well as gender specific.

The gender specific toys help to build confidence and create wonderful bonding experiences amongst both parents of same sex children and amongst the children who they relate with most.

Specifically on Tonka, there are essentially two reasons why we choose to market Tonka to boys. In all of our research, the overwhelming majority of Tonka interest is with little boys. Further, we have scores of research that tell us about the psychological differences between boys and girls and how they play. In fact, there is some recent research that explains how this can actually be traced back to the actual biology and chemistry in the brain. This research proves to us that while there will be girls who defy these studies, the marketing is best targeted to boys and moms of little boys.

Thank again for your concern and interest, and I hope this letter helps to shed some light on our marketing strategy.

My Very Best,

Angie Salem
Director of Marketing, Tonka brand
Hasbro, Inc.

Veronica Donofrio
Consumer Affairs Representative

Of course that being said, maybe we could come up with other marketing angles for Hasbro:
Black people -- what can you say? They're just built different!
Catholics -- what can you say? They're just built different!

My brain just short-circuited.

Angie and Veronica: If gender specific toys are necessary in order for children to bond with parents of the same sex, how would a mom and son be able to play w/ Tonka together? Or is the mom just telling dad what she needs money for, so she can go to the toy store to pick up a fun gender-specific toy for him to play with his son?

Can't dads bond with their daughters over dollies, coloring books, linkin logs, or, heaven forbid: Tonka trucks? Same goes for moms & sons, obvi.

Shorter Tonka:

We market toy trucks to boys, and amazingly, we then find that boys are more likely to play with our trucks, so we use that as an excuse to make our advertising even more sexist. We acknowledge that there may be some girls out there who like to play with trucks, but we don't really give a crap about them, because we'll be getting their money anyway. After all, what're they going to do? It's not like there's a feminist toy-truck-maker out there.

And for anybody who thinks this doesn't matter, I know a little girl who, at the age of 3 and a half, developed a really interest in trucks and trains which her mother tried to encourage. She bought her a box of toy trucks with decals and little people. The child took one look at the box and looked up at her mother and said "Why are there only boys in my trucks? I don't want trucks with boys in them. I want trucks with girls."

It matters.

Thanks for posting that, halfmad! This is my favorite part:

"The gender specific toys help to build confidence and create wonderful bonding experiences amongst both parents of same sex children and amongst the children who they relate with most."

Hahaha!! Because we all know gender-neutral toys do NOT build confidence or create bonding experiences. *headdesk*

SarahMC,
re: homeschooling
What you are suggesting is of course a wonderful concept- teaching children outside of the structure of school. It is very difficult to homeschool, and those who choose it have a lot harder of a job, IMO.

That said, my personal opinion on the matter is that school prepares kids for the kind of structures they encounter as they grow up and enter the workforce. It enables children to interact on entirely different levels- you aren't just maneuvering through relationships with people mom and dad chose / you've met and formed friendships with, you're interacting with multiple authority figures, kids nothing like you, etc. Any supplemental education outside of that 8-3 setting is a bonus, but I think schools are worthwhile for our children to attend and that they provide necessary learning structures, again in my personal opinion. I guess all I'm saying is I don't think it's an all or nothing kind of thing- you can attend school and learn to think outside the box.

Then again, talk to me after my head explodes when my daughter has been through her first Thanksgiving Production a few years from now and the message of "Pilgrims helped the Indians!" comes across- I might have something different to say. Reteaching my daughter history is going to be a priority. :)

[/i]believe ALL CHILDREN of any gender/gender expression should be actively encouraged to be fearless risk-takers. To me, there's nothing sadder than a boy OR girl afraid of his or her own shadow, afraid of catching a ball, afraid of every passing animal, afraid of living and getting dirty and working hard and getting sweaty and messy. Fearlessness has been co-opted as a masculine gendered trait, and if I as a parent have to pick my battles (which, believe me, you do), then that's the first and foremost one to fight, IMHO. So if the boy wants a sword and the girl wants a doll, or vice versa, whatever. I roll with it. But to me, the battle that's paramount is raising kids who aren't afraid of interacting fully with their world.[/i]

i'm totally with you on the co-opting of fearlessness as male and that kids should be encouraged to experience the world. however, a very significant caveat to that is that seriously some people just are not into getting dirty or playing sports. i happen to be one of them. it's not because i have a vagina, although that usually gets more sympathy for my not being into it than i would probably get if i had been male. i certainly didn't fail to interact with the world or have all kinds of wonderful imaginative adventures as a child, and yeah, occasionally i had to suck it up and get dirty, but it was always a downside for me. essentially, i live in my head and i always have. the most fun i ever had playing with dolls and stuffed animals and action figures was because i could make up my own stories. so yeah, basically i just wanted to mention that kids can be all kinds of creative and adventurous without being much into rolling around in the dirt or playing sports.

on the whole raising kids issue - while it's fine to let them "play with what they want to play with," those decisions in their little minds are informed by stupid commercials like this and what other kids are doing (which is 95% gender normative). i don't think you need to force timmy to wear mommy's heels and pearls, but wouldn't it be helpful to occasionally throw in something they might not otherwise be exposed to? teach jill how to kick a soccer ball and see if she likes it? if timmy likes to help mom in the kitchen, get him an easy bake oven? it doesn't have to be so either/or -- totally hands off or totally cram other gender activities down the kid's throat.

Here's the email I sent to the Tonka people:

I would like to know how boys are "built different" in such a way that use of a Tonka truck would apply to them in particular. Is there something special about the shape sorter for which the child needs a penis? This seems highly inappropriate.

Sincerely, ---

Thanks for the link to customer service.

I have to say, I love it when one gender or the other is referred to as "just different" -- not "just different" from the opposite sex, but "just different." "Just built differently," or "just wired differently," or "just born different." It takes a serious spirit of alienation and exclusion to make either boys/men or girls/women sound like a collective freak of nature even in the face of the fact that they're HALF THE GODDAMN POPULATION.

Seriously, when you can start with a perfectly balanced dichotomy and make one half the standard and the other the endearing/exasperating/unteachable deviant mob from that standard, you've encapsulated the bullshit behind gender roles so perfectly that I can only shake my head. Or retire silently to my bedchamber. Or something.

I can't believe no one suggested the name Pat!

Ha! It's Pat! That's before my time, so I'm not even sure why I get the reference.

To: Angie Salem
Director of Marketing
&
Veronica Donofrio
Consumer Affairs
Hasbro, Inc.

Of course, it's been scientifically proven that males are biochemically more suited to the rough-and-tumble world of business than females. They're more aggressive, smarter, less emotional, and their strong hunter-brain make them adept at hurling plastic toys and dominating in corporate culture.

Because men and women are "just different", you'd both be better suited to a more caring, nurturing role in society.

I suggest you resign from your jobs immediately and go back in the kitchen where you belong. Since you have a natural desire to gravitate towards toy mops and Easy-Bake ovens, you should feel much more comfortable there.

Thanks,
- Concerned Consumer

Gah. This thread is making me so fucking ANGRY. Thanks for that rebuttal to Tonka, Ksms. I'll be curious to see the response.

I'm dubious if Basriona actually works with kids-- maybe her definition of cruel is far, far different from mine, at any rate. The girls are just as cruel as the boys by the time cruelty comes out-- boys are more likely to be physically violent, yes, but social nastiness can hurt just as much (trust me, I remember; I have worked with kids, watched them, and been a kid myself!).

The dichotomy I can't get is this: is it really so impossible to encourage gentleness and love in boys without turning them into 'sissies' who are reviled by their peers? I call bullshit. I've seen plenty of boys who are kind and gentle to younger children or siblings, who engage in imaginative play, and who are creative without being stigmatized by their peers. They don't have to wear skirts and nail polish to defy the stereotypes and be their own person-- though I think it's awesome when they do that too.

I don't like "pure" gender neutral names much myself-- I think I'd go with Alexander/Alexandra with a nickname of "Alex", or something similar, if I chose gender neutral. Casey's a good name, though, strong, without many stereotypes attached to it, and not as gentrified as Taylor or Jordan.

Is it just me, or does Basiorana sound absolutely pathological about enforcing proper 'boy' behavior? I hope shes infertile! I wouldnt want to see her raising a girl, or a boy!
Also, I remember wanting to join a tree climb with some boys at a cookout my family was part of. They were playing with pocket knives, and enjoying themselves in the trees. I asked them if I could join, or see the pocketknife, and I remember them saying,"no, these are boys things, girls dont do that."

Pissed me off. Probably had a parent like you.

pram in the hall,
thats a good example of kids who are extensions of progress in society, rather than the weak perpetuation of oppression most of society demonstrate. You have very enlightened kids. Your story also brings up the reality, that if we didnt have kids (and adults) like yours then how would we erase this restrictive gender dichotomy? Sometimes you have to survive being called a wuss/tomboy, so that you maintain your identity to be an example for others in the future. I.e.-Yesterday we made fun of girls who played sports, today we encourage it.

All basioranas doing is breaking her potential son down to conform to serve the idiocy, rather than break it. Indocrinating him into a system of privilege and discrimination. Why is she even on this website?

I hope shes infertile!

That's just...mean. Really, really mean.

I don't agree with Basiorana on this issue; I think that she's just reinforcing the hierarchy that makes it OK for girls to do boy things, because masculinity is somehow more worthy than femininity, but that boys shouldn't do girl things because that's a step down. But wishing infertility on someone because they have different child-raising beliefs than you do? It's nasty.

OMG I just saw a commercial where a doll pisses on itself! The girl looked like she was grossed out! If a girl is indoctrinated to like this crap, then why wouldnt she be into creepy crawlies, and bugs? You know, those stereotypically 'boys things!' To channel her interest in the world around her torwards 'playing mommy, and nuturing is a serious misuse of her mind. The girl in the commercial looked like she was grossed out. I got a quick laugh! Who makes this shit? Why not the "Quiverfull Kit," or "Polygamous Starter Kit?" Or the "Prayer for Contraceptive Game?"

Also, basiorana,
I have witnessed many men who are troubled because they were taught or are expected to not show emotion. One man I talked with complained that he was made fun of for crying when he broke up with his girlfriend. She said he should not cry, and should 'be a man.' We were talking about feminism and he said he was against feminism because it did not address these kinds of issues. I told him that it does, because feminists are against stifling healthy ndividual expression based on gender stereotypes and roles. He later changed his mind.

EG,
no its not harsh because I'm expressing genuine concern for child welfare. When a parent believes it is her duty to suppress a boys emotions to conform to privileged gender roles then what she is doing is abuse. She is also adamently upholding sexism. She shouldnt even be on this website. Yes, I do wish her infetility. Perhaps you are overly empathetic to that remark because you really, really want kids, and would not want that on yourself?

Does anyone else find it twisted that a parent would want their 4 year old playing 'mother?' A pregnant 4 year old!

I consider it to be mean because it's a personal attack, Gopher, and because you have no way of knowing whether or not Basiorana has grappled with this particular issue. I'd consider it to be equally nasty if somebody said to one of the people on this board who don't want kids that they hoped they got knocked up and were unable to get an abortion. Wishing ill on somebody else is mean-spirited, especially because all Basiorana is saying that she would do is to socialize her kid according to prevailing gender norms. I agree with you that that isn't, in my opinion, what's emotionally best for children, but I don't think it qualifies as abusive, either.

Eh, the four-year-olds I know often play "mother." A lot of child-play is based on imitating the actions and roles of the adults around them, so "mother" is a pretty common game--it also allows the kids to invert the usual power dynamic of her life by taking on the mantle of the more powerful figure (I used to go over to my dolls and animals and, hell, inanimate objects and recite my mother's dictums to them--"Bear, when you are a big girl, you can have hot tea! But not now! Not hot tea for you!").

What do you mean, "all shes trying to do is raise her boy to conform to social norms?"

Like thats not hugely misogynistic! Thats literally enforcing sexism in society, and teaching a child to enforce and expect it as well.

Lastly, I said she should be infertile as she would make an abusive mother. This kind of abuse is not often identified in society because its so common. However, just because its so common doesnt make it acceptable. We hardly need 'breeders' out there simply creating another walking, talking human life only to spew forth and expect to inherit gender privileged 'swag' soleley because they have a penis, right?

I agree with Rock Star's comment (at the top) about little girls learning to walk by pushing toy strollers. I'd also like to add the child-sized vaccuum cleaners to the list. Early training for girl's to become a house wife and mother. *sigh*

On another note, I was actually expecting the commercial to end with a view of the "boy's" Tonka truck beside one decked out in pink for little girls.

If someone had given this toy to one of my brothers or nieghboors back in the late 80s and early 90s, I would have played with it, just I played with the Fisher Price woodworking shop, tonka toy trucks and plastic rats and snakes. Also just as my brothers played with the Fisher Price Kitchen, Easy Bake oven and my variety of dolls.

My 3-year-old son and 1-year-old daughter got into a fight yesterday because they both wanted to play with the same baby doll. I offered them both a similar baby doll, different baby dolls, Spiderman, and a ball. No go. Both wanted the baby doll. Since it was my son who'd been the impetus behind getting the doll dressed (it was naked and we couldn't find its clothes, so I made it an outfit out of a sock), and since he was doing things like changing its diaper, I let him have it.

When he was changing the diaper, he said, "I'm the mommy. I'm changing the baby's diaper." I said to him, "No, you're the daddy, because you're a boy. Daddies change diapers too." I was torn, because on the one hand if he wants to play that he's a girl I don't care -- go ahead. But I also want him to understand that despite his own father hardly ever changing his diaper, changing diapers *is* a job daddies do, and if you're male, you're a daddy, but you can still relate to your baby the same way mommy does.

He likes Spiderman, Legos, Star Wars, sandboxes, and playing ball. He loved going to a friend's birthday party at a firehouse and getting to climb on the fire truck. And he likes baby dolls. And I, at least, am never going to tell him or let anyone in my hearing tell him he shouldn't. And my 1 year old likes baby dolls, and carrying around a purse, and wearing pretty dresses, and she also likes to run after a ball and climb on the furniture and play with Duplos. And no one will be allowed to tell her she can't do these things.

Socialization gets them as they age. My older son liked baby dolls until he was about 5 or 6. he has been known to occasionally play Bratz with his sister (they have male Bratz dolls, and he uses them), but he hasn't done that in a few years. Even now, though, he complains to me that there should be more girls in Lego sets, and he likes female characters that kick ass, such as Starbuck in new BSG. You can't entirely fight socialization, but by presenting the positive role models and encouraging the non-gender-specific play when they're little, I think it helps them to remember that girls are people too as they get older.

Wow, people really hate me on this comment thread now.

I believe the ability to pick and chose to whom you reveal your emotions is a powerful skill. I'm not saying that I would want my kids to never cry, just that I want them to be able to hold it until they are no longer in a potentially hazardous situation. And I don't have problems with some level of gender roles as long as you teach the children respect.

If you think that's "abusive" enough to warrant wanting me to lose my reproductive abilities, so be it. Perhaps you should focus your infertility-wishing abilities on someone who deserves it more, but oh well. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to disagree with it. I presume you also want all religious women to be infertile, and pretty much every woman in the third world, and pretty much everybody but the most devoted feminists. It's for "child welfare," you know?

But as for saying I don't belong on this board-- I support feminism because I believe women need to have the ability to control their reproductive freedom, because I think there are women all around the world who are TRULY oppressed, and because feminism has done great good in the world; it greatly increases the workforce without increasing the population, it encourages education, and it leads to more women in government, which tends to lead to more stable, less corrupt systems.

I hope that you can understand that someone can appreciate and support parts of a movement without agreeing unequivocally with every aspect of it.

All right. I am Basiorana's boyfriend, and I was raised by a radical feminist mother. I would like to personally say that being raised without gender roles, without a masculine sexual identity, and without the ability to hide my emotions has caused serious problems throughout my life (I am 23 now), and continues to do so. I am under the care of a therapist, and have spent most of my life in social isolation and abject misery because I am unable to function in ordinary social groups. Thanks to people like Basiorana, I have become much more socially apt, and on a personal note, I think wishing infertility on someone is a disgusting thing to do to anyone, regardless of whether you agree with their views or not. No parent is perfect, nor should anyone be held to unrealistic idealistic standards, which as I feel I am living proof of - don't work anywhere near as well in practice as in theory.

Yet another thread on feministing showing feminism's dogmatic side. Anyone who dares challenge the core beliefs of gender theory (which I find both impossible and lugubrious) gets ripped into with personal invectiveness. Basiorana's points were hardly radical.

every single post darwin66 makes in short:

I'm smarter than all of you, so while posting a shorter and less analytically in-depth comment than most of the posters, I just wanted you to know that ___ part of feminism is stupid.

I don't exactly think Basiorana's posts were getting completely ripped. I think there was definitely some discussion going on. And no, in this culture Basiorana's comments are not radical. Neither is the belief that children should be given abstinent-only education.

Constantine & Basoriana (or am I really just addressing the same person twice?) -

Bull. Shit. One example of the lack of gender roles supposedly crippling a man outweighs the reality of prevalent traditionally crippling both women and men?

Also, I would bet that your emotional and social problems are a lot more complex that what can simply be blamed on your mother. Imagine if society allowed you to show or not show your emotions as much as you want and allowed you to be who you are rather than forcing you to conform to the ideal role of a Real Man.

If "masculinity" is so important to the growth, development and happiness of men, why do they have to be trained in it? Why do girls/women have to be trained in "femininity"?
They are social constructs. The only reason a non-masculine man would have a miserable life is because the rest of society, trained in rigid gender norms, can't handle it and treats him poorly. The solution is not to perpetuate the masculine/feminine construct but to abolish it.

First of all, not everyone creates multiple accounts to prove their points. Constantine wanted to comment, is all (Also, I knew at least one person would accuse me of that!).

And there are two ways to successfully abolish things. One is to pass laws, like the abolition of slavery. That's not likely to happen here. The other is to do it in increments. With each generation, you move closer to your goals. This is actually happening with gender roles. But it will not happen overnight, and raising a child to be so far ahead of society that they are ostracized from it is harmful to the child without actually helping society. One child will not change the world, especially if he struggles to function in it.

My posts are not radical because I am not radical, though I actually am very socially liberal. I think changing society takes time, many generations and many increments, and forcing people to change causes more trouble than it prevents. It causes people to backlash against the movements they should be supporting.

You use words like "imagine" because you know that's not what the world is like RIGHT NOW. So were I to be raising kids RIGHT NOW, I wouldn't raise them to be happy, good, and successful in some distant future, but rather to be so RIGHT NOW.

To FSB in regards to my post - It may be that how I am is "right," but so long as society says otherwise, I'm the one who will be at a disadvantage. I would like to seriously ask you if this world that you picture is realistic. A world where someone like me is normal may be great, but it stands almost zero chance of happening. Let's be realistic. Humans BEINGS throughout their history have had gender roles, and they are in fact biologically hardwired into our brains (for evidence see non-human primates, particularly the culture of chimpanzees, bonobos, and our homonid ancestors). You're asking humanity to make a fundamental shift that society never will make.

To Gopher, I've been reading your prior posts. I'd never be one to Godwin an internet argument, but you should seriously think about the company you keep.

Eh, I'm pretty sure we can overcome any hard-wiring we might or might not have. It's just a bad idea to try to do it in a generation.

Of course that is not what the world is like right now. And it never will be a reality if people keep raising their kids with the current status quo. You could very easily raise your kids to be "happy, good, and successful" right now, but how would that get us any closer to a future where people are able to step outside rigid gender roles. Keeping with the current gender norms does not move us toward freedom from gender oppression.

Yeah, I could raise my son to be a macho prick and raise my daughter to be a lifeless trophy wife. They might be happy and their childhoods may be easy, but at what cost? If we don't actively make changes now, future generations will say the same thing, "Gosh, I wish I could raise my kids outside of these suffocating gender norms, but it is so gosh darned tough." And so of course they would also stick to the current gender roles because it is arguable easier. What progress!

Ah, but it's not keeping the status quo-- it's just enabling them to live within it. A boy can grow up wanting to be a stay-at-home dad and still not bring in his dolls to show-and-tell, and while he's more progressive than his father's generation he's still going to be accepted by his own. And then his son can move another step forward, because society will be slowly moving that way.

It's all about baby steps.

"Hard wiring" is used to excuse a lot of bullshit. Whether there is or is not any sort of "hard wiring" for social gender roles, or to what extent, really doesn't matter. It does not excuse oppressive gender norms that do not allow people to be individuals.

I do not think that this sort of change can be made in a generation. But things will never change if no one at least tries, regardless of what is easy. Like that saying that gets posted up in the hallways of elementary schools: What is right is not always easy and what is easy is not always right. Super-cheesy, but applicable I think. The point is, when do we start trying to change gender roles? Because if we wait until it is easy on parents, kids, and the rest of society, we will be waiting forever.

My original argument was to not force one's children to grow up completely without gender roles, but rather to allow those which are necessary in the modern day. And with each generation, there is more acceptance. We should try-- but each generation should draw a new line and not put our ideals over the needs of our children.

I'm smarter than Ninapendamaishi, so while posting a shorter and less analytically in-depth comment than most of the posters, I just wanted you to know that Ninapendamaishi part of feminism is stupid.

Seriously darwin, what are you, 5?

I have engaged in a lot more in-depth discussion and analysis than I have seen you do in these threads. So irregardless of whether you have in-depth, reasoned out positions on things, you sure don't display them to the rest of us.

Are you one of those professors who lord it over students who disagree with you? (just out of curiosity.) Because honestly, if you hadn't made such a big deal previously about being a professor, I wouldn't pay as much attention to the general insulting tone and lack of depth present in the bulk of your comments.

I'm pretty sure we can overcome any hard-wiring we might or might not have.

If gender roles were hard-wired, parents, society and the media wouldn't have to drill them into children's head.

irregardless?

irregardless to add emphasis, or regardless. Whichever you prefer.

Wanna compare verbal SAT scores? (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) Except.. let's not. I already feel like I'm stuping, and I suddenly feel slightly embarassed.

OK, wait. Darwin is insulting other posters' intelligence? Classy. Nothing is more impressive, argument-wise, than random insults.

Well something that sort of amazes me, personally, is the way that some people feel free to act when they're anonymous, online.

Like for instance, I feel like overall, the things I've written are not things I would feel like I needed to hide from family or friends (I mean yeah, I'm a little outspoken, but that's true in real-life also). On the other hand, I really question how darwin would feel about her students and colleagues reading her comments on this website and knowing they were attributable to her.

I can say that personally, when I was younger I went through a short phase of arguing with people a lot online and being what I know think was unnecessarily nasty or arrogant sometimes. But at the time I was dealing with some serious anxiety/insecurity issues. So I just wonder what some of these posters on here would be like to deal with in real-life.

That is both the lure and danger of anonymity, right?

Obviously, I use it. And that probably leads me to be more aggressive than I might otherwise be--but the political positions I take are mine, and I wouldn't be ashamed to own them. I decided to use a pseudonym for this board because I knew I'd be discussing issues I feel strongly about and I was concerned that if by chance a student of mine wandered onto the board and read such strong opinions, he or she might feel uncomfortable expressing a different opinion in class, and that would feel to me like an abuse of my power as a teacher.

In my experience, people who bully and insult other people on-line are usually doing it on-line because they don't have the courage to stand up to other people in real life. The good version of this is when a person in trouble who is still frightened about reaching out for help in person (i.e. someone who feels like the only feminist in their school, someone who has been raped and doesn't feel like she can tell anybody), the anonymity of the internet can help them take those first steps. I like to think the good outweighs the bad...

(I think I've put far too much thought into this!)

Oh I use a pseudonym too, b/c I don't want every random person to be able to google me and know all about strongly held opinions on controversial things, sure.

But I just mean that in the way I've presented myself, I overall am not ashamed, and overall it is not that different from the way I would engage in an intense intellectual debate with classmates in the dining hall, or something. And certainly I doubt close friends would be surprised if they read my stuff.

Ahh -when politically and academically-oriented types collide online. We are so nerdy haha.