Mum Diary: Why Do Retailers Continuously Patronise Little Girls?

I’m really cross. I’m really cross because, even though I don’t have a daughter, I can see examples everywhere of how little girls are being short-changed by retailers and advertisers.

They are having their play shaped by marketers’ ideas of what boys and girls should like rather than allowing them the freedom to choose their own playthings and find their own identities.

Just this week I am particularly seething, because I visited the Asda website to look for costumes for my two boys. The fancy dress page of the website offered two options: "Boys will be boys – shop for boys" and "Little princesses – shop for girls".

It was a clear gender divide; on the boys’ page were superheroes, pirates and monsters, while on the girls’ side were princess dresses, a beautician costume and a cheerleader outfit. There were a few more aspirational costumes too; a vet outfit (why don’t the boys get that as a choice?) and a dragon, but no pirate or superhero costumes.

Of course it's not just Asda that does this. Why are retailers restricting children’s choices like this? It is 2015; boys can grow up to be nurses, girls can grow up to be soldiers. It is so horribly unambitious to hand one child a doll and the other a truck, it restrict children’s play and self-discovery. It can’t even be good for business, like refusing to allow half your customers on one side of the shop.

As I ranted about this, a friend pointed out that you can buy magnetic words for children on Amazon, the kind you stick to the fridge. The ‘boy’ words include running, climbing, cobweb, worms, sticks and mud. The ‘girl’ words feature clothes, princess, dancing, make-up and – most frustratingly of all – shoes.

Sweet Little Girls And Tough Little Boys
It’s not just the fact that boys and girls are having their options limited this way; I was also very frustrated by the language used by the retailer.

"Boys will be boys" implies that they are rugged, playful little chaps, while "Little princesses" is coy, sickly sweet and restrictive.

"Little princesses" don’t dig in the mud for worms or attempt to toboggan down the stairs using a tray. "Little princesses" are sweet and delicate and worried about their pretty dresses. The language we use around children helps shape their behaviour, so why on earth are we telling girls that they need to be delicate and pretty when we tell boys to be brave and bold?

I have three brilliant nieces who love 'Frozen' and other princessy films, but who also love to run through the woods waving sticks as swords, and play in the mud and sand. One of them in particular loves her pirate costume, especially when her mother paints her face with a big piratical beard. If she had listened to Asda, she’d be dressed as a beautician or a princess instead. How depressing, how limiting.

Some parents will unthinkingly tell their daughters not to get their pretty dresses dirty, so even if they are not consciously limiting their play, they will do so because of their outfits.

Do My Boys Have Dollies?
Now, perhaps you will be reading this and thinking "well, little girls do like dresses and most little boys don’t". I actually think that is a fair point; look around my home and you wouldn’t think I believe in not stereotyping children’s toys. The house is covered in my boys’ toys and these range from diggers and rockets, to dinosaurs and insects. There is not a doll or a butterfly to be seen.

But that’s not because I refuse to buy traditionally ‘girly’ things for Harry and Olly. I have tried hard to let them lead their own play and to ask for the things they want. When they were small, I watched the sort of toys and games they played with most at toddler groups and used that as a guide for Christmas and birthdays.

I have never stopped them playing with toys that are traditionally seen as ‘girly’ because that is outdated nonsense. But my two undeniably prefer trucks and dinosaurs to toy kitchens and dolls. And that’s fine – they can choose.

If I ever have a daughter I hope I will offer her a similar free choice. And if what she wants is a princess costume and a baby doll, then that’s fine. There’s nothing wrong with girls making a free choice to play with those things. However, if she wanted trucks and spiders then that’s also fine, not to mention cheaper as we have already got quite a lot of those! But if society tells her that some toys are for girls, and some are for boys then she will feel pressured to conform and take the girl toys.

And I expect that, like my lovely nieces, most little girls are somewhere in between. They may want sparkly 'Frozen' dresses, but they probably also want pirate outfits for when they are feeling bloodthirsty. They should not have to feel that they are asking for a ‘boy thing’ when they want to be a superhero, just like boys should not be stopped from playing at vets or Frozen.

No, No, There’s No Limit
Now, I am not saying that the reason for the gender play gap is because we dress little girls as princesses and little boys as Iron Man. But segregating costumes and toys like this limits both boys and girls from exploring their identities themselves, and imposes restrictive societal expectations and norms. We need to be more ambitious for our children.

We damage little girls by limiting their horizons and telling them they should be princesses who like shoes. But we also hurt little boys by telling them that they cannot have dolls or play at house. There are some excellent and eloquent arguments being made by the Let Toys Be Toys campaign, which I really recommend if you want to read more.

Finally, if you’re wondering, I did ask Asda for a comment, via their press office, Twitter and Facebook, but they didn’t bother to reply. I do wonder whether it this divide is a conscious decision or just a marketing hangover.

Are you frustrated by these gender divides for boys and girls? Have your say using the comments below.

[Gender Neutral Nursery Design Ideas You’ll Love]

[Mum Diary: My Child’s Worst Ever Meltdown]