A Disturbing Discovery (your e-mail)
The post A Disturbing Discovery generated quite a bit of e-mail from you guys, and as always, it was thoughtful and much appreciated. Here's a general survey of the e-mail with a few additional notes as well.First off, in no way was I trying to imply that girls were less creative than boys. No, no, no. That didn't even cross my mind. What bothered me is that the toys in the "girls" aisles seem inherently less creative. The dolls seemed entirely to focus on appearance and the acquisition of additional possessions (the dream house, the dream car, the hot tub, etc.) that exist in the real world.
Like I said, I'm the least likely person in the world to notice this, but it was so blatant that it was impossible to ignore.
The toys in the "non-pink aisles," in contrast, largely drew from heroic archetypes that have existed for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.
So, to me, the difference in the message of the toys came down to this: if you're a girl, you're supposed to play dress-up and buy shit. If you're a boy, you're supposed to save the world.
Damn, don't we want girls saving the world, too? I felt like girls were getting sold short.
That's where I was coming from with the original post.
Now, let's take a look at your e-mails.
First, I received several e-mails from Australia indicating that toy selection was the same over there, and several of you suggested that given the worldwide strength of some of these brands (Barbie, especially), it's probably the same (or nearly the same) in every Western country.
Next is this wonderfully eloquent and wry e-mail from "JellyfishGreen":
The fun of Barbie is *not* the *action*, which you have pointed out is somewhat restricted to changing outfits. It's the *interaction* - hours of stimulated conversation and social events between your dolls, your friends dolls, and at least once before real boys become interesting again, the male-dolls. Acting out school scenes, mother's conversations with other adults, role-playing...
It's like the Sims toy. There is apparently a world where conversations are not condensed into call-signs and barked orders, where the telephone is used for more than updating your location and ETA, where they are used to determine your relationship to another rather than the much more logical rank-badge-and-sargeant's-stripes of the military. There are also aspects to "caring" that imply more than simple medical aid, but rather influence over hearts-and-minds.
While GI Joe is out colonizing the unknown, Barbie is weaving those colonies into a society. And possibly a civilization?
Man, if a world exists where the telephone is used for more than updating your location and ETA, I hope I never find it. The concept of action versus interaction, though, is well-considered, and I only wish I were half that perceptive.
James Lee also made an excellent point about parents and the choices they make:
As a father of a 5 year old daughter, I am acutely aware of the awful gender stereotypes when it comes to boys and girls toys. I agree that it is disturbing and, quite honestly, a bit infuriating. What I have learned though is that as much as boys and girls get pressured to play with what someone else thinks is gender appropriate, it is up to the parents to either just accept the status quo and go with it, taking the path of least resistance, or be actively involved in making decision on what you want to encourage your kids to play with.
Steven Hurdle made an interesting point that I hadn't even considered:
I would further add that while you correctly note that more imagination is being asked of boys through their toys, there's another alarming element: the route to comprehending math and science is through exploring the world around us--looking outward, not inward. Which set of toys is going to encourage that? And the first, and most crucial, component is developing spatial awareness, and what's going to do that better: Lego and Transformers, or Holiday Barbie?
I think Steven's comment applies to both sexes, actually--Legos have to be one of the greatest toys ever made when it comes to developing both spatial awareness and a design-oriented approach to play.
John D'Angelo wrote in and taught me that life is analog, not binary, and he includes a wonderful description of his sister (who clearly kicks much ass):
My sister is a perfect example of the type of well-rounded woman your mention toward the end of the post, and yet my sister loves clothes and loved playing with dolls/changing their clothes growing up. I think the key factor you mention is the variety and choice of toys that we seem to deny young girls as a culture. My little sister and I are only a few years apart, so she wound up playing with all of my GI Joes and other toys with me as we grew up and I'm sure I've had an undue influence on her interest in stereotypical "boy" things like science fiction, baseball and computer games. With all of that said, my sister was also a complete girl growing up in a lot of ways (except for the fact that she has always hated pink).
Now Kimberly is a grown woman, a successful graphic designer, and someone who still loves clothes while she also feels comfortable with a Bumblebee figurine hanging from her rear view mirror and talking about the scientific implications of different time travel theories touched on in an episode of Lost. The important thing was my family let her follow her interests without judging them one way or the other.
Lastly, and this is always my favorite category, there were some great descriptions in your e-mails. From Franklin Brown (describing his wife):
My daughter likes three types of toys: Cooking toys, bouncy balls, and dolls. That's it. That's how she is. We certainly haven't shoved that crap down her throat, because my wife is a hard-ass, take-no-grief cowgirl.
Rachel Schirra described a highlight of her childhood:
I hated Barbies, for the most part. One year my aunts gave me Barbies and my brother NERF guns, and I was so incensed by this that I tied the Barbies up to things and my brother and I shot them with his NERF guns. This is one of my more vivid memories of my childhood.
David Alpern (who is a fine writer) e-mailed and included a story to a column he wrote about his daughter, which you can read here, and here's an excerpt:
All the knights had been arranged in lines, and 2 dragons were facing each other at the front.
It looked so familiar, but I couldn't quite put my finger on it.
"What's going on, Becca?"
WARNING: DADS WITH SENSITIVE STOMACHS MAY WANT TO STOP READING HERE
"The dragons are getting married."
Oh, God. The Barbie Plague had hit my castle.
Jim Riegel (who I mentioned earlier) described his youngest daughter (who is 8) this way:
Once she came out of the bedroom wearing a ballet outfit (complete with tutu), a plastic sparkly tiara and some of my wife's heels... with a wooden sword thrust through a sash tied around her waist. She announced she was off to slay the dragon and rescue herself a prince. That is a well-adjusted modern girl.
Lastly, Gene Cooley wrote in with an awesome description of one of his daughtesr:
My younger daughter, Lexi 6.0, will find interest in a few of the things in the girls section, but would see nothing incongruous with walking out of Target with a My Little Pony and a broadsword.
Neither would I.
<< Home