Feminine likes and pursuits are almost always devalued, in pretty much every culture. If sewing is a woman's job in one culture, it's considered base work. If it's a man's job in another culture, it is considered noble work.

If tomorrow all girls started liking yellow, we would think of yellow with scorn.

The answer isn't to reinforce the devaluation of girl stuff, but to honor it.

For me, it's more about variety. I love pink, I love dressing my daughter in it. It's a beautiful color on her. But could I maybe get some other options? Go to any standard retailer and check out the color options for baby girl clothes that aren't specifically unisex--not much available without pink.

Also, the idea that girls won't want to play with Legos or bows and arrows or whatever unless they're pink is just stupid, but you'll find that most boys won't touch their sister's pink bow with someone else's ten foot pole...but don't worry, because the boy version is a rustic brown and green, very masculine and only $15.95. The toy companies know what they're doing, and gender roles don't have much to do with it

Last weekend, the New York Times ran a story about the popularity of pink toy weapons,

Something like that was in that Youtube series called "Sh%t Southern Women Say". A lady with the honey sweet accent is at the gun store and inspecting a pistol. She looks at the salesman and asks, "Does this come in pink?".

The only "problem" I have with pink is along the lines of what mse said - the lack of options. I had that problem as a girl and now I have that problem as a mom. My daughter likes pink, but she doesn't LOVE pink. She has some pink things, but she also likes other colors.

I have it easy because I've gotten so many hand-me-downs, but stuff her size (4T-ish, so not quite in the "girls" section for most things) is almost universally pink or white (and dressing a preschooler in white is not a good idea). At least a few years back (when the stuff I've been handed-down was on the racks) there was more variety!

Pink is being used by marketers to mean "girly" but that doesn't mean that all girls have to accept that definition.

I also agree with the toy comment. I try to get things both kids will play with - and that means avoiding the "girl" aisle. No, I don't have a problem with all the toys there, but do I need a hot-pink wagon? No, the standard red will do just fine. In this sense, it's a bit of a marketing gimmick to me. You have a girl first and you (and relatives) get the pink things, then if you have a boy, you're probably going to need to get the same thing again in a different color.

Of course, as I write this I'm having a hot-pink and quite sparkly Minnie Mouse being bounced on my shoulder... :)

It's the assumption that ALL girls want pink and that ALL that girls want is pink that is bothersome. Not enough that I would write an article saying how bad it is, but I will support the notion that it's annoying. Even my girly-girl wants to wear blue, brown, green, etc. If we only give one "choice" then how are they supposed to figure out what they like as individuals?

I have to say, I haven't had a problem with finding non-pink clothes for my girls. Finding church/special occasion dresses in colors that weren't pastel was a bit difficult when they were babies and toddlers, but there was plenty of lavender and sky blue and yellow. My older likes pink and looks cute in it, but my younger daughter wears purple or black (which bothers my stepmother to no end, for reasons I don't understand) pretty much every day. I just did a load of laundry that included 7 or 8 pairs of black, gray or both (black leopard. Yes.) leggings.

If we have to worry about kids' color preferences, a smarter move would be to de-stigmatize the idea of boys playing with pink. It always bothered me that no one would think twice about my daughter wearing a pair of hand-me-down overalls from her brother, but the reverse would be horrible.

Mine is still a baby, so maybe it's a regional/age/seasonal thing and will get better over time.

Yes, it is age dependent. My daughter is nearly out of the toddler section. It's much better in the "big girls" section. I have had some luck in the fancy dresses. In wither there's lots that are black based.

My daughter is 8 months old and I don't have a problem finding non-pink clothes for her. She has a lot of mint, lavender, yellow, and orange/coral right now as well as pink. Pink is my favorite color so I'd have no problem dressing her in only pink, but I would like her to have a variety as well. For some reason gray seems to be a fashionable baby girl color right now.

Well now women can get their guns in pink but are not limited to only pink.

I have a pink Sig Sauer. When I bought mine they also offered the same model in purple.

Feminine likes and pursuits are almost always devalued, in pretty much every culture. If sewing is a woman's job in one culture, it's considered base work. If it's a man's job in another culture, it is considered noble work.

Posted by: NicoleK at March 29, 2014 3:05 AM
______________________________

In the same vein, while I don't quite know the difference between being a seamstress and being a tailor, I don't remember hearing of female tailors - and I'm guessing tailors get paid a lot more.

Much in the same way that female chefs didn't used to be common - and chefs DEFINITELY get paid more than mere cooks.

Interesting, Amy... My wife's skin tone is similar to yours, and she seldom wears pink. She says it makes her skin look pasty.

A seamstress (or seamster - the male equivalent) is traditional someone who is in the business of sewing. A tailor designs or specifies alterations to existing clothes and may also carry out the modification or creation. Clearly different jobs though now I believe the terms of are often used interchangeably.

I used to get my dress shirts from a tailor. He would take down measures and have me try on some samples. He would write instructions that would be sent off site where someone else would cut and sew the shirt (a seamstress). Then on final fitting he sometimes wanted minor changes in which case a onsite seamster would make the change (I believe more serious changes would be sent off site). Once he moved the collar button himself.

From what I have seen, the boy pretending to be iron-man is going to get a lot more flack than the girl in pink.

On Topic: I don't see the big thing about pink. It does seem like a bit of a marketing gimmick.

In the same vein, while I don't quite know the difference between being a seamstress and being a tailor, I don't remember hearing of female tailors - and I'm guessing tailors get paid a lot more.

Much in the same way that female chefs didn't used to be common - and chefs DEFINITELY get paid more than mere cooks.

Because private businesses and consumers are as a matter of course willing to pay a 60% premium for work done by a man just for the cachet of it being done by a man. Or something like that.