dangertits:

skiptripfall:

rainbowfairyprincess:

I am incredibly grateful to my parents for giving me both kinds of toys. I preferred the dolls, but at least I know that was my own honest choice.

My mom wouldn’t let me have toys. 

I still find most commentary on the sexist division of girl toys and boy toys to be rather lacking. Of course if is terrible that girls and boys are given toys that encourage them to enact stereotypical gender roles ways so young; this type of socialization might prime them to fill specific roles later on in life. But people are still undervaluing “girls toys,” equating them with passive frivolousness. And how sexist is that? The sentiment is that “gender neutral” toys, always verging towards “boys toys,” are constructive, educational, and worthwhile. Dolls aren’t. This is the kind of sentiment that dismisses the value of “women’s work” of care-giving later on in life.
“Boys toys” tend to be physically complex. “Girls toys” tend to be socially complex.  The complexity of the imaginary play that children often engage in with dolls is intangible and made invisible early on—because you aren’t looking.  It is so much easier for a child to say “look what I made” and get a pat on the back than to say “watch me engage.”
I played with lot of different types of toys. Sure, I liked to build things with legos. But I much preferred my dolls. And guess what? All forty or so of my beanie babies had individual personalities. They had roles, romances, they interacted with each other in complex ways. There were smaller subgroups of birds or bears. I used them to create a complete micro-society. But an adult passerby would see that pile of critters as a rather useless and excessive collection.
Understanding social complexities, the kind of play which “girls toys” encourage, is undervalued from an early age.
Let’s please stop with the “dolls are dumb” rhetoric. It isn’t helpful. It’s still sexist. The problem of gendered children’s toys won’t be fixed by allowing free access to “boys toys” for all, but by seeing the value in diverse types of play, and encouraging all children to engage in them.

Re-reblogging for commentary.
And to add that dolls ought to be marketed/designed in a way that encourages that kind of creative play, rather than the way they seem to be done now, with pre-packaged personalities and an emphasis on how “sexy” they are.

dangertits:

skiptripfall:

rainbowfairyprincess:

I am incredibly grateful to my parents for giving me both kinds of toys. I preferred the dolls, but at least I know that was my own honest choice.

My mom wouldn’t let me have toys. 

I still find most commentary on the sexist division of girl toys and boy toys to be rather lacking. Of course if is terrible that girls and boys are given toys that encourage them to enact stereotypical gender roles ways so young; this type of socialization might prime them to fill specific roles later on in life. But people are still undervaluing “girls toys,” equating them with passive frivolousness. And how sexist is that? The sentiment is that “gender neutral” toys, always verging towards “boys toys,” are constructive, educational, and worthwhile. Dolls aren’t. This is the kind of sentiment that dismisses the value of “women’s work” of care-giving later on in life.

“Boys toys” tend to be physically complex. “Girls toys” tend to be socially complex.  The complexity of the imaginary play that children often engage in with dolls is intangible and made invisible early on—because you aren’t looking.  It is so much easier for a child to say “look what I made” and get a pat on the back than to say “watch me engage.”

I played with lot of different types of toys. Sure, I liked to build things with legos. But I much preferred my dolls. And guess what? All forty or so of my beanie babies had individual personalities. They had roles, romances, they interacted with each other in complex ways. There were smaller subgroups of birds or bears. I used them to create a complete micro-society. But an adult passerby would see that pile of critters as a rather useless and excessive collection.

Understanding social complexities, the kind of play which “girls toys” encourage, is undervalued from an early age.

Let’s please stop with the “dolls are dumb” rhetoric. It isn’t helpful. It’s still sexist. The problem of gendered children’s toys won’t be fixed by allowing free access to “boys toys” for all, but by seeing the value in diverse types of play, and encouraging all children to engage in them.

Re-reblogging for commentary.

And to add that dolls ought to be marketed/designed in a way that encourages that kind of creative play, rather than the way they seem to be done now, with pre-packaged personalities and an emphasis on how “sexy” they are.

  1. madamedevideoland reblogged this from mswyrr and added:
    I remember seeing Astronaut Barbie when I was younger. We need more of that.
  2. ahopelessdaydreamer reblogged this from mswyrr
  3. mswyrr reblogged this from someotherchick
  4. sherlyyoujest reblogged this from blackpuma
  5. absolutedeath reblogged this from mokonochan
  6. mokonochan reblogged this from dersite-knight-of-breath
  7. dersite-knight-of-breath reblogged this from chibizilla
  8. carlybelle reblogged this from hermioneinwonderland
  9. idontevenknow637 reblogged this from pelennor-feels
  10. pelennor-feels reblogged this from hermioneinwonderland
  11. hermioneinwonderland reblogged this from orbitingasupernova
  12. zeriakit reblogged this from nhubby and added:
    Love it. I remember doing a psychology project on this, and that was my near exact answer, especially on what age the...
  13. poisonyourbreath reblogged this from elvesarebad
  14. blackpuma reblogged this from orbitingasupernova
  15. theskullqueen reblogged this from missingagloe
  16. missingagloe reblogged this from consultingdetectiveandallama and added:
    There are also LOTS of “girl’s” toys that are meant to stimulate creativity, like art kits, jewelry making kits, and...
  17. elvesarebad reblogged this from someotherchick
  18. nhubby reblogged this from wingsandtails and added:
    Always reblarg. this has excellent commentary UvU
  19. sea-unicorn reblogged this from katiejanekaboom
  20. notaleprechaun reblogged this from uselesswhitenoise and added:
    I loved playing with dolls when I was little, it was my precursor to the Sims series.
  21. chibizilla reblogged this from hummingbirdprince
  22. scottishdreamergirl reblogged this from inventrix
  23. tureyeltaino reblogged this from hummingbirdprince
  24. gitraba reblogged this from hummingbirdprince
  25. lovepmmimi reblogged this from hummingbirdprince
  26. hummingbirdprince reblogged this from inventrix and added:
    and not just dolls, but also all of the cooking and cleaning products. They should be marketed in gender neutral...
  27. inventrix reblogged this from dervlaaarghhh and added:
    WHAT THAT PERSON WITH THE REALLY LONG COMMENT SAID. I don’t even have anything else to add. They said it perfectly.
  28. hi-mom reblogged this from dangertits and added:
    actually can’t imagine not having that social element in play. I loved building towns out
  29. nobodybutnobodyoutherealone reblogged this from thegaiaphageisgrapingyou and added:
    I agree with the commentary above and wanted to add that I played with dolls (primarily Barbies) for a long time. I...
  30. senatorskoshie reblogged this from crazybruce
  31. itisbutascratch reblogged this from katiejanekaboom
Short URL for this post: http://tmblr.co/ZXjm1yE9tEZX