Would you say a sign saying 'girls toys' is inappropriate?

[WiseOwl182]

37 minutes ago, Halibut said:

The labelling of toys as 'boy's toys' or 'girl's toys' isn't going to put children in A and E; but it does help perpetuate some of the gender stereotypes which contribute to women being massively under represented in STEM (Science, technology, engineering and maths) subjects in education and ultimately the workplace.  It limits girls and women's choices and opportunities.

     You could try and argue that this doesn't actually matter, or that girls and women are just no good at, or have no interest in such areas of interest and endeavor, but I and many others think otherwise. Since it's fairly clear that removing gender distinctions from toys wouldn't do any harm, why bother keeping them?

Because keeping them wouldn't do any "harm" either. Females are massively over represented in political leadership positions in this country. How did toy labelling limit their options? 

 

One option that has become limited is becoming a full time housewife and parent, which some women still want to do.

 

 

[Halibut]

12 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Because keeping them wouldn't do any "harm" either. Females are massively over represented in political leadership positions in this country. How did toy labelling limit their options? 

 

One option that has become limited is becoming a full time housewife and parent, which some women still want to do.

 

 

Lol. Highlighted for comedic effect. 

In real life meanwhile, women make up 32 percent of MP's. Only a catastrophically inept mathematician or a man would call this a massive overepresentation.

 

How many women are studying engineering, science and maths? It's almost as if you don't want to make society fairer and more equal - weird!

Edited December 29, 2018 by Halibut

[WiseOwl182]

8 minutes ago, Halibut said:

Lol. Highlighted for comedic effect. 

In real life meanwhile, women make up 32 percent of MP's. Only a catastrophically inept mathematician or a man would call this a massive overepresentation.

 

How many women are studying engineering, science and maths? It's almost as if you don't want to make society fairer and more equal - weird!

What has 32% of MPs got to do with political leadership? Prime Minister? Scottish First Minister? Northern Ireland First Minister? That's 3 in 4 UK national leaders that are female.

 

Actually I do believe in equality, I just don't agree gender toy labelling is an issue. As I said before, some of the people on this thread should expend their energies on genuine gender inequality issues that do cause "actual harm", such as forced arranged marriages, grooming gangs, etc.

[Halibut]

9 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Quote

What has 32% of MPs got to do with political leadership? Prime Minister? Scottish First Minister? Northern Ireland First Minister? That's 3 in 4 UK national leaders that are female.

Yes - and trying to cite it as a reason why gendered toys aren't an issue is clearly absurd.

It's rather like saying ''.America can't be racist they had a black president

 

Quote

Actually I do believe in equality, I just don't agree gender toy labelling is an issue. As I said before, some of the people on this thread should expend their energies on genuine gender inequality issues that do cause "actual harm", such as forced arranged marriages, grooming gangs, etc.

You're looking at it from the wrong end of the telescope - things like arranged marriage and  sexual abuse can only happen in a climate where women are perceived as having lower worth than men. Gendered toys contribute to the conditions where that climate exists. Besides, you're making that age old error of thinking that because  a and b are big and obvious problems people shouldn't spend any time thinking about c. Speaking of actual harm, what actual harm would be done by removing gendering from toys?

 

Edited December 29, 2018 by Halibut

[Cyclone]

2 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Because keeping them wouldn't do any "harm" either. Females are massively over represented in political leadership positions in this country. How did toy labelling limit their options? 

 

One option that has become limited is becoming a full time housewife and parent, which some women still want to do.

 

 

It's already been proven that it does real and lasting harm.

You refusing to accept it doesn't alter it.

12 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

It normalises something that they aspire to.

 

I've answered lots of your questions, now it's your turn. In what way does labelling toys "girls" or "boys" toys cause "actual harm"?

Answered in post #59 was it.  Numerous studies detail the harm it causes to both boys and girls.

[nikki-red]

Posts have been removed. There is a clear warning at the top of every page of this thread.

If you cant remain civil the thread will be closed.

[WiseOwl182]

6 hours ago, Cyclone said:

It's already been proven that it does real and lasting harm.

You refusing to accept it doesn't alter it.

Answered in post #59 was it.  Numerous studies detail the harm it causes to both boys and girls.

Please quote from the conclusion where it states "actual harm" (your words).

8 hours ago, Halibut said:

You're looking at it from the wrong end of the telescope - things like arranged marriage and  sexual abuse can only happen in a climate where women are perceived as having lower worth than men. Gendered toys contribute to the conditions where that climate exists. Besides, you're making that age old error of thinking that because  a and b are big and obvious problems people shouldn't spend any time thinking about c. Speaking of actual harm, what actual harm would be done by removing gendering from toys?

On the contrary, societies tend to start with the bigger wins before worrying about the trivial. In some middle Eastern countries do you think women are more concerned with toy labelling or stonings?

8 hours ago, Halibut said:

Yes - and trying to cite it as a reason why gendered toys aren't an issue is clearly absurd.

It's rather like saying ''.America can't be racist they had a black president

Nice analogy, as it shows the majority aren't racist 

[Cyclone]

The key finding: Whether a child is in Baltimore, Beijing or New Delhi, the onset of adolescence triggers a common set of rigidly enforced gender expectations associated with increased lifelong risks of mental and physical health problems.

 

Are you now going to try to claim that mental and physical health problems aren't "actual harm"?

[WiseOwl182]

29 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

 

 

 

Are you now going to try to claim that mental and physical health problems aren't "actual harm"?

"Onset of adolescence triggers...". No mention of Tesco toy labels.

[Cyclone]

Seriously.  You were expecting Tesco aisle labels to be mentioned.  We've established that gender stereotyping is directly harmful, we've established that marketing and labelling toys for specific genders is a form of stereotyping.

There's literally nothing to dispute, although I'm sure that won't stop you.

Perhaps you can instead ask me again if I have children, or perhaps point out that other, more important issues exist.  Anything to distract from having to acknowledge the points to have been proven.