Effects of Gender Color-Coding Conny Gollek

Effects of Gender Color-Coding on Toddlers’ Gender-Typical Toy Play Wong & Hines (2015) Observed toddlers play with gender-colour coded toys Coded amount of time children played with each toy Boys and girls preferred the train over the doll Difference in toy selection was greater for toys in typical colours Preference for a-typical toy was greater if in typical colour Boys more affected by colour Pink seems more gender typed than blue Overall effect of colour was small at the ages studied Preference might increase with age

Does it matter? Children recognise their own sex around the age of 2, by 4-5 years the know this won’t change They look out for signs to confirm their group identity, eagerly adapting gender norms Retailers use gender norms to market toys, clothes and even books specifically to either boys or girls Claim, consumer demand this to make shopping decisions easier

So, does it really matter? Children learn through play Stereotypes reinforce outdated gender roles 4 year olds choose occupations typical for their gender (Trice & Rush, 1995) Boys are particularly critical of male peers’ interest in non-traditional boys roles Pre-adolescent girls show more restricted choice of future career aspirations (McMahon & Patton, 1997) 22% of boys thought they had to do well in school as they will have to provide for a family (Tinklin et al., 2005) Girls higher aspirations in schooling doesn’t translate into occupational choices (Schoon et al., 2007)

Play matters Gendered toys take away opportunities They over-emphasize focus on appearance for girls, on rough action play for boys Toys are not trivial, so isn’t marketing

Let toys be toys – for girls and boys Campaign launched in 2012, asking retailers to take down “boys” and “girls” signs 14 retailers changed their signage, 60% reduction in UK stores 8 publishers committed to not releasing new girl/boy labelled titles Let clothes be clothes challenges gender stereotypes in children’s clothing