FAQs

Toys

Children may have different preferences, but even the most car-mad child doesn’t play with cars ALL the time. It’s important that children get a wide range of play experiences to help them develop different skills. So why can’t a session of crashing toy cars be followed by cooking up some plastic lunch?

And different styles of play don’t necessarily mean different toys. Children might approach the same toy but in a different way. For example one child may take two dinosaurs and set up a role play, another might engage the dinosaurs in a battle! But a dinosaur is not intrinsically a male or female toy. Allowing children a wide variety of toys enables them to explore their imagination, so there’s really no reason to mark off certain toys “for boys” and others “for girls”.

In homes and daycare settings boys and girls play together every day – why do toy retailers want to tell them they’re doing it wrong?

We’re not denying that there may be some innate differences between boys and girls. That’s a debate for another time.

But it’s worth noting that even those who champion gender differences recognise that there is a lot of overlap between the two sexes in their skills and interests. This means many boys will enjoy playing with dollhouses and buggies and many girls will like to play with construction toys and science kits, and many kids will enjoy both.

It’s also worth noting that much scientific research relating to gender toy preference refers to older children who have already picked up messages from society about what they should play with.

Whilst no-one is stopping children physically, these signs are telling children what they are supposed to like. They reinforce the very real social stigma attached to children playing with the “wrong toys”. A parent might be happy for their child to play with whatever they want, but they may be afraid of their children being teased by their peers. This is especially true when it comes to boys playing with “girls’” toys, eg. toy kitchens, buggies and dolls. As any parent of a son will know, the taunt of being called a “girl” or “gay” is a common one for young boys.

And of course many, if not most, toys are bought as gifts, often by people who don’t know the child well. Falling back on tired gender stereotypes may be an easy option, but a child may never find out if they would enjoy a particular kind of toy if they’re never offered it.

If no one takes any notice of the signs then why keep them?

We’ve found from the many comments of parents on Facebook that children are actually putting down toys they want because they are in the ‘wrong’ aisle. We want children to feel comfortable choosing any toy they want.

The marketing industry spends millions on influencing children’s choices and these signs are part of that process. They are a small but real part of the wider pressure on children to keep within their gender norms.

We think it does matter. A lot. Child psychologists have shown that the toys children play with develop certain skills and reinforce certain interests.

Boys are encouraged to play with construction toys that hone their spatial skills whilst the toys labelled for girls are geared towards domestic tasks. This is clearly reflected in the gender imbalance in adult society where women are under-represented in the STEM industries whilst men rarely tend to be the primary care-giver for their children. This is a waste of talent, potential and opportunity.

Similarly, whilst toys aimed at boys encourage activity and adventure, many girls’ toys send the message that appearance is what matters. It’s no surprise that the vast majority of adults with eating disorders are women.

Nothing at all! But pink is just one colour amongst many, yet it seems to be the only one offered to girls. As with toys, we would like girls to have a more varied choice.

Retailers and manufacturers use colour-coding to indicate whether a toy is for a boy or a girl. Children know this and choose their toys accordingly. But as we have seen, what is available in the two different colours differs greatly and effectively restricts children’s choices. The reality is that very few boys will play with pink toys because they fear being teased. Let’s reduce this stigma by taking down the signs.

It’s also worth noting that blue used to be the conventional colour for girls whilst red was the colour for boys. There’s no scientific basis for girls liking pink!

We think that the retailers are shooting themselves in the foot by telling half of their potential customers that an item is not for them.

‘Girl’ and ‘Boy’ categories simply don’t make sense – we’ve seen magic sets, musical instruments and games and puzzles under ‘Boys’, and arts and crafts and Olympic mascots under ‘Girls’. This can’t possibly help shoppers find what they want. We suggest that retailers just say what is item is, not who it is for, to help shoppers find what they are looking for.

Plenty of big retailers, on and offline, manage to display their stock without resorting to gender. See our “Who’s doing what” page for more details.

Many shoppers are frustrated by these silly generalisations about what boys and girls like, and are now looking elsewhere for shops sell without these stereotypes and which categorise their products according to theme and function rather than gender. We’ve awarded over 50 such retailers with our Toymark award for good practice; for a shop near you see our directory of recommended retailers.

If relatives and friends buy for children solely according to gender there is a good chance that they will get it wrong. Not all girls like pink and sparkly things and not all boys like cars and diggers. And lots of children might like both!

If you’re not sure what to buy a child, it would be a good idea to contact the parents and find out the interests of the individual child rather than make assumptions based on the child’s gender.

We’re not actually asking for all signs to be taken down, just those that are based on gender. Signs indicating theme and function will still help relatives to find a suitable present.

We want children to have more freedom, not less. It’s perfectly fine for boys to play with trucks and girls to play with dolls. But we want them to have a wider choice, and not feel restricted by labels or peer pressure to conform to someone else’s idea of what they are supposed to like.

A child can, and should, enjoy playing with a wide range of toys. Just because a girl likes playing with toy kitchens doesn’t mean she won’t like playing with aeroplanes. Each child is an individual with a variety of interests. Why cut their imagination in half?

This isn’t about political correctness. This is about doing the right thing by our children and giving them a real and varied choice. We believe in equality, but this isn’t about making children the same. It’s about giving children the choice to be individuals.

Actually they haven’t. The blatant segregation of toys along gender lines has become more pronounced over the last couple of decades, as has the aggressive marketing of pink versions of toys for girls. For example, many mothers tell us that the toys that they enjoyed playing with as young girls, eg. lego, meccano, marble runs, are now being marketed solely towards boys.

It’s true that the problem is bigger than just the labelling in stores. But this is a positive step in the right direction and it will hopefully make people think about those issues.

Besides, we all have to start somewhere!

Over the last few decades, pink and blue have been increasingly used by marketers to offer a two-way choice to customers: feminine versus masculine. Most children and adults now understand this shorthand, and will generally believe that something in blue is aimed at boys and something in pink is for girls only. We would love the toy industry to make use of all the colours in the rainbow, meaning that pink and blue can return to being just two more colours for children to choose from.

Books

That’s making a massive assumption about what children actually do like. Real kids are a lot more interesting than one-dimensional stereotypes. Why can’t they like cars AND palaces, adventure AND friendship?

Separating stories and activities in this way sends harmful messages to children that only certain interests are acceptable, and also creates an unrealistic division between boys and girls. There is far more variety of personality and interests among boys or girls than there is between them.

But where does this demand start? Marketing is highly influential, else businesses wouldn’t do it. Segmenting your audience by gender – telling part of your audience that a certain product is ‘just for them’ – is a successful and growing marketing tactic. The gendered marketing of children’s books and toys has become so extreme that it starts to seem ‘normal’ for girls only to be offered princesses and fairies, and ‘normal’ to them only ever to ask for those themes.

Children aren’t able to understand marketing messages in the same way as adults. There is a real ethical problem with marketing techniques that promote limiting gender stereotypes of boys as active superheroes and girls as passive, decorative princesses. Responsible publishers, particularly those with an educational objectives, should not use them.

Firstly in many (if not most) cases, these books won’t be selected by children themselves, but chosen for them by adults. The wonderful range of books available can be daunting, and when it comes to buying for children we don’t know well (such as for children’s parties) there’s enormous social pressure to go for something stereotypical as a ‘safe’ choice.

This is about shopping habits and social norms, but these didn’t arise in a vacuum; marketing has a significant role in shaping them. Unfortunately, the marketing trend of ‘segmenting’ the boys and girls markets for toys and books sends children a harmful message that their interests are, or should be, entirely different.

Secondly, there’s no comparable data on the books that AREN’T bought because of gendered marketing, because shoppers don’t pick them for children who might enjoy them, or because children don’t pick them up, feeling that they’re ‘off limits’.

Thirdly, there isn’t always that much choice. Shoppers might not want a ‘Girls’ sticker book’, but if their child likes puppies, and that’s the one with the puppies in, they might well buy it.

People may well search for ‘books for boys’ or ‘books for girls’, but we needn’t assume that people starting with these search terms are necessarily seeking a package of lazy gender stereotypes. People search by gender because, often, for parties or extended family, they don’t know much else about the child they’re buying for and are searching for ideas. Choosing books isn’t easy: many children’s books are published every year, but few are reviewed. The Book People website, for example, stocks thousands of children’s titles, several hundred in each age category.

Even when a shopper puts the word ‘boys’ in a search engine, it doesn’t mean they are buying for a boy, as this quote from a supporter demonstrates; “I used to type in “boys” when shopping for girls, just because it was a neat shorthand for “normal toys minus the pink crap”.

Marketing has created a situation where buying by gender seems normal, but arbitrarily dividing children’s interests in this way doesn’t reflect reality, and limits children’s choices.

We can see the books that are sold by telling boys and girls their interests are different, what we can’t see is the reading that doesn’t happen because of this artificial division. The books left on the shelf because it didn’t occur to the buyer that the girl or boy they’re shopping for could like them. The books never read, because the reader believed they were ‘not for them’.

What of the reluctant reading boy, who is reluctant because he would prefer family or pony stories to snot and football, but daren’t pick up a ‘pink book’?

Learning to read is hard. Choosing books can be hard. It can’t help kids to know that the adult world has ‘rules’ about what they’re supposed to find interesting; rules that they have to second-guess or risk mockery. How many children decide not to pick up a book at all rather than risk getting it wrong?

We’re not asking for publishers to get rid of any of their books, but to remove ‘Boys’ and ‘Girls’ labels when they reprint or commission new titles. And if the only thing holding a set of colouring pages or stories together is that they’re all stereotypically associated with girls or boys, then it might be time to come up with something more interesting or creative.

There’s nothing wrong in itself with a pirate or fairy themed activity book. The problem is the presentation of these themes as inevitably connected to one gender or the other. Girls can like pirates and adventure, boys can like magic and dressing up. Why tell them otherwise?