While shopping with his pregnant wife, Jarad Dewing discovered that sexist messages start very early for little girls.
–
After discovering we are having a little girl, my wife reminded me we needed to go to Babies”R”Us and set up a baby registry. While perusing outfits (“This is sooo cute! OHMIGOSH let’s get this!”) I noticed a greyscale hoodie and bodysuit combo by Carter’s that read MOMMY’S LITTLE GENIUS. “Oh, this is perfect,” I thought, and then I checked the hoodie, which read LITTLE GENTLEMAN ACADEMY. “Huh. Maybe there’s a girl version?” I hoped.
I turned around, and there was the corresponding set, specifically for girls. It read BEAUTIFUL IN EVERY WAY.
What. The hell.
It’s not enough that women are judged on their looks or feminine personality traits, it’s not enough that women make 30% less money than men for the same work, it’s not enough that assertive girls are “bossy” and smart girls are “nerds” and strong girls are “tomboys”…
No. Now we must inculcate our innocent newborn girls with the paradigm that their minds do not matter. “Nobody likes a smart girl!” we’re teaching her. Just be beautiful! That’s all you’re good for!
I call b*llshit. Shame on you, Carter’s. Shame on you, Babies”R”Us.
Our little girls deserve a better start than what you’re offering.
–
Also read: Why I Bought Boys’ Underwear For My Daughter by Tom Burns
thanks for that, it’s use full
Here’s the girl genius version of the shirt: http://www.carters.com/carters-baby-girl-babyboom-bodysuits/888510430971.html
I guess the store you looked at was just out of stock.
So would the other sexist message “MOMMY’S LITTLE GENIUS” (seems not) have bothered you or are you OK with fathers not being considered parents?
Whilst agreeing totally with the writer, and it’ll get worse as they get older (comics for boys include lego and toy guns, girls get lipstick and nail varnish), a new born won’t be indoctrinated by something written on their clothes, or indeed a label saying ‘gentleman’ rather than ‘lady’.
Buy her the grey clothes, the examples you and your wife set are far more important than something she’ll cover in puke, pee, and poop.
I’ve always found math (‘minor’ or otherwise) and dispassionate, logical discourse more compelling tools for rebutting or deconstructing an argument (good or bad) than sarcasm. Sarcasm dismisses an argument without ever bothering to take that important middle step of actually examining and/or rebutting it (which, I thought, was the whole point of discourse). There’s no points for self-satisfaction; if you’ve got a better case to make Sam, then make it.
“…women make 30% less money than men for the same work ” Look again, think outside the box.
“Nobody likes a smart girl!” we’re teaching her.” Um, do you know the ratio of males to females in Higher Ed?
Tom has cancelled sexism through the cunning use of minor math. Women of the world rejoice! All hail Tom.
Good point Tom. It is a myth that women earn less than men for the same job. And good on you for pointing out the obvious disparity in higher education with boys performing abysmally now.
It is a crisis.
But back to the article: thank you for highlighting the absurdity of girl’s clothing. I feel the same way when buying clothes for my 6year old daughter. I also despair at the sexualization of girls in the media.
There is a wonderful YouTube clip about this same topic.
Thank you again.