Thursday, May 15, 2008

It's all relative.

Pink used to be for boys, blue for girls. Go figure.

In the Pink, by Elayne Riggs - ComicMix news:
"In fact, I'm often torn by this whole pinking thing, because as a second-wave feminist my instinct is to shy away from color coding consumerism. After all, this country (at whose expense other countries are having quite the laugh, by the way) now raises its citizens from birth to believe that 'pink is for girls, blue is for boys.' Did you know that this wasn't always the case? Even in the last century, pink was considered the proper hue for boys as it was thought to be the stronger color (in the Christian tradition, red was associated as male, so its 'little sibling' pink was used for boys; whereas blue was associated with the Virgin Mary and thus was deemed appropriate for girls). Following the first World War, blue was used extensively for men's uniforms, and thus became associated as more of a masculine color. From the 1940's onward, Madison Avenue pushed 'think pink' for women. So really, we're talking about a period of time younger than my Mom! And it's not only arbitrary but it's just plain silly. I'm hard-pressed enough to fall for the 'dolls are for girls (particularly given how many boys and men collect 'action figures') and tools are for boys' nonsense without succumbing to this completely fabricated hue-based biological determinism!"

No comments:

Post a Comment