Does anyone else find a pink princess TV alarmingly disturbing? Presumably every little princess needs to stay connected to the World Outside via her own cable- and DVD-ready color television…but why must that TV be pink and purple, topped with a crown-like curlicue? Are TVs so manly and intimidating that little girls have to be gently coaxed into using them? Would a girl’s gender identity be irrevocably harmed if she were to watch a neutral-colored or (heaven forbid) blue television that didn’t perpetually reinforce the notion that Pink is for Princesses?
Although I’m far from being a Raging Feminist, I’ve never understood the segregation of boys’ and girls’ toys. As a child, I duly played with Barbie dolls…but I also loved playing with Matchbox cars. Barbies were fun because you could dress them, and toy cars were fun because you could drive them. What interested me about any given toy was its potential to be either moved or manipulated. On those rare occasions when I now find myself in a fast food restaurant, I’m often bemused by the gender-specific toys that are sometimes offered with children’s meals: inevitably the primly poseable girlie dolls look boring next to boyish dump trucks and rocket-ships with their bells, whistles, and other moveable parts.
Given the choice between a girls-only princess TV and a non-gender specific Mickey Mouse TV, why would parents choose the former over the latter? If we want our daughters to grow up as their brothers’ equals, why would we reinforce at an early age the notion that a girl can’t watch TV with the big boys? Are we so insecure about our daughters’ intelligence that we think they require products that have been dumbed-down to stereotypically girlish expectations? Spending hours in front of a TV is already mind-numbing enough; need we heighten the intellectual impact by suggesting that pink-obsessed princesses spend their time plugged in while waiting for their princes to come?
Sep 22, 2005 at 8:00 am
Humanity still has a lot to learn regarding what is truly important in the human experience. I believe your example probably has more to do with capitalism than gender stereotyping, although I’m sure it lurks somewhere in their subconscious or the idea wouldn’t have come up in the first place.
Sep 22, 2005 at 8:03 am
I’d like the pink TV, thank you very much, and I resent your suggestion that that’s because I can’t handle a boy’s TV or even a gender-neutral TV. There’s more sexism in your post than in the pink TV.
Sep 22, 2005 at 8:42 am
Good post. I’m the proud father of a 9 month old little girl and I have to say that I never want to treat my daughter like all she can ever be is a “little princess”. I tell her she is cute and sweet of course, but I also tell her that I love how curious she is, and I tell her that I love how well she eats. I want her to just be happy, be herself and to do the things that interest her. If she’s into pink TVs – great. If she’s into riding dirt bikes and wants to try the neighbors four wheeler (when she’s old enough and understands safety of course) – then fine!
I’ve always hated little girls are “supposed” to be emotional, clingy, sweet, cute, etc. and how little boys are “supposed” to be tough, unemotional, take-what-they-want little men.
It’s stupid. Do we REALLY want our children to be little imagesof ourselves or even worse, little examples of what we think they should be?
Sep 22, 2005 at 8:52 am
I have to admit that I like the pink TV much better than the other one, even though I was never much for Barbies. Those ears just look a little too much like EYEs. And who wants a TV that stares back at you?!
To be perfectly honest though, if you’re shopping for Christmas presents, I’d prefer one of those flat ones that hangs on the wall.
Sep 22, 2005 at 9:54 am
Just a couple things, having been a teacher…
John K,
I have a daughter too, and I agree about letting her play with cars and other non-girl toys. Whatever she wants to play with is fine with me. Do you have a son, though?
I believe MOST fathers would have a tough time with their son carrying around a baby doll or purse out in public.
It’s a terrible double standard – but it’s woven into our society. Actually, it runs deeper – it’s woven into our genetics.
Geneder specific roles – is it environemtnal (like the pink TV) or inherent? It’s both.
I think your post IS just as sexist as the original thinking behind the televisions. Really – it’s a way to market and get parents to think, “Oh how cute” and buy it.
You make some pretty HUGE jumps in assumptions in your post, linking a television with a girl simply waiting for her prince to come.
If someone is SO Nazi about breaking gender roles, I think that pushes that person about as far out there as sexist pigs.
Somewhere in the middle is always best. Respect gender roles – male and female brains ARE wired differently, and that is a scientific fact. But we must make strides to make sure that we have our kids’ best interest at heart, and also respect our child for choosing a toy that’s NOT so gender specific. In schools, boys act up more to get the teacher’s attention, often at the price of girl student’s time with the teacher. THAT is where we need to work on gender equality.
Sep 22, 2005 at 10:31 am
I look at it as mass produced art – creative expression.
Based purely on what the “art” is saying – the pink tv: pink – compassionate, nurturing love, the heart symbol with big flourishes to each side – listen to your heart, the purple in the inside and the outlining – protection and transformation (which is quite a clever placement of the colour in this case). With or without conscious awareness, this is a well-designed tv purposefully. Though I couldn’t watch one like that as it would be distracting. A note to interior design parents, or even a child who favours pink, this would be a natural choice. Children live in fantasy worlds, of make believe, so this doesn’t seem out of the norm.
I have often wondered myself why tvs are so bland and a horrible black all the time – if not that, silver. Of course, although I would not recommend this extreme, it would be nice to see some variety.
Sep 22, 2005 at 11:27 am
Putting all of the gender issues aside, why does a young girl or boy need their very own TV? So they can further isolate themselves in their rooms? What’s wrong with a good book? Or pushing them out the door to play and get dirty? Rant over!
Sep 22, 2005 at 11:46 am
I like the pink TV with the curlycues. Fairy Princess acocutrements are just fine. Childhood is short and a cute little TV for girls or boys to use while Princess DVDs is just dandy in my book.
Sep 22, 2005 at 12:42 pm
Setting aside all the feminine gender role stuff which I don’t understand or care about, I’d like to comment on the notion of all little girls as “princesses.” I absolutely hate the current fashion of having “Princess” and “Drama Queen” or whatever splashed over all little girls’ stuff. Because what it shouts is “I can do whatever I want and you should give me whatever I want because I’m soooooo special.”
Anyone remember the book “The Little Princess” and what being a princess meant to Sarah? It meant being strong, patient, generous, compassionate, and self-controlled…about completely opposite of a pink princess tv bought by doting parents or grandparents…or a red Mickey Mouse tv for that matter.
I’d hate it equally if little boys’ stuff was splashed around with “Prince” or “Stud.” Is it? I don’t pay as much attention to little boys’ stuff because I don’t have a son and I do have a stepdaughter.
Sep 22, 2005 at 1:10 pm
I agree with Brian. I was thinking exactly the same thing. Personally, I think both of those t.v.s are hideous. If you must get a t.v. for a kid, get one they will still want to have in their room when they are 14. Neither one of those would fly with my 12 year old son or 14 year old daughter! It is really consumerism because if you buy one of those you sure will need to buy another one in a few years- they gotcha!
Sep 22, 2005 at 2:23 pm
I’m speechless. Some of your readers seem to think you ARE a raging feminist, Lorianne! The only one of your assumptions I wince at is that feminists are raging
I’m completely with you on the rest of it.
Sep 22, 2005 at 4:45 pm
I think you make a good point with the last sentence, to wit:
(Especially when there seems to be too many options and not enough time to watch them all, come to think of it.)
Sep 22, 2005 at 8:59 pm
I remember being a little girl, and pressured into playing with only girl toys. I preferred blocks and stuff with wheels, but was given dolls and a toy ironing board. I hate pink to this day.
A girly pink tv is an extreme and kitchy example, but it is an example of the wrongness of marketing to children through small minded cultural stereotypes. Good, attentive parents could give their girly girls one of these with a sense of humor and be just fine. But too often, Parental Supervision is not all it’s cracked up to be. And children who could become anything, are left to define themselves through what advertisers want to sell them.
Sep 22, 2005 at 10:53 pm
If I were going to buy a TV for a child’s room, it would not be either of those (I’d prefer the red one, though). They are part of the “planned obsolescence” of most manufacturers. I don’t think children should have TV’s in their rooms, but if I did, it would be a regular tv, not something gender specific or childish like these.
Sep 22, 2005 at 11:42 pm
I disagree with Brian with one aspect. You can hide in a room and read a book too.
It’s not the TV; it’s what you watch on TV that’s important.
Kids need to be socialized too. I probably wouldn’t buy a TV for my child’s room either, though. But sometimes lazy parents will buy a TV for their kids for their room so that they won’t have to deal with them.
“All things in moderation” is my motto.
About the princess issue… Only if you treat the kid like a princess (giving in to everything she wants whenever she wants it) will she be one. The color of the TV with the name “princess” on it will hardly spoil the child.
Sep 23, 2005 at 7:41 am
The question for me is: why are people buying TVs just for their kids, regardless of style? None of my three kids had TVs in their rooms until they hit college, except for the youngest who inherited her brother’s tiny,non-cable TV when she was 13.
Lots of little girls like pink and purple. They all pretty much outgrow it and become self-confident women. Neither my son or any of his friends were allowed to have weaopns as toys, but they’d turn a stick or even an artfully bitten piece of toast into a gun. I don’t worry a lot about it stereotyping because your kids will turn out to be who they are regardless of your best efforts.
Sep 23, 2005 at 7:49 pm
Television might be O.K. for discriminating adults, but for kids, it’s intellectual poison. It works not only to shape perceptions and foster anti-social impulses toward competition, selfishness and greed, but also lowers attention spans. Prolonged television watching (more than two hours at a go) has been shown to produce mild depression in susceptible people. Recently, new studies of so-called educational television got some play in the mainstream media: exposure to shows like “Sesame Street” had no discernable influence on how early or how well children learned to read. But at least if kids were watching PBS, they wouldn’t be exposed to advertising. Kids of the age these TVs seem aimed for have been shown to possess little ability to evaluate the truth-claims made in advertisements – and the advertisers know it. Exposing your kids to commenrcial TV is a form of child abuse in my opinion. In Scandanavia, television advertising aimed at children is banned.
Good post, Lorianne. Like Jean, I am surprised by how many of your readers took umbrage at your very mild sentiments of disapproval toward gender stereotyping. As I read you, it’s the stereotyping and the social programming you object to, not the existence of gender roles per se. And while there may be some biological basis for the latter, the details are almost exclusively cultural in origin. I encourage “The Phoenix” to read Margaret Mead’s Male and Female.
Sep 23, 2005 at 9:42 pm
There’s a heck of a lot more that contributes to depression than watching TV. Those “scientific” studies aren’t scientific unless those researching gather more information on what’s going on in the home.
A happy and healthy child will not spend her/his precious time in front of the boob tube. They will find other activities.
Too much watching TV is an escape. Children and adults alike will find anything they can to escape if there’s problems in their life.
Watching TV is not the problem; it’s the result of one, so I don’t buy into that “TV causes depression” thing.
Sep 25, 2005 at 9:16 pm
Lorianne it is all very easy to understand once you understand the basics. As a writer you know it is all in the words used to describe objects. In the toy marketing world, little girls play with dolls, little boys play with “action figures”.(This keeps parents from worrying about gender role issues with thier children.) See all very easy. There are many words used to describe snow, however, snow for many of us is just snow. Thus, in a perfect world toys are just toys. Too bad we don’t live in a perfect world.
This is a great post on your blog. It is thought provoking and got lots of interesting responses. This is a topic you might want to explore again with your wonderful photographs and thoughts.
Best wishes,
Joe
Sep 26, 2005 at 8:16 am
Hey look, it’s Lorianne on TV – on girlie TV no less!
I can see some particularly girlie type girl being very excited to get one of these for her room to go with her other girlie decor, given that a gray-black box would probably be there otherwise. Some girls are just attracted to stuff like that at a particular age (say pre-teen). So I wouldn’t assume that parents are going to buy this for a young child with the intention of engendering (so to speak) girliness or princessness.
And I don’t think TV is necessarily evil or poisonous or sucking the brains out of people. I don’t watch a lot of TV, but there are series that are smart, well-acted and produced, and I don’t feel mindlessly compelled to buy any of the crap that comes on during the commercials. But yah, it’s bad to watch too much, and particularly for children to watch too much or unsupervised.