More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Monica Gallagher Sakala

GET UPDATES FROM Monica Gallagher Sakala
 

On Praising Tomboys and Rejecting Feminine Boys

Posted: 01/09/12 05:26 PM ET

Mid-way through last year, my daughter's pirate obsession was born. She'd always shown a proclivity towards what I would call "boy toys," beginning with her affinity for climbing fences before her first birthday and her inclination towards playing strictly with balls. So when her obsession with all things pirate emerged, randomly, one warm summer day when she was just two, I wasn't the least bit surprised.

Frankly, the unexpected fascination with certain toys or dress-up clothes that preschoolers display is part of their charm. Who doesn't chuckle at the sight of a little girl wearing a Tinkerbell dress mixed with a pirate sword and a cat mask strolling through Trader Joes? But as my daughter's love for toys traditionally associated with little boys has evolved into a passion for Spiderman, dinosaurs and robots, I've noticed a disturbing trend towards reverse sexism placed on kids as young as 2 and 3 years old.

Everyone applauds my daughter's tom-boyishness. It's charming that she chose to be a skeleton for Halloween instead of a princess. She is strong, independent, different, other parents remark. In reality, what they are doing is praising the qualities about her that we associate with men. On the other end of the spectrum are the examples of boys her same age who like to play with Barbies, dolls or ride a pink bicycle down the street.

Instead of applauding a boy's affinity towards learning to nurture and take-care-of, unfortunately, so many fret that he is too "girlie" or worse, will he be... gay? What is happening is this: a young boy's affinity towards toys and items associated with girls is considered weak, too sensitive, and too feminine. While a girl's affinity towards traditionally male toys demonstrates her strength and is praise worthy.

Disturbing, much?

Notice what happened last year when the creative director from J.Crew was featured in the catalogue with her 5-year-old son painting his toe nails hot pink. Religious groups and conservative talk show hosts across the country cried foul. Last year, one blogger spoke honestly about her son's love for princess dresses and girlie toys; his affinity towards all things girl led to a constant barrage of unsolicited advice from "random moms" about how to steer him towards more boy things. Why must we assume this mother wanted to steer her young son towards boy things?

Why can't a kid just be 3 or 4 without us dumping gender identity issues on them?

Truth be told, I have little to do with what toys my child wants to play with. She shows me that she loves dinosaurs and robots and pirates, along with Legos and puzzles, so my job is to encourage her to play with what she enjoys. As adults, do we consider the world through the eyes of the children enough? Does an avid science-fiction reader lose her choice to read that book because her partner despises science fiction or isn't comfortable with it? Of course not. So they when why would we limit a little boy's desire to play Barbie or Polly Pockets?

Lise Eliot, author of Pink Brain, Blue Brain: How Small Differences Grow Into Troublesome Gaps -- And What We Can Do About It offers some provocative counter-arguments to these broadly accepted notions, ones that I, too, am guilty of assuming; specifically that girls and boys are hard-wired towards different toys. Her conclusion is there is "little solid evidence of sex differences in children's brains" and she explains that until the age of one, kids prefer dolls over other toys, and by preschool, children learn which toys are socially acceptable for their gender mainly by watching older children play.

Based on Eliot's conclusions, isn't the real question: Why aren't adults indifferent towards what toys children are drawn to, if preschoolers are indifferent to it despite learning what is the "right" kind of toy to play with by observing older kids?

Ultimately, I think the solution is not to force gender neutral toys on our kids but to instead be aware of our own pre-conceived notions of what we think our kids should play with or should wear and be more open with how our own discomfort or stereotypes are unfairly pushed on such young children. Let's let them play with what they want to play with and wear what they are most comfortable in.

Eliot astutely reminds us that "kids rise or fall according to what we believe about them." In that vein, if my daughter is praised for her proclivity to traditionally male toys without public commentary that she will become a, gasp, lesbian, then why don't we praise little boys for playing with female toys and, in turn, developing his nurturing, sensitive side? Teaching the lesson that things associated with females are considered weak or soft and things associated with men are considered strong, at such a young age, is a dangerous and slippery slope.

 

Follow Monica Gallagher Sakala on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@wired_momma

 
 
  • Comments
  • 90
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:36 AM on 03/01/2012
Great article. People do not realize how early they start shaping their children's behavior. Unfortunately most people seem to want their kids to be just like them. Parents, take a step back and think about the ways your childhood was shaped by the adults around you, and what the consequences were. Some things might be worth changing.
08:09 AM on 02/10/2012
I think the reason for this is because of the attitude that men are superior to women, so men being into "women stuff" are seeing as "lowering themselves" to women - and that's why effeminate men get criticized by society. When women are criticized for liking "men stuff", it's usually because they think women don't "deserve it". So that's that.
01:37 PM on 01/14/2012
Seeing that this article is all about questioning assumptions, here's one for the author.

Could these liberal mothers be steering their sons to traditionally feminine modes because they have a misandrist streak?
05:01 PM on 01/14/2012
INDIVIDUALS are capable of anything. "Liberal mothers" dont try to prove a point going as far as to steer their chlidren toward a unquestionable more challenging and scrutinized existence. Who would do that? Being a robot is easier, which the right is very happy to promote and even force-feed.
09:14 AM on 01/16/2012
"Liberal mothers" dont try to prove a point going as far as to steer their chlidren toward a unquestionable more challenging and scrutinized existence.
09:16 AM on 01/16/2012
I had to give that a seperate reply because it's so off the mark. What about all the hippy communes of the 1970s? What about raising your child "gender neutral" or any of the other liberal dominated "good ideas" that have led to at the very least, social awkwardness.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dinsquared
Shopping Diva, Soapbox Stander
01:58 PM on 01/16/2012
Way to miss the entire point of the article.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Monica Gallagher Sakala
02:17 PM on 01/16/2012
It's Monica - the author. And thank you - these are all entirely different topics than what I raised in the piece.
04:05 PM on 01/17/2012
Way to get defensive. Liberals must not challenge any protected classes...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sol76
10:26 PM on 01/13/2012
This cultural ascension of women as the dominant sex can only be achieved by feminising men and shaming every sign of maleness. It is not surprising considering how women have been systematically oppressed and exploited through most of human history; now they have a taste of power and they are running with it.
05:03 PM on 01/14/2012
so THIS is power??? smh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFh5F8cFb3g
07:41 AM on 01/11/2012
I'd just like to point out that there is no such thing as "reverse sexism." There is sexism...and sexism.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
05:17 PM on 01/13/2012
But there is reverse "silly".
04:11 AM on 01/11/2012
we have all grown up in a world gender is considered appropriate and useful. Were not dumping gender identity issues on small children, were making explicit the implicit. Why do we need to know what gender a child is? Why? Why do we need to know until they reach puberty? To be honest until the age they can legally have sex who actually needs to know? Their doctors, the parents probably. Everyone else - why? What does sex and gender have in relation to the real world? If your not going to have sexual relations with someone why do you need to know their gender?
Knowing how good they are with computers or their ability to handle their finances or how a good they are - these are relaxant bits of knowledge
but gender and sex what do they really tell you about a person other than the way they have been indoctrinated in their life.
01:17 AM on 01/11/2012
It's such a double standard the way boys with feminine tendencies are treated by society, in comparison to tomboys. I hate that this double standard exists. A woman can go into the men's department, buy a pair of boxers, wear them regularly, and nobody bats an eye. Send a man into a lingerie shop and the whole place stops. Why is this?

The best explanation may lie in a quote by Don Vito Corleone: Women and children can afford to be careless, but not men. "

We raise boys knowing that they will have to be men someday, men living in a world of other men, who are, more often than not, irrational and violent. We choose to raise them hard, because we'd rather them be monsters that survive than saints that get chewed up by the relentless conflict of the male world.
09:18 AM on 01/11/2012
So you're saying we need to continue the cycle rather than break it?
10:47 PM on 01/14/2012
I'm saying that breaking the cycle by dressing effeminate boys as females will not break the cycle, the cycle needs to be broken at the bully level.
04:13 AM on 01/13/2012
What's the quote got to do with this article? That's rather insulting.
10:16 PM on 01/10/2012
As a person who almost invariably supports progressive causes and equality for all, I can appreciate the concern expressed here about the significant role that sexism still appears to play in our culture. On a practical level, I hope no well-meaning soul here is planning on encouraging growing boys to be more effeminate. I went through the public education system and that would go over about as well as an African American crashing a klan rally, probably worse.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Valerie Keefe
09:19 PM on 01/10/2012
There's definitely pervasive femmephobia when it comes to gender in the Western world. Just look at the uproar over Bobby Montoya, a seven-year-old girl who wanted to join the girl scouts. What's wrong with that, you ask? Well, Bobby was assigned-male-at-birth, which means that when she was born, they thought she was a boy. Since she's been able to speak, she's been loudly disagreeing with that assertion. She's trans, and the uproar over her very existence has been vociferous, coming not just from the religious right, but their usual allies when it comes to cisnormativity: A big honking chunk of the left. I am looking forward to the day we get past this and let little girls join the girl scouts... even if we thought originally that they were boys.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nix28
Embracing honesty and its ugly step-sister, truth.
08:11 PM on 01/11/2012
I'm a bit confused...what is an assigned male at birth? Are you referring to Bobby's sex or gender? One is irrefutable; the other is malleable.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Valerie Keefe
09:04 PM on 01/11/2012
Neither are malleable. I'm referring to one of the reproductive organs: The midbrain, which, in a sapient species, is the only legitimate measure of sex. Everything else serves the midbrain.
01:40 PM on 01/14/2012
LOL in the Western world. The left really, really needs to challenge it's sacred cows. Femmephobia is pervasive in the Western world? No, not really.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Valerie Keefe
01:58 PM on 01/14/2012
I wouldn't call acknowledging femmephobia a sacred cow of the organized left...

Radicalfeminists seem to spend most of their time hating the femme-presenting, sex workers, and trans women.

Trans women are far more likely to be attacked than trans men.

And yes, looking at Dr. Peggy Drexler's column, "The Incredible Shrinking Man" we can see that femmephobia isn't confined to females. Men too are mocked for being 'too feminine':

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peggy-drexler/the-incredible-shrinking-_1_b_88013.html

We do live in a society that asserts that to be masculine is to be powerful, capable, laudable, and to be feminine is to be a candyglass confection, pretty to look at, but utterly a useless parasite...

That said, femmephobia isn't the same as misogyny. It's hard to say that we have a society that universally privileges men when they're 93% of workplace fatalities and 83% of workplace related deaths, (which kill about 260,000 per year in the US) It's hard to say that being a man means more intellectual broadening when 60% of university undergrads are female (the ratio is somewhat tighter in post-graduate study but women are still the majority.)

I'm not talking about the typical myopic second-wave hobbyhorses when I'm talking about femmephobia. (And yes, I'd prefer something a bit less inflammatory than femmephobia, but I've already coined Mediocritopian and one word is enough for the lexicon from me, thank you.)
klwarner
Third wheel legend, always in the way
06:26 PM on 01/10/2012
Hi Monica, this is a really well written article, informative without being baiting, something we find too too little of in internet articles sometimes. I was a tomboy as a little girl (through sheer virtue of having a big brother to look up to all the time), and still caught a lot of flack for it, but I know the plight of little boys who wanna play with dolls can be a hard one (Have you seen the most recent season of Curb Your Enthusiasm? Very relevant episode in there.) Thanks for the thoughts, a lovely addition to the public discourse.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Monica Gallagher Sakala
08:37 PM on 01/10/2012
Thank you for such a thoughtful and complimentary reply! I really appreciate it. I haven't seen the recent season of Curb Your Enthusiasm but will definitely check it out.
02:32 PM on 01/10/2012
I agree - although I think the tolerance (or even encouraging) of tomboy behavior stops suddenly during the teen years (I was the tomboy who grew into the, gasp, lesbian). It's okay to be the sport and science loving girl right up until your breasts come in, then it's clearly time to put away the "boy" stuff and start with makeup and clothes. Our daughter is just barely two and into dinosaurs and lego (and sequinned purses and hats) - which people think is cute right now. However, when our dinosaur-clutching toddler is dressed in blue jeans and a dinosaur t-shirt, eyebrows are raised and people do say things....I think even progressive straight folks are a bit uncomfortable with our daughter looking tomboyish as it seems to justify the right's contention that we're all out to convert the kiddies.
photo
LintLass
"When you can balance a tackhammer on your head...
07:16 PM on 01/10/2012
People still have that bias, too, that tomboyishness=gayness somehow.

It's funny about the dinosaurs thing, though: I never thought it was considered that 'gendered' of an interest. Even when I was a kid, it seemed *everyone* was into dinosaurs. They just couldn't teach us enough paleontology. :)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Monica Gallagher Sakala
08:39 PM on 01/10/2012
I hope my youngest stays interested in dinosaurs for a long time! Unfortunately, it does seem like dinosaurs are marketed heavily towards boys - at least in toys. And certainly clothes. At this point, I just let my little one shop in the boy section because it seems clothing makers think only little boys want super hero, dinosaur and pirate gear. At least I've found some clever vendors on Etsy who get that little girls like those things too! Thanks for commenting!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Monica Gallagher Sakala
01:49 PM on 01/10/2012
This is Monica - the author. Thanks for all the supportive and insightful comments so far everyone! Keep them coming.
09:29 AM on 01/10/2012
We are still living in a Patriarchal culture where masculine traits are rewarded socially and economically. Being feminine is still considered a "weakness". Boys are socialized to be strong and to repress their emotions. "Boys don't cry". Women are still paid less than a man for the same work. We still have very few women in Congress and no woman president or even VP. Women atheletes are celebrities but a effiminate boy who prefers ballet is reviled. ex. Johnny Weir, the Olympic ice skater. Even Lesbianism is considered more acceptable than gay men having sex because it is a turn on for many heterosexual men to see two women having sex. A threesome of a man and two women is a huge turn on for most men and not considered negative at all except by the Bible thumpers who do not condone sex at all. Let's face it, men still rule the world and our culture reflects that reality.
Females have often been encouraged to go into professions such as nursing or teaching while boys are steered towards medicine and engineering. Slowly this is changing but it is still an unspoken part of our culture. Women went to college to find a husband but men went to get a career.
This bias plays out in so many different ways in our society but the way children are socialized is a very good example of cultural bias at play starting in childhood and continuing on throughout adult life.
04:15 AM on 01/13/2012
Totally agreed. Very good points raised here, Nikki. Sad that it will probably always be this way..
10:45 PM on 01/14/2012
Lesbianism sells, gay sex doesn't. The media exploits one sexuality for profits.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Bellanova
I'm nobody. Who are you?
01:10 AM on 01/10/2012
It is worth noting that gifted kids tend to be more androgynous than their average peers. In fact, the higher the intelligence (and special talents), the more androgynous tendencies we observe in both girls and boys.
10:46 AM on 01/11/2012
Sorry, but what a load of BS. As the parent of 2 gifted children, I disagree.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Bellanova
I'm nobody. Who are you?
02:20 PM on 01/11/2012
It may not apply to your children, but there is about 100 years of clinical and research data showing it to be true:

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/creative-mind/2011/02/the-complexity-of-the-creative-personality/

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Gender+identity+and+the+overexcitability+profiles+of+gifted+college...-a0205638141

There is more, of course, but you can find it easily on your own.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Ryan MD
Surgeon. Husband. Father. Democrat.
06:35 PM on 01/11/2012
You read that through a filter of misperception of the word "adrogyny." No one was implying a thing about their sexual preferences.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Ryan MD
Surgeon. Husband. Father. Democrat.
06:34 PM on 01/11/2012
The intellectual development opens up the emotional/developmental, doesn't it? My college aged daughter displays a keen intuitive grasp of her male friends and enjoys their activities as much as those thought to belong to her gender. I married a woman who is the same way. How our littler girl manifests is still TBD. However I hope she has the same sort of bilateral comfor t. It benefits them in work situations later and in relationships. I'm firmly convinced of that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Bellanova
I'm nobody. Who are you?
08:16 PM on 01/11/2012
"The intellectual development opens up the emotional/developmental, doesn't it?"

Yes, it usually does (with the exceptions, also quite common, of one-sided development seen, for example, in the gifted with Asperger's). And you're right that it is an asset, both in relationships and at work.

But while tomboyish gifted girls are somewhat more easily accepted for (and/or in spite of) their tomboyishness, the same cannot be said about gifted boys who display more feminine traits and interests. They have a much tougher time growing up.

Your little girl will probably be very much like her mom -- i.e., wonderful. :)
photo
jf12
Occupying myself
12:25 AM on 01/10/2012
It's not going to matter in the long run anyway: almost all adult males are rejected by females. It doesn't matter if they are masculine or feminine. The only thing that matter is if they are attractive or not.
09:15 AM on 01/10/2012
or how much money they have....lol.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Valerie Keefe
09:28 PM on 01/10/2012
Very true, we can't forget the success-objectification of men that serves as the counterpoint to the sex objectification of women. A system that encourages men to die, so long as they die rich, that ensures that they're 93% of workplace fatalities, and 84% of work-related fatalities, and pushes them to ignore the work-life balance that gets them into prominent and well-paying jobs like congress, for example, much more frequently, is surely not a gender egalitarian system. Our society may be misogynistic, but it sure kills, shames, and imprisons a lot of men while doing so. Hopefully the third-wave won't make the mistake the first-wave (theocratic bourgeois moralizing, such as temperance) and second-wave (Ignorance of racial issues, class issues, occasional heterosexism and rampant, venomous, cissexism) made. Hopefully they won't forget that men, especially working class men, are killed and assaulted and, through social expectation, deprived of the kind of liberated life we say everyone deserves.

Hopefully this is the generation that gets feminism and humanism right.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:57 PM on 01/11/2012
Post # 10,251 complaining about women being attracted to attractive men.
photo
jf12
Occupying myself
03:24 PM on 01/11/2012
You miscounted.