Pretty in Pink, a Boy in Blue?
I have a confession to make. My daughter may love the boys. She and Oliver have been the best of friends since they were one. She used to boss Tanner around and make him get her coat for her, or pick up her things when she left them on the floor. Zachary worships the ground she walks on, and I am told they all fight to sit next to her at meal time.
However, under no circumstances is she borrowing their pants. That is, unless she has an accident.
She is only two, after all.
I couldn’t decide whether to laugh or cry at this Feministing post:
I got this email from a friend of mine, and I just had to share.
At lunch I ducked into Baby Gap to find my 2 year old some new jeans, as she’s torn holes in or outgrown her others. Leafing through the sales rack I found that Gap does actually make one style that is not (a) sparkled or pink, (b) embossed with flowers [nothing wrong w/that, but we have several and kid needs a little variety] or (c) “skinny” (yes, they do make those for toddlers…). But what do they call these unadorned items of toddler fashion? Boyfriend Jeans!! Yes, that’s right, if my 2 year old daughter actually wants to wear comfortable jeans with nothing on them but denim, she must have borrowed them from her BOYFRIEND.
I’ve never much cared about how we dressed my daughter so far. As a baby, we just put her in whatever we had lying around clean, a feat in itself since she spit up every hour or so. Once she was around five months, we never bothered with dresses because she was already trying to crawl. Skirts seemed ridiculous for a child intent on walking, then running, far before she ever really learned good balance. And now, as a two year old, the amount of time she spends trying to climb, jump and flip herself over means that jeans and sweatpants are her uniform of choice. Some clothes are pink, some are blue, some are purple, some are brown. In general, I enjoy the fact that it’s too early for her to be conscious of what she has on.
But it is already difficult to buy her plain clothing, minus the flowers, ribbons, sparkles or hearts. To call those simple, plain, normal pieces of clothing “boyfriend jeans” shows how hard the industry is already trying to market my child into believing simple is for boys, and girls can only have it if the boys give their permission. And the idea of borrowing these pants from the “boyfriend” is one that is being used at least one decade too soon.
Next, maybe the Gap will try marketing some letterman’s jackets for the preschool crowd. Or perhaps a new line of promise rings for those budding would-be second grade Romeos?
Me (the baby dressed in baseballs at 5 months)