This wasn’t how I was going to write this blog post. I was going to talk about the latest John Lewis Christmas advert, and how if you watch carefully there’s a shot of the small child running around in a really cute Gruffalo costime. About how when I was doing my Christmas shopping in John Lewis I had a look at the children’s costumes section and there was just one of those costumes left, in the perfect size for the geekdaughter. About how it was clearly fated that I buy it, and so I did. And about how much she loves it, and how she’s worn it pretty much all the time since Christmas day.
However, this is not that blog post. It is instead a bit of a rant about clothes labelling.
Because I went to the John Lewis website to find the product details page for the costume so I could link to it. And what did I find? The costume is sitting in the “Gifts for boys” section…
Gifts for boys?!
Why on earth should a Gruffalo costume be categorised as a gift for a boy? There are girl Gruffalos too you know (or else how else could they have had a child!?). And rather ironically in the John Lewis Christmas advert it’s the little sister who’s wearing the costume. So why oh why does it have to be categorised as a boy’s costume? Is it really so bad to call something “unisex” these days?
I had the same experience buying a new dressing gown for the geekdaughter. Her favourite colour is red, and so when I saw the lovely plain red, soft dressing gown I grabbed it without hesitation. It was only later when I got it home that I saw the label said “John Lewis boys” (I think it’s the same one that the little boy wears towards the end of the advert.). Again, it’s a plain dressing gown, does it really have to be labelled “boy”?
She still wears (and loves) her Thomas the Tank Engine T-Shirt (from the boys section in M&Co), and I’ve already blogged about her fabulous elf pyjamas from the boys section in Next… So this is not unique to John Lewis in any way. And let’s not forget the time that I bought her boys Pull-Ups because quite frankly she prefers Toy Story characters to Disney Princesses!
My daughter has already started asking me about whether things are “girl things” or “boy things”, to which I try to encourage her not to think like that. I’d like her to grow up without any preconceptions like that, although if she’s constantly being hit with the message that little girls things are all pink and flowery, how long will it take before she starts believing it? I know one thing – I’ll carry on buying her stuff like the Gruffalo costume as often as I can.
Night night, sleepy Gruffalo
What annoys me in the shops with clothing, is that there’s so little choice for boys. The girls get three aisles / rows of clothes, whilst the boys get one. Why? Surely retailers “get” that it’s usually a woman – mummy – buying the clothes, so she would like something to choose from? (That’s me just being stereotypical of course – and it’s usually Lovely Bloke who does it in our house because he’s the stay at home dad whilst I work.) We’d like more choice for our sons please!
We’ve had, in the last month or so, our nearly 5 year old son, E, telling me that I can’t do something – can’t remember what now, because I’m a girl and it’s not something that a girl can do. And that I’m not in charge – Daddy is. The latter is to do with him being stay at home carer, but the former – like huh? I get so annoyed with that. Girls and Boys can do anything they set their mind to. Just not sure how I communicate that to our nearly 5 year old…
That’s also true. I don’t for clothes much for my son as he has two older cousins and lives in their cast-offs. I do notice also though that boys clothes tend to be in more muted colours, lots of browns and greens. I also found it hard to get something smart for him when I was looking for something special for his naming ceremony.
And yes, I’m keen to convey the message that either of my kids can do anything they want. like you, not sure what the best way to do that is!
Clothes are clothes, I still sometimes buy clothes from the men’s section. They’re usually cheaper, often more well made, and sometimes there’s no similar ladies product. It does get a bit trickier as you get older, since men and women are obviously not the same shape. But for kids the age of you’re daughter, I don’t see what the big deal is. The only thing I can think is that it may have more to do with not wanting to “feminize” boys, rather than a concern about what’s appropriate for girls.
If the clothes fit, wear them. Who cares what section they came from.
I’m with you, and that’s why I buy my daughter stuff from the boys section when appropriate. I’ve also realised I’m sitting here wearing a pair of men’s socks after I accidentally bought the wrong size for the geekdaddy and didn’t want them to go to waste!
I think the labelling puts as much as possible into the ‘boy’ department because there is less boy stuff and way more opportunity for girls clothing. Or possibly for the comfort and ease of my friend who is a hot pink bling lady, with a sworn tomby for a daughter – it means she knows exactly where to look and doesn’t get confused 😉
Interesting theories 🙂
That’s especially ridiculous (and Gruffulo’s Child is a girl too) but I’ve taken JL to task for separating dressing up into girls’ and boys’ stuff before, because invariably the doctor, fire fighter, police officer and superhero/toy story type stuff goes into the boys’ sections leaving only nurses, vets and fairies in the girls’ section. Dressing up is about imaginative play which BY VERY DEFINITION is free from boundaries of social convention. Drives me wild. Again 😉
I don’t see why there should be “boys” and “girls” sections at all. Obviously it’s different for grown-ups with completely different body shapes and sizes, but boys and girls are physically almost identical. Why not just have “dresses” “trousers” and “tops” sections instead of gender segregating things that don’t need to be categorised? Especially the way in which cartoon characters and items are treated – girls’ tops don’t have space ships and trains on them because girls aren’t allowed to want to be an astronaut or a train driver, the girls’ tops have flowers and patterns on (because god forbid a boy like flowers) and princesses, because that’s “what girls like”. Toy story has astronauts and cowboys, so it’s for boys only. I still vividly remember having a howler of a tantrum in m&s when I was 7 or 8 because I wanted a top with a car on it (because I liked toy cars) but I couldn’t because the only ones were in the “boys section” and I’d get teased if anyone saw the label. Because apparently little girls aren’t allowed to like cars, or monsters, or robots, or aliens, they have to like…. well, what exactly?
Soon to also write a blog on this. Found your blog when researching. 🙂
Thanks for commenting 🙂 I’ll look out for your blog post on it 🙂
I agree totally. I found your blog whilst searching for Gruffalo knickers. My daughter wears her brothers her brothers pants! No one seems to make them. Mind you I’m on the look out for unisex coloured leggings for my boy/girl twins to share during potty training….nope, nothing unless I spend a fortune! He will just have to wear the navy with fabric flowers for now…oh and a fairy skirt from the dressing up box. I’d love to start a unisex clothing company….we would make dresses, just with dinosaurs on them!
I had my daughter in “boys” pullups for a while during potty training, as she preferred Toy Story to Princesses (sadly no longer the case!). And my son wore all her cast-off vests as a baby – pink and flowery! I wasn’t going to buy new when I had perfectly good ones already, just like you 🙂