No longer can I restrain myself: John Lewis ditching ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ labels, M&S attacked by campaigners for ‘sexist’ trainers — what on earth is going on?
In any other circumstances I would put this down to whimsy. A bit of a marketing ploy, in that oh-so lucrative month of September, when parents are digging deep into the family coffers for new uniforms, in a bid to grab their attention — and their cash.
But this trend to steer children’s clothing departments away from anything ‘gender binary’ (even the pompous phrasing sounds ludicrous) is gaining ground.
Self declared feminist Jeanette Kupfermann believes its time for the backlash to begin against the gender-neutral movement after seeing John Lewis’ latest movement
Put simply, the family-friendly store announced its children’s clothes would bear labels reading ‘girls and boys’ or ‘boys and girls’ and its sections would no longer be divided along obvious gender lines.
In short, clothes will be clothes. A pretty party dress and Action Man pyjamas? Gender-neutral.
I don’t think anyone at John Lewis anticipated the backlash from the general public who — thank goodness — still have a modicum of common sense on this issue.
Do campaigners spearheading this ‘gender-neutral’ movement honestly think that changing labels will change biology and actually do away with boys and girls — and the whole male/female divide?
Of course it won’t. Girls will be girls and boys most definitely boys, and they prefer it that way. Some may call this conditioning, but what’s the alternative? Crude social engineering, which we know doesn’t work.
In fact, I see the gender-neutral movement as almost cult-like in its determination to stamp out so-called differences, which could prove ultimately harmful.
Not everyone wants their girl child perennially parading about like a pink Barbie Princess, nor their son clad from day one like a butch rugger player or Formula 1 driver, but we still need these ‘anchoring’ points in our lives, the little membership passes to our individual clubs.
She believes eliminating gender stereotypes for one sex also damages the other
We still need to recognise femininity and masculinity and not confuse them. Even those who, as children, experiment with gender identity usually revert to typical symbols of gender eventually.
We’ve all known dungaree-wearing tomboys, forever climbing trees and sporting grazed knees, who in adulthood metamorphosed into veritable Marilyn Monroes and conversely, the macho ‘Action Man’ who shows you pictures of himself as a two-year-old, complete with ringlets and a frilly frock taking dancing lessons.
Did the clothes, activities or hairstyles make any difference to their eventual gender identity? Not a jot. But that doesn’t mean boys and girls’ clothes don’t have a place.
I’ve always considered myself a feminist. I’ve fought for equal opportunity and rights and to give women a voice and better education so they can make the fullest use of their potential. But believing in equality doesn’t mean that I believe men and women are the same.
I’ve always rejoiced in my ‘femaleness’. I’ve never felt held back by ‘biological determinism’. I unashamedly enjoy all things feminine — from make-up to cooking — but this hasn’t stopped me being ambitious and able to hold my own in the world.
‘Glamour’ to me does not spell weak, repressed or victimised. Rather, it’s a form of self-expression. In any case ‘femininity’ is not composed of one attitude, emotion or concept, but can mean different things at different times. To restrict the terms male and female — as gender-neutral campaigns do — may have the aim of broadening options, but in reality it has the opposite effect.
Every time we try to eliminate a ‘stereotypical’ quality in one sex, we’re actually diminishing it for both. Introducing gender-free clothing is like imposing the Mao suit on everyone (and of course the Chinese eventually reverted too to male and female clothing).
In fact, there’s more than a whiff of Maoism about the whole boy/girl clothing label issue. As an anthropologist, I know that, without exception, all studies show societies everywhere, at every point in history, differentiating the sexes. Clothing — and other artefacts — act as symbols of these differences, which is what the campaigners hate.
Jeanette questioned when the line would be drawn if the world continues to campaign to eliminate differences such as gender and body size
They call this ‘stereotyping’, arguing that it holds back women, denies minorities their rights and recognition, and limits people.
In some instances, such as the crinolines and corsets of old, there is a grain of truth in this, but a whitewash in the other direction misses the broader point; that gender specific clothing gives people categories to provide a sense of belonging.
Once you do away with them the world not only loses its colour but its clarity and its ‘markers’. It becomes a formless place without differentiation, like a garden full of concrete slabs instead of a range of plants and flowers.
Imagine, too, if other groups started to campaign to eliminate all differences. The overweight could demand that manufacturers only offer a ‘one-size-fits-all’ sack-like garment; those of different hair colours could demand that there is never a reference to ‘blondes’ or ‘brunettes’ (as these definitely stereotype).
Writer Sarah Chalmers and her twins (pictured) say John Lewis’s latest campaign is aimed at middle class parents rather than their children
Spectacle wearers could demand that everyone be forced to wear glasses; short people that only they can wear heels so that all height differences are equalised. The list is endless.
Why should gender be the only ‘stereotype’ picked out from all the many biological variations if we take all this to its logical conclusion?
I think it’s about time someone did show just how absurd this movement is — and how it could end up making our world not only a drabber place but an extremely diminished one, rather like a cult that demands everyone wear the same shapeless smock, hair-cut and facial expression.
Initiatives like the John Lewis ‘Boys & Girls’ range will surely make me — and many others — make a greater effort to find distinct ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ baby clothes, trainers and toys. I shall seek out pink with a vengeance. I shall relish sequins, glitter and frou-frou. One friend is so incensed she’s threatening to dress like Barbara Cartland!
It’s about time for the backlash to begin in earnest before too much damage is done.