Men Support Less Pink for Boys, Purple Too Gay Now Too

December 17, 2012

Water remains wet, Fire remains hot, Easy Bake Oven cake still tastes like crap.







luggage 045_full














Two Easybakesb$(KGrHqF,!okFBLQpHOU7BQWRr1Gl7g~~60_350065356966495_300X300


xmas-toys-3ez bake real meal






76 Responses to “Men Support Less Pink for Boys, Purple Too Gay Now Too”

  1. 1899fcbarcelona Says:

    Who says cooking’s limited to females? Cooking has nothing to do with one’s gender. Why doesn’t Hasbro come out with “gender neutral” ovens? (Even though in my opinion a color is a color and has no gender attached to it).

  2. feral opera company Says:

    I actually see their point. Cooking is gender neutral, and if I were a little girl, I would also be put off by toys that were pink and purple, and I might ask my parents why I couldn’t have a blue oven and a blue bicycle, because blue fits my personality better than pink. I wish some girl had brought up this issue on her own behalf, rather than this being framed as “boys who cook shouldn’t have to use pink things.”

    BTW, years ago, I went through a culinary program and worked in industry for a while, and the most unpleasant part of school and work was the openly hostile and dangerous boys club the food scene is. Men only want us in the kitchen at home, but in a restaurant kitchen, men make it very clear that women are there at their peril. (I mean you have to work in close quarters with people who will use body language to indicate that they’ll push you against the pizza oven because you shouldn’t even be there.)

    • radicalwoman Says:

      Women are only supposed to cook for free. If you get paid for it, then it’s a man’s job *eyeroll*

    • Becky Green Says:

      Another reason men like to cook in the public domain is for the attention, accolades, and ego boost they receive. It goes against most men’s nature to do something and NOT get a pat on the back for it. “You did such a good job, you’re such a good boy, you deserve a gold star!”

      It reminds me of a phrase I heard regarding politics: “Men go into politics to become somebody and women go into politics to get something done.” I think the sentiment holds true for most occupations.

      Sorry to be crude about it, but I truly don’t know what men like having stroked more, their ego or their cock. I think it’s a tie.

    • Loup-loup garou Says:

      Thanks for those observations about the restaurant business. I haven’t worked in a commercial kitchen myself, but I’ve seen that kind of body language on some other “non-traditional” jobs I’ve had.

      The absolute worst working environments, in my experience, are the ones that are traditionally male-dominated, but aren’t recognized by the general public as super-manly — the dudes feel like they have more to lose if a woman shows up.

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      Male cooks are, for the most part, total PRICKS to waitresses, too.

      It was axiomatic in my early days (high school and college waitress jobs) that if there was a male cook, he was going to be mean as a junk-yard dog and vicious as a snake — right out of the box for absolutely no reason.

      I think a lot of it was about marking his territory (EVERYTHING was a pissing match with these dudes) and also defensiveness if they thought that they were not getting the proper deference from all the females. It’s hard to stroke some dude’s ego constantly when you’re running off your feet during a dinner rush, even if you were inclined to do so in the first place. Of course, if they thought that you weren’t kissing their ass enough, they’d consistently mess up your orders and make you beg for things several times before they’d make a big show of finally getting around to it.

      I chalk it up to testosterone poisoning.

      I have learned that the ONLY thing that warms guys up to you (that is: keeps males in a male-dominated workplace from making every moment at work a living hell for the women) is a consistent patter of self-deprecating humor (which helps to trick their egos into settling down…a bit) and at the same time, taking zero crap from them. It’s a delicate balancing act that grows more exhausting with each passing year. Most of the time I don’t bother now. My patter has developed such sharp edges of sarcasm that they often look afraid. A recent encounter:

      Me: (politely) “Bob, may I ask you a question?”
      Bob: (arrogantly) “Is it important? I’m very busy.”
      Me: (dangerously) “Important? Of COURSE it’s not important. It’s me asking the question, isn’t it?”
      Bob: (looking scared) “Ulp.”

      My grandmother — who served military men in a bar/cafe that she and my grandfather owned — was a genius at this trick. EVERYONE knew that she’d kick their butts out of the cafe if they gave her one iota of crap, but she did it all with a wide-eyed smile and a put-on, little-girl meets Betty Boop voice: “Oooh! Don’t make me pull my shot-gun from under the counter, mister. I might break one of my pretty nails, and I just gave myself a fresh manicure! Tee-hee.” (waving her red talons in his face)

      Oh, he’d get the message. Loud and clear. If he didn’t, the other customers would clue him in right quick: “You do NOT want to make Madame Lesage angry with you. She is a kitten — with tiger claws.”

      • Beth Says:

        Till you said “Bob” I could have sworn we worked with the same prick.

        Our chef (at a shitty little bistro) insisted everyone call him ‘chef’. So you’d have all these sycophants in the kitchen ‘yes chef’ and ‘right away chef’. He called all 8 female waitresses simply ‘waitress’. So I refused to call him ‘chef’. It was always ‘Collin’. He was a narcissistic arsehole and prone to bouts of rage in the kitchen.

        I never understood that. It’s food, not bloody life-and-death. There’s no need for tantrums.

  3. GallusMag Says:

    This campaign is not about halting the practice of shoving pink shit down girl’s throats, or supporting women in male-dominated careers. It is not about stopping male-supremacy or homophobia. It is about claiming that pink and purple are “girl’s colors” and that being forced to use an item that comes in a “girl’s” color is an affront to the masculinity (entitled male supremacy) of a four year old boy. Fuck this shit.

  4. GallusMag Says:

    Also, when did purple become a girl’s color? I missed that memo.

    • Ave Says:

      purple is considered close to pink colour wise; when a feminine boy wants to have pink but isn’t allowed he goes towards purple as an alternative (an example I can give you about a boy who wanted a purple game: so there’s been a push to to say that’s a “girl’s” colour too because they don’t want boys to have anything feminine about them at all.
      it’s all social gender roles….being a feminine guy is not acceptable in general society (unfortunately).
      that’s not to say a boy interested in pink/purple is necessarily wanting to be feminine either.

      • EqualRightsAndProtection Says:

        Ave that link just makes me want to cry. Or scream. Or throw something. Or some other inappropriate action.

        We are socializing our men like neanderthals. Worse. I bet when a neanderthal wanted to wear the stripey zebra skin instead of the boring brown auroch skin, no one whacked him on the side of the head and said, “Thag!! You can’t wear that! Only child-bearing people wear that! You will be eaten by a lion if you wear that outside of your cave.”

      • Sylvie Says:

        Purple is considered “close to pink” therefore it’s a “girl’s colour”? That’s awesome logic there. Here’s some more awesome logic.

        When the visible spectrum is expressed linearly, purple is not close to pink:

        Purple is only close to pink when the visible spectrum is expressed as a wheel:

        Blue is also close to pink and it’s the favourite:
        “Before the 20th century, Europeans countries varied, with some assigning colors based on the baby’s complexion, and others assigning pink sometimes to boys and sometimes to girls.”

        “Many have noted the contrary association of pink with boys in 20th-century America”

      • GallusMag Says:

        @Sylvie- and the “linear spectrum” is based on ACTUAL wavelength. Awesome comment.

      • Elin Says:

        @ EqualRightsAndProtection , actually Neanderthals were peaceful people, who were less inclined to socialize, and had less rigid sex roles (by which I mean the females also hunted). In fact, people consider them to have been matrilineal, like Bonobo’s (perhaps matriarchical). It is Homo sapiens men who are the conformist and aggressive kind in this comparison, systematically raping women and killing infants. There’s some interbreeding hypothesis (actually probably inter-raping given HSs male nature) and some people believe mild autism is the influence of Neanderthal genes still shining through (with perhaps retarded autism being caused by incompatabilies between Nth. and HS genes) b/c of various typical traits; just like red hair is supposedly a sign of that (since Nth.s had more often) (notice HS’s weird hating on red-haired people).

      • Mortified Says:

        I have to take exception to Elin’s assertion that Homo sapiens males are universal in their sex role behavior and ideals. Across many different cultures these behaviors vary widely. I suppose the origin of male privilege is in their larger size and greater physical strength compared to females, but there is plenty of sociological and anthropological evidence to show that sex roles are cultural.

        Merry Christmas (or other holidays as you may prefer) to GM and all her readers. I wish us all a blessed and sane new year. But honestly, I don’t expect it (sanity, anyway.) Things will get worse before the backlash, but that backlash is inevitable.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Merry Christmas Mortified!

      • anon male Says:

        re: video game link, I think the wrong message about gender is being discussed based on that. My takeaway, is that it’s not about girly game vs. macho game but $5 used-title vs. new full priced-title and the father wanted to take advantage of one son’s generosity to get something he’d benefit from, maybe twice, as the newer game could be traded in for more, eventually, too.

        I think the idea of benefitting from kids instead of being burdened by them has everything to do with masculinity and is something I see every day as dudes suddenly want to steal the kids away from their mothers and become “welfare kings” the second the kids are out of diapers and are old enough to play Madden. Let women do the heavy lifting and then fuck them over. “You sat on your ass for 6 years, now it’s my turn! Go get a job! And my teenage girlfriend is going to be their new mom!” And somehow this is seen by the government as feminist progress and men evolving “new masculinities” and “taking responsibility.”

        I’m also repulsed that the take away for many people out there is that it’s ok or natural or acceptable for the kid to think that there are “girly” colors. And by the assumption he’s trans or something by virtue of wanting them and that’s as complex as reality can possibly be.

        re: pink,

        purple is a hard color to match and doing anything that screams “outfit” is an underclass marker, typically, as anything impractical or inconvenient tends to be. If you only own two pairs of pants and five shirts, having one piece be purple is probably not to your advantage.

        Of course, among underclass populations, working hard on your appearance (or conspicuous consumption) is a credit in some ways. An all purple suit screams “pimp,” etc., although this kind of thing interacts oddly when meshed with the overarching culture. (Think about Puffy’s tribute song to Biggie where he talks about how as kids they spent all day at the mall shopping for shoes together; Carrie Bradshaw would think that’s excessive / embarassing for an epitaph.)

        I think pink is probably easier to wear than purple (for males with a conventional wardrobe) and actually wins you more macho points for attempting it.

        That’s why I’m offended by all this nonsense. The point isn’t that pink needs to be open to boys and men to enjoy with their shiny new enlightened “masculinitites.” The point is that males benefit from this crap coming and going. Poison can put on pink spandex tights and fuck groupies left and right. At the same time as Chef Boyardee of Pizzadom can complain about a future version of himself not being adequitely catered to. This is patriarchy. Males own everything including pink. So what the fuck are we whining about?

  5. Loup-loup garou Says:

    Anyone else remember a book called The Kids’ Kitchen Takeover? It was published in 1975, the “free to be you and me” era, and is now sadly out of print. It had instructions for all kinds of kitchen-related projects you could do on your own, or with minimal supervision, using actual real kitchen stuff, as opposed to fake toy versions like the Easy Bake Oven.

    It was also gender-neutral without doing a whole song and dance about it. There were pictures of boys and girls cooking and building things together, with no disclaimers, apologies, or hand-wringing reassurances about how it won’t ruin their future chance of getting a prom date.

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      Males cooking what they and their families eat? What a revolutionary concept! ;0|

      What’s next? Males washing dishes!!??

      Nah. Just kidding. That’ll never happen.

      (Can y’all believe we are STILL having these ridiculous conversations about women’s work and men’s work, women’s colors and men’s colors, women’s “natural” roles and men’s “natural” roles — forty years after Billie Jean King wiped the tennis court with Bobby Riggs’ saggy carcass?)

      DUDES: If it doesn’t involve pushing a baby out of your non-existant vagina or nursing a baby at your non-milk-producing breasts? It’s OK. You can do it. Nobody has to paint it blue for your first!


      • GallusMag Says:

        THAT’S what I find so insidious about this “campaign”. There’s a REASON this particular “campaign” has LEGS in an era of such feminist backlash and it ISN’T because everyone hasn’t heard a million times about how sex stereotyping is wrong, and it isn’t because- oh how charming a thirteen year old girl started it and isn’t THAT something. NO NO NO. The “virus” embedded in this viral meme is spreading because it is a reversal, AND it reinforces the extreme gender/sex-role norms of the age. It takes the LANGUAGE of feminism and “free to be you and me” and REVERSES the meaning. It is incredibly insidious. People might need to actually watch the video I’ve posted to catch it. The online petition contains the same reversals but is much more balanced. The video shows more clearly the reversal which is the root of this campaign’s viral popularity. I suspect that people are not actually watching the video attached to this post. Or if they are, perhaps the reversal is not as clear to them as it is to me.

        This is the NEW “free to be you and me”, and it is an incredibly gendered revision which reinforces a sex-based hierarchy. It is a TRANS-Genderist version of “free to be you and me”. It is the mainstreaming of the reversal of feminist critique of sex-roles AND IT IS DRESSED IN FEMINIST CLOTHING.

      • Marie-France Lesage Says:

        Yes. I get it.

        It’s 2012 and (drum roll please…followed by a big tuba BLAT!) girls are newly “free” to cook with their pink, little home-maker style, isn’t she sweet to cook cupcakes for the home-room, Easy Back-Lash oven and boys need to be “freed” to cook with a new stainless-steel, food-industry-dood-approved, prepare-me-to-be-head-chef Easy Big-Bucks oven.

        Back to your little kitchens, bitches — it’s sex-role stereotyping in “freedom of choice” drag.


      • GallusMag Says:

        “Easy-Backlash-Oven” YES! Hahahahahaha

    • Adrian Says:

      I did not know about that book, but I do remember really wanting an Easy-Bake Oven as a kid (a friend of mine had one, and I don’t think it was pink – orange maybe?). My mom just laughed and refused to spend money on such a thing, saying that if I wanted to bake cakes she’d show me how to do it in the real oven and we could all eat from it when it’s done because it would be some reasonable size!

      • Beth Says:

        I’m the same Adrian. My mum and dad refused to spend money on a glorified light bulb (they felt the same about kids sewing machines) and therefore my three older brothers and I learned through observation. Cooking or sewing wasn’t a womyns thing, it was a necessity for life. I also learned how to change lightbulbs and do basic plumbing and car maintenance the same way. I feel very lucky that I was always treated as a human by my mum and dad instead of a female incapable of doing anything.

  6. GallusMag Says:

    OT: I WANNNNNT that Simpson’s 100% official donut makerrrr!

  7. GallusMag Says:

    What this campaign says:

    YES pink glittery shit is female. We accept that truth, and presumably love it.

    It is understandable that any boy- even 4 year olds- would be repulsed to use an item that is popular among, and marketed to, females.

    Because that would fail to comply to the masculine ideal and undermines his birthright which grooms him for sex-based oppression of the lower caste.

    Remarket your product so that boys don’t suffer the humiliation of being forced to use items associated with the under-caste.

  8. GallusMag Says:

    Remarket your product so that boys don’t suffer the humiliation of being forced to use items associated with the under-caste.

  9. GallusMag Says:

    “PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Hasbro says it will soon reveal a gender-neutral Easy-Bake Oven after meeting with a New Jersey girl who started a campaign calling on the toy maker to make one that appeals to all kids.
    McKenna Pope, 13, of Garfield, N.J., got more than 40,000 signatures on her online petition at and the support of celebrity chefs including Bobby Flay, who backed her call for Hasbro to make a gender-neutral oven and to include boys in the ads.
    She was prompted to start the petition after shopping for an Easy-Bake as a Christmas present for her 4-year-old brother, Gavyn Boscio, and finding them only in purple and pink.
    Hasbro invited McKenna and her family to its Pawtucket, R.I., headquarters to meet with its Easy-Bake team, and on Monday, they drove to Rhode Island from New Jersey. During the meeting, Hasbro executives showed off a prototype of their newest Easy-Bake: one that’s black, silver and blue.
    Hasbro has been working on the new color scheme and design for about 18 months, and decided to invite McKenna to see it and offer her thoughts, said John Frascotti, Hasbro’s chief marketing officer.
    McKenna said the company is doing everything she asked, including putting boys in the ads.
    “I think that they really met most or even all of what I wanted them to do, and they really amazed me,” she said, adding that Gavyn thought the new design was “awesome.”
    Frascotti pointed out that the classic toy has had about a dozen different color schemes, from yellow to green to teal to silver, since first being introduced in 1963. The most recent iteration, introduced in 2011, is mostly purple with pink accents.
    He said it’s sold well since then, and that prompted the company to look for a way to update it and to broaden the consumer base by doing it in different colors.
    “It’s actually a product that’s played with by both boys and girls,” he said. “We will continue to offer the existing product too because it’s so popular.”
    Hasbro plans to introduce the new color scheme at the industry’s Toy Fair in New York in February. Frascotti said people are likely to see it on store shelves next summer.
    As for McKenna’s Christmas present for her brother, she said the TV show “Inside Edition” gave the family an Easy-Bake Oven after learning of her campaign. For Christmas, she said, she’ll probably buy him some mixes to bake in it.”

    • liberalsareinsane Says:

      Hopefully McKenna{OY} snaps out of her funfem phase; otherwise, I see several failed marriages and a bunch of snot nosed, fatherless brats in her future.

      I’m sure little Gavyn will be fine though.

  10. GallusMag Says:

    Last years ovens came in electric blue and brown (as pictured above). The whole bullshit about this years purple edition belies the actual meme of this campaign, which is: Male supremacy is disrespected by “forcing” males to use items coded as dirty nasty shitty lowly female.

  11. GallusMag Says:

    The reversals these days are so clever, so elegant, so well-encapsulated.

    • Sylvie Says:

      Insidious. Like a dis-ease.
      Equally disturbing are the gaslighting-type responses, and other FOG-type manipulations employed to shut down any dissent.

  12. GallusMag Says:

    Kenner, now Hasbro has marketed these ovens with a million campaigns and a million color themes, as seen in the post above. Who gives a shit? The toy stores are completely divided by the reproductive sex of the child. This is done to enforce a sex-based social hierarchy where males are superior to females. The fucking oven will still be located on the side designated for those children presumed to be capable of egg production and offspring gestation.

  13. Sylvie Says:

    When I watched the YouTube video of the kid (with sound off), couldn’t help fathoming how much of what he said was what he had been told (and indeed conditioned) to say.

    I’m so glad I’m getting old so I can exit the planet soon 😀

    • GallusMag Says:


      • cabochon Says:

        I agree with GallusMag that you can’t go soon, but as an oldie I know what’cha mean. It’s really discouraging to see progress reversed over the decades rather than augmented.

      • sylvie Says:

        Thank you 🙂

        I’m grateful for the sanity check this site provides, when it seems like the rest of the world is reenacting Animal Farm.

  14. GallusMag Says:

    London’s Harrods opens gender-neutral toy store for kids
    by Jonathan Ore Posted: August 8, 2012 7:10 PM Last Updated: August 8, 2012 8:26 PM
    Categories: World

    London’s department store Harrods has opened the doors to its Toy Kingdom, a 26,000 square foot wonderland for children, and possible nightmare for their parents.

    But amidst the piles of toys, dioramas and bookshelves, its most radical design choice hopes is intended to go unnoticed by children: the entire store is gender-neutral.

    The Toy Kingdom is separated into sections based on theme rather than gender, according de zeen magazine. The sections, or Dreamscapes, include The Big Top populated by circus animals and colourful costumes, and The Reading Room that resembles a children’s library and comes with a generous helping of Harry Potter scenery.

    “They are deliberately non-gender-specific, because we felt that was an antiquated way of looking at toys,” Matt Smith of Shed Design told The Guardian. “I think increasingly kids are playing with an array of different toys and we wanted to give that balance.”

    The discussion about gender roles in children’s toys has grown to include more than the Barbie aisle for girls and the Hot Wheels aisle for the boys.

    The Toy Kingdom is arranged by themes, such as the Candy Store pictured above, rather than by gender. (Shed Design)

    LEGO released the LEGO Friends line in January, aimed at girls with pastel-coloured blocks and a series of girl mini-doll figures. The brand was criticized for the intention to “reach the other 50% of the population” with its girl-centric themes.

    While the idea of a gender-neutral toy store may be commendable, several sources have said that the project could go further with the idea. A promotional image for the Enchanted Forest section features plenty of pink accessories, including a pile of Hello Kitty Dolls.

    Meanwhile, the science fiction-centric Odyssey area features figures of Iron Man and soldiers from the Halo videogame series, illuminated by sparse spotlights in a darker venue marked with browns and blues.

    The Guardian also noted that female employees in the Toy Kingdom wore pink t-shirts, while men wore blue ones. Harrods Home director David Miller was quoted as saying the colours were chosen for no reason other than that they were nice colours. “We are not stopping our female members of staff wearing a boy T-shirt…although they are a different cut.”

    The importance of teaching children what is or is not “for boys” and “for girls” isn’t lost on commenters, however. “toys are probably kids’ first encounters with social stereotypes and expectations; they instill through play both the good and bad of the adult world – especially gender roles,” writes Kill Screen’s Jacob Simon.

    “With a simple but astute move, the Toy Kingdom gives us a new model for play – one in which I won’t be shamed for loving Hello Kitty.”

    • Sylvie Says:

      I found this one:

      When questioned about this decision, David Miller, director of Harrods’ Home, replied:

      “We are not stopping our female members of staff wearing a boy T-shirt, should they want to,” he said, adding: “Although they are a different cut.” So there were no gender connotations whatsoever in the choice? “No, none at all.”


      I applaud their efforts with the displays. However I am disappointed by the unwillingness to admit gender connotations with the shirts. Glaringly obvious is the statement that the shirts are a different cut, so there was thought put into who would be wearing what etc.

      It’d be nice for a change, when someone is caught out like this, they just admit they overlooked something and didn’t try to cover up with faulty logic. I personally would respect them more if they did (e.g. “oh you’re right, gosh we overlooked that one. I’ll look into getting some other options for our staff to wear”).

      Trying to cover up the oversight detracts from the good intent. And I loathe liars.

      • Adrian Says:

        …and different cut is a BIG DEAL in today’s hyper-gender-segregated world. So many posters over on the F2T transtrender sites who write of terrible policing by their parents, to the point of, I kid you not, getting upset with them when they wear the “wrong” type of t-shirt!

        “girls'” s-shirts are sexy cut, slim, designed to show off the figure and wear small. “boys'” t-shirts (or occasionally “unisex” but as we all know, the existence of “girls'” t-shirts FORCES the “unisex” t-shirts to be perceived as “boys'”) are straight cut less body-hugging t-shirts that were the “standard normal” type of t-shirt.

        Some parents have a problem with their girl children wearing a not specifically “femmy” body-hugging sexualization style of t-shirt, because it makes them wonder if their kid might be gender-confused. It’s just really out there.

        Meanwhile this toy store has been talked about as somehow controversial or “trying to start something” or “radical” (in negative terms) and that too just shows how insidious this gender-policing has become.

      • Sylvie Says:

        Adrian Says:
        …and different cut is a BIG DEAL

        Mr Miller even states outright “a boy T-shirt”.

        It’s futile trying to make a “gender-neutral toy store for kids”, unless you only stock toys that are also gender-neutral.

        Otherwise, any efforts that go into layout etc are instantly and automatically negated by the plethora of pink toys featuring girls on the boxes, and blue/black/metallic/cool toys featuring boys on the boxes.

        Combined with the fact that in general, lots of kids will already be conditioned to want toys that someone or something has brainwashed them to want. “Waaa, Kate won’t let me play with them at lunch time unless I get a Barbie Styling Head too”

        I realise that’s not true for all. Insert comment about those instances being the exception rather than the rule.

        So to round this off nicely, today at work, a True Story (TM) 😀

        My colleague has a big plastic department store bag next to his desk. Making predictable conversation/attempting to display an innocuous interest in people you recently met/hardly know (TM), I ask “Did you buy presents for your son? What did you get?”

        My colleague explains that he bought two gifts for the city mission donation box at his gym. Donate two gifts: one gift for a boy and one gift for a girl. He pulls the boxed toys he (his wife?*) bought out of the bag, the glaringly obvious boys gift first. It’s a well made set of demolition trucks, tools and small figurines painted to look like construction workers. I thought it looked quite cool. It didn’t look “cheap”.

        The gift for a girl? A fucking plastic toy kettle. I shit you not. And it looks nasty cheap.

        Me: “uh, what does it do?”
        Colleague: (inspecting box, mutters something about batteries included)
        Me: “sooo, it makes noises?”
        Colleague: (still inspecting box) “yeah it whistles and makes boiling noises”
        Me: “that’s the boys gift, right?”

        Go make us a cup of tea bitch, there’s a good lass.

        (*I wondered if it was his wife who bought the toys due to the seeming lack of familiarity with what he bought. Who knows).

      • Sylvie Says:


        Heh @ “Kevin”

        ^ (That’s way higher quality than the one the guy at work bought).

        Selling toys designed to “help children make sense of their world”

        “Press the button to see the light and then tilt to hear the boiling sounds.”

        Kid gets hold of real kettle
        Ends up in ER after pouring boiling hot water on feet:
        “I wanted to hear the boiling noises mummy”

        “…toys guaranteed to make life’s first and most important lessons as much fun as possible.”

      • GallusMag Says:


        Tea bitch privilege
        Servitude fixed charming smile
        Pink gyno object

      • Sylvie Says:


        Need more!

  15. luckynkl Says:

    A thump on the head to the dude in the video who wanted Hasbro to come up with a really cool design for boys – implying designs which are meant to appeal to girls, aren’t cool.

    Personally, I never had an Easy-Bake Oven. I was using a real oven by the time I was 9. Cooking, cleaning and raising children wasn’t gendered in my family. My family hadn’t been in America all that long tho. One wonders if it’s more of an Anglo thing and why white boys would be so insecure and obsessed with such things?

    Also, when I was growing up, blue was the color for girls and red was the color for boys, which was reflected in mine and my brothers’ bicycles. I never understood why they put that horizontal bar on the boys’ bike frame tho. They were always racking themselves on it.

    • Sylvie Says:

      luckynkl Says:
      I never understood why they put that horizontal bar on the boys’ bike frame tho.

      The cross-bar makes it a better bike.

      That missing cross-bar renders bikes made for girls, well, pretty much useless. Has anyone ever noticed how if you stand up on the pedals on a girls bike in order to pedal harder, the bike seems to ‘bend’, and it’s really hard*?? (*when compared to a bike with a cross-bar)

      “Radically sloped top tubes that compromise the integrity of the traditional diamond frame may require additional gusseting tubes”

      Radically sloped tubes as in a fucking girly fucking bike:

      You can actually buy stabilisers to put on bikes that have no cross-bar. TO MAKE THEM BETTER BIKES:

      In 2010 someone called Daven Hiskey also took time to find out why:

      “the horizontal crossbar ends up adding quite a bit of strength to the frame of the bike”

      Because girls won’t ever ride fast or demand performance or anything like that, good heavens no, they might break a sweat and that’s not very feminine. Girls just want a nice looking pink bike they can put a cute basket on the front of, for when they’re out picking fucking daisies or painting fucking landscapes. A nice looking bike* that’s fucking useless for riding up fucking hills. (*lies)

      Men on the other hand, they need a bike that is going to perform. They need to get places, to do important things and see important people.

      “the differences between the men’s and the women’s bikes now tends to be reflected in the design by accounting for shorter torsos and arms on most women; modified hip placement; modified seat design; and the like.”

      It’s bullshit. Women don’t need a different bike (or whatever other product they’re being conned into buying the bullshit female version of. Yes, there might be one or two exceptions, though I can’t think of any and I’d probably argue those as well). However people have been brainwashed into thinking they do. They’ll be more comfortable etc O_o The thing with believing that shite, is that most won’t end up testing the product NOT designed for women. So they’ll never know if it’s “more comfortable” or what ever other pitch the salesperson or manufacturer is using. “Oooh they said it’s designed for women, that must mean it’s going to be more suitable for me. Isn’t it nice that they do this?”

      When I look at most things “designed for women”, I (generally) see inferior products. And it fucks me off. Especially if they’re more expensive. And they’re usually pink, or have pink accents. And they suck.

      “The Cristal reserved for women! Thinner for a better handling for women”

      I’m a woman. And I loathe thin pens. And now I loathe Bic pens.

      When I bought a mountain bike, I was given the option of changing the seat to a “more comfortable” seat for ladies. It was bigger, heavier and thinking back now, reminds me of a bloated pair of knickers with an bulky sanitary napkin in it. Or something. I declined the offer. The seat that came with the bike was perfect.

      Manufacturers who make inferior products for women, deserve to have them shoved up their urethral opening.


      • Beth Says:

        Female hips are different to male hips, our hips are wider and more circular. But I’m pretty damn sure that could be resolved with the bike seat rather than a total re-design of a bike.

        I can remember this being addressed in a blog post (if you can find it, I’ll be eternally grateful) talking about cycling garments being geared towards men and the like because only men liek bikes! All bicycle enthusiast ads were geared towards men as opposed to females. Because, like you said, women need baskets while we cycle serenely through villages. No woman could take it seriously, taking on a challenge like le tour de France.

      • Beth Says:

        And re-reading this, I see you addressed the bike seat issue. But as a female with big hips, I do need a different bike seat. Male seats feel extremely painful for me. Maybe I’m an anomaly. But the experiences I’ve had with other females has been the same. The male seat is too narrow and puts pressure on the pelvic bone, sometimes even pain through the pubis bone because of pressure placed on flesh.

      • Sylvie Says:

        Hi Beth – I agree about the hips/seat, and no I don’t think you are an anomaly 🙂

        Rather, the ladies seat I was offered was an example of inferior quality when comparing like for like. It was the standard ladies seat offered as a replacement, in exchange for the standard seat that came with the bike. There are better ladies bike seats out there, but I would have had to pay for an upgrade.

        Though I do find it harder to justify the arms/torso argument (and as a result, a completely different, often inferior product design for women), when there are men who also have the same arms/torso ratios mentioned in that quote. I am doubtful these men would buy a “ladies bike” (though I have seen exceptions etc).

      • Beth Says:

        Yes, okay. I misread it. Haha! Too much patriachial bullshit has my haunches up today. I will agree with what you said. To gain a female fitted bike is more expensive than going with the male standard and it is often of inferior quality. Also, as a female that is 180cm ( which I think is 6ft for my non metric compatriots) I think the handle difference is bullshit. How about ‘tall people’ and ‘short people’? Because plenty of males are shorter than me.

      • Sylvie Says:


        I can see how it might read like that, I was on a bit of a ramble (sorry for rambling on your blog GM!)

        Re haunches, I can relate, it never ends huh? Similar myself this week. From Mr Tea Bitch at work, to other male colleagues suggesting (to me), that female clients might be behaving the way they are “because she’s single. Or maybe she just broke up with someone” to the very predictable “maybe she has her period”. It’s like working with internet trolls, heh.

        (Alas, the client is pissed off because none of these people have provided a solution in six months).

      • Adrian Says:

        @Beth – Yeah you can definitely get replacement seats from normal sports bike manufacturers now, labelled “women” and “men” for actual body preference reasons, both high quality.

        Frames now come in all sizes too. I have a standard hybrid commuter bike, with the straight crossbar. The frame itself is tiny because I’m short, but it’s a good stable bike. Plenty of room for rear-mounted folding baskets too. I don’t like having a basket on the front and I don’t like wearing a heavy pack either, so it’s all about rear baskets for me. My bike is blue/grey.

        The standard “girls’ bikes” (as they seem to call it in the US anyway) are good if you’re required to wear a calf-length skirt to school and your school forbids “sports bikes” (i.e. normal crossbar bikes where you can get up some speed) anyway. When I was in school (in Japan) both the boys and girls used ’em and they were called “mama chari” (“mama bikes”). But they’re definitely all about riding slow to the market in either a long skirt or stuffy suit. For any sort of actual riding where you don’t need to step through the frame, bring on the sports bikes! Cross bars! Heck, I commute in normal clothes now (pants) and am okay kicking my leg over the back on my normal bike.

        The worst of the “mama chari” have the super bendy tube, but only ONE tube. And fat tires that are usually partly flat. And a huge basket on the front. Possibly with a dog in it…

    • Beth Says:

      It doesn’t say anything in the petition, what makes it a female transformer? Pink?

      I have never met a female that likes pink and only a few that like purple. That’s like 100 people in one persons life. Does anyone on this thread know any womyn that like pink? I know tonnes of womyn that like green, blue, red, black, and orange but no pink takers. This is gender re-enforcement. Girls can’t like something unless it’s x/y or z. How about a petition that says ‘fuck this colour configuration bullshit, like what you want. Even if it’s baby shit yellow’.

      I’m an extreme femme, I get my nails done, hair dyed and I wear designer clothes and I still find this shit insultive.

      • Sylvie Says:

        I loathe pink.

        Though I have met women who do like it.

        It’d be interesting to do a study, to identify whether the calming effects of Baker Miller Pink (aka Drunk-Tank Pink) was universally true or not. I don’t believe it is:

        Luscher noticed that color preferences shifted according to psychological and physiological fluctuations in his patients. Luscher asserted that color choice reflects emotional states. He theorized that one’s color choices reflect corresponding changes in the endocrine system, which produces hormones.

        Schauss then wondered if the reverse might also be true. Could color cause emotional and hormonal changes? Could various wavelengths of light trigger profound and measurable responses in the endocrine system?

        In early tests in 1978, Schauss observed that color, surprisingly, did affect muscle strength, either invigorating or enervating the subject, and even influenced the cardiovascular system. Schauss began to experiment on himself, with the help of his research assistant John Ott. Amazingly, he discovered that a particular shade of pink had the most profound effect. He labeled this tone of pink P-618. Schauss noted that by merely staring at an 18 x 24 inch card printed with this color, especially after exercising, there would result “a marked effect on lowering the heart rate, pulse and respiration as compared to other colors.”

        In 1979, Schauss managed to convince the directors of a Naval correctional institute in Seattle, Washington to paint some prison confinement cells pink in order to determine the effects this might have on prisoners. Schauss named the color after the Naval correctional institute directors, Baker and Miller. Baker-Miller Pink is now the official name of the paint whose color has the following rgb code: R:255, G:145, B: 175.

      • Beth Says:

        Now I feel silly because a tonne is a metric size meaning one thousand and I stated I could only estimate that I knew 100 females. I am stating my mistake knowing people will attack me for my analogy and I feel the need to clarify to make sure my point is sound. The crux of my point was that of all the females I have known, none of them have like pink and throughout my life it has been 100+ females that I have known.

      • GallusMag Says:

        @Beth- no worries. The only people that “attack” on this blog are those that say DUH DUH DUH brain sex DUH stupid cunts who hate men -er, laydees who were once men DUH.

      • Beth Says:

        I know it might sound like bullshit but the science of that argument is outdated. Society has changed and so has our response to colour. Maybe men work harder or are calmer faced with a ‘feminine’ influence. Although, in biological terms, pink is important to us. I am familiar with it being the abscence of green (with respect to the spectrum) but pink froth is a sign of serious illness. Maybe that’s why it is calmative.

        Pink is not so much a ‘girl’ colour, you can see douchebags at your local PIV centric club toting pink with their v-necks.

        I feel req

      • Sylvie Says:

        Beth Says:
        “I know it might sound like bullshit but the science of that argument is outdated.”

        I don’t doubt it 🙂 (thus my comment re being universally true “I don’t believe it is”). I haven’t looked any further into research after that but will do so. I certainly don’t feel calm looking at that vile colour. Read into that what you will Sigmund Freud.

      • Beth Says:

        No, Sylvie. I feel like I’m coming across antagonstic. It’s because I’m super mad at entitled males. I’m being your typical scientist. Reading between lines (overthinking this).I get what you are stating. I’m just trying to rationalise what you presented.

        I think response to colour will always have to deal with mood (which you stated). Because colour is a wavelength of light and I am truly fascinated by the implications that a wave (or beam) of light (which determines colours omg I am getting nerdy) has a emotional response in humans. Bcause light for humans is a reflection of an object. I got sorta silly physics-ie will this. Sorry 🙂

      • Sylvie Says:


        Heh! Oh no, I just realised you could think the Sigmund Freud reference was aimed at you, when it was quite literally meaning Sigmund Freud!

        Gah! *tears hair out* 🙂

      • Sylvie Says:

        Re the topic of wavelengths and effect on mood etc. I recall reading Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television (published 1978, way ahead of it’s time if you ask me), where (if I remember correctly), the author mentioned a study about the effects of exposing plants solely to red, green or blue light (because older cathode ray tube TV’s are of course RGB).

        I can’t recall the results precisely, which is a shame. However if I’m not mistaken the plants were basically very unhappy plants (not surprising. My description doesn’t do it justice).

        Another study in the book about the effects of children studying with a view of green trees out the window vs children without.

        It’s a fascinating book. Rather than focus on the content, the book discussed how the medium itself is the issue:

        “The technology itself places absolute limits on what may pass through it.”

        Bit of a tangent there.

  16. Beth Says:

    Gallus, thanks! Yeah, I know. Everyone knew what I meant. But I feel required (the trail off from my last post) to point this out because individuals on the net have a tendency to nitpick on a minor point. I felt by calling it out and acknowledging it, they would have to focus on the point of my argument as opposed to flying around semantics.

    • Sylvie Says:

      I find it shame we even need to. People make mistakes, and usually the point is not lost as a result 🙂

      (Not related to your post in any way) I find the psychology behind unwillingness to admit a mistake quite fascinating. It’s controlling, trying to control outcomes and the opinions of others.

    • Sylvie Says:

      If I offended, I am sorry.

      • Beth Says:

        Haha! No offence was taken. I was worried I was coming off obsessive and strange. Re colour: I think it’s fascinating that small things such as colour affect us when we think of ourselves beyond such trivial things.

        The television book looks interesting. I remember talking to a psychologist and she told me that it is increasingly common in her practice for her to deal with children who have difficulty with attention. Basically the bombardment of sensory information through iPads, tvs and through the internet was actually changing our brain to be less attentive. Also read something about how Google search has actually decreased memory span because we no longer try to retain as much memory. Just by being able to do a quick search to get information (such as spellcheck), we’ve begun to neglect our own memories. I can’t scientifically verify this, but it’s interesting if it’s true.

      • Sylvie Says:

        Beth said:
        “I remember talking to a psychologist and she told me that it is increasingly common in her practice for her to deal with children who have difficulty with attention.”


        That’s covered in the book as well, specifically the speed and number of transitions per minute making it impossible to pay attention.

        How the number of transitions per minute and/or their speed, and/or how much of a contrast there is between the transitions (e.g. quiet scene to loud scene, slow scene to fast scene etc) adds to the desensitising effect (including transition to super loud ad breaks).

        I recall an example the book gave re documentaries about other cultures, and how it was difficult for people to develop empathy for the culture. I think they also mentioned some stats about how few details people are able to recall after watching a documentary.

        If I remember correctly, apparently documentaries change scenes every ten seconds (or they did back then) – slower than sitcoms or cartoons etc but still too fast to develop empathy.

        So it’s interesting that more recently there’s a lot of speculation about the rise in narcissism and the corresponding decline in empathy 🙂

        Beth said:
        “No offence was taken.”

  17. Guls Says:

    Ellen lampooned the whole boy/girl marketing thing well, earlier this year – yous have maybe seen this already, but And whilst it was a little off-topic, feral opera company,radicalwoman and becky green made some worthwhile points about the catering industry being in large part an ego-driven sausage-fest and often far from welcoming to women. Anthony Bourdain’s books, ‘Kitchen Confidential’ and ‘Typhoid Mary’ are both articulate and entertaining on the subject. In my current position as head chef for a charity, I run an altogether more inclusive, and decidedly less macho and profane kitchen – no cheffy-boy hissy fits or referring to a busy service as an ‘arse-rape’ I’m pleased to say.- though for many years I was the token straight-boy in a department (and organization) that was predominantly queer (our charity works in the HIV/AIDS healthcare sector, in Brighton UK). But I’m digressing further and further from the topi in hand, so… Easy Bake? – I’m not sure we have those here in the UK, though not being a parent I’ve never trouled to look out for such things. They look kinda tacky – I learned to love cooking by accompanying Mum in the kitchen, and I’m not sure that brightly-coloured play ovens wouldn’t have put me off rather than encouraged my cooking exploits. I never felt any contradiction between slipping into the kitchen when Mum was out and surprising her by getting dinner ready for her return; and heading off out to play Action Man in the street with my mates. (Maybe a certain degree of attention-seeking involved, mind.) If Gunmetal Grey Easy Bakes encourage boys to dabble more in cooking then maybe that’s not a wholly bad thing – though I’d question the depth and sincerity of their interest if the colour of the oven is such a big deal – but it is a shame to have to pander to such facile gender stereotypes – so beautifully satirized by Ellen – to engage them in an activity that frankly, any person ought to have a basic grasp of as a matter of course, independence and self-respect.

    Interesting post and discussion, take care,


  18. FeistyAmazon Says:

    Well, I NEVER wanted an ‘Easy Bake Oven’, too girly, but I knew girlfriends who did have one…..never saw quite how it operated. Still I did help my Mom in the kitchen. And from childhood to this day, I LOVE PURPLE…all shades of purple, but especially the most brilliant does do something to my brain, it stimulates it in a way NO OTHER COLOR does..just like it thrills me when I see a rainbow, I love rainbow wear, and rainbows..but I will ALWAYS gravitate to the purple ray…..for me, it IS our connection as Lesbians, it’s our color! It’s part of the spectrum..’

    On the other hand I HATE pink…especially that baby pink. The closest I can ever get to pink is magenta(which is more purplish). And when you go in a department store, you see the harsh primary colors for boys, along with war implying olive green, and pink, lavendar, sometimes turquoise and yellow for girls…but MOSTLY that sickly pepto bismol pink. You can’t get away from it.
    And so many women brainwashed to wear pink…well the most delicate kinds….

    I hate how kids’ toys are so gendered, even that store, with the expectation the men wear normal shirts that are blue, and women wear shirts that are pink! Sheesh! Only store I EVER saw that was truly gender neutral was the Sierra Club store. They had puzzles, and science kits, and books and things about animals, and beautiful animal t shirts in all colors….NOT gendered at all….educational toys that didn’t imitate the domestic sphere for girls, rather encouraging them to become scientists, biologists, the like, or war mongering like most of the boys’ toys.

    The pure sexism of the videos..’look at my big ole silver oven, or make it black” (like a Weber grill). Real men grill and cook, and MAKE MONEY and become chefs….girls and women are domestic slaves that don’t get to touch the silver or black grill, and are nothing more than cooks! Yep the sexism just reeks off those dudes.

    And then this around Legos: “LEGO released the LEGO Friends line in January, aimed at girls with pastel-coloured blocks and a series of girl mini-doll figures. The brand was criticized for the intention to “reach the other 50% of the population” with its girl-centric themes.”

    How about LOSE the body conscious and vain ‘girl centric’ babymaking themes, and the boy warmongering themes, and work on themes that are far more integrated that BOTH can work on?

    I HATED holidays because I absolutely feared getting some girly toy that was pink or a doll or something. I remember once I got a patent leather pink square purse from one of my aunts or uncles….I hated it and it sat in my closet. I felt bad about never using it, but I knew they really didn’t know me….and I dreaded that even though I begged them not to, my family would get me a doll I hated! Cuz I wasn’t ‘girly enough’, and I HAD to be given a girly present, of at least one of them.

    Well all of ’em got shoved to the back of the closet and I’d play with my brother’s toys instead…..

    So much for ‘gender policing’ through toys….and all parents are sold to unconsciously do so!

    These guys in the video just do it in a back asswards way!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: