The Huggies Baby Network recently featured an article by Lisa Beamer titled “The Greatest Things About Girls.” It horrified me, frankly, to see yet another example of how people even now smother their children in traditional gender roles. Here are some select quotes:
I loved having my boys, but after several years of trucks, dinosaurs and dirty fingernails, my thoughts immediately jumped to all of the things that typified little girls for me: dresses, hair ribbons and shopping sprees, just to name a few. I’ve not been disappointed, as my daughter loves pretty clothes as well as accompanying me to the mall. She’s my shadow when I cook and clean, and we enjoy “girl time,” painting our fingernails and playing with her dolls. . . .
Overwhelmingly, little girls invoke memories of playing dress up with dolls from our younger years. April Schmidt says of her now grown daughter, “It was like my favorite dolly from childhood came to life.”
. . . Aside from playing with dolls, there are other fun activities that seem tailor made for moms and their girls. Says Betty Kunze of her elementary-aged daughter, “She enjoys baking and cooking. Since these are some of my favorite activities too, its [sic] a lot of fun to do them with her.”
. . . “Although the modern generation might not agree with my thinking,” says Terry, “It is nice after spending so much time teaching my boys to be tough, to turn around and teach my girls that softness is not a weakness,” a lesson our daughters need to learn.
Hmm. So girls should be treated like dolls, taught to shop and paint their nails, cook and be soft. Granted, there are many girls who like frills and shopping–but how many would like trucks and dinosaurs, too, given the chance? As far as cooking, my son loves to help me in the kitchen, and I don’t view this as a gender-specific activity at all. Furthermore, shouldn’t we teach both our boys and girls that there’s a time to be soft and a time to be tough?
This is not to deny that gender differences do exist, but they are not so absolute as this article proclaims. I do think children tend to gravitate towards one parent or the other for different needs. For children of opposite-sex parents, this may work along gender lines, or it may depend, as it does for children of same-sex parents, on the specific personalities and interests of each person.
Towards the end, Beamer does make mention of the increased opportunities available for women these days, but the point seems weak after such a fine defense of traditional roles. Do we as same-sex parents have an easier time exposing our children to the full range of options open to them, because we ourselves have gone down non-traditional paths? Or do we risk going too far in the opposite direction? I’d like to think that if I had a girl, and she wanted to wear pink and play with a Princess Barbie, I’d let her do so–but I admit, part of me would wince. I hope I’ve struck a balance with my son, who is nutty about backhoes, fire engines and trains, but also likes to cook, helps me with the grocery shopping, and makes his teddy bears kiss each other. There’s always a three-way tug-of-war between what society expects from our children, what we want for them, and what they want for themselves. I hope all parents, of whatever orientation or identity, are able to guide their children through these competing forces in a way that lets them thrive as their true selves.
Our daughter is 5 and she is so frilly, pink and girly! We didn’t “make” her that way or encourage her to be that way. She just is. She isn’t biologically ours. She was adopted at 6 weeks. So, she doesn’t have our genes. Her birthmother with whom she had very little contact was very frilly and girly. She was all into pink everything and frilly everything. Long hair, long nails, dresses, just everything girly. My partner is so NOT girly, but not butch either, just a normal pants-wearing woman. I am a bit more girly but not frilly or “pink” at all. Our child is just who she is because of who she is. If we have to blame anybody, let’s blame God.