General News Stride Rite Ad Calls Girls Princesses, Boys Powerful, Outrages Parents

I'm glad she stepped up and said something. Hopefully more parents will come forward to also speak against this kind of advertising. Stores and marketers need to learn that pushing such ridged gender stereotypes is just woefully antiquated and is only hindering our societies growth. I think the kid in this clip below sums up everything about this perfectly.

Riley on Marketing - YouTube

 

I see her point, but isn't it a little overboard to just go and quit shopping somewhere for something as silly as that? Stride Rite isn't trying to get girls to be dainty and sparkly and isn't trying to get boys to be rough and dirty. It just seems to me like a lot of controversy over something small. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I just feel like what kind of shoes each gender should wear isn't as important when we have million of people suffering from malnutrition in third world countries.

 

No, it isn't. She's sending a strong point that she will not support this kind of close-minded marketing. Everyone who is Trans* suffers because most of society has these ridged gender stereotypes engrained into their minds. It's hard for us to buy clothes because people believe that you have to dress a certain way. They're freaking shoes, so there is no need to advertise that "Girls would like X while guys buy Y". And it's kind of hard to argue about their intentions where when they hang such big banners up stating so. Issues like this needs to be addressed if we're going to be more accepted into mainstream society. Also, please don't pull the starving 3rd world argument. Just because an issue doesn't impact you doesn't mean a problem should be white-washed away by comparing it to a worse case dilemma.

 

Terrible, but the comments to that article only confirm why companies market things in such a way in the first place. Most parents want their little girls to be delicate princesses. Most parents want their little boys to be rough and tumble warriors.

Unfortunately, there are still far more people out there who would get outraged over an ad targeting boys with pink and pretty advertising or targeting girls with violent superhero advertising, compared to the small minority outraged over this advertising re-enforcing existing stereotypes.


But obviously, the most desirable long-term objective should be the complete abolition of gender.

 

I know I have an opposing opinion here, but honestly, I see nothing wrong with the ads.

Now, if they were opposite, saying boys want to be pretty pretty princesses and girls need to be powerful, what would happen?

If a boy wants to wear a princess dress, an ad showing a girl will not dissuade him. Likewise for girls and being powerful.

I swear, people these days will seriously get pissed off about anything.

A company could put an ad out showing a boy and a girl playing jumprope together and parents would be pissed that they dare not show that kids of any age could use it, because it only shows kids of one age.

If you honestly think these ads are wrong:



I just... don't know what to say to you. It's a freaking advertisement. Barbie commercials ONLY contain girls. Does that stop boys from playing with barbies if they like them? Likewise with Hotwheels/etc. commercials.

Should EVERY princess ad ONLY show boys? How about "powerful" ads only showing Girls?

Aren't you suggesting the SAME THING you're protesting? You'd just create a new gender stereotype.

 

I think we should all move to Sweden



It's gotta be better for the profit line too - portraying that your product is implicitly (and arbitrarily) only suitable for half the population isn't a very good business tactic.

 

Um, actually gender policing both from peers and from adults is a pretty powerful force. A girl might want to be an athlete and play sports, but instead she will play with dolls and dress up as a princess, in order to conform to what is expected of her- in order to avoid being bullied and ostracized. The same goes for the boy who hates sports but thinks it is great fun to pick out outfits for dolls; he will instead waste his time playing football in order to conform to what is expected of him. Because a boy going near a doll is inviting bullying and ostracism.

 

Read the edit I posted at the end of my post.

And no. Plenty of boys play with dolls. Plenty of girls play with cars.

The -only- thing that can really stop a kid from playing with what they want is their parents.

 

Putting them on ANY child puts them on a gender. Even if it's just what people assume the child's gender is.

If advertisements only showed the item and not them being on someone, then sales wouldn't be as good.

 

And I'm sorry for coming at you so strong. (*hug*) It's just one of those things that I really struggled with growing up. My parents wouldn't allow me to wear pink or do anything that other girls liked. So I was stuck with really bland shoes and wearing masculine clothes like baggy cargo pants. It wasn't until I got older and started making my own money that I had control of how I got to dress. It would always pain me that I couldn't do anything I wanted without being ridiculed as a sissy.

Oh, but I want to hear what you want to say to "someone like me" having an issue with this marketing. Because I have a major problem with marketers and advertisements only cramming gender stereotypes down childrens throats. And what are you raging over? We're only asking for a 50/50 gender equality with marketing.

 

They could feature more than one gender, like in the picture I posted. They can also alternate between genders - certain products are far over-represented by certain genders. Having to pick one or the other is a false dichotomy.

 

Yes. They can. But outraging over the first one for the product is silly.

They're essentially saying "Put it on the child that DOESN'T fit the gender stereotype, or you're doing a bad thing for the world."

It's creating a new gender stereotype, and the people outraged over this are in turn, technically hypocrites.

 

What data do you have to back up this claim? Define "plenty". And what age are you talking about?

In most cases, behaviors perceived as non-gender-conforming are socialized out of little boys and girls by the time they reach school age. Boys who play with dolls will be bullied by their peers and meet disapproval from their parents.


In response to your addition to your last post, I don't think anyone is suggesting that we just reverse the gender stereotyping, advertising princesses only to boys and superheroes only to girls...what we do want is to reach a point where the same advertising can be used to appeal to both boys and girls. There's no reason to be segregating children into two separate boxes based on something as trivial as gender. Every individual is unique, some individuals like sports, other individuals like dolls...grouping people by penis or vagina denies and suppresses each individual's unique humanity.

 

Perhaps anything resembling outrage as a response to this is a bit of an overreaction. But this isn't an isolated incident - there have been harmful gender stereotypes in advertising for as long as advertising has existed. We have to be vocally unhappy if anything is going to be changed.

I haven't seen anyone say that the gender stereotypes should be reversed and then enforced equally as strongly as they are now - that would be hypocritical. All I have seen is people saying that the stereotypes shouldn't be limited to a particular gender. Obviously this would mean that some portrayal of 'non-traditional' gender roles is required to achieve this, but that certainly isn't anything like creating a new gender stereotype.

 

What data do you have to back up your claims that gender peer pressure stops boys from playing with dolls? None.

I played with dolls. Many of my guy friends played with dolls. I knew many girls who played with cars.

And again, if that was all the outrage was about, it'd be one thing. But this is the only instance of the ad, yet people are screaming. If say this ad had been done 5 other times and every time it was boys in the sneaker for example, then I'd agree.

But it's the first time the company used the ads. But by claiming outrage now, they're suggesting that girls are not allowed to be princesses or boys are not allowed to be strong, because that's the stereotype.

Going crazy after the first time is stupid and hypocritical, as it does nothing but suggest the people want them to always use the reverse gender stereotype, which in turn, creates a new stereotype.