Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: gender stereotypes

Male and female sex symbol.

By Lilli DeBode, guest blogger and senior at Kent Place School
“Pink is for girls, blue is for boys” These are words that many children have uttered at least once. But where does this rule come from exactly? I know that this color mandate has influenced my childhood, and I doubt it would be a stretch to say that it reaches almost every child in America and in many countries around the world. I once chose a Pooh-Bear toy instead of a Tweety Bird toy because Pooh-Bear was wearing a red shirt and that was more girly than the completely yellow Tweety Bird. Ridiculous? Of course, but that was just how my pink-infiltrated mind was working at the time.
If you visit a Toys R Us and walk down the aisles filled with “girl toys,” you will be engulfed in a sea of pink. Products for boys? Blue as far as the eye can see.
I did some research on the history of pink and blue and what I found was pretty surprising. the trend is particularly new. Back in 1918, the Ladies’ Home Journal stated, “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.” How did this entire rule just flip suddenly? Not only did the colors themselves switch gender, but the trait associations with the colors changed too. Seriously, when was the last time someone said “pink is a stronger color?”
So apparently in the 1940s manufacturers just decided that pink would now be for girls, and blue for boys. Since that was the age of the baby boomers, the trend took off, and producers ran with it all the way into the 21st century.
Since the pink and blue rule has been around for a few generations, girls are immediately attracted to pink and boys to blue. Until recently, Legos advertised their blocks as gender neutral. As soon as they started making some of their packaging pink, though, sales soared as little girls started clamoring for the bubblegum colored boxes.
It is evident that this is not a matter of preference, (100% of girls do not inherently love the color pink). Instead, this is just an easy way for advertisers to get their products directly to their target audience.
One woman in South Korea decided to make a gallery showing just how many products children these days have that are either pink or blue. It is called “The Pink and Blue Project” And you can find the unbelievable pictures right here.

Sources and Resources: For more on the history of pink and blue click here.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

money

By Lilli DeBode, guest blogger, senior at Kent Place School

Ladies, have you ever wanted a tablet, but just couldn’t bear to be seen with one of those tremendously masculine iPads? Lucky for you, technology has made a breakthrough. Eurostar, a Middle East-based manufacturer has come out with the ePad Femme, a dainty little tablet complete with pink background and pre-downloaded apps such as weight loss tracker, clothing size converter, and recipe apps.

There really isn’t much to say about this; it pretty much speaks for itself. Obviously the ePad Femme is receiving a lot of backlash, and rightfully so. (Just try searching it; you will be met with pages upon pages of enraged articles).

What I don’t understand is how Eurostar thought this was a good idea.

Bic’s “For Her” pens and Honda’s “She’s” car received the same exact criticism. The fact that these products all came out at relatively the same time is somewhat troubling. After the first atrociously stereotypical product came out and was met with such intense backlash, shouldn’t the other companies have taken the hint and made their products a little less… pink?

I don’t think it’s the fact that these products were made with women in mind that’s the problem; rather it’s the fact that these companies made their products so outlandishly stereotypical. Really, shouldn’t they know better by now? This is 50’s era nonsense that, frankly, we shouldn’t be dealing with today.

Hopefully the rest of the world’s companies will learn from the newest commercial blunder and will spare us the introduction of the “Trashcanita.”

Ultimately, men and women are different, and putting more choices on the market certainly wouldn’t hurt anyone. However, the differences between men’s and women’s products have to be tasteful. Otherwise the validity for making gender specific products that are usually unisex is completely lost.

Sources and Resources: For two interesting pieces about the ePad Femme, read Time’s article  or Slate’s article. For information about Honda’s female-focused car read this CNN article. For a comedic take on Bic’s pens “for her,” watch Ellen’s video .

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

GoDaddy--The-Kiss-jpg

By Lilli DeBode, guest blogger, senior at Kent Place School

Basically everyone saw this commercial. And if you didn’t see it, consider yourself lucky. You were one of the few who were spared the experience of uncomfortably squirming around your couch, accidentally kicking a plate of nachos off of the coffee table in the process, whilst trying to shield your eyes and cover your ears simultaneously, and then possibly screaming around the seventh second of the commercial in the attempt to purge your body of this terrible spectacle that has befallen before your poor eyes (at least that’s what I experienced). Overly dramatic? I think not.

If you have not yet figured out what I am talking about, I am referring to the scarring Go Daddy commercial that aired a week ago on the Super Bowl. Yes, the one with supermodel, Bar Rafaeli and some random archetypal nerd making out, close up with high def. cameras and sound (oh, so much sound).

After their smushed together faces finally left my TV screen, (and after I was finished screaming) I was left speechless. “That was possibly the single most sexist thing I have ever seen” I said in a stupor to my mother who was crouching next to me, picking up the nachos that had flown across the room when my foot struck them a few seconds beforehand. How could anyone actually think that this commercial was a good idea? The whole basis of the ad was that Go Daddy has succeeded in combining brains and beauty, (two traits that usually don’t mix) and to demonstrate this, they needed a beautiful woman and a nerdy man. I could delve into why that commercial was so wrong on so many levels, but I can’t analyze it any better than they do in this article so let’s skip into the economics of this… shall we say… mistake?

It costs approximately 3.8 million dollars for a 30 second ad on Super Bowl Sunday. About 108 million people watched that night, and since then, more than 10 million people have watched the ad on YouTube. Sure, if its publicity Go Daddy was looking for, they certainly got what they wanted. After all, if you only have thirty seconds to make a lasting impression on millions of people, you’re going to have to do something risky. Although Go Daddy definitely did something extreme, they did it at the expense of half of all their viewers. Another minor fact that may have slipped Go Daddy’s mind is that the people who are going to use GoDaddy.com are not 13-year old boys.

Of course this was not the first time blatant sexism was used in a Super Bowl ad. It seems that every year there are at least four or five exceedingly offensive ones, but what will it take for these companies to realize that misogyny is not really selling like it used to. Today, women control about 75% of consumer spending, so maybe instead of insulting more than half of the world’s population, next year we could see more from Amy Poehler or the talking E-Trade babies. One can only hope.

I do leave you with this one plea though: For the sake of all women—no—all decent human beings, please never support Go Daddy by giving them your business.

Sources and Resources: This Forbes article is very interesting and it talks about five of 2013′s worst commercials. CNN’s article also discusses the commercial, focusing on the twitter feedback (#notbuyingit by Miss Representation) Go Daddy received.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment