Gender No Longer Exists

 

bumper_bumper_stickerToday I made the mistake of turning to ABC for their morning network news. After being blinded by the pastels of their dollhouse-like set, I watched several bobble-headed women and one extremely handsome fellow discuss Target stores doing away with gender signs. The giddy news “person” reported that there will be no more girls’ toys or boys’ toys — just toys. No more girls’ or boys’ clothes — just clothes. They will remove pink wall paper from the Barbie aisle and remove blue from G.I. Joe’s section. Target wants to do away with any gender signage to create “balance.”

Why? ABC explained that a pierced, hair dyed, tattooed Mother was shocked, SHOCKED!!!, when she saw the evil gender signage. Abi Bechtel is a self referred feminist who doesn’t want her kids playing with toys meant for their own gender. It’s sexist!

Target considers this “social media backlash” against gender signage as justification to, well, ignore gender all together.

By the way, the ABC “news” team had absolutely zero mention of anyone who may disagree with this craziness. Fair and balanced, amirite?

As a father to two sons, one a definite alpha male, and the other, well… he likes hugs, I cringed at this report. One thing I know is that kids gravitate toward what they like. Most kids like toys or clothes designed for their own gender.

What Target is doing is furthering the extremist narrative that gender in itself is exclusionary. It’s better to remove “boys” and “girls” labels as those could make the infinitesimal percentage of kids who feel different, also feel excluded.

The question is, where does this stop? When will the color blue be outlawed? When will Mattel Toys be mandated to have Barbie, Ken and Pat?

You can watch the full ABC report here.

Published in Culture
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 118 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Sandy Member
    Sandy
    @Sandy

    Ed G.:

    Randy Weivoda:Now that I think about it some more, we really need to end all segregation in clothing stores. ….

    Exactly! Now, point me to the dressing room where the women go to try on lingerie. I’m sure they wouldn’t mind a second opinion on fit. In the new enlightenment they’ll probably welcome it. Right?

    Especially if you are willing to model it.

    • #61
  2. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    Vance Richards:  evidently a scale model of the Akagi was a bad choice.

    Depends.  As of May 1942, or July 1942?  For the July version, you need scuba gear.

    • #62
  3. Jojo Inactive
    Jojo
    @TheDowagerJojo

    DrewInWisconsin:

    Jojo:I do find the sign kind of obnoxious, since it’s pointed out, though I would not have given it any thought in real life.

    As a frequent Target shopper, I have never seen the sign depicted in that image: “Girls’ Building Sets.” I think it’s a fake. And I have two girls who are nuts about LEGOs.

    But now I have to go to Target and look. If I don’t see it, I’m declaring it a fake.

    (If I do see it, I won’t care anyway.)

    -trigger alert-

    Do they prefer PINK Legos?

    • #63
  4. David Sussman Member
    David Sussman
    @DaveSussman

    Basil Fawlty: I’ve always thought Erector Sets should be gender neutral.

    Too. Many. Innuendos… Must. Resist. CoC. Non-compliant. Comeback.

    • #64
  5. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    10 cents:I have damaged by these signs all my life. I need reparations. Perfectly in small unmarked bills. The word “feminist” also hurts me. It is like NOW hates me. If they would go for a generic word like “Undefinablist, that would ease my PAIN. Doesn’t everyone think “humanist” is bad too because why favor one animal over another?

    That’s what did it?

    • #65
  6. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Jojo:

    DrewInWisconsin:

    Jojo:I do find the sign kind of obnoxious, since it’s pointed out, though I would not have given it any thought in real life.

    As a frequent Target shopper, I have never seen the sign depicted in that image: “Girls’ Building Sets.” I think it’s a fake. And I have two girls who are nuts about LEGOs.

    Do they prefer PINK Legos?

    They’ll take any LEGOs, but they don’t think of LEGO Friends as “real” LEGOs.

    Also, they want girl minifigures, and gravitate toward “real” LEGO sets that have them.

    • #66
  7. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Sandy:

    Ed G.:

    Randy Weivoda:Now that I think about it some more, we really need to end all segregation in clothing stores. ….

    Exactly! Now, point me to the dressing room where the women go to try on lingerie. I’m sure they wouldn’t mind a second opinion on fit. In the new enlightenment they’ll probably welcome it. Right?

    Especially if you are willing to model it.

    Ok, maybe we all need to rethink the zeitgeist.

    • #67
  8. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    My girls are YUUUGE Lego fans (I hate to think how much money sits on our shelves in the form of plastic blocks). Same as Drew’s, though. Lego Friends are okay for the younger daughter, but their favorites are from the books/movies. Oldest daughter just completed an Avenger’s set she ordered from London. Their previous favorites were Sauron’s Tower, Hogwarts, Diagon Alley, and ships from Pirates of the Caribbean. Lego is awesome!

    • #68
  9. Man With the Axe Inactive
    Man With the Axe
    @ManWiththeAxe

    Toys and clothes present different issues.

    The toys identify themselves. Trucks, action figures, sports equipment, tools, don’t have to be labeled as boy’s toys for boys to be attracted to them, and if not so labeled, a certain small number of girls will also be attracted. The converse is true for dolls and tea sets and the other things that girls love but very few boys have any interest in.

    It’s really helpful for boys’ and girls’ clothes to be labeled as such. Even when basically the same, they are cut differently, they fasten differently, they are sized differently. The gayest of gay men are not usually going to shop in the women’s department.

    • #69
  10. E. Kent Golding Moderator
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    When my daughter was about 2 or 3 we were going through Toys R Us and  shopping for toys.   I kept suggesting toys that I would enjoy playing with with her.   After about 3 suggestions she yelled at me for suggesting Boy Toys ( Kid’s toys, not cheerleaders ), and told me she was a girl, and wanted girl toys.    Kids are what they are.   My 3 year old had her own mind, and didn’t need labels or the color Pink to know what she wanted, and what she wanted was girly.   Unless idiot parents push them,  Boys will usually pick manly toys and Girls will pick girly toys.

    • #70
  11. E. Kent Golding Moderator
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    Lego is Crazy Successful with Lego Friends,    a girl focused Lego Series.

    • #71
  12. E. Kent Golding Moderator
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    Basil Fawlty:I fear this is the new Abi-normal.

    Marty Feldman and Arrowsmith taught me to “Walk this way..”

    • #72
  13. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    E. Kent Golding:Lego is Crazy Successful with Lego Friends, a girl focused Lego Series.

    Yeah, and SJWs HATE them.

    Which tells you that SJWs actually hate girls. Or at least, girls who like girl stuff.

    • #73
  14. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    No discrimination in the toy department whatsoever!. Shelving is a tool of the Patriarchy. All toys should be displayed in a egalitarian heap in the middle of the floor.

    Occupy Toys’R’Us!

    • #74
  15. Jules PA Inactive
    Jules PA
    @JulesPA

    DrewInWisconsin:

    skipsul:

    Maybe it will drive out the trend for too small hipster “skinny” stuff.

    Skinny jeans belong in the women’s clothing department.

    not even.

    • #75
  16. Ryan M Inactive
    Ryan M
    @RyanM

    Jamie Lockett:

    Mike H: People here can criticize the decision and belittle the reasoning that went into it. That’s the market at work too.

    Sure, and I can respond in kind right?

    I think the complaint has much more to do with the social media outrage (and it’s current dominance in culture) than the substance of Target’s action.  I think it is perfectly consistent to praise the free market while simultaneously disliking this sort of thing.  I certainly do.

    • #76
  17. Dean Murphy Member
    Dean Murphy
    @DeanMurphy

    LibertyDefender:Note: I welcome any and all to join my grass roots campaign to remind the public that people do not have gender. Words have gender, people have sex.

    Hey, I say that too!  But so did Mollie.

    • #77
  18. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Jamie Lockett:If Target as a free market operator wishes to do this what is the problem? If there is really such a clamoring for gender identified toys and clothes then the market will respond and smack them down.

    Right?

    Yes.  Which is what we are doing here.

    Right?

    • #78
  19. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Jamie Lockett:

    Mike H: People here can criticize the decision and belittle the reasoning that went into it. That’s the market at work too.

    Sure, and I can respond in kind right?

    Absolutely.  And in as shrill a fashion as you wish.

    • #79
  20. Douglas Inactive
    Douglas
    @Douglas

    I’ve refused to shop at Target since the flag flap. After this,  I recently put my foot down and told my wife no more of my hard earned dollars will go to Target or places like it. She agreed after she saw yet another TV show where they had teenaged boys kissing each other. Maybe we can’t stop the madness that the culture is descending into, but we damn well don’t have to support it with our money. My family is cutting a lot of financial ties. We got rid of movie channels already, and now we’re looking at cable itself. All I watch are some football and TCM, and I may even give that up soon, especially with the way ESPN is becoming more and more Olbermannized.

    Bottom line: shun companies that do this stuff. Even if it inconveniences you.

    • #80
  21. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Frankly, we are offended by your repeated use of the singular.

    • #81
  22. David Sussman Member
    David Sussman
    @DaveSussman

    Ball Diamond Ball:

    Frankly, we are offended by your repeated use of the singular.

    You ever make it to MacArthur’s Memorial?

    And don’t call me Frankly.

    • #82
  23. Nick Baldock Inactive
    Nick Baldock
    @NickBaldock

    Maybe I’m phenomenally dumb, but I would have read that sign as “(Generic) Building Sets” and “Girls’ Building Sets” – that is, somebody had gone out of their way to devise a product designed specifically to interest girls in construction. This could be considered condescending, I guess, but I wouldn’t have inferred that girls were banned from the “Building Sets.”

    This will go further than you probably want to imagine. The logical corollary, which is the abolition of separate sports events for “men” and “women”, may take a little longer. Paging Billie Jean King…

    • #83
  24. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    David Sussman:

    Ball Diamond Ball:

    Frankly, we are offended by your repeated use of the singular.

    You ever make it to MacArthur’s Memorial?

    And don’t call me Frankly.

    We did go to the Nautica and Wisconsin museums, inspired by your pimping of that historic district.  Thanks!

    • #84
  25. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    You may not be interested in reality, but reality is interested in you…

    • #85
  26. David Sussman Member
    David Sussman
    @DaveSussman

    Kozak:You may not be interested in reality, but reality is interested in you…

    The end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end.

    • #86
  27. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    To be is to do.  -Aristotle

    To do is to be.  -Descartes

    Do be do be do.  -Sinatra

    • #87
  28. Cynthia Belisle Inactive
    Cynthia Belisle
    @CynthiaBelisle

    I’m going to stay home and go to Amazon.com.

    • #88
  29. Severely Ltd. Inactive
    Severely Ltd.
    @SeverelyLtd

    David Sussman:

    Jamie Lockett:

    Mike H: Right, you should just be careful not to imply that being upset by it is somehow anti-market.

    I didn’t say that, nor did I title my post suggesting that Targets move was emblematic of the removal of gender from society.

    Jamie,

    Sorry, but I disagree. Target is not a small mom & pop retailer. It’s ubiquitous. It certainly does represent “society”.

    BTW: I like Target. I shop Target. I respect a store that gets me to spend $200 when I only went for shampoo.

    Can’t resist those skull caps and skinny jeans, huh?

    • #89
  30. Kate Braestrup Member
    Kate Braestrup
    @GrannyDude

    David Sussman: Androgyny isn’t just a style but a sociological statement that covers gender equity and sexuality.

    Which is a new thing. 18thcmandress

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.