The Forum > Article Comments > The insidious apartheid of thinking pink > Comments
The insidious apartheid of thinking pink : Comments
By Monica Dux, published 23/11/2010There something disquieting about the sheer ubiquity of the pinkification of our girls.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- ...
- 8
- 9
- 10
-
- All
Posted by lentaubman, Tuesday, 23 November 2010 6:47:26 AM
| |
I can empathize with the author and sense their oppression.
I also have problems deciding what clothes and colours to wear. Posted by vanna, Tuesday, 23 November 2010 7:40:57 AM
| |
I was waiting for the bit that links the colour pink to genitals and reducing little girls to a potential sex object.
It's articles like this that prove we have equality. When you're stressing about colours you're really clutching at straws. I love theories like this. In response I always relate the explination of pool I heard in a movie once. It's racial. The aim of the game is for the good 'white' ball to sink all the other 'colours', with the greatest prize to sink the black ball. This all comes about because of the white man's fear of the potency of black balls! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX8cIdXlHuU MMmm suck on those chocolate salty balls, put-em-in-your-mouth-and-suck-em. But I digress. I think the phenomena described is really about the fear and shame of people thinking your little girl is so ugly as to be assumed a boy. This is a symptom of our misandrist society. BTW: Once girls get to about 5-8 they desire everything they have to be purple. Posted by Houellebecq, Tuesday, 23 November 2010 8:39:08 AM
| |
sweetheart, it aint worth bothering about; girls and boys will turn out the way their genetics determine. Pink or blue baby knickers wont change a thing in the long run
Posted by peter piper, Tuesday, 23 November 2010 8:40:56 AM
| |
Oh, and when it comes to nurture vs nature, I have already described how it works elsewhere.
When discussing something negative for men, it's nature. When discussing something negative for women, it's conditioning. When discussing something positive for women, it's nature, unless in the context of women being treated differently, then it's conditioning. When discussing something positive for men, it's conditioning. So, if a man commits a violent crime, it's the violent nature of men. Ditto wars. The expectation is that with women holding all the positions of power there would be no war. If a man achieves in a leadership role, invents cures for cancer, does anything else good, it's conditioning. Women could achieve the same given the same conditioning and opportunities. If a woman is looking to get custody, children are better off with the nature of the nurturing mother. But this nurturing is conditioning in the context of any gender pay gap, and women who choose not to work are only more interested in mothering due to conditioning. Posted by Houellebecq, Tuesday, 23 November 2010 8:44:38 AM
| |
We all seem to have been sucked in by pink - just look at all those sportsmen wearing pink to support breast cancer research. Nothing against BCR, but surely men have an under-researched cancer of their own to support. What colour for prostate cancer research eh? Don't know? Me neither.
My least favourite colour is Barbie pink - but she wasn't always that way and I expect pink will have its day and we can all move on. I am far more concerned about little girls wearing come-hither clothes, makeup and heeled shoes. Posted by Candide, Tuesday, 23 November 2010 9:19:38 AM
|
Some people really do have too much time on their hands