Originally Posted by Addictista

^^^^ Agreed! It's called having your cake and eating it too. If as a woman you support Title IX, women working outside the home, women working in male-dominated fields, et al, then you must also support stay at home dads, boys who play with dolls, and men who cry. We can't break one side of gender stereotyping but leave the other side intact. That sends the message that male traits are good while female traits are bad. Feminism has to cut both ways in order to be valid and self-supporting. As I write this, I see that it's possible to frame this issue from a purely feminist perspective, and we can put the LGBT slant aside for the purposes of discussion. It's about not letting feminism turn into self-hate. If a woman, a feminist, is bothered by a little boy who exhibits feminine traits, then she may be saying that she sees her own womanhood, her feminine traits, as a disadvantage. Is feminism really about allowing a woman to exhibit male traits in an acceptable way and subsuming our female traits? I don't think so, but if a feminist fears feminine traits in a male child, that might be her unintended message. Just a thought.

I don't disagree with a word of your post. That said, it is possible to justify the expansion of women's power in the workplace on the grounds that every adult needs to be capable of meeting their own basic needs for food, housing, clothing, etc. If you take away women's rights to work, you basically reduce their only avenue to support themselves to legalized forms of, at its root, prostitution. Marriage, sex, whatever it takes to get a man as a man is the only one who can work to bring in means to provide. That's a significantly more important and fundamental human right than that of a boy or man to paint his toenails pink and participate in drag shows.

For the record, I don't see anything controversial about the ad at all. Most children imitate their parents - mothers and fathers. Regardless of how he grows up, he wouldn't be the first straight man to feel faint embarrassment over that one silly time he painted his nails or, say, worn a dress as a small child. Alternatively, he wouldn't be the first gay man to have had the act of toenail painting resonate deeply with him at a young age. Nail polish is not going to change the course of his future.

pretty color, but no thanks

Originally Posted by doreenjoy

I also have a close male friend who, as a child, wanted to dress up as various Disney princesses on Halloween. His parents were both ministers and they had no problem with it and he is a wonderful adult man today.

Funny you should mention that:

From the sitcom "According to Jim" ------



Season 4: 2004-2005 Episode 84/5 "Dress to Kill Me" October 26, 2004
Kyle wants to be Cinderella for Halloween. Jim is against it because he thinks he's growing up to be a sissy. Jim buys Kyle a manly costume (a dinosaur) but Kyle changes back into the dress. Jim, Andy, and Kyle all sit on the couch, Jim and Kyle persistent. Jim goes in the kitchen, sees an older Kyle who convinces Jim to let Kyle go as Cinderella. In the end, they all go as ladies and they trick-or-treat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...o_Jim_episodes

Originally Posted by Addictista

Again, the ad challenges gender stereotypes, that's why you (poster) chose the word "atypical" to describe it. I think that makes for an interesting discussion, and it does uncover some deeply held gender bias and stereotyping (not directed at you, poster, personally). Frankly, anything that makes society think about equality under the law and gender bias/stereotyping is a good thing in my eyes.

I think it challenges reality more than it does any stereotype. Unless upwards of 50% of little boys spend time with their mums painting their toe nails pink, it is atypical.

I think some people have difficulty acknowledging the fact that there are innate difference between the sexes, and that no amount of social meddling is going to make them disappear.

Well, judging by how many women have posted in the various comment sections on sites and here and in the nail forum that they have in fact had their little boys want their nails painted at one time or another (and the guys in my family and male friends after asking around)...

Apparently, it is NOT all that atypical. People are just still trying to enforce a gender stereotype on them, which as mentioned: Is a dangerous double standard.

It was atypical when women began to wear pants and shorts in American culture... It was atypical for little girls to aspire to be race car drivers, doctors, vets, soldiers, ect.

You can't have it one way. If women and girls can go against gender stereotype, then little boys and men can as well. There is nothing damaging or controversial about pink nail polish. The controversy is over gender stereotypes and trying to enforce them on a little kid by making outlandish claims over how it may affect his self-image, sexuality and gender identity.

Yes, there are differences between the *sexes*. Pink nail polish isn't one of them.

Originally Posted by BomberGal

There is nothing damaging or controversial about pink nail polish. The controversy is over gender stereotypes and trying to enforce them on a little kid by making outlandish claims over how it may affect his self-image, sexuality and gender identity. Yes, there are differences between the *sexes*. Pink nail polish isn't one of them.

This. I can say, under the cover of anonymity , that one of my brothers was, for some time, the youngest child with two older sisters. And we treated him like our human doll - and he loved the attention! He was put in dresses, tiaras, nail polish, makeup, etc. (until our dad caught us "playing house" one weekend and gently explained to him that "us guys dont do that." Which made not a whit of difference because we had him in a tiara the next day.) He wasnt dressing up to "be like a girl" - it was because the people he had available to play with were doing just that and he wanted to be included in the fun (which he wasnt old enough to attach a stigma to yet). He grew up to head his college sports team, and date almost every girl on the team (to our embarrassment), and is now married to one of the sweetest and most gorgeous women on the planet. The only thing that came out of his childhood dressup sessions (at least to my knowledge) is a continuously satisfying source of blackmail.

Nail polish is not going to make a difference. An absent father will make a difference. A controlling mother with inappropriate personal boundaries will make a difference. Various forms of abuse, neglect, mistreatment make a difference. The environments in which children find themselves in those vulnerable, insecure early teen years will make a difference. Genetics and wiring make a difference. Two coats of Zoya in "Poppy Pink!" are not going to turn a future ladies man into Eddie Izzard.

Quote:

Well, judging by how many women have posted in the various comment sections on sites and here and in the nail forum that they have in fact had their little boys want their nails painted at one time or another (and the guys in my family and male friends after asking around)...

I am not sure where you live and with whom you interact, but we use to have children in our house 8 hours a day, five days a week, when my mum was a daycare worker (which she was for almost a decade). I simply don't remember a case of boy coming to our house with nail polish on. I guess it could be argued that the boys wanted to wear it but were told not to by their parents. I know there were a couple of occasions where the kids were playing dress ups and the boys wore some girly garments and it certainly didn't bother me. But if the parents didn't like their kids doing that, I don't think that would make them the wicked witches of the west.

Quote:

Apparently, it is NOT all that atypical. People are just still trying to enforce a gender stereotype on them, which as mentioned: Is a dangerous double standard. It was atypical when women began to wear pants and shorts in American culture... It was atypical for little girls to aspire to be race car drivers, doctors, vets, soldiers, ect.

I don't know that many little girls aspire to be race car drivers or soldiers today. But if they do, good for them. I myself am studying in a male dominated field (engineering) so I am not averse to "breaking stereotypes".

Quote:

You can't have it one way. If women and girls can go against gender stereotype, then little boys and men can as well. There is nothing damaging or controversial about pink nail polish. The controversy is over gender stereotypes and trying to enforce them on a little kid by making outlandish claims over how it may affect his self-image, sexuality and gender identity.

I really don't care what little boys or girls wear. I am more or less a libertarian. I couldn't care less what anyone wears, but not everyone is going to be comfortable with these things, and I don't think that makes them bad or in need of reform. If your comfortable with your son wearing nail polish, that's fine. If your not comfortable with your son wearing nail polish, that's fine too.

Quote:

Yes, there are differences between the *sexes*. Pink nail polish isn't one of them.

Hey, I like me some nail polish as much as the next girl, or guy, or whatever.

Originally Posted by BomberGal

Well, judging by how many women have posted in the various comment sections on sites and here and in the nail forum that they have in fact had their little boys want their nails painted at one time or another (and the guys in my family and male friends after asking around)... Apparently, it is NOT all that atypical. People are just still trying to enforce a gender stereotype on them, which as mentioned: Is a dangerous double standard. It was atypical when women began to wear pants and shorts in American culture... It was atypical for little girls to aspire to be race car drivers, doctors, vets, soldiers, ect. You can't have it one way. If women and girls can go against gender stereotype, then little boys and men can as well. There is nothing damaging or controversial about pink nail polish. The controversy is over gender stereotypes and trying to enforce them on a little kid by making outlandish claims over how it may affect his self-image, sexuality and gender identity. Yes, there are differences between the *sexes*. Pink nail polish isn't one of them.

This. I was too tired this morning and couldn't find a way to say this as eloquently as this poster did.

Originally Posted by BigBlueSky

I am not sure where you live and with whom you interact, but we use to have children in our house 8 hours a day, five days a week, when my mum was a daycare worker (which she was for almost a decade). I simply don't remember a case of boy coming to our house with nail polish on. I guess it could be argued that the boys wanted to wear it but were told not to by their parents. I know there were a couple of occasions where the kids were playing dress ups and the boys wore some girly garments and it certainly didn't bother me. But if the parents didn't like their kids doing that, I don't think that would make them the wicked witches of the west.

I agree that its a parent's choice and an individuals choice what they wear or allow.

What I don't agree with is making outrageous claims about those choices and trying to force them onto other people and their children. Which is the nonsense going on about this mother and her son.

If you wouldn't let your son get his nails painted, thats fine. But don't make or support outlandish claims that its somehow wrong, inappropriate, damaging, ect and will somehow make them transgender, gay, ect. Or that his mother is exploiting him any more than any other child in media. Especially when others try so hard to break gender stereotypes on the other gender.

Quote:

I don't know that many little girls aspire to be race car drivers or soldiers today. But if they do, good for them. I myself am studying in a male dominated field (engineering) so I am not averse to "breaking stereotypes".

Yet there is a difference for little boys and men?

Quote:

I really don't care what little boys or girls wear. I am more or less a libertarian. I couldn't care less what anyone wears, but not everyone is going to be comfortable with these things, and I don't think that makes them bad or in need of reform. If your comfortable with your son wearing nail polish, that's fine. If your not comfortable with your son wearing nail polish, that's fine too.

My issue isn't with parents who would prefer not to let their own son do it (though depending on the parent, I might consider it hypocritical). It is instead with taking a harmless ad and making a mountain out of a mole hill and making outlandish and sensational claims about its meaning or the effects it will have on the child's future and his mother's concern for his well-being and future. And the double standard and prejudice the whole circus is promoting.

ETA: The ONLY thing I consider scandalous or alarming about this whole thing... Is the manner of ignorance, hypocrisy and absurdity some have interpreted it with and responded to it with. Pink nail polish: Harmless. Mass ignorance and double standards: very dangerous.

Quote:

Mass ignorance and double standards: very dangerous.

Yes, but unfortunately we're dealing with human beings.

I think the difference with the criticism in the media and many posters here is that the posters here say they wouldn't let their boy do that. Fine. As a parent, that's their choice, and no one should force them to think it is okay for their child to wear nailpolish if they don't like it. But the talking heads in the articles are claiming psychological harm to a child they know nothing about. They are saying that the mere fact that someone applied pink nailpolish to his toes will somehow damage him and his view of himself as a male. THAT is what many people think is outrageous. So have your son wear nailpolish or don't, but don't claim irreversible harm to the child of parents with a different view.

Originally Posted by HauteMama

I think the difference with the criticism in the media and many posters here is that the posters here say they wouldn't let their boy do that. Fine. As a parent, that's their choice, and no one should force them to think it is okay for their child to wear nailpolish if they don't like it. But the talking heads in the articles are claiming psychological harm to a child they know nothing about. They are saying that the mere fact that someone applied pink nailpolish to his toes will somehow damage him and his view of himself as a male. THAT is what many people think is outrageous. So have your son wear nailpolish or don't, but don't claim irreversible harm to the child of parents with a different view.

Originally Posted by HauteMama

I think the difference with the criticism in the media and many posters here is that the posters here say they wouldn't let their boy do that. Fine. As a parent, that's their choice, and no one should force them to think it is okay for their child to wear nailpolish if they don't like it. But the talking heads in the articles are claiming psychological harm to a child they know nothing about. They are saying that the mere fact that someone applied pink nailpolish to his toes will somehow damage him and his view of himself as a male. THAT is what many people think is outrageous. So have your son wear nailpolish or don't, but don't claim irreversible harm to the child of parents with a different view.

Reminds me of the time when I went shoe shopping with DS and was browsing shoe aisles in a department store. I tried on a couple pairs of heels, and DS looked at me curiously and asked "What do they feel like? Can I try a pair?" So I said "Sure", got a pair in his size and gave them to him. A woman in the aisle glared at me, but I ignored her. DS walked a few feet in the shoes, took them off and gave them back saying "Gosh mom, how on earth can you walk in those?" and went off to look at sneakers. The woman who glared at me earlier said "Boys shouldn't be wearing women's shoes. That's just wrong!" I didn't bother to reply. It's my kid, not hers, and trying on a high-heeled shoe doesn't make him any different from what he is already.

Originally Posted by DiorDeVille

This. I can say, under the cover of anonymity , that one of my brothers was, for some time, the youngest child with two older sisters. And we treated him like our human doll - and he loved the attention! He was put in dresses, tiaras, nail polish, makeup, etc. (until our dad caught us "playing house" one weekend and gently explained to him that "us guys dont do that." Which made not a whit of difference because we had him in a tiara the next day.) He wasnt dressing up to "be like a girl" - it was because the people he had available to play with were doing just that and he wanted to be included in the fun (which he wasnt old enough to attach a stigma to yet). He grew up to head his college sports team, and date almost every girl on the team (to our embarrassment), and is now married to one of the sweetest and most gorgeous women on the planet. The only thing that came out of his childhood dressup sessions (at least to my knowledge) is a continuously satisfying source of blackmail. Nail polish is not going to make a difference. An absent father will make a difference. A controlling mother with inappropriate personal boundaries will make a difference. Various forms of abuse, neglect, mistreatment make a difference. The environments in which children find themselves in those vulnerable, insecure early teen years will make a difference. Genetics and wiring make a difference. Two coats of Zoya in "Poppy Pink!" are not going to turn a future ladies man into Eddie Izzard.

Preach it sister!!

Originally Posted by BomberGal

Well, judging by how many women have posted in the various comment sections on sites and here and in the nail forum that they have in fact had their little boys want their nails painted at one time or another (and the guys in my family and male friends after asking around)... Apparently, it is NOT all that atypical. People are just still trying to enforce a gender stereotype on them, which as mentioned: Is a dangerous double standard. It was atypical when women began to wear pants and shorts in American culture... It was atypical for little girls to aspire to be race car drivers, doctors, vets, soldiers, ect. You can't have it one way. If women and girls can go against gender stereotype, then little boys and men can as well. There is nothing damaging or controversial about pink nail polish. The controversy is over gender stereotypes and trying to enforce them on a little kid by making outlandish claims over how it may affect his self-image, sexuality and gender identity. Yes, there are differences between the *sexes*. Pink nail polish isn't one of them.

Originally Posted by DiorDeVille

This. I can say, under the cover of anonymity , that one of my brothers was, for some time, the youngest child with two older sisters. And we treated him like our human doll - and he loved the attention! He was put in dresses, tiaras, nail polish, makeup, etc. (until our dad caught us "playing house" one weekend and gently explained to him that "us guys dont do that." Which made not a whit of difference because we had him in a tiara the next day.) He wasnt dressing up to "be like a girl" - it was because the people he had available to play with were doing just that and he wanted to be included in the fun (which he wasnt old enough to attach a stigma to yet). He grew up to head his college sports team, and date almost every girl on the team (to our embarrassment), and is now married to one of the sweetest and most gorgeous women on the planet. The only thing that came out of his childhood dressup sessions (at least to my knowledge) is a continuously satisfying source of blackmail. Nail polish is not going to make a difference. An absent father will make a difference. A controlling mother with inappropriate personal boundaries will make a difference. Various forms of abuse, neglect, mistreatment make a difference. The environments in which children find themselves in those vulnerable, insecure early teen years will make a difference. Genetics and wiring make a difference. Two coats of Zoya in "Poppy Pink!" are not going to turn a future ladies man into Eddie Izzard.

Good posts. I totally agree and I just don't see the big deal about a little boy donning nail polish. It's amazing how closed-minded some people can be. I once dressed my little brother up in a skirt and painted his nails, and he still turned out to be a fine young man! And if painting nails were actually his preference (and not me forcing him lol), then I would accept that and love him just the same. If the person enjoys it and it's not hurting anyone else, then what does anyone care? It's not their business what others' personal choices are. If they don't like it, then they don't have to choose to do it themselves. Live and let live.