I’ve written before about the gendering phenomenon—how eager we are to gender our children, for whom gender, not to mention sex and sexuality, are meaningless, carrying only the meaning that we as skewed, culturally shaped adults bring with us.
My daughter Maybelle, although she has a very gendered first name, does not go through the world as a specifically gendered being. She is equally fascinated with baby dolls and dinosaurs. She loves trains and Willie Nelson’s “Whiskey River” (appropriate for a three year old? Perhaps not, but she does love it). There are many factors that lead to this androgyny of interests: her parents, of course, being fairly radical feminists plays a role. But also I think she doesn’t pick up the gendered cues that her classmates are beginning to perform and observe. Having an intellectual disability is sort of beneficial in that it screens the subtle nuances—nuances that I consider fairly pathological.
Emotions, Maybelle responds to. But the notion that “girls wear dresses, boys play with dinosaurs”? Not so much.
Adults, however, love some gender distinctions, particularly when little kids are concerned. Many adults who adore Maybelle get tingly at the idea of dressing her in little girl dresses. And here’s the most successful strategy to come along: Maybelle’s preschool teachers have suggested that they’ll have an easier time helping to potty train her if we send her to school in dresses.
That’s been an effective strategy. We’re very eager for Maybelle to become potty trained, and she seems eager to give it a try, herself. So we’re sending her to school in dresses.
Her dress-wearing was big news. Every person in Maybelle’s preschool—from the director to the undergraduate student workers—have commented on the fact that Maybelle often comes to school these days wearing dresses. My mom, who lives about 500 miles away from us, heard about this fact through a friend of a friend, who found this significant enough that she called my mom up to say, “I hear Maybelle’s wearing dresses!”
A couple of things strike me about this. First of all, if dresses really do make potty training easier, why aren’t the little boys in Maybelle’s class being encouraged to come to school in dresses? And second, it’s interesting how much validation Maybelle gets. “You look so pretty!” adults say to her.
There’s something satisfying to many adults about a girl wearing a dress, and they’re initiating the process that will make this feel satisfying to Maybelle, too. She’ll pick up on the fact that she gets excessive good vibes when she wears a dress. They don’t encourage boys to come to school in dresses for the same reason that they validate Maybelle for wearing one: these are both phenomena related to us creating and perpetuating gender.
Of course she’s adorable in her dresses, but she’s also adorable when she looks a bit like a rock chick, like a comic book fan, like a nerd in her glasses, reading a book. I want her to have a lot of space to develop the personal expression that fits her best, no matter how that maps onto our current configurations of gender.
Comments 18
SamiJ — May 16, 2012
The wearing of pants on boy babies is something only adopted in the last century. Same with the color pink.
It seems like the more aware society is regarding gender differences, the more ways are adopted to adhere to them.
JenB — May 16, 2012
Love this post.
I wonder if this is partly a traditional southern/ Charleston phenomenon? Or at least, I don't have friends elsewhere that think it is usual for little girls to be in dresses to such an extent (as in, daily). Down here the little boys often wear those onesies (Jon Jons) with the tall white socks that, I've learned the hard way, look like dresses to the rest of the country, too.
Anyway, even here in Charleston, I think you'll see that the girls start to resist dress wearing by about 5 or 6. It is not cool after that. So even if they are getting oohs and ahhs for looking so "dressed up," something else over takes their fashion decisions in a little bit of time.
But otherwise, I'd love to hear more about the problem with dresses. I put my girls in dresses because I admire so many adults in dresses. I'd like them to be like these adults, so, dresses don't worry me. But I know I must be missing something.
I have thought about whether they will get "stuck" with some look I foist on them. But so many people leave behind the gender/ preppiness/ parental styling of their youth, and abandoning the clothing seems to be the first thing we can do (and with ease).
I've done one practical thing, if the worry is the attention kids get for clothes: lots of costumes. These seem to crack up at least the non-crabby adults out there, and they are far more attention getting than any old dress.
gwp_admin — May 16, 2012
I do love the costume idea!
Heather Hewett — May 17, 2012
Love this post. So interesting to see how gender roles and expectations are playing out in Maybelle's young life! My younger sister is older (40) and her "failure" to meet gendered norms still plays a role in how people perceive her, I think.
Terri — May 17, 2012
This all seems to be part of the backlash. When my kids were young (in the 80's) my pre-school age daughter wore lots of overalls in neutral colors that were then passed on to her brother. The same with the jeans and the Keds. The toys were mostly primary colors for the preschoolers. Today the gendering seems ubiquitous. Everything from birth on is gendered: pink car seat, stroller, high hair, etc. Toys which don't even have a gendered function are made in green or blue for boys and a girls version in pink or purple. Most toy stores are clearly devided into boy and girls sections. Separating boys from girls is a subtle way of reinforcing traditional gender roles. Are we returning to the '50s?
gwp_admin — May 17, 2012
I think some of this reinforcing of gender roles is market-driven. Folks can sell more if you have to buy gear for your daughters that can't then be passed on to your sons.
And Heather, so glad to hear about your sister not matching up with gendered roles!
Holly — May 17, 2012
Just wanted to say that I enjoyed reading your post. I found this blog via the CNN article on mommy wars. I am new to the Charleston area and am encouraged to have a great feminist thinker/writer locally! As the mom of a little girl, I'll definitely be checking back frequently.
gwp_admin — May 17, 2012
Thanks, Holly, and welcome to Charleston! You can have a look at my other blog, too: www.baxtersez.com.
Deborah (akaTawanda Bee) — May 18, 2012
Interesting perspective. I wear pants more than dresses, and when I decide to wear a dress, I actually feel grateful that I have many more choices than all the men I come in contact with down at the courthouse. Especially during the summer while they are sweating away in their suits.
Alison Piepmeier — May 18, 2012
It's definitely true about choices--women have more options for clothing than men.
Maehem (TMae) — May 21, 2012
I immediately wondered if the preschool was encouraging boys to come to school in dresses to facilitate potty training as I read that. Because, wow, yes, it does seem that dresses would do that. So, dresses for all the children! No? That's not happening? Hmm.
It's really complicated for me to unpack the ways in which my kid is gendered. I shop in the boys section for his clothes, I guess because he has a penis. Or because I'm not really a fan of ruffles and glitter? I don't intentionally put him in clothes from the girls section, but I DO intentionally buy him pink toys whenever they're available. And, as radical as I am, I wonder about my motivation for clothing him. Conformity? Passivity? People care less about girls in pants, than about boys in dresses?
I wish it was easier.
Alison Piepmeier — May 21, 2012
Ha! You and I are alike, TMae: I rarely shop in the girls' section because I'm not a fan of ruffles and glitter. But I get to claim it as radical feminism!
I do dislike how boys' clothing is so sports-oriented, but I love the shirts with rock star gear on them. And dinosaurs.
Christine — May 24, 2012
I enjoyed this post on many levels. Thanks for writing! I was reading through the comments that followed, and I find one of them problematic. I wonder if you/others have thoughts on this as well. Allison, you wrote, "...women have more options for clothing than men." While I agree that this is socially true, doesn't this line of thinking also perpetuate the problem that there are "appropriate" clothing choices just for women and others just for men? If the issue is really why your daughter is encouraged to wear dresses and what this says about our culture and what it means for her gender development, then I think labeling clothes (or other items) are gender-specific will only reinforce these ideas for your daughter and other young children. What do you think?
Lucy — May 27, 2012
Thanks for being up to letting her wear both. My mom was a great parent, but she never understood why I hated wearing dresses, growing up--I just never GOT why I had to wear things like that. The glitter, the frills, the ribbons... It just wasn't FOR me. And these arguments started when I was five! Thankfully she gave up after I graduated middle school, but picture day was such a nightmare, growing up, in an otherwise beautiful relationship. : So again, thanks for catching this, and being open to the idea of her dressing how she wants to be who she wants. We who don't have kids, but know what it's like to be in the spot of kids who don't like conforming to gender, appreciate you, too.
christylee — May 27, 2012
My husband and son both wear kilts for no special reason at all. My son is 3 and likes them because he doesn't have to wear underwater.
Welcome to Monday ~ 28th May 2012 | feminaust ~ for australian feminism — May 27, 2012
[...] Potty training is apparently easier for pre-school teachers when the child is in a dress….so why aren’t we encouraging little boys to be sent to school in dresses? [...]
Mindy — May 27, 2012
It is interesting that your daughter's pre-school said it would be easier to toilet train her if she wore dresses. My daughter's pre-school said it was easier if the girls wore pants/shorts because it was better for running, climbing and jumping if they weren't tripping over skirts and there was never any issue with getting their pants down in time to make it to the toilet. They did encourage us not to dress our kids (boys and girls) in overalls as getting those off in time could be tricky for little kids who have waited until the last possible minute to run to the toilet. So I'm smelling a bit of a rat with the dresses/toilet training thing. But it would be easy enough to test out at home first to see if your daughter does find dresses easier than pants when toilet training.
Mo — May 30, 2012
Reading these comments and the post I can't help but worry there is a misogyny in the idea that dresses or dress-wearers, if they are female, are lesser.