Nicole S. sent in this great example of the way that differences in bodies are used to infer a wide-range of non-anatomical differences between boys and girls (or, in this case, the other way around).
Nicole S. sent in this great example of the way that differences in bodies are used to infer a wide-range of non-anatomical differences between boys and girls (or, in this case, the other way around).
Comments 48
BradMillersHero — February 11, 2011
How ridiculous.
"Boys and girls are different... BECAUSE YOU'VE BRAINWASHED THEM TO BE THAT WAY"
Gina C. — February 11, 2011
Okay.... I'm actually put off by the fact that diapers are now gendered for toddlers. They are diapers. Used to potty train children. Diapers. So now we're also telling our babies that they're boys/girls because of the diapers they use....
And I just had a sudden outrageous thought - is this some kind of mass-heterosexual ploy of homophobes to ward off "homosexual" feelings/identity/inclinations/etc?
What?! I'm confused.
(I hope you can hear my confusion and picture my confused look at this nonsense of it all.)
Andrew — February 11, 2011
For context's sake, is it not worth noting that this is an Australian ad?
I lived in Australia for awhile, and found that while a lot of the material-world stuff is easily recognized by Americans, there are some subtle but very noticeable differences in gender politics (as well as ethnic ones) and in how they're discussed. While the gendered imagery in this TV spot has plenty in common with similar ones in America and Europe, I'm not sure how the voice-over text and the split-screen effect suggesting that the children are somehow each other's opposite would play elsewhere. I'd expect at least a little bit of controversy over what's taken for granted.
Also, I have no idea whether the sex-specific diapers are actually more effective; would have to pass that question on to people who have tested them against the old-school ones, if any are reading here...
Molly W. — February 11, 2011
Something that strikes me about this ad is that it's actually surprisingly ambiguous in its presentation of boys and girls as different.
It presents the two kids as *superficially* gendered but fundamentally almost *identical* -- he's waving a sword, she's waving a wand; he's covered in mud, she's covered in frosting, he's cuddling a dinosaur, she's cuddling a pony.
Even as it's affirming some stereotypes, it's undermining others (that boys are messier and more active, that girls are quieter and more nurturing).
Nick — February 11, 2011
Is it the media that has brainwashed society, or is it us that has brainwashed ourselves. Marketing doesn't happen to make a certain gender become something they are not, they do it because that gender uses the product the most and therefore is a MONEY MAKER. Imagine that, corporations using marketing for MONEY and not brainwashing. What a surreal idea; so instead of being selfish and thinking that corporations are out to get us with their marketing deployments, maybe we need to take a step back and realize why they do it; BECAUSE OF US. We shape our world, we shape who we are. So watch your argument because half of you sound very uneducated and jump on the quick sociological bandwagon that perhaps has BRAINWASHED YOU!
Peter — February 11, 2011
"Because there is a difference?!?" Shameful.
Colin Chapman — February 11, 2011
You guys, look out! The horrible conservative "old media" is trying to tell us that our children aren't androgenous! Fuuuuuck!
Hey dipshits, their junk is in different spots and they pee differently. We shouldn't all be forced to wallow in our own piss for the sake of ideological argument. This website isn't even about sociology, what a fucking joke.
Maggie — February 11, 2011
Oh for the love of pete, half of the comments on this are painfully asinine today.
No one here seems to have a problem with the actual diapers being different. As I watched this I thought according to this I was a boy, what with the mud and dinosaurs and stuff. Did you all not even notice the pretty pretty princess vs. car-lovin' sword-wieldin' BS? With the triumphant ending of "There ARE differences"?
The diapers have almost nothing to do with the whole thing. The crap gender coding does.
Cola — February 11, 2011
It's good to know I was some kind of abomination as a girl because I hated baking cookies and dinosaurs were my favorite thing in the world. Oops, guess my vagina didn't do its job right.
m — February 11, 2011
Apart form the obvious, I do wonder about the difference in diapers. Why isn't there any absorbance under the bum for boys? And considering how fast you'd go through them, how many parents would actually take the time to sort out the intended gender for their diapers? I don't have any children of my own, so I can't claim to be an expert, but the concept seems a bit weird.
Trinker — February 12, 2011
I have been changing both boy diapers and girl diapers for years now, and this is simply hooey. I tuck his penis downward, and so the wet-zone is *at most* an inch different between him and her. (I suppose one can argue that testicles inhibit the flow rearward.) Depending on how they were lying or standing when they were peeing, all *sorts* of possibilities can and do occur in varying wetness zones.
*shrug*