Abigail Byrd

When we think of pink and blue as colors that we see everyday, objects come to mind: flowers or bubble gum or waves in the ocean. But, when putting them together, you get “pink and blue”, a concept widely associated with gender. As the colors merge, the ideas behind them become more complex. It become pink versus blue, girls versus boys, femininity versus masculinity. These divides and characteristics are constantly reinforced by modern day products, media, and advertising making the fixation seems so normal, so set in stone. In actuality, the switch to pink for girls and blue for boys happened less than a century ago.

Before the mid 19th century, most children wore white dresses, purely for practicality. White cloth was easy to make and easy to bleach and dresses were easier to handle than pants and a shirt. Because of this, there was never a clear sign plastered to kids that screamed “I’m a girl” or “I’m a boy”, something that is so common in children’s clothing today. Even as pastels emerged in children’s fashion, there wasn’t a strict code specifying which colors went with which gender. But it didn’t take long for some regulations to emerge and, until World War II, pink was actually for boys, while blue was for girls. Jeanne Maglaty, a editor for Smithsonian magazine, says that pink was “a more decided and stronger color”, better for boys, while blue was seen as “more delicate and dainty, prettier for the girl”. Time magazine even printed a chart in 1927 showing gender appropriate colors according to big name U.S. stores at the time, and pink was much more popular for boys than girls. But, as most fads do, that fashion gradually faded away. In fact, it did more than that. It reversed drastically and, by the end of World War II, pink was for girls and blue was for boys.

There was no real driving force behind the switch. One theory is that the change was caused by a misprint in a magazine, but that’s never been proven. Whatever it was, the newly gendered colors spread rapidly, and not only in the United States. During the war, Adolf Hitler had gay individuals labeled with a pink triangles, instigating the association between femininity and pink. Later, as America settled down after the war and common gender stereotypes were reinforced by the rebirth of the traditional family unit, the Baby Boomers were born. These children, who would grow up to have an enormous influence on the world we live in today, were raised with the pink for girls and blue for boys fashion. This generation carried this trend into the 21st century, where so much has changed but, for some reason, this idea has stayed the same.

In our modern world, you don’t have to look far to find the pink for girls, blue for boys mindset. It only takes one glance at a baby to tell what gender they are, based on their clothing. Toy aisles seem like completely different worlds, some riddled with army men and earthy tones and others with Barbie dolls and every shade of pink imaginable. Why is this? Why would a trend that’s so seemingly arbitrary last all these years? One reason, besides the influence of the Baby Boomers, is because of the emergence of prenatal testing. Knowing the sex of your baby before birth allows time for planning and preparation, which usually comes in the form of decoration and gifts. Expecting parents are now able to accurately paint their nursery walls different shades of blush and bashful for a little girl or dark navy blue for a little boy. Families can buy gender specific clothing to give the new baby, such as a bright pink onesie that says “pretty like mommy” across the front. And, as the child grows, so does their interest in toys. Little girls receive toy kitchens and playsets decked out in pink bows and frills while boys get tool sets and plastic dinosaurs. These common themes are just as evident in 2015 as they were in the mid 1900s. But, today, it seems that there is less emphasis on blue for boys and much more on pink for girls. Anything that isn’t rose or violet is considered masculine and boyish. But, they’re just colors, right? On the surface, that’s true. Pink and blue are just colors. A study from the Newcastle University in the UK proved that the fixation on pink and blue could have happened just as easily with any other color. Humans were shown to have tendencies to hyperfocus on the colors associated with their groups, just like girls and boys do with the colors pink and blue. The infatuation is inevitable and, with the constant reference to these colors and the group they are associated with, it’s almost unavoidable.

There is no denying the underlying characteristics of the pink and blue concept. Pink means girly, which, stereotypically, means feminine, domestic, and weak. Blue, on the other hand, means masculine, tough, and dominating. These roles and colors are undeniably correlated throughout history, from the domestic life after World War II to the ongoing feminist movement in our world today. People in the modern world are beginning to wonder about the psychological effects of these colors. Are the children growing up in the 21st century being harmed by the constant pressure to conform to traditional gender roles? Some say no, that the stereotypes associated with pink and blue are simply human nature. But others are more concerned about the nurture aspect, as that nature, for the most part, has been disproven. The kickstarter “Princess Awesome” just released a gender-neutral clothing line for you girls, stating that “girls shouldn’t have to decide between dresses and dinosaurs, or ruffles and robots.” Many toy companies are also making the gradual switch to gender neutral products and advertising, a change that was brought on by the “Let Toys Be Toys” campaign. Also, social media has brought these issues into the spotlight of today’s society like never before. Through platforms such as Twitter and Instagram, people have initiated a nationwide conversation about gender stereotyping and discrimination, all stemming back to children and the pressures placed on them at such a young age. Pressures to conform to roles that are considered “normal” are projected to kids through advertising, media, and, of course, the repeated idea that pink is for girls and blue is for boys. Organizations like the ones I mentioned earlier are advocating for a change to lessen the the influence of this arbitrary and outdated concept. They, along with all the people speaking up about this issue are hoping that someday soon we will, once again, be able to think of blue and pink aso nothing more than colors.