Pink for Girls and Blue for Boys.

[Oswy]

Not sure where this should have gone - could have been theory, politics or history but I thought those who frequent this section of the forum might be most interested.

Anyway, there's been a recent study from Newcastle University which has concluded that female preference for pink is genetic and a product of evolutionary forces acting on women. here's the link: Blue and Pink. (http://www.ncl.ac.uk/press.office/press.release/content.phtml?ref=1187625608)

I'm sceptical. I think the study is deeply flawed in that it seems to ignore the no-doubt substantial socialisation the subjects will have experienced in forming their preferences. It's also a small study group with an even smaller control (Chinese) group.

Anyway - why is pink, in Western society at least, a girl's colour? I've seen some references to the idea that pink was something of a masculine colour prior to the 20th century and that the association of pink with femininity might be connected to the pink triangle the Nazis used to identify homosexuals - but I've seen nothing of a scholarly nature.

Any views?

[RedAnarchist]

Pink used to be used for the British Empire on maps, so it probably was considered a "masculine" colour before the 20th century.

What the study shows is how women have been conditioned into preferring pink, rather than there being any sort of genetic link.

[Oswy]

Pink used to be used for the British Empire on maps, so it probably was considered a "masculine" colour before the 20th century.

What the study shows is how women have been conditioned into preferring pink, rather than there being any sort of genetic link.

Well if it's an evolutionary force it's genetic, no? Here's a snippet of the anouncement:



Evolution may have driven women's preference for pink, according to the study published today.

[Hexen]

Did you know that during the middle ages (or somewhere during that time) that the male color was red (symbolizing bloodshed, war, fire, etc) and female color was blue (symbolizing passiveness, peace, etc)? then overtime it changed to pink= male, blue = female then the sterotypes reversed vice versaly for what is now? So that study above is just a bunch of pseudo-scientifc hogwash (with the sole purpose/agenda of undermining social movements for equality) if they try to link it to evolution (hence leading to biology) rather than a social construct manifested by societies ideals like it is in reality.

[Rosa Provokateur]

All I know is that my Chuck Taylors are pink and that makes em better, not worse:D

[Kassad]

Honestly, it's more of a developing thing. Children are often (well, in America at least) born and grow accustomed to these colors and they apply them to their lives. Most people break the barrier, in a sense, as they get older. It's a sociological thing, honestly, but it isn't really discriminatory.

[Lord Testicles]

I once heard that it came from a medieval moorish tradition to differentiate between male and female infants. Apparently boys were considered a gift from god and so wore the colour blue since blue was seen as a heavenly colour and that girls were seen as inferior so they wore pink which was seen as an earthly colour.

Although I don't know how much truth is in this.

[Hyacinth]

The study is nonsense, it is trying to justify the contingent gender differences that we impose on people by rooting them in evolution. The link doesn't give us the age of the participants, but it does say that they were young adults, so at this point they would have already undergone considerable socialization. Even on younger children, those who would be capable of participating in such a study, i.e. language users, they have also been thoroughly socialized and have acquired the concept of gender norms. Even the control group, granting cultural differences, have been exposed to Western gender norms through globalization, and increasing globalization is resulting in the homogenization of culture around the globe.

What the other posters have said about the 'boy-colors' and 'girl-colors' having been different in different historical periods is true; I cannot recall exactly where I read the explanation of why pink did used to be a boy's color, but up until the turn of the last century it largely was, at least in the West.

[Lynx]

Pink is a color that males have been conditioned not to wear. Stay tuned.

[rouchambeau]

The experiment never really concluded that a certain gender preferring a certain color is rooted in genetics or evolution. All the experiment has shown is that people today have preferences that correlate with gender.

[bayano]

yeah, the claim that its biological (incidentally, biological is different than genetic) is completely speculation on the part of the scientists according to the article, which still jumps to the same conclusions.

towards the end, it says they're going to next test infants, but who's to say how much those infants haven't already been conditioned too. babies' tv shows, nurseries, clothes, toys, are all often in gendered colors. they would have to find a culture with either equal or non-existing representations of blue and pink.

[Kassad]

Well, at least in the high school culture around me, men wear pink as a sign of rebellion and standing out against traditional norms. As true as this may be, girls do not stand out when they wear blue. Interesting concept.

[Dust Bunnies]

Just some more sexism folks.

[jake williams]

Well, at least in the high school culture around me, men wear pink as a sign of rebellion and standing out against traditional norms.
At my school sexist douchebags wear pink in an awkward combination to combine their sexist douchebaggery with a weak attempt to deny their sexist douchebaggery.

ed: Oh, and the study is bullshit.

[MarxSchmarx]

I once heard that it came from a medieval moorish tradition to differentiate between male and female infants. Apparently boys were considered a gift from god and so wore the colour blue since blue was seen as a heavenly colour and that girls were seen as inferior so they wore pink which was seen as an earthly colour.

The version I read was that blue was apparently considered a color to ward of evil spirits in ancient Greece, and baby boys were treasured so they were given blue to wear. However, this same source said that pink seemed as good/unique a demarcation for girls as any other color so that aspect of the explanation is unsatisfying.

[Sasha]

What the study shows is how women have been conditioned into preferring pink, rather than there being any sort of genetic link.

this.

fucking bullshit socio-biology.
i always call these kind or arguments "playing basketball makes you taller" reasoning. the fact that the mayority of basketball players are tall doesn't mean you become taller from playing basketball. Fucking simplistic pseudo science.

[TC]

I love it when natural scientists make speculative theoretical claims to sensationalize their data...then people can say that stuff they want to believe anyways has 'science' behind it lol.

[Sendo]

I'm a male and I've always hated pink. Who knows, maybe its because it is associated with girls. But then again I've worn neon pink/neon green stripes when I was a kid (late 80s early 90s.....it happens) and I have no problem with purple or any stigma. Maybe it's individual variance, my genetics, my upbringing, or the Y chromosome, but I've never liked pastels or any soft, faded colors like sky blue or soft pink or lavender.

Even if it was true that men did prefer cool tones to warm ones (btw I prefer purple or red, then the cools, and yellow at last)...what does it matter? You can make a genetic link that women have higher pitched voices. Whup dee doo! As a kid I feared booming voices, but as a grown male I prefer and understand much better sounds and voices that are fuller and deeper. That's a biological fact that one's hearing gets accustomed to one's peers and whatnot. Makes sense for our ears to adapt to human ranges, and within that, prefer ranges closer to our own.

We don't need to be so knee-jerk and quick to beat down another worthless study. Who cares? How anyone could turn this into a justification of sexism is beyond me. I don't know if my preferences are tied to my family's genes, my culture, me, or my gender genes. I don't care either. I certainly don't think 95% of humanity cares either.

The more important question is why society feels it necessary to mark boys and girls with colors anywhere outside of the hospital birth rooms. That could open a discussion on sexism and subconscious discrimination.