>Why the phrase "games for girls" makes me cringe

>I’m going to take a break from gaming-related porn here. The thing about delving the depths of the internet is that you always discover that there’s an entirely new level of awful that you didn’t know about until you went looking. Instead, I’m going look at girls’ versions of board games today as kind of a palette cleanser. Before I start, though, I’ll note that several of these pictures were ganked from an excellent article on The Society Pages that deserves a read.

Anyone who has ever tried to buy a board game for the children in their lives will know that toys and games for children are marketed in a very gendered way. It is not at all uncommon to go to a toy store and see displays like this:

Stuff like this just makes me cringe because this isn’t me, nor has it ever been me. As a child, I refused to own anything pink – although to my mother’s credit she was far less dismayed by this than by the fact that I refused to wear dresses from the age of 8 onward. So the fact that the robots in marketing departments everywhere have decided that LITTLE GIRLS LIKE PINK is discomfiting to me. Sure I liked pants better than dresses and took tae kwon do instead of ballet, but I’d like to think that didn’t make me any less of a girl.Now of course I’ll admit that there’s a good reason why game companies do this – these things sell. Look at the Disney Princess line; it’s practically a license to print money. But just as with any group of people, not all little girls have the same tastes – so it makes me sad to see game companies marketing to girls as if all girls ever want the same things, especially when that same marketing comes with the added sexist baggage that goes with it.

I mean, check this out:


OMG! Why bother with the boring game when I can just pose with this pretty, pretty purse?

So, yes, a pink version of Twister is pretty ridiculous. I defy you to give me a rational explanation of how the default Twister is a “boys’ game” and thus warrants a “girls’ version”. But aside from the total eyeroll factor, check out the packaging and you’ll notice that Twister Pink doesn’t come in a game box – it comes in A PURSE. Even better, there’s a tiny drawing of some girls actually playing the game up top, but the image that dominates the packaging is the girl posing prettily with the purse.Does Milton Bradley think that girls won’t play games if they don’t come in gender-appropriate containers? Like little girls who would not have played vanilla Twister IN A BOX would suddenly jump all over playing Twister Pink IN A PURSE? How is the purse a value-added feature? Arg. Just… arg.

And there’s plenty of other examples of patronizing packaging as well. Like:


“F*CKYOU” would also be a bingo, and would be worth a lot more with F, C, K, and Y. Too bad its two words.

Fashion? FASHION? There’s an entire world of seven letter words out there, like “entrail”, “retinas”, and “inertia”. And you chose to go with FASHION. I mean, even from a Scrabble point of view it’s a shitty word since five of your seven letters are 1-pointers.And, man, what are you trying to say with this? That the only reading girls do is Twilight, fashion mags, and celebrity gossip? That fashion is such an all-consuming part of a girl’s life that even while playing a board game her thoughts are, naturally, about what she’s wearing? That she can’t relate to any concept that isn’t directly related to fashion?

Well, that would at least explain this monstrosity:


Monopoly for girls! Colon capital D! I have to have one!

This edition of Monopoly comes with the pieces in a jewelry box. And even better, all those boring properties like “Boardwalk” and “Park Place” have been replaced with things way more relevant to girls – like shopping malls, hair salons, and fashion boutiques! Because heaven knows that girls can’t ever aspire to be usurious property barons out to make a quick buck. That would make them successful business people! Much better to change it so that the things that they own are stuff that boys wouldn’t want to own anyway. Eew, cooties!But then, everyone knows that girls can’t expect to have the same careers as boys:


Quick! Someone give me some insulin! I’m going into pink overload!

So the great thing about this game is that you get to play to figure out what kind of career is best for you. Don’t worry about having challenging professions – your options are all things won’t be intellectually taxing. (And if they are they’ll be jobs men don’t want.) Potential careers include things like: “Fashion Designer”, “Animal Doctor”, and “Super Mom”. Because it’s important to start teaching girls at a young age that the only value they offer to society is their ability to reproduce.I realize that this is an older game – from about 1990 – and I don’t honestly know if there’s a newer edition. I devoutly hope not. But I thought it deserved a mention since I found it while browsing through Board Game Geek. Wei Hwa Huang wrote an excellent review of the game called “Most Condescending Game Ever“, and then some BGG users proceeded to then argue that this actually wasn’t sexist at all.

/facepalm

Other things that are, apparently, not sexist include:


New preschool curricula include Disney Princess Recognition. True story.

It doesn’t really matter what pictures you use for Memory as long as there are two of them. But you know what I’d love? A “Girls Edition” of Memory with pictures of astronauts, spaceships, and power tools. I would totally buy that for the girl toddlers in my life.Last we have something that a friend alerted me to:

 

The fail is so large it practically has its own gravitational pull.

So. Much. Hatred.

The bottom right hand of the package says SOLID WOOD BLOCKS (are pretty in pink). Because I guess it’s important that all board games for girls are pretty. What makes this extra terrible is that it’s essentially Truth or Dare, but without the Dares and with only really insipid Truths. Like “If you had one wish, what would you wish for?” and “who do you have a crush on right now?”.

Now, I’ll admit to creating a Truth or Dare Jenga set with some friends in university, and it was always a blast to play. Why not create a non-gendered Truth or Dare Jenga and let the game stand on its own merits for crying out loud?

About wundergeek
In addition to being a cranky feminist blogger, I am an artist, photographer, and somewhat half-assed writer living in the wilds of Canada with a wonderful spouse and two slightly broken cats.

14 Responses to >Why the phrase "games for girls" makes me cringe

  1. davmopedia says:

    >*palate cleanserThough considering the overabundance of pink, "palette cleanser" does sort of work, in a perverse way.

  2. davmopedia says:

    >To be fair, Hasbro does sell a non-gendered truth or dare Jenga. Here's a link to its bgg page: http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8916/jenga-truth-or-dare

  3. Renee says:

    >Jenga truth or dare that doesn't involve alcohol? I'm stunned. The "Careers For Girls" thing is just wretched. I worked in a big box store for 14 years, I've participated in this "pink-washing of girls toys" conversation many times before, so I thought I was beyond being shocked. But here I am, shocked again.This is one of those chicken-and-the-egg sort of discussions. Toy manufacturers didn't create these cliches (or did they?), but they're certainly essential to perpetuating them. And why wouldn't they…it's so much easier on their marketing departments if they don't actually have to think about how to sell stuff to girls and young women. Slap some pink on it, a tube of lipstick or something sparkly, and you can move on to the important stuff…the boys. It's just good business and as the conversations with LPJ have already shown us, business trumps morality and/or good taste.

  4. nekoewen says:

    >The toy aisle is always depressing that way. You can always tell you're in the section with stuff aimed at girls by that peculiar shade of pink demanded by Barbie. It's amazing how uniform it is at times. I can *kind of* see something like Mystery Date or Tinkerbell stuff being aimed specifically at girls, but if girls aren't playing Jenga it's almost certainly not for a lack of pinkness. Of course, that's only one of many mainstream forms of entertainment that seem to radiate a contempt for the audience.Personally I've never known a girl that actually likes pink (my youngest sister was and still is big on purple though), and I've known a few who've very specifically despised pink with a burning passion.(And of course there's the fact that pink used to be considered a masculine color, hence the pink dress shirts that you still see sometimes even today.)

  5. Welleran says:

    >Great commentary! I would say I feel your pain, but, being a guy, I am not bombarded by such drivel (or at least can filter it out).

  6. wundergeek says:

    >Davmopedia & Renee: Truth or Dare Jenga is way more fun when you start with a blank Jenga set. I mean, there's no way the legal department is going to let them put any really FUN Dares on the pieces, now are they?Renee: Virtual fistbump. Stuff like this is the reason why sometimes I'm scared of the possibility of having girl child(ren) if/when I reproduce.Ewen: I find it interesting that adult men are reclaiming pink, but pink for BOYS is still verboten. It's good to hear that there are still young girls today who are pink-averse like I was.Welleran: Thanks! I'm glad you like it! Filtering isn't always bad, as long as it doesn't turn into habitual blinders. I'll admit I do a certain amount of filtering on a daily basis. I mean, I have to, or I'd go completely bonkers.

  7. kmvalexa says:

    >One of the interesting things is the implicit understanding that the standard version of a game is for boys. You'll see the standard game and a girl's version, but never a standard game and a boy's version.Who knows, if they'd shown a boy on the box I might have had an Easy-Bake Oven when I was a kid.

  8. Renee says:

    >@ kmvalexaExactly! That's kind of the fundamental principle of discrimination, really. The idea that one thing is better than another thing is rooted in the idea that that "better thing" is "normal" or "standard", and that other things "abnormalness" is cited as proof of its inferior nature. Male is normal, straight is normal, cisgender is normal, able-bodied is normal, and so on…I can't actually think of any examples where the less "normal" or "common" thing is considered better or more desirable. Maybe wealth.@ wundergeekI'm sure the makers of Jenga would be appalled at some of the uses their game was put to by my friends and I. :p And yeah, sometimes I think maybe I'm lucky I don't have to make the decision about having children (though mostly it just pisses me off that that I never had the option…or at least the correct one).

  9. Chaltab says:

    >These are all so awful. Even aside from the ridiculous pinkness, the stereotyping of what girls are interested in and what careers they should pursue… This is why I let my little cousin Macey play with my copy of Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia. Awesome female protagonist, no pink.

  10. valacosa says:

    >I don't know where I stand on that memory game. It doesn't actually say "for girls" on it. But if I were to include that in my (meagre) game collection, my housemates would probably question my sexuality — so I suppose your point stands. "Careers for girls" is dreadful, though. I'm shocked that it exists. I would think that at some point, someone would say, "Wait, this is a really bad idea." You don't see other demographics treated this way. You wouldn't expect, say, "Careers for blacks".

  11. Anonymous says:

    >I bet all that pink dye causes cancer.

  12. >Scroll down to see the "My Cleaning Troly", marketed "for girls only". Isn't that lovely.http://www.themorningnews.org/archives/guides/2010_holiday_survival_guide_for_slackers.php

  13. wundergeek says:

    >Tim: Oh god. It hurts…

  14. Pingback: Judge a book by its cover « giullina.net

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 248 other followers

%d bloggers like this: