Agreed, but this is more than just a gender thing it's a gender race thing.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Sleepwear brand removes kids "Boys Will Be Boys" pyjamas after complaint
- Thread starter Eduardo Corrochio
- Start date
Yeah it's not like you could just make a shirt that says "All Lives Matter" and not expect any backlash.
Having read most of this thread (why did I do that?), that's basically what happened here, except the general expression of bemusement from Team Shrug has triggered an "Era will be Era" moment.
The loss of freedom is perceived, not technical.
You're the worst poster ITT. Take your bad faith dishonesty elsewhere, and please don't PM me again.
It's not in any way. This is how these people perceive it.
Not sure about never, but it's going to take a while for sure.
If you want a discussion you need to be ready for other opinions.
It's just the way it works man, whether you like it or not.
It you can't handle that ...
What really makes me hate it is that it defines boys as being boys. This is so narrow and offensive in of itself. Why does a boy have to be a boy?
Shocked at how many people here think this is PC gone too far. As the father of two young boys I do my best to squash any gender stereotypes. They know not to hit anyone, not just "don't hit girls". They know both boys and girls can do shitty things and be held responsible for their actions. They also know that girls can be just as rough as boys and as sweet.
I don't think it's just been co-opted. I think the sentence itself is the issue from the beginning. It implies troublemaking is excused because of the sex of the person. Special treatment for boys. Now think about how most people would percieve a shirt that said girls will be girls. Would it conjure the same images boys will be boys does? No.
Yeah this is a whole other issue with it. Basically this sentence has multiple problematic implications about boys, men, the balance of the sexes, gender identity questions. Not surprised someone complained about it.
We have to create conflict to preserve some antiquated saying because of snowflakes feeling they are losing the freedom to force a company to keep using it.
This phrase has never been meant to be kids will be kids or it would have been phrased like that. It is a symptom of a culture that expects boys to be rambunctious/aggressive/problematic and just shrug their shoulders while girls are expected to be much more easy to handle and proper. That's why you see it used to also explain away men being bad as well. It's an expectation that the male gender is just that way and we should just expect it.
It's both.
It's part of the root cause, AND it's been co-opted.
It's a shitty phrase now because of how it helped create toxic masculinity, and how it's being used currently.
It's like you have never seen kids pyjamas before or kids clothes in general. They are gendered as fuck.
"Daddy's little princess"
"Bows make everything better"
Thank you for your entertaining posts. You seem to be a great person and not at all posting in bad faith or any kind of shit posting. Thank you for your bravery.
I'd argue it's always been a shitty statement. It's like saying boys are just going to be bad, what are you going to do? While at the same time the expectations for girls are different. It got co opted because the attitude it got co opted for is the same one that really started the statement in the first place. It never meant kids will be kids or it would have been phrased as such. It is specifically saying the male gender is more rambunctious and what are you going to do cause that is the way they are.
And I hate those clothes too. Never thought of complaining about them but if I had a girl no way I'd dress her in that crap.
Because a boy is a boy? I swear some of you are Russian bots spouting nonsense to push people to the right.
I think this story specifically is a little silly.
However, I have to ask: is "PC culture" really the "absolute worst?"
You're sure there aren't many other worse things?
That doesn't mean he can't be taught to be nice to others or how to play nicely. Which is what the person you responded to was trying to imply. It almost seems like you are purposely ignoring the implication to make this reply.
This news is waaaay too innocuous to throw one of these up.
Yes and no. I said why does a boy have to bea boy? Why can't a boy be a girl or a man or anything they want? We should be moving past gender norms. We can changes peoples sex so why are still having gender norms? It's archaic in this day and age. People still cling to the past and won't allow us to let go.
Errr, ok? Happy you found my posts entertaining!
I will tick every box next week on a brand new post, stay tuned!
Boys will be boys is usually an excuse to let white boys get away with shitty behavior and/or illegal acts.
Lol what?
I'm sorry but boys will be boys is used to describe boys of any color being ....boys. Doing what boys do, coming in the house covered in mud and grass stains after rough housing with friends and doing the antics that little boys do. Boys have fun when they are young. That's not something limited to little white boys.
A boy picks his nose and eats a booger it's boys being boys. Any color, race, nationality whatever.
I have a two year old. When I'm at kids parties and at the park, you bet your ass "boys will be boys" and the girls are a little different. Girls are usually calmer, more civilised. Boys have "fits of testosterone" and act out a lot more. And there's nothing you can do about it. It's nature.
I dunno man, the far right (being nazi's, hating people of color, wanting to take rights away from various minority groups etc) to me is just as bad as (wanting to get rid of gender norms, wanting more inclusion, informing companies about offensive/dated phrases on their clothes etc). Just as bad as one another
I always found this "Men/Boys cannot help themselves" argument strange. If true they are slaves to their animalistic urges. Thus they cannot be rational actors and kind of need someone to watch over them.
And since you just disqualified all men and boys they would have to be led by women or genderqueer people.
Kind of like pets. Those are also not responsible for what they do so responsibility falls to their owners.
So "Boys will be boys" should be really offensive to men. Of course right now it works like a get out of jail card so why think so far. But who knows, it might turn into the man version of "Women are too emotional".
That is another potential angle why the phrase is problematic and hostile even to men.
And since you just disqualified all men and boys they would have to be led by women or genderqueer people.
Kind of like pets. Those are also not responsible for what they do so responsibility falls to their owners.
So "Boys will be boys" should be really offensive to men. Of course right now it works like a get out of jail card so why think so far. But who knows, it might turn into the man version of "Women are too emotional".
That is another potential angle why the phrase is problematic and hostile even to men.
OK. My posts to you was simply asking you to explain what you were talking about as I didn't want to to shit up the thread. You kept accusing me of not answering a question, so I very politely asked what the question was,
I was super polite in the pm's. Can post them if you want.
Anyway makes no difference, I was a gent but posting them is rude I think. I have no interest in that.
Yeah that's how I read that phrase. Harmless exuberance/gross stuff that you see boys tend to do more than girls.
Then go with kids will be kids. Boys will be boys, as it's been pointed out already, and with proof of such, has been used to excuse college age and older white males from rape and other awful acts. Sorry, but the phrase has a much much darker and shittier connotation to it than it used to. And for the record, as a teacher, girls can do some pretty crazy, stupid shit when they're young. Why? Because they're fucking children, hence kids will be kids.
Maybe in your country, don't know about Australia. Over here it's more about kids and their testosterone. My kid's been having some "Hulking out" moments lately, and he's generally pretty calm.
I think the term Boys will be Boys is important to acknowledge in the sense that so many kids these days are put on ADHD medication when they are just being energetic kids who have wild imaginations. I don't like it when a kids wild behavior is treated as if its not normal.
Although, clearly some people use it to excuse rotten behavior, but that's just shitty people using an innocuous phrase.
Although, clearly some people use it to excuse rotten behavior, but that's just shitty people using an innocuous phrase.
The original use of the phrase was to capture this.
That and the dumber things men do...which is run around, shout and get dirty.
Kids will be kids just doesn't have the same ring to it sorry.
When a boy and girl walks in the house covered in mud you can smile and say "lol kids"
But when two boys come in the house looking like they had a kick ass day of having fun it's boys will be boys. The world is not going to stop saying that. Like ever...
When little girls get into their mothers closet and come out wearinf her clothes and make up smeared on them like a clown and everyone goes "aww how cute girls will be girls@
Now see, this just shows that even looking at the phrase in a 100% innocent light, it's still a stupid and possibly hurtful phrase. Girls like doing all of those things too but I know many women who were kept from "rough-housing" or getting dirty because that was seen as something a little girl shouldn't do.
This
Nope, white boys get the benefit of the doubt, minorities do not.
And you need to be ready for people to think your opinion is shit and to dismiss it entirely, that is also how discussion works.
People who choose to spare a moment of their time for the benefit of society
The phrase is also used to excuse fighting, bullying, vandalism, theft, etc. even in young (white) boys. This entire thread is basically just repeating that no, this phrase isn't only used in innocent ways. Guess we'll just keep repeating it.
What if a boy wants to play with makeup? They don't get "boys will be boys" in that situation. Or if a girl wants to play a sport, they don't get "girls will be girls". In both situations there is inherent harm due to narrow defined gender roles that make people outside those roles feel like shit, and you're arguing in favor of that.
What is it, a fucking corporate slogan? Doesn't have the right ring for what?