topic Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section in Community Chat

Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:59:09 GMT

I don't understand why this has become an issue.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

Goldengate8361 — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:13:16 GMT

I think it's to avoid gender-stereotyping, which I think is a good thing.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

brii — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:13:23 GMT

what is the issue?

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

deepwaterdotter — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:14:02 GMT

Don't most department stores reorganize their toy department this time of year to make room for the influx of toys presented for Christmas gifts?

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:22:19 GMT

As I understand it, a mom took a photo of a Target sign that said "Building Sets" and below it, it said "Girls' Building Sets." She complained that the sets for girls were mostly pink and different than the sets for boys.

Target agreed and has taken down the signs which label toys as for boys or girls.

But there has been a big backlash against Target for doing this.

I understand what happened, but I do not understand why some people are so upset about it. It's all over the news.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:23:29 GMT

@Goldengate8361 wrote:
I think it's to avoid gender-stereotyping, which I think is a good thing.

************************

I think it's a good thing, too.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

Laura14 — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:36:18 GMT

I think it's ridiculous and more of a parent issue than a store issue.

Does the department store really have to put signs up that your kid is allowed to buy any toy they want? Really?

The store doesn't care as long as you have cash or a good credit card nor should you care about what the sign above your head says. I have yet to see a store employee refuse to sell a toy because a girl is buying it but it was in the boy aisle or vice versa.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

gmkb — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:22:26 GMT

It seems to me that in all matters in this country, the loud voice of a few means more than the voice of the majority. That woman evidently felt she couldn't buy her daughter a 'boy' set of blocks because of the sign - ridiculous. She is free to buy either set for her daughter - no rules.

I wanted to add that I do not object to removing boy/girl signs. My objection is to a few forcing all matter of things on the rest of us or in this case on Target.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:35:21 GMT

I totally understand the point the mom is making. What I dodn't understand is why so many are angry that the toys will no longer be labeled Boy's Toys, and Girl's Toys.

They are doing the same for their children's section for bedding. Go in and pick what you want: footballs on the bedspread or Disney princesses. The store will no longer say one is for boys while the other is for girls.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

surfk — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:44:46 GMT

I don't think its ridiculous at all. And I don't think it is only the parent who is looking. Depending upon a child's age, most toy-seeking kids can read enough as to recognize the words "BOY" and "GIRL".

So there is always also that dynamic happening in the toy aisles. A kid will maybe be attracted to a specific toy but then sees all of these LABELS all over the packaging or signs on the shelves.

And they'll suddenly be confused, embarrassed and thinking something is "wrong" with them for wanting the "regular" erector set rather than the My Pretty Pony version of one.

Even if there is no real differential between two items, many kids will just shy away from or even balk at the idea of buying something labeled for the opposite gender. There is no real material difference but they read the words "For Boys" and many girls just don't want it anymore.

Or a boy will want the lavender colored item and not the blue one which is marked for "BOYS".

COLOR belongs to everyone - to both males and females. its ridiculous to limit a person's world even down to whether they are "blue" or "pink" people.

And a toy which isn't intended to promote gender stereotypes then doesn't need the labels or the color coding. A microscope "for girls" doesn't have to be PINK. I mean, unless she plans to grow up to be Dr. Paris Hilton, so few real microscopes a young female scientist will ever use will be PINK. lol

Its actually better for businesses in the end. They can stop making so many gender-duplicates of items not requiring gender differentials. And all the toys have the opportunity to be bought suddenly by twice the number of potential shoppers.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

Laura14 — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:44:35 GMT

@NoelSeven wrote:
I totally understand the point the mom is making. What I dodn't understand is why so many are angry that the toys will no longer be labeled Boy's Toys, and Girl's Toys.

They are doing the same for their children's section for bedding. Go in and pick what you want: footballs on the bedspread or Disney princesses. The store will no longer say one is for boys while the other is for girls.

I don't think it has anything to do with what the signs say or don't say. People are miffed, in my opinion, because it seems like no one can use good old fashioned common sense anymore. Consumers need to stop making extra busy work and expense for these companies with their nonsense, expense that will be coming back to us. And businesses need to stop bending to every social media whim and remember the customer is not always right and you can't make everyone happy.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

nana59 — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:47:27 GMT

Aren't there more important issues in this world that need to be reorganized!!!

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:51:35 GMT

surfk, that's a great synopsis! I agree with you.

It's true, it's not just one parent. A lot of parents have complained over the years that toys are too discriminatory. Numerous female engineers and scientists, included. Building toys were always put in the boys section. Sure, a girl could go in there but was not really made to feel at home there.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:54:44 GMT

@Laura14 wrote:
@NoelSeven wrote:
I totally understand the point the mom is making. What I dodn't understand is why so many are angry that the toys will no longer be labeled Boy's Toys, and Girl's Toys.

They are doing the same for their children's section for bedding. Go in and pick what you want: footballs on the bedspread or Disney princesses. The store will no longer say one is for boys while the other is for girls.
I don't think it has anything to do with what the signs say or don't say. People are miffed, in my opinion, because it seems like no one can use good old fashioned common sense anymore. Consumers need to stop making extra busy work and expense for these companies with their nonsense, expense that will be coming back to us. And businesses need to stop bending to every social media whim and remember the customer is not always right and you can't make everyone happy.

******************************
Actually, it's less work. No signs needed anymore saying Boys building sets and Girls building sets.

Maybe just one, saying Building Sets.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

brii — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:56:43 GMT

Just seems so silly to market toys specifically for girls and boys.

Kids who have siblings of the opposite gender play together.

I know when my kids went to preschool, all the toys were available for both boys and girls.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

Laura14 — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:59:39 GMT

@surfk wrote:
I don't think its ridiculous at all. And I don't think it is only the parent who is looking. Depending upon a child's age, most toy-seeking kids can read enough as to recognize the words "BOY" and "GIRL".

So there is always also that dynamic happening in the toy aisles. A kid will maybe be attracted to a specific toy but then sees all of these LABELS all over the packaging or signs on the shelves.

And they'll suddenly be confused, embarrassed and thinking something is "wrong" with them for wanting the "regular" erector set rather than the My Pretty Pony version of one.

Even if there is no real differential between two items, many kids will just shy away from or even balk at the idea of buying something labeled for the opposite gender. There is no real material difference but they read the words "For Boys" and many girls just don't want it anymore.

Or a boy will want the lavender colored item and not the blue one which is marked for "BOYS".

COLOR belongs to everyone - to both males and females. its ridiculous to limit a person's world even down to whether they are "blue" or "pink" people.

And a toy which isn't intended to promote gender stereotypes then doesn't need the labels or the color coding. A microscope "for girls" doesn't have to be PINK. I mean, unless she plans to grow up to be Dr. Paris Hilton, so few real microscopes a young female scientist will ever use will be PINK. lol

Its actually better for businesses in the end. They can stop making so many gender-duplicates of items not requiring gender differentials. And all the toys have the opportunity to be bought suddenly by twice the number of potential shoppers.

Totally agree that businesses need to stop color coding their products. It's really not necessary for a majority of items.

But I have to respectfully disagree with the kid being embarrased aspect. When I was a little girl in the 70s, my choice of dolls was a white blond hair blue eyed doll or the black brown hair brown eyed doll. That was it. This was way before Cabbage Patch and American Girl.

As an Italian kid, I resembled the black doll much more since blonde hair and blue eyes don't exist in my family at all. I at least got the hair and eyes with the black doll which was two of three as opposed to 1 out of 3. And after an argument with my grandmother, I got the black doll.

That's why I see it as a parent issue or in my case a grandparent issue. Everyone would know and see that this little white kid was carrying a black doll which apparently wasn't really done in the 1970s and it embarrassed her. Not me. Kids don't think in those terms. Adults do and unfortunately pass that mindset down. This was race but insert gender if you want today.

I think if you try to teach your kid independence and not to care what others think (which I get is hard in a peer group especially when they are young since kids are cruel), it really can be done. And it will always be the parents' responsibility to teach their children acceptance than it will ever be for any corporation.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

Laura14 — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:01:15 GMT

@NoelSeven wrote:
@Laura14 wrote:
@NoelSeven wrote:
I totally understand the point the mom is making. What I dodn't understand is why so many are angry that the toys will no longer be labeled Boy's Toys, and Girl's Toys.

They are doing the same for their children's section for bedding. Go in and pick what you want: footballs on the bedspread or Disney princesses. The store will no longer say one is for boys while the other is for girls.
I don't think it has anything to do with what the signs say or don't say. People are miffed, in my opinion, because it seems like no one can use good old fashioned common sense anymore. Consumers need to stop making extra busy work and expense for these companies with their nonsense, expense that will be coming back to us. And businesses need to stop bending to every social media whim and remember the customer is not always right and you can't make everyone happy.

******************************
Actually, it's less work. No signs needed anymore saying Boys building sets and Girls building sets.

Maybe just one, saying Building Sets.

Upfront cost of removing and replacing those signs for an international chain is not cheap. Add in the graphic design cost of the new signage and it gets up there and won't be a non-expense for many years.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:04:36 GMT

@brii wrote:
Just seems so silly to market toys specifically for girls and boys.

Kids who have siblings of the opposite gender play together.

I know when my kids went to preschool, all the toys were available for both boys and girls.

**************************************

I think so, too. When my daughter was little, the big toy sellers were about Star Wars. She got a lot of toys I had to go to the boy's section for. Including a giant Darth Vader head where kids kept their little figurines.

The son of a friend liked stuffed animals and baby dolls when he was little. He was such a gentle soul. When he grew up, he loved taking care of animals and he was so good to his girlfriends. We loved him, we were all one big family. Unfortunately, he died of cancer as a young guy.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

NoelSeven — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:07:36 GMT

@Laura14 wrote:
@NoelSeven wrote:
@Laura14 wrote:
@NoelSeven wrote:
I totally understand the point the mom is making. What I dodn't understand is why so many are angry that the toys will no longer be labeled Boy's Toys, and Girl's Toys.

They are doing the same for their children's section for bedding. Go in and pick what you want: footballs on the bedspread or Disney princesses. The store will no longer say one is for boys while the other is for girls.
I don't think it has anything to do with what the signs say or don't say. People are miffed, in my opinion, because it seems like no one can use good old fashioned common sense anymore. Consumers need to stop making extra busy work and expense for these companies with their nonsense, expense that will be coming back to us. And businesses need to stop bending to every social media whim and remember the customer is not always right and you can't make everyone happy.

******************************
Actually, it's less work. No signs needed anymore saying Boys building sets and Girls building sets.

Maybe just one, saying Building Sets.

Upfront cost of removing and replacing those signs for an international chain is not cheap. Add in the graphic design cost of the new signage and it gets up there and won't be a non-expense for many years.

**********************************

If you frequent Target you already know they constantly reorganize their stores and try new things. Target is not complaining about this, just a few people who see it as gender blending.

Re: Target Reorganizes Their Toy Section

kdgn — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:15:33 GMT

I don't know if this has anything to do with the sign for the girl's building sets or not:

I was speaking with a friend of mine recently. Her young granddaughter had had minor surgery and they had sent a set of pink building Legos to her. The girl was thrilled and got to buy another set. I guess Lego had decided to manufacture specifically to young girls in shades of pink. Perhaps the sign for Girls building sets was informational: letting the parents know that the girl's sets were with the "traditional" building sets and not located with the dolls-

I haven't had to buy Legos in years but I know the girls in my classroom played with the buidling sets that I had right along with the boys. Some may have preferred sets in pink, some may not have. All they really cared about at age 5 was building something. But there were always some parents who felt Legos were for boys and not for girls.