The quick answer is: neither.
According to an article on the Smithsonian website, assigning the color pink to girls and blue to boys did not become popular until the 1940s. Interestingly, an article published in Earnshaw's Infants' Department in 1918 advised that “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.” (1) As recently as 1927, “Time magazine printed a chart showing sex-appropriate colors for girls and boys according to leading U.S. stores. In Boston, Filene’s told parents to dress boys in pink. So did Best & Co. in New York City, Halle’s in Cleveland and Marshall Field in Chicago.” (1)
In this photo of Franklin D. Roosevelt as a young lad, he wears fashionable clothing of the era: a dress, a hat with a feather, and patent leather shoes. White was commonly used for children because it was easy to bleach and keep clean looking. Boys’ hair was commonly kept long until the age of six or seven.
A Google Image search of the term “baby clothes” conducted on March 29, 2015 reveals that we are back to a time of gender colorizing infants. These “Newborn Baby . . . Perfect Shower Gift[s]” (2) come in color sets for a girl or a boy:
“Hit a home run for your little guy's wardrobe with this boys' Nike baseball creeper and hat set.” (3)
“Seattle Seahawks Infant Girl Pink Onesie TuTu Dress with Bow Headband - Licensed NFL Baby Clothes that is a newborn girl creeper bodysuit dress with tutu skirt [and] matching headband with bow.” (4)