Pink or Blue - Which are You?
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.

When my daughters were babies, in the early 1980s, pink for girls and blue for boys was less fashionable than it had been. Women were committed to raising their girls to have more opportunities, and femininity was challenged as a reflection of oppression. There was a range of products available for babies in gender neutral greens and yellows, bright reds, etc. Frilly pink for girls was out!

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:

While boys’ outfits do not prepare them for a life of objectification, girls’ outfits do. Isn’t she cute? She’s just like a little doll. “Lifelike miniature baby doll collection by Cheryl Hill dressed in Tinker Bell-inspired outfits with Tinker Bell artwork, sparkling wings and more.” (5)

As queer politics get more radical, more trans folks are coming out every day, and those who challenge gender norms are more frequently making it real in personal encounters, a quick examination of the mass marketing of baby clothes reveals that the policing of gender is still going strong. This quick study of the marketing of infant clothing reveals that genderizing is perhaps more prevalent today than it was 30 years ago. Baby clothes reveal the push to keep girls feminine and boys masculine. And that’s not natural.

June 1970 The Kinks - "Lola" from Lola vs. Powerman and the Moneygoround, Part One
The video is a live version that may amuse. Note that Ray has been compelled to change "Coca-cola" to "cherry-cola" by the time of this performance. Earlier versions on You Tube are uncensored.

I saw Ray Davies perform in Portland (around 2012). I felt compelled to leave my balcony seat and move to the very front of the crowd at the lip of the stage, joining the passionate dancers. almost all of them young, trans, gay, or queer, calling out for Lola. 

Of course "kink" is British slang for sexual deviation.

1972 David Bowie - "Suffragette City" from The Rise And Fall Of Ziggy Stardust And The Spiders From Mars
This song was a useful anthem for liberated women of that time but makes even more sense when you see Bowie perform it live. Love the earrings.

The Stones also performed "Angie" from Goats Head Soup
It's not the lyrics or the beautiful piano by Nicky Hopkins that made this piece a cutting edge gender mash-up - it's Mick's outfit.

1974 David Bowie - "Rebel Rebel" from Diamond Dogs 
The lyrics, the costume, and Bowie's entire persona challenged gender stereotypes.

The times they were a changin' and what a relief for some of us.

One recent Sunday at the flea market a mother pushed a stroller past the wares. A small child reached out towards something sparkly, little hands grabbing at empty air. Mommy grabbed the desired object, a bracelet of plastic beads – looked it over, and then tossed it back into the bin. “No, that’s for girls,” she explained to the disappointed child.

Gender is arbitrary, constructed in thousands of moments like this. This was a microaggression, policing the masculinity of a toddler.

Over time, this child will no doubt learn to suppress natural and instinctive behaviors in order to fit his mother’s expectations of gender conformity and fulfill a role in the masculine hegemony that governs our interactions, directly affecting our outcomes.

The idea that gender differences are natural and biological is so accepted that to even speak in opposition to that notion is a form of blasphemy. But think back to the moment of birth – what is the first thing we must know about a newborn. Is it weight, height, or Apgar score? NO! It is gender. It’s a girl – get out the pink bows. It’s a boy – a tiny baseball mitt and a football.

Our behavior towards newborns and infants is very specifically genderized. We cradle little girls, cooing and telling them they are beautiful. With little boys? We engage in mock roughhousing, boxing with them. We police the behavior of boys, enforcing our perception of what it means to be male, starting from their first moments on the planet.