Children can perceive what toys they are “supposed” to play with and what toys are designated for the other gender. I was able to play with all types of toys as a child, but this is because of my brothers, and we would share toys all the time. I never thought it was weird that my brother would play with a Barbie, and I would play with an action figure. Skočajić discusses a study where children were shown pictures of masculine/feminine toys and asked to stereotype them into two categories. It was discovered that boys were more likely to stereotype masculine toys more often than girls did. They are less likely to play with a pink toy because pink is perceived as a feminine color. This can be seen as them claiming their masculinity. Toxic masculinity can be seen in this issue because boys are expected to only play with a select set of toys. They are looked at differently if they were seen playing with a more feminine toy and overall judged by other boys. Overall, girls showed more interest in counter-stereotyping toys/activities. The way children understand gender stereotypes can be changed and influenced by the way adults and the toy industry present this information to them.
King’s experiment investigates how children think about gendered toys and how it can limit their growth and development. She presents, through her research, how message phrasing through words such as “boys like dolls” can change their perception about gender-stereotypical toys. By using more gender-neutral language such as “this kid likes dolls”, it doesn’t solidify gender stereotypes compared to when gendered pronouns are used. By using such language, it can open minds to playing with toys that are not necessarily labeled for their gender and promote more inclusivity for all toys. Mr. Potato Head is more of a gender-neutral toy because the task is to simply take him apart. Additionally, there is also Mrs. Potato Head which demonstrates more gender inclusivity for both girls and boys. It is easy to spot how girls and boys are specifically targeted based on their stereotypes for colors and language. Williams chose 5 different girls and boy’s toys where she compares the images and language used to market to children. The word “princess “was used to target girls whereas the word “kid” was used to target boys. Furthermore, the color scheme for girls was mainly pink and for boys it was more greens/blues. Girls’ toys are more materialistic, where they are seen playing dress up with clothes and jewelry. Boy’s toys are more of an activity where they are seen playing sports or building something. Skočajić’s response also supports the idea that boy’s toys are more inclusive of girls in terms of activities and color scheme whereas boys do not want to play with girls’ toys since it is not very acceptable for boys to play with “feminine” toys.
