What toys are marketed for boys, and what for girls? What do we learn through playing with gendered toys?

 If there was only femininity or masculinity in the world, would it be femininity or masculinity? Are we freer in a situation where the ideology of postmodernism has expanded to infinity and the sexual notions that the older generation adheres to have been dismantled? Is the world richer in such a situation? I think the symbols that distinguish between women and men more clearly specify each individual. And when we have those concepts, we are conceptually richer. Just as the concept of a line segment is enriched by distinguishing between a straight line and a curve. An individual's identity can be enriched with countless symbols and images. Of course, you might think this is a passive bondage. On the one hand, you might think it is more obvious to use these expressions when looking at history. But I don't think there is a distinction just to train social conditioning, class struggle. I think that distinction allows us to experience gender uniqueness, that abstraction, metaphorically, in the world on a daily basis. 

But I don't think taking pink toys away from boys is the right way to discipline them. Girls can also play with blue toys. In my opinion, boys need uniqueness that sets them apart from women, not blue toys. Similarly, strictly speaking, girls don't need pink toys. Children can indirectly learn gender uniqueness with the toys.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

April 29 (Mon) Kim Chae Eun

Introduction to the blog

W12.1 Blog for reading materials