5 ms·
I actually remember reading, recently, that the color division is cultural. Point in fact is that around 1900 and earlier, if color had any meaning at all, it w
by baltoo 16y ago
I actually remember reading, recently, that the color division is cultural. Point in fact is that around 1900 and earlier, if color had any meaning at all, it was reversed. Pink, being close to red, was manly. Blue, being close to violet, was womanly.
That the roles are globally reversed now could very well be indicative of a newish cultural shift that has nothing to do with nature, genes or suchlike.
- lhnz 16y agoIf that is true, that is so interesting. Can you remember where you read this?
- baltoo 16y agoWhile trying to find the article I stumbled across Straight dope (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2831/was-pink-originally-the-color-for-boys-and-blue-for-girls http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2831/was-pink-origi...), that claims that this idea might well be wrong. I does however, I think, speak out against the idea that pink-girly and blue-boyly is something known to be inherent. Although I guess the thing I read earlier might well be wong, I'm still not that convinced that colors are that gender based by default.