4 ms·
Nope. Historically, pink was considered a masculine color, because it's a shade of red. It was like this for centuries, until the 20th century in western nati
by magduf 7y ago
Nope. Historically, pink was considered a masculine color, because it's a shade of red. It was like this for centuries, until the 20th century in western nations.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago>because it's a shade of red. // Not quite sure what your nope refers to, but you release that's not a reason. All you've done is shift the question from "why is pink for boys" to "why is red for boys" and still haven't countered any of my observations, particularly that it might be "pink" was for boys because of social conditioning in the past.
- magduf 7y agoI'm not sure what you're getting at. I'm just pointing out that this whole thing is entirely cultural, and that it's changed very, very recently (within the last century or so). There's no underlying biological reason for pink to appeal to little girls; it's just a cultural artifact. If little girls were dressed in lime green all the time from birth and the culture militantly pushed the idea that "lime green is only for girls!", then little girls would want lime green toys and clothes.