3 ms·

Why not just forbid the use of store imposed gender labels? Wouldn't that be easier, and more in keeping with thr historical interpretation of civil rights law?

• gruez 5y ago
  >Why not just forbid the use of store imposed gender labels? Entirely? Or only for the "probably shouldn't be gendered toys"? Going with "entirely" doesn't seem right because like it or not, people have a certain kind of toy in mind when shopping, and they want easily know where the barbies are.
  • 2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
    So have the Barbie section. The car section, etc. Like supermarket signage. It’s been a while since I’ve been to a toy store though so I don’t know what it’s like these days.
    • gruez 5y ago
      Right, but they're not going to be placed randomly. The barbie shelves will still be next to the dollhouse shelves. You see the same thing in supermarkets. The fruit area is next to the vegetables. Under this proposal, there will still be boy's/girl's sections, they'll just be unlabeled.
  • lr4444lr 5y ago
    In the same vein that we would not brook "white people's toys" or "Handicapped people's toys". I.e., even a shopkeeper may not stop people from buying cross section in those examples, but we recognize that it conveys an intimidating hostility and don't allow it.
    • gruez 5y ago
      But are "men's" section in clothing stores fine, even though many pieces of garment can plausibly be worn by both genders?
      • lr4444lr 5y ago
        That's a good point. The clothing itself is alreay labeled that way though, and its literally part of the sizing. I guess I'd say the manufacturers are the better target for legislative changes on that. The shopkeeper is simply conveying the information he's given in the vast majority of the products.
      • ceejayoz 5y ago
        Old Navy and Target both have gender-neutral sections now.