Expanding Gender Equality into Toys:

A Proposal to Create a Toy Which Allows Exploration Across Gender Lines

Prepared for John A. Frascotti

By Hannah Wynne

December 10, 2015

2048 Kings House Rd.

Silver Spring, MD 20905
December 10, 2015
Hannah Wynne
Student at University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742

Dear John A. Frascotti, President of Hasbro Brands,

I appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal to you and I greatly thank you
for your time.

As you know, the toy market is always evolving, with new products developed
each year. I am excited to propose a new type of toy that will allow young boys to
explore interests across the gender barrier. In my research, I have found that creating a
new type of toy will provide a sorely missed opportunity for young boys to fully explore
their interests. The blatant lack of toys marketed towards young boys interested in
crossing gender lines is a large indicator that the issue of gender inequality is present in
the toys. By creating a toy geared towards young boys exploring typically girl
associated activities, Hasbro can create equality among toys.

I urge you to consider creating a new childrens toy because of the possibility to
reach gender equality, but also for the potential profits your company could earn. A new
childrens toy could be the fresh angle Hasbro needs to truly be the best company in the
toy industry.

Sincerely,
Hannah Wynne, University of Maryland student

Problem Section:

2
 The problem with current toys on the market is that they are marketed exclusively

towards specific genders. Gender specific toys are often color-coded, separated, and

follow gender norms very closely. Even toys designed to break gender barriers (ie.

GoldieBlox) are only aimed at girls and not boys. This does not allow much room for

exploration across gender lines and denies progression towards gender equality.

Toy marketing: Toys are marketed in a way that paints boys and girls as mutually

exclusive genders. The cooking sets, Barbie dolls, or princess dresses are put in separate

isles from the chemistry sets, action figures, and super hero costumes. Instead of

grouping each toy together in categories such as dress up, figurines, and play kits, these

toys are grouped based off of what gender each toy is targeting. Not only does this

maintain the attitude that boys cannot play dress up or that girls cannot mix chemicals,

but it maintains gender disparity in general. Consumers have defended this style of

marketing because it is easier to find items, they are preventing their childrens gender

confusion, or they use the gender segregation to steer their children towards their gender

appropriate isle.

Gendered marketing wasnt always used as heavily as it is now. In the not so

distant past of the 1970s, gendered marketing was radically diminished (Sweet). Boys

were seen playing with domestic toys in ads and girls were seen with building toys.

Gender neutrality within the toy market is not a new phenomenon, but with the advent of

television and a whole new medium for advertising, gender-neutral toy ads were quickly

replaced with gender-binary toy ads.

3
 Along with ads specifically targeting the separate genders, ad agencies or

departments thoroughly research who their consumers are to properly target their ads

(Moss). In their research, ad agencies found that women did most of the shopping

compared to their male counterparts. As a result, their ads are targeted towards women.

This is an example of how gendered marketing goes beyond the children, and is aimed

towards parents as well. Using gendered marketing based on loose assumptions and

stereotypes might not be the 'right' thing to do, but when businesses are trying to look

ethical or trying to make a profit, it is what they lean towards.

Toy production: When toy companies are pitching ideas for new products, they are

providing the groundwork for how these toys are marketed and ultimately how they are

consumed. Deciding to color a child oven blue, pink, or green can have a profound effect

on marketing and consumption.Toys are created with the intent to specifically be a girls

toy or a boys toy. Color-coding the toys is a large beacon to children and parents that

kids should not play across gender lines. Along with the blatant color-coding, toys that

could be labeled as unisex are typically marketed towards boys.

Legos are a great example of this. Legos could simply be called building blocks,

but are instead separated by gender. However, there are a great number of Legos that are

geared towards young boys, and only a small amount geared towards girls. Even then, the

Lego sets geared towards girls are often color-coded as pink.

One of the reasons toys are color coded so heavily and follow gender stereotypes

so strictly is because in the corporate toy world, there are very few women in top level

positions. This is true of most corporate companies, but in the toy industry, this has an

4
effect on how toy ideas are created. The result is that the brainstormers are mostly men

who do not know much about being inside the mind of a little girl unless they have

daughters. Instead of using real world information, they rely on loose stereotypes to fill in

the gaps, thus color-coding. Management does affect which products are put onto the

market and how they are produced (Lam).

Lack of gender blurring toys: Start up company GoldieBlox has made great strides

creating a toy geared towards young girls that allows them to participate in a typically

male activity (engineering). This company has grown exponentially in only three years.

Starting as a kickstarter, the toy was on shelves in Toys R Us stores across the nation in

only six months (GoldieBlox). This shows it is possible to create a gender blurring toy

that is successful. Unfortunately, a similar toy for young boys has not been created. There

is such an emphasis on being masculine, that a product, which allows young boys to

explore typically feminine activities, has not been produced. This lack of presentation

reflects our societys view that men and boys should not engage in feminine activities,

and also helps to represent how gender inequality is present even in toys.

Solution Section:

The main recommendation proposed is to create a new toy that is geared towards

young boys, and incorporates caregiving, nurturing, or creativity into play. The

development of a new toy will engage a new portion of the toy market, and will also

provide a missing opportunity for boys to explore their interests. Both the potential for

increased profits and a push towards gender equality will be addressed by creating a new

toy.

5
A Brand New Toy: There are currently no popular childrens toys on the market that are

both marketed towards young boys and allow children to express their interests across

gender lines. Too often young boys are labeled as sissies or girls for acting outside of

societys strict definition of masculinity, and this is viewed as a bad thing (Jordan).

Creating a new toy will help to curb the stigma that boys cannot participate in anything

feminine.

There has been significant research, which shows that gender deviance is not a

mental disease, and cannot be spread by the color pink. The idea that gender deviance

needed to be treated originated in 1960s psychology, and even though the notion has

been dismissed, people still hold onto that idea (Pyne). However, there is an even larger

portion of people that are becoming more open to the idea of young boys and girls

crossing gender lines. As the years go on, people who disagree with the blurring of

gender lines will be the minority and your main consumer base will come to expect a toy

that reflects their views. Having a new toy will not only make kids think differently about

their peers and how they play, but it will also make Hasbro a progressive company that is

ready for societys changing needs (Grinberg).

Logistics: Of course creating a new toy line is not a completely effortless endeavor. The

most persistent issue would be the actual development of a new toy. Creating a toy that

was more than a girl toy color-coded blue would require cognitive research, testing to see

if children would actually use the toy, and analysis of boys play patterns.

Development would occupy the main portion of finances when creating the new

toy. With a similar toy idea, GoldieBlox developed their company with the help of a

6
kickstarter campaign. The campaign gathered $285,881 to develop the toy, manufacture

the toy, send the toy out, and pay its employees (GoldieBlox). Based off of an average of

the past five years, Hasbros R&D budget is around 53.26 million (YCharts). In addition,

Hasbro already has manufacturing factories, shipping locations, and employee budgets in

place. The cost to add an additional toy to production lines will be minimal in comparison

to the time and money that will need to be spent on development.

Response to Objection:

Childrens Backing: Gender is largely a social construct. We have been told what is

associated with boys and what is associated with girls from the start of our lives. Take

color-coding for instance. Originally, the color blue was associated with girls and the

color pink was associated with boys (Threlfall). Now, those color schemes have been

flipped, but it goes to show that society creates these notions/constructs of what gender

means.

Children will naturally be open to playing with toys that are not assigned to their

typical gender. In fact, children playing with typically female toys expressed a higher

cognitive play than when playing with typically male toys (Cherney). So while it can be

beneficial for children to play across gender boundaries, it is marketing, parents, and

presentation of toys that guides children towards playing with only their gender typical

toys.

Unfortunately it is only young girls that are being encouraged to explore all

scopes of their interests, including the STEM field or other typically male dominated

fields. President Obama has made it a national issue to encourage young girls to pursue

7
science and to lessen the gender gap in the STEM field (White House). On the other end

of the spectrum we have very influential public figures, toy companies, and toy stores

condemning young boys exploring outside of their gender norms (Advocate). While not

all of those people or companies explicitly set out to ostracize those boys, marketing toys

by gender and not allowing room for children to play over gender lines enforces the

skewed trend that only girls can play with both gendered toys.

If this strict gendered marketing was not in place and was not as heavily enforced

as it is, boys playing with typically feminine toys would not be seen as an oddity.

Naturally, children are inclined to play with whatever toy interests them. It is only with

strict social norms that they play solely with their own genders assigned toys.

In the 1970s Lego campaign, the company suggested that both girls and boys

were capable of playing with the toys. Girls might be interested in building rocket ships,

while boys might be interested in building a houses and vice versa. The proved that their

toy was popular when the young kids were crossing gender lines, and Lego also made it

acceptable to do so.

Parental Support: Parents have a great fear that by allowing their young boys to play with

non-gender typical toys, their children will be traumatized or bullied for their choice. To

curb this, parents reward their children for displaying gender appropriate behaviors

(Risman). Along with fear of bullying from playing with the wrong toys, fear of gender

confusion also plays into the unease of parents.

When Target introduced the gender-neutral toy section, there were many parents

that did not understand what gender-neutral meant, and blacklisted Target from their

8
frequented stores. To these parents, Target was pushing the homosexual agenda and

ignoring that most of their consumers were not gender-neutral, but male or female

(Hains). The criticism was definitely heard, and most of the criticism was a blatant

ignorance of what gender-neutrality is. Fortunately for Target, and the kids who purchase

their toys there, the backlash was minimal compared to the large outreach of support from

parents who were frustrated with the serious gender marketing.

Target would have not taken the plunge into becoming a gender-neutral childrens

toy retailer if the company did not believe it could profit from doing so. Businesses are

ethical to maintain a good corporate image, which in turn aids in making a profit

(Aasland). The Target company changed their toy layout because the benefit outweighed

the cost. It is understandable that you would not want to invest in a product that does not

sell and could potentially have a repercussion on the companys public relations, but the

potential for profit increase and a rise in public support could be what the company needs

to hold its spot as a successful global company.

Conclusion:

There is probably a large portion of people who dont understand the large

complex topic of gender fluidity and all of the wonderful things that can come from it.

For women and girls, it is perfectly acceptable to show at least some gender fluidity, i.e.

playing with Star Wars toys or dressing in a pantsuit, but the same isnt said of men and

boys. This is acceptable, but any small hint of gender fluidity in boys, and people become

defensive.

9
 Gender fluidity aside, young boys playing with girl toys cannot turn them

gay. Being gay is not a disease easily picked up in the pink isle at Toys R Us. Having a

child that is different from the others is a great fear of parents because of the potential

ridicule and bullying they will experience. Unfortunately by being hyper protective of

young boys exploring their feminine side, parents are just enforcing heteronormativity,

which hurts both gender equality and enforces homophobia.

However, while young girls are being strongly encouraged to play with

GoldieBlox and boys are being condemned for playing with girl toys, there is no

flagship campaign that allows boys to explore other interests. There is no doubt that

GoldieBlox has helped bridge the gender gap in STEM, but is the reason for no parallel

company because of the already powerful patriarchy that colors our society?

Women fight for gender equality because in most cases men are allowed certain

rights and opportunities simply because they are men. If men are already in positions of

power, why do we need to fight for their right to explore outside of their gender? The

issue of gender equality goes deeper than letting girls play with building blocks, and boils

down to the aversion of feminine attributes and the emphasis on masculine traits in the

work place.

With Hasbros help, not only can young boys explore many different interests, but

the toy industry will make greater strides towards gender equality. The creation of a new

toy will provide an opportunity for young boys that is otherwise absent, and will possibly

a new source of revenue for your company.

10
 Works Cited:

Aasland, Dag G. "On the Ethics behind 'Business Ethics.'" Journal of Business Ethics: n.

pag. Print.

"Dr. Phil: No Girls Toys for Boys." Advocate. N.p., 9 Feb. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.advocate.com/news/daily-news/2011/02/09/dr-phil-no-girls-toys-

boys>.

Beede, David. "Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation." Department of

Commerce: n. pag. Print.

Cherney, Isabelle. "The Effects of Stereotyped Toys and Gender on Play Assessment in

Children Aged 18-47 Months." Educational Psychology 23 (2003): n. pag. Print.

"About GoldieBlox." GoldieBlox. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.goldieblox.com/>.

Grinberg, Emanuella. "When kids play across gender lines." CNN. N.p., n.d. Web. 15

Oct. 2015. <http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/living/harrods-gender-neutral-

toys/>.

Hains, Rebecca. "Target will stop labeling toys for boys or for girls. Good." Washington

Post 13 Aug. 2015: n. pag. Print.

Jordan, Ellen. "Fighting Boys and Fantasy Play: The construction of masculinity in the

early years of school." Gender and Education: n. pag. Print.

Lam, Bourree. "Do Toy Companies Need More Women at the Top?" The Atlantic. N.p.,

n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

11
 <http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/09/do-toy-companies-need-

more-women-at-the-top/380295/>.

Moss, Gloria. Gender, Design and Marketing How Gender Drives Our Perception of

Design and Marketing. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

Pyne, Jake. "Gender independent kids: A paradigm shift in approaches to gender non-

conforming children." Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality: n. pag. Print.

Risman, Barbara. "From sex roles to gender structure." Current Sociology Review: n. pag.

Print.

Sweet, Elizabeth. "Toys Are More Divided by Gender Now Than They Were 50 Years

Ago." The Atlantic. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/12/toys-are-more-divided-by-

gender-now-than-they-were-50-years-ago/383556/>.

Threlfall, Perry. Personal interview. 21 Sept. 2015.

"Women and Girls in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM)." White

House. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Nov. 2015.

<https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/stem_factsheet_2

013_07232013.pdf>.

"Hasbro Research and Development Expense (Quarterly)." Y Charts. N.p., n.d. Web. 10

Dec. 2015. <https://ycharts.com/companies/HAS/r_and_d_expense>.

12