BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN VERSION:2.0 CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260611T211609Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20131003T120000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20131003T133000 SUMMARY:Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?” Scientific accounts of gendered toy preferences UID:20260618T062737Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-bd7db559-gt5qm TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:Linkway Meeting Room on Level 4 of the John Medley Building\, University of Melbourne \, Melbourne\, Australia DESCRIPTION:

In recent years\, the gendered marketing of toys has received significant attention in the media. Particularly high profile examples include critical reactions to Legos&rsquo\; stereotypically feminine &ldquo\;Friends&rdquo\; range for girls and the (ultimately successful) campaign for the famous London toy store Hamleys to remove labels specifically designating particular aisles of toys as &lsquo\;for girls&rsquo\; and &lsquo\;for boys&rsquo\;. Segmentation of the toy market has been criticised for reinforcing gender stereotypes and limiting children&rsquo\;s play and learning opportunities. However\, some commentators and researchers have defended gendered marketing by drawing on scientific findings supposedly demonstrating an &lsquo\;innate&rsquo\; basis to these sex differences. Gendered marketing is thus seen as\, at worst\, reinforcing children&rsquo\;s &lsquo\;elemental&rsquo\; play preferences. A further\, related\, defence is that products and marketing that do not so mirror supposedly innate differences will be unsuccessful. This paper reviews challenges to this traditional account of the development of gendered toy preferences\, and considers defences of gendered marketing in light of these criticisms \;  \; \;

ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR