Analysis Of When Kids Play Across Gender Lines By Kamalla Grinberg

In her article “When Kids Play Across Gender Lines” CNN reporter, Emanuella Grinberg uses many elements to show why we should remove gender-specific toy marketing. Grinberg uses both fact and stories to develop her argument. Both of the stories Grinberg uses in her article support my argument that gender-specific marketing harms kids because it can ultimately lead to kids getting bullied. Her first story comes from author of Calling on Toy Retailers to Eliminate Gender-Based Marketing, Carrie Goldman. Grinberg then uses multiple points from Goldman’s book to support her argument. Her second story and the commentary following it bring up my example of boys’ sexuality being pulled into the question if he plays with girls’ toys. Grinberg also

Robb brings up how toys have not always had gender specific marketing but the market back tracked between the 1970s and the 1990s and have continued since then. Robb then mentions many stores recent actions to tone down and remove gender-specific marketing from their stores. This includes Target’s removable of gender labels from their bedding and toy aisles. Robb than begins to include the idea of more qualified people than her. She includes author Jo Paoletti’s idea that girls don’t actually prefer pink but that they are taught to. She backs this up with a study by Vanessa Lobue and Judy DeLoache in which children age seven months to five years were asked to choose between a pink or blue object and it wasn’t until around two and a half that girls preference for pink became obvious. Robb then includes many quotes from Megan Fulcher, associate professor of psychology at Washington and Lee University. She uses Fulcher’s idea that gender-specific toys marketing leads to hindered learn, such as in motor skills. This article fits into my research paper because it shows that stores should rid of gender-specific marketing because it harms children and it shows that business were able to do it in the