Chapter 7 – Toys
Chapter Summary
This chapter uses the case of toys to explore socialization: the lifelong process of learning the norms of a particular society. We focus on gender socialization, but also briefly examine how socialization processes relate to other forms of inequality, hierarchy, and social stratification. The bifurcated world of gendered toys allows us to introduce sociological concepts of sex, gender, gender roles, gender identity, doing gender, sexism, and patriarchy. We also consider kids’ desire for toys: Are kids’ consumer desires driven by the quest for group belonging or social distinction (or both)? A toy box can tell us a lot about how childhood is viewed and experienced, and reveal hegemonic ideals of gender and parenting in consumer culture.
Further Reading
West, Candance and Don Zimmerman. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender & Society 1(2):125–151.
West and Zimmerman’s classic paper presents the argument that gender is not a static trait but an ongoing accomplishment, performed through everyday social interactions. They distinguish between sex, sex categorization, and gender, explaining that gender is enacted and reinforced through behaviors aligned with societal expectations. Individuals are held accountable for their gendered actions, which maintain existing power structures and inequalities. The authors propose that understanding gender as a social process can help challenge these structures and drive social change.
Discussion questions
- What does it mean to “do gender” according to West and Zimmerman? How does this differ from and challenge conventional understandings of gender?
- How do the authors distinguish sex, sex categorization, and gender? Why is it important to distinguish these concepts in understanding how gender is performed in everyday life?
- How do different institutions (e.g., work, family, school, etc.) contribute to the “naturalness” of gender roles? Can you think of examples from your own experience?
- What do the authors mean by “accountability”? What are the social mechanisms through which individuals are held accountable for their gendered behaviors? How does accountability apply to other social roles?
- What are the implications of viewing gender as a social accomplishment for challenging gender inequality?
Lareau, Annette. 2002. “Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black Families and White Families.” American Sociological Review 67(5): 747-776.
Annette Lareau’s article examines the effects of social class on childrearing strategies. Through an ethnographic study, Lareau identifies two distinct approaches: middle-class parents practice “concerted cultivation,” fostering their children’s talents through organized activities and reasoning, while working-class and poor parents engage in the “accomplishment of natural growth,” allowing children more unstructured playtime and relying on directives rather than discussion. Social class, rather than race, largely influences these childrearing patterns, which in turn affect how children interact with institutions and adults, shaping their sense of entitlement or constraint. Lareau highlights the long-term implications of these differences, particularly as middle-class children develop skills that advantage them in navigating institutions and social structures.
Discussion questions
- How do economic and social constraints shape the childrearing strategies parents employ? What challenges might working-class and poor families face in adopting a “concerted cultivation” approach?
- How do childrearing strategies influence children’s sense of entitlement or constraint when interacting with dominant institutions (e.g., schools, medical professionals)? What are the broader implications for social mobility and inequality?
- What role do institutional settings (like schools and healthcare) play in reinforcing or challenging the effects of class-based childrearing practices?
- How might Black families’ experiences with racism and discrimination affect their approach to childrearing, even when they belong to the middle class or practice “concerted cultivation”?
Reich, Stephanie M., Rebecca W. Black, and Tammie Foliaki. 2018. “Constructing Difference: Lego® Set Narratives Promote Stereotypic Gender Roles and Play.” Sex Roles 79 (5–6): 285–98.
This article explores how Lego sets marketed to boys and girls promote gendered narratives around children’s play. The study found that Lego City sets (targeted at boys) emphasize professional roles, heroism, and adventure, while Lego Friends sets (targeted at girls) focus on hobbies, socializing, domestic activities, and beauty. The narratives reinforce traditional gender stereotypes, with boys positioned as active, skilled agents and girls as passive, social caregivers. The authors argue that these gendered messages can influence children’s perceptions of gender roles and future career aspirations.
Discussion questions
- What are the main differences between the narratives and roles promoted in Lego City sets (targeted at boys) and Lego Friends sets (targeted at girls), and how do these differences reflect traditional gender stereotypes?
- How might the narratives embedded in Lego products encourage boys and girls to adopt different types of skills, interests, and future goals?
- Why do companies like Lego market products in gendered ways?
- How might exposure to gender neutral toys affect children’s creativity and imagination compared to playing with gender-stereotyped toys?
Quizzes
Test your knowledge with the Chapter 7 quizzes!
Quiz
Active Learning – Further Online Resources
Toys and socialization: Girl toys vs. boy toys
We can learn a lot from this fun BBC experiment investigating gender stereotypes and toys (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWu44AqF0iI). In the experiment, the researchers dress a male toddler in girls’ clothes and a female toddler in boys’ clothes. Adults are then invited to play with the child, having an assortment of stereotypical feminine toys (dolls, stuffed animals) and masculine toys (robots, cars, spatial reasoning tasks) at their disposal. What do the adults’ behaviours reveal about gendered play preferences? What does this experiment suggest about the role of toys in the socialization process?
Kids as change agents:
Watch this short interview with child activists Ella and Caitlin McEwan, whose efforts led to Burger King’s removal of plastic toys from their kids meals. What does this story tell us about children’s agency (and its limits) within consumer culture?
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49738889
Let Toys Be Toys:
Visit the website for the UK organization “Let Toys Be Toys” (http://www.lettoysbetoys.org.uk). Check out some of their recent campaigns to promote gender neutrality and equity in toy advertising. Do you think that these campaigns will have an impact? How would we extend this conversation about inclusive toys to include other areas of social difference and discrimination, such as race or disability?
Flashcards
Refresh your knowledge of key terms with this chapter’s flashcards.
