I have been thinking a lot this summer about labels. Labels have been frequently in the news, often surrounding very serious events. Two labels that occasionally (although not often) come up here are “feminine” and “masculine,” used to describe decor. These days I am not liking these labels. I am thinking: Never again will I use these words on this blog, unless used to examine history. Dear readers, what do you think? Above: In 1954, Kohler did not shy from putting a boy in a pink bathroom. Would any company do this today?
Did you see this recent story about Target’s decision to no longer use gender descriptions to differentiate toys, home and entertainment? I’m liking this.
Here are a few of my thoughts on why the time has come to sideline the terms “feminine” and “masculine” to describe decor and decorating styles:
- It seems that these labels are virtually all driven by cultural norms that change over time and are in no way absolute. For example, we’ve written before about Jo Paolettis’s book, Pink and Blue: Telling the Boys from the Girls in America (affiliate link), which studied how the modern associations of pink for girls and blue for boys rose to prominence relatively recently in the history of child rearing. And wood paneling — probably widely viewed as a man-cave material today — well, that was such a common wall covering for so many decades in the 20th Century that I can’t imagine it was viewed as masculine or feminine. Is there any aspect of a decorating preference that is truly hard-wired into our biology based on our sex? Okay, I did track this story in 2008, but now the source link is dead, so I don’t know how to investigate further.
- These decorating labels promote and reinforce hard-to-change cultural norms that run deep and which limit the behaviors and opportunities of people of both genders. As in: If so-called feminine decor is soft and ornamental –> then so must be girls and women. Ergo, hard-edged, no-nonsense “masculine” decor underscores the notion that men must be these things, too.
- They are stereotypes. Nix these labels and instead, work a little harder to find and use more specific descriptive language about the decorating choices made by each unique individual.
Why do you think about using the terms “feminine” and “masculine” to describe decor, dear readers?
.
Jo Paoletti says
Pam, this is uncanny! I have been thinking the same thing about clothing descriptors. “Masculine” and “feminine” are sort of passive descriptors, which don’t actually tell you anything about how something looks, but point to cultural stereotypes. In my opinion, “tribal” and “exotic” and “oriental” are used in similar ways. That means that in order to “get” the meaning of the word, you have to be familiar with the cultural reference. As my research on the history of pink and blue shows (thanks for the shout-out!) , pink is only “feminine” in a specific cultural context, and only recently, historically speaking. I prefer clothing that is tailored, functional, and has pockets. I tend to dislike fussy details, floral prints, and pastels. Doesn’t that tell more than saying I prefer masculine clothing to feminine clothing?
As for the various people who believe that biological sex is binary (either male or female), please Google “intersex”. The real world is much more complicated than Wally and the Beaver thought.
pam kueber says
Hi Jo, Thanks for adding to the discussion!
Jo says
Thanks for starting it! I elaborated on my blog just now! http://www.pinkisforboys.org/blog/masculine-and-feminine-descriptive-or-lazy
Jeanne Jeanne says
Okaaay, so what about the term man-cave? You said “And wood paneling — probably widely viewed as a man-cave material today —”
What is that meant to imply? To follow your thinking, shouldn’t it be just a cave?
Personally, I don’t see an issue with the terms masculine and feminine as long as you don’t assume women should be/like feminine things and men should be/like masculine things. When we describe something as Danish Modern, are we assuming that should be the style of everyone in Denmark? Hmmm, maybe I need to relabel my dining room as Teak Modern since I am of Norwegian heritage.
pam kueber says
When I said man-cave I was tapping the stereotype.
IDK re Danish Modern. I also hear Scandinavian Modern used a lot. Hey, I’m 1/4 Norwegian too!
tammyCA says
I guess because of the era I grew up in I tend to think of feminine and masculine style/decor but after studying art history I started to think in the terms yin and yang.
While we’re kinda on the subject what about that word I don’t like “outdated”? why does poor granny always get a beating?
pam kueber says
You know I don’t like “outdated”. It’s a meaningless word. Everything has a date. The date is was made and installed.
Jay says
When I feel like ranting I’ll watch an episode of House Hunters so I can listen to some young thing exclaim it’s dated (Kitchen/Bath) and has to go. Sheesh! Whatever happened to just buying the house and moving in. I have to laugh about the granny bashing; I don’t know any other way to describe my house but as a Granny Ranch.
Geronimom says
No. Please, just NO! I think we have all been around long enough to know what is meant by the traditional term “masculine” or “feminine”. Speaking for myself, one of the reasons I come to this site on a regular basis is because it is a special kind of oasis where I can just relax and enjoy things for what they were – and not have to deal with having to be sucked into the whole crazy P.C. driven agenda that the eternally offended are always trying to shove down my throat everywhere else. I have always loved history. I also love vintage because to me it represents a happier time – a time when things were still made in America (soundly!) by Americans and there was pride in that. A time when people could out and out say what something actually was without having to constantly be afraid of having their meaning twisted incorrectly to something never intended by those determined to do so. Nowadays, if you are against ISIS or radical terrorism, it is construed by the P.C. police as being “anti-Muslim”, enforcing immigration laws is twisted into being “anti-Hispanic”, talking seriously about crime or welfare is considered “anti-black”. Following Biblical morality is “anti-gay and anti-woman”. I’m SO incredibly sick of it all – which is why Retrorenovation has been my go-to place every day until now. I come here to detox from all of that outside garbage and focus instead on a time period that, despite having its own debateable issues, I myself, love. I don’t want to now start worrying about having to tippy toe around any ultra sensitive individuals who have problems calling something what it has always been called! Please leave my happy little “Retrorenovation Oasis” as it has always been – a non-agenda driven site where we can all share the same love of the past without having to constantly worry how traditionally understood terms are phrased!
mimi says
My first response……you’re kidding, right? Then I saw the volume and immediacy of comments, and it seems not. I am so weary of forced political correctness, when just plain good manners is all that is needed. Of course there are differences in males and females, all sorts of empirical and natural evidence. Please keep this forum in the wonderful, enjoyable, honest format we’ve all loved reading! Enough politics everywhere else. But thanks for asking.
LuAnn says
I appreciate your attention to detail and to the subtleties of language, Pam. As much as I dislike disagreements over the internet, I tend to think that describing something as a masculine or feminine design element isn’t a value judgment. It’s sort of like yin and yang. It just “is”. I probably have never used either of those descriptors when speaking about design, but I tend to think somewhat in those terms. I hope I won’t be judged and categorized as a troglodyte if I ever use masculine or feminine terminology on your blog. 😉
pam kueber says
LuAnn, not to worry! I don’t see as the same category as h*** or h****** or u***, which are not civil and which I do not allow on the blog. One of the things that several readers have pointed out and which I am thinking hard about is: Most people who are using the terms “feminine” or “masculine” to describe decorating styles are not using them as a value judgment or to attack.
Guy H says
I am wondering is why you think it’s a “boy” in the Kohler ad? Because the child has short hair or because the child chooses to be topless?
Your impulse appears to be ‘short hair and topless’ equals boy. Nix those stereotypes, Pam. Work harder to describe the child.
pam kueber says
Good one, Guy!
Guy H says
😉
Jay says
I think “boy” because it’s an ad from the 50s. No way would a girl be shown topless. It all has to be taken in context of the times.
Trudi says
What about the Coppertone girl?
Jay says
Oh! I thought she came around in the 60s when societal mores started to loosen a bit, I must be wrong.
Steve H says
Kudos to you Pam for striving for precision in your writing. Social media and today’s super casual communication styles have made us very sloppy in the way we express ourselves.
I think we need to first distinguish between an historical perspective versus a current perspective. It’s a fact that in the mid 20th century, gender divisions were pervasive in society – in the jobs we did, in how we raised our children, and yes, in how we decorated our homes. When analyzing an historical document like yesterday’s Armstrong decorating ideas, I think it’s ok to acknowledge that some of the designs were originally aimed at a particular gender. It’s a simple observation of fact.
Today we know that there’s as much difference among women or among men as there is between women and men. It would be very inappropriate (as well as offensive) to label someone’s recently completed kitchen remodel as masculine or feminine. It would be silly and naïve to categorize the 99 decorating ideas for pink bathrooms as masculine or feminine styles.
I know some folks bristle at any attempt to reform the way we communicate. I think they feel that to do so would mean admitting that they have been retroactively wrong. Instead of worrying about right and wrong, let’s just think of it as an improvement. If you could find a better way to do something why wouldn’t you do it?
Trudi says
Pam you have the right to take your blog in whatever direction you desire. All I want from your blog is a place to enjoy mid century beauty. Not another place where every word is examined for possible offense.
J D Log says
I am not sure if I really understand this topic but it seems to me that a lot more people seem are overly sensitive these days and we have these P.C vigilante police. I am a member of an old American car blog and once someone mentioned one of those wars that the U.S was involved harsh words were said on both sides until the moderator got it under control and stated let’s keep it to cars this is our common interest and passion.
Maybe you were just thinking out loud but we all have a passion for old decor and history. History should not be prettied up it is a fact otherwise we will never learn from it about the good and the bad
LREKing says
If we cannot examine history from our current perspective, then how can we learn anything from it?
J D Log says
What I am saying is if we selectively modify it how can we learn anything from it
Carol says
BRAVO! Well said.