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?
.
James Cobalt says
Labels are not inherently bad; it’s how we use them. The main issues with feminine and masculine is they can be exclusionary against people who don’t align with the matching gender, and they are subjective terms that are largely cultural – so their meanings change over time and mean different things to different people. Masculine attire for example means something very different to teens in South Korea than it does to adults in Guatemala. Masculine drinks are very different in 1910s NYC than 2010s NYC.
I like my living room to be earth toned with browns, yellows, and beige, with lots of hard angles and rough textures. I like my bedroom to be bright with shiny surfaces, curvy lines, and tall drapes. It definitely feels weird when people say my living room is masculine or my bedroom is feminine. I don’t see them that way – they are both reflective of what I look to get out of each room. One feels connected to nature, relaxed, and uncomplicated. The other feels bright, clean, and energizing (which I appreciate in the morning).
I do applaud your effort to use non-exclusionary nomenclature. It won’t be easy, but it will force you to explain styles in a more nuanced manner which could prove more interesting. I guess a shiny pink bathroom could be “fun”, “youthful”, and “glossy”. A dark den with exposed beams could be “rustic”, “moody”, and “earthy”. Still, considering your blog deals with period styles that were heavily gendered, it’ll be tough to avoid them completely, and I don’t think it’s necessary.
Debi Kelly Van Cleave says
I’m the biggest advocate for the LGBT community–I think the discrimination against these people is partially where this topic comes from. But I also think we have gotten too overly politically correct. It’s getting kind of silly now.
Ed says
I find myself agreeing with this. I try to avoid being offensive, but at some point our ability to communicate breaks down.
On a separate note: Several years ago I worked for a fellow who avoided hiring women because he felt they couldn’t be technically savvy regarding our products, ATVs and lawnmowers, etc. I didn’t think it helped his position when the guys he hired were invariably as bad as he claimed women would be.
TerriLynn says
Personally, I wish we could leave the political correctness out of our decorating.
Amy says
Political correctness (PC) has no place in decorating. PC is not what any of this is about.
We are limited in our thoughts, (consequently, our actions) by our vocabulary.
Banning the terms “masculine” or “feminine” simply removes the constraints of our own thoughts, allows us to paint on a bigger canvas. Sometimes we need to challenge ourselves to change old ways of thinking. If we find new words, we just might find whole new thoughts to go with them….and then we grow. It won’t even hurt.
God bless you for promoting the proper use of the English language.
tammyCA says
I found reading the comments so interesting & it’s good to stretch the brain muscle & think. I keep thinking about this topic & it leads to other thoughts I’ve always wondered about like why are most current decorators/designers/house flippers always going for neutrals? What exactly would happen if they put in a new pink tiled bathroom? What would the reaction, comments be? If the person/homeowner didn’t like it then exactly what would their explanation be as to why they don’t like it? It reminds them of granny? Then was granny bad or good? I think some people don’t like pink because they associate it with pepto bismol & having an upset stomach (I have that association with ginger ale, but not pepto even when I threw up pink..I was intrigued & I love pink still????)..or is it because it’s because it’s a “passé” color? But how can a color go out of style? Or is pink & pastels associated with being delicate & therefore weak? I’m not judging, just thinking & wondering..everybody should do what makes them happy & not hurt anybody (‘tho it emotionally, somewhat physically pains me when I see a vintage bathroom sledgehammered on TV, which is why I stopped watching those shows).
pam kueber says
For those subscribing to this thread — all day yesterday and last night I mulled all the comments and then this morning I woke up and reread the story. In the story, I made an edit: I added a few words to make it clear that it is me who “will not use these words” in our stories — there is no request that readers not use them, and this was never my intention. I do not put them in the same category as words deemed uncivil that I don’t let through – words l like h***, u*** and h******. I sincerely apologize if this was not clear and caused anyone distress.
Thank you for taking the time to express your views. I asked for them! This has been a most interesting experience. I am still digesting all the comments and will likely do a followup.
Kate H says
This sounds like a great idea to me. Labels are constraining. Nobody puts Baby in the corner!
Jay says
I always check the site early in the morning but chose to refrain from immediately commenting as I wanted to read the other comments -all interesting. Some folks have gotten worked up but I think you raised an interesting point. Myself, I only see fem vs. masc in decor from a historical point especially with regards to the vintage catalogs and decor ad scenes you generously share with us that are ca. 40s/50s because those were the times. But your site is much more then that and has evolved over time and will continue to evolve. Write as you see fit! As a guy, I wear pink shirts and have a frilly couch in the basement (free from my sister’s MIL) so I don’t really see what all the fuss is about. By the way, I was surprised to see that Target assigned gender to toys – now that’s just stupid. Everyone have a nice day and enjoy today’s post.
Nina462 says
I agree with Jay – I would still use those terms as historical dictates, but would not describe a modern piece of furniture or décor as masculine/feminine.
I guess though, I’m not offended very easily. It’s a first world problem and there’s a lot more going on the world ….so I like to sit back and enjoy your website.
Carol says
Dear Pam, In regards to the context of this website, I do not find the words feminine and masculine offensive when describing decor. I don’t understand why people are offended by your question. It is your website and we are all “voyeurs” so to speak. I don’t love every article because I may not be interested in the topic. However, I love this website and am grateful for the chance to view it everyday. I apparently was the only person who commented on the toilet article. I was thrilled you posted it. I read every article and read the comments if interested. Everyone has an opinion on everything and that’s fine. I personally do not feel put off by this conversation because if I weren’t interested, I wouldn’t read it. I am not forced to read the comments in order to view the articles. Fortunately for us, you post every weekday and after all tomorrow is another day. By the way, I like all of the articles and some are so golden I’m rendered speechless.
pam kueber says
Oh my, thank you for such a nice comment. It means a lot.
Amelia says
That /was/ a nice comment. It can be rare to find those, and as someone who often avoids getting into Commentsville for the nasty things that sometimes turn up, even I appreciate how Carol has worded this.
I agree. The only difference is that I would fall into the category of humans who are somewhat offended by the gendering and use of “masculinity” and “femininity” as descriptors.
For most of my life, I have felt uncomfortable being described as “femmey” but likewise really disliked the popular alternative “tomboy”. Why do we require these labels at all? Can we not just be, and like what we like? Your reasoning above, Pam, is all on point! I completely support your thoughts and feelings on this, as well as your choice to go label-free and avoid gender-essentialist concepts.
If you’d be interested, here is one post I liked. This blogger is restricting the use of these labels even within comments (I am not here suggesting you do this), but makes a great point about the problematic nature of Gender Essentialism:
“Gender essentialism is the assumption that women are naturally like this, while men are naturally like that, and nature made it so and anyone who deviates from that pattern is a freak. Most commonly it comes in the form of “women are naturally submissive and men are naturally dominant”.
This is an absolutely unprovable statement. It is an opinion, not a fact. Look at the amount of gender conditioning we receive from infancy: different colors for girls and boys (in some cultures), commercials proclaiming boys like toy guns and trucks while girls like dollies that pee. Throughout life, we are punished for deviating from our cultural gender norms, and yet very few people find it easy to avoid those deviations.
If it’s so natural, why all the conditioning?”
— http://thehathorlegacy.com/why-there-will-be-no-more-gender-essentialist-comments-allowed-on-this-site/
Thanks a lot for opening up this dialogue and seeking out the comments of those most affected by these issues! I suspect your readership and reader’s loyalty and love of your phenomenal website will only grow stronger from here! <3
pam kueber says
Hi Amelia, thank you for the link. I actually was writing a followup comment to the thread clarifying that my intent was not to ban these words from comments.
It’s all a very interesting topic… As I said in my comment, I will plan a followup.
Louis Fremont says
I would note that although these days objects themselves do not necessarily signify an automatic association to one gender or the other, colors always will. I base this on research showing that women and men tend to prefer surrounding themselves with different colors. And yes, of course, there are exceptions. But generalizations are not automatically invalid, provided people think things though and truly understand the meaning of a generalization.
Dan Contrino says
I’m with you! I own an antique store and I hear those terms from customers and other dealers all the time. When I catch myself about to say “feminine” or “masculine” to describe a piece, I take a step back and try to come up with another adjective. Dark, soft, light, hard, sharp are among the alternative terms I use. I’d feel terrible if I insulted a customer by labeling their style with a gender specific term.