Printer-friendly versionCamilla was drawing a doll she was planning to get with her parents over the weekend. She was talking to herself in sing-song tones as she drew the doll, some of her clothes and her own house.
Across the table sat Tommy; he heard Camilla talking about the doll she was about to get. He exclaimed, almost as joyfully, “Hey! I’m going to get a doll too!” The two began to chat about the types of dolls they were going to get.
Across the room, another boy, busily building with blocks, said in a voice that reached across the room, “You are getting a doll?” A look of confusion spread across his face.
A teachable moment if there ever was one, the teacher nearby immediately interjected, asking several children in the area, “Wait a minute. Are there things just for boys and things just for girls?”
Some students offered an unsure yes. Others mumbled, no. She repeated the question, “Are there boy toys and girl toys?”
There were many more no’s this time, but the issue needed further clarification. It was addressed 30 minutes later during our morning meeting. After briefly talking about the different things girls and boys can play with, from dolls to trucks, she read Charlotte Zolotow’s William’s Doll.
It’s a tender story about a young boy who, above anything else, wants a doll to wash and clean and dress a feed, to put to bed at night, and to love. He doesn’t want just any doll; he wants a girl doll with a little white dress and blond hair and eyes that shut with a clack when you lay her down.
Upon hearing this, William’s brother and a friend make fun of him. They call him a sissy and a creep. His father buys him a basketball and a train set instead. William ends up playing and liking both of these things.
When William’s grandmother learns that all he really wants is a doll, she takes him to get one. And she tells William’s father that he needs it “so that when he’s a father like you, he’ll know how to take care of his baby and feed him and love him and bring him the things he wants, like a doll so that he can practice being a father.”
This is really the take-away message of the book: both girls and boys need dolls so they can practice being mommies and daddies. In fact, the author wrote the book in response to the child-rearing practices when she was a parent: Fathers had a very hands-off approach to the day-to-day routines.
While not every boy will want a doll after reading the story, that’s not the point. The point is to offer an alternative. Boys need not only play basketball and have trains as toys. Girls need not only play house or have dolls as toys.
By the end of the story, every child understood the message. The boy whose initial question had prompted the discussion even said, “Hey, I play basketball, and sometimes I play with my sister’s doll when we play together.”
I’m sure this message will need repeating (as we have seen in the past here and here), as years of socialization can’t be undone with one story and one conversation. But if every teacher is responsive and aware of every child’s needs, this message will be reinforced over and over again. And maybe one day, instead of having to reinforce this message, we will be able to just celebrate it.
Palenski is a kindergarten teacher in Connecticut.
Comments
Hello, I'm very glad to hear
Hello,
I'm very glad to hear the teacher intervened and gave students a chance to talk about this. I'm also glad they read a book and delved deeper into the subject.
My concern is that some of the books and media productions, particularly those developed in the 1970s with every intention of challenging sexism, can actually teach sexism and homophobia instead.
I think context is critical. So, for example, Free to Be You and Me, the groundbreaking album and video that includes William's Doll, was intended to be anti-sexist. But it assumes that gender stereotypes are utterly pervasive and hegemonic. They are still almost as hegemonic today, but, thankfully, today, there are quite a few 5 year olds who would never think to bully a boy on the basis that they played with dolls, or even think twice about it. And this story could send the unintended message: "It's dangerous for boys to play with dolls. You're likely to get bullied by friends and rejected by the male members of your family."
One more comment. No wonder the students were confused by the teacher's question about whether there are boy toys and girl toys (this makes it a wonderful question). If they go to Toys R Us or most toy catalogs, the answer is undeniably yes. So, this creates an opportunity to teach students that some companies try to make money by attempting to sell them sexist ideas. But they don't need to buy it. I know, some might think 5 year olds can't get this. And at one level they might not get it. But the Sneetches by Dr. Seuss is a wonderful way to teach this: Sylvester McMonkey McBean makes money by selling the Sneetches on discrimination and feeling bad about themselves -- and that the solution is to pay him. Many many students can be taught the connection, and can be taught to look for discriminatory messages in advertising, from a very young age.
Gender bias taught in the
Gender bias taught in the childhood !
Ted has beautifully elaborated how boys and girls are being discriminated by their
parents in their choice of toys. Doll is deemed an exclusive prerogatives of girls.
The children grow up in an environment where masculine / feminine jobs and hobbies
are earmarked. Infants are just infants not to be looked upon as girl or boy as the
grown up parents do.Let boy be boys that is let boys and girls be children.Let parents
not instil in their children gender bias at an impressinable stage lest they may
consolidate it as they grow up into parents.Kudos to Ted for a thought provoking story.
Prof.(Mr.) Suhas Patwardhan
M.A. ( English literature, 1976 )
University of Bombay.
MUMBAI - I N D I A
====================