'Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?'

The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate

Cordelia Fine, Emma Rush

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The gendered marketing of children's toys is under considerable scrutiny, as reflected by numerous consumer-led campaigns and vigorous media debates. This article seeks to assist stakeholders to better understand the ethical and scientific assumptions that underlie the two opposing positions in this debate, and assess their relative strength. There is apparent consensus in the underlying ethical foundations of the debate, with all commentators seeming to endorse the values of corporate social responsibility and gender equality. However, the debate splits over three critical points of empirical disagreement: whether gendered toy marketing influences children's toy preferences or simply reflects boys' and girls' fundamentally different interests; whether the effects of gendered toy marketing are negative, neutral or beneficial; and whether a shift to gender-neutral marketing would be economically viable. We assess the three points of disagreement against the available evidence and shared ethical principles underlying the debate, and conclude that current defences of gendered toy marketing fail.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-16
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Business Ethics
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

toy
marketing
moral philosophy
science
gender
social responsibility
equality
campaign
stakeholder
Toys
Marketing
evidence
Values

Cite this

@article{0dc7953ed1df42769d6de88419c25d93,
title = "'Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?': The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate",
abstract = "The gendered marketing of children's toys is under considerable scrutiny, as reflected by numerous consumer-led campaigns and vigorous media debates. This article seeks to assist stakeholders to better understand the ethical and scientific assumptions that underlie the two opposing positions in this debate, and assess their relative strength. There is apparent consensus in the underlying ethical foundations of the debate, with all commentators seeming to endorse the values of corporate social responsibility and gender equality. However, the debate splits over three critical points of empirical disagreement: whether gendered toy marketing influences children's toy preferences or simply reflects boys' and girls' fundamentally different interests; whether the effects of gendered toy marketing are negative, neutral or beneficial; and whether a shift to gender-neutral marketing would be economically viable. We assess the three points of disagreement against the available evidence and shared ethical principles underlying the debate, and conclude that current defences of gendered toy marketing fail.",
keywords = "Essentialism, Ethics, Gender stereotypes, Marketing, Toys, Corporate social responsibility",
author = "Cordelia Fine and Emma Rush",
note = "Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: Journal title (773t) = Journal of Business Ethics. ISSNs: 0167-4544;",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1007/s10551-016-3080-3",
language = "English",
pages = "1--16",
journal = "Journal of Business Ethics",
issn = "0167-4544",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 'Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?'

T2 - The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate

AU - Fine, Cordelia

AU - Rush, Emma

N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: Journal title (773t) = Journal of Business Ethics. ISSNs: 0167-4544;

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - The gendered marketing of children's toys is under considerable scrutiny, as reflected by numerous consumer-led campaigns and vigorous media debates. This article seeks to assist stakeholders to better understand the ethical and scientific assumptions that underlie the two opposing positions in this debate, and assess their relative strength. There is apparent consensus in the underlying ethical foundations of the debate, with all commentators seeming to endorse the values of corporate social responsibility and gender equality. However, the debate splits over three critical points of empirical disagreement: whether gendered toy marketing influences children's toy preferences or simply reflects boys' and girls' fundamentally different interests; whether the effects of gendered toy marketing are negative, neutral or beneficial; and whether a shift to gender-neutral marketing would be economically viable. We assess the three points of disagreement against the available evidence and shared ethical principles underlying the debate, and conclude that current defences of gendered toy marketing fail.

AB - The gendered marketing of children's toys is under considerable scrutiny, as reflected by numerous consumer-led campaigns and vigorous media debates. This article seeks to assist stakeholders to better understand the ethical and scientific assumptions that underlie the two opposing positions in this debate, and assess their relative strength. There is apparent consensus in the underlying ethical foundations of the debate, with all commentators seeming to endorse the values of corporate social responsibility and gender equality. However, the debate splits over three critical points of empirical disagreement: whether gendered toy marketing influences children's toy preferences or simply reflects boys' and girls' fundamentally different interests; whether the effects of gendered toy marketing are negative, neutral or beneficial; and whether a shift to gender-neutral marketing would be economically viable. We assess the three points of disagreement against the available evidence and shared ethical principles underlying the debate, and conclude that current defences of gendered toy marketing fail.

KW - Essentialism, Ethics, Gender stereotypes, Marketing, Toys, Corporate social responsibility

U2 - 10.1007/s10551-016-3080-3

DO - 10.1007/s10551-016-3080-3

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 16

JO - Journal of Business Ethics

JF - Journal of Business Ethics

SN - 0167-4544

ER -