Gender and ecology notes

This week in Luisa’s lecture we explored the theme of gender within the context of ecology, and discussed various questions concerning gender and design. We were highly encouraged to share our ideas and views on gender, as well as answer questions that Luisa had put in place for us and take part in interesting tasks. Here are some of my answers and notes from the lecture:

What’s the difference between sex and gender?

Sex is your biological makeup and gender is how you want to be portrayed. It’s more complex and societal. It refers to people’s perception and understanding of themselves, and how they want to be seen outwardly in society.

What does gender have to do with design?

Within product and physical design we live surrounded by objects against their will. Pink is typically associated with females and blues and greens are associated with males. Think pink toothbrushes, manly chocolate bars, princess lunch boxes, macho ear buds etc – there’s nothing that can’t be needlessly feminised or masculinised. But thinking more on design as a practice, it is typically a male-dominant industry but that is slowly changing as the world progresses.

‘At one level the gendering of objects is an extremely complex process which sometimes seems impossible to elucidate yet the over-determination of coding involved in the construction of certain objects as ‘male’ and ‘female’ can sometimes seem crude, almost comical’

Smaller commodities and in particular children’s toys are especially subject to this kind of gender branding, making it clear that objects are frequently used to police the training of the young into assuming the ‘correct’ gender. This characterisation of toys and products is reflecting the stereotypical views and roles in society. In doing this we are forcing children to believe they must grow up following the rules we set in place.

Patriarchal society benefits greatly from encouraging gender roles, punishing girls for not being deferential enough and boys for not being tough enough, despite the damage it causes.

In 2016 The Times revealed the existence of a gender price gap where items branded for women cost on average 37% more; a pink scooter commanding £5 more than a blue one, Levi’s 501 jeans for women and retailing at 46% more than those of men.

We have seen a rapid de-gendering and re-gendering of commodities in society over the past 50 years, the former trend in large part the success of second wave feminism, which pointed out the rigid and restrictive nature of gender stereotypes, particularly towards children. Toys are just toys, clothes are just clothes. Since then we have seen a kind of revenge and upheaval of gender, with anything and everything branded blue or pink with accompanying roles.