Gendered Toy Marketing

Gendered Toy Marketing White Paper

May 11, 2020 ·

Project Description

Our project, in its completed form, is a website designed to inform readers about the causes and consequences of gendered toy marketing, and to spark discussion about the issue. We believe that it has become a highly informative, well-designed website for people to learn about gendered toy marketing. To increase awareness about our website and its content, we also developed social media campaigns, one on Instagram and one on Twitter. On these platforms, we engaged with frontrunners of the gendered toys debate, academics, and the general public as a means to spark discussion between these audiences.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic which switched class from in-person to online, we were forced to make some adjustments to our initial proposal and vision. Some activities, such as the social media campaigns and engagement with the Davidson community, had to be scaled down. The scale of our outreach had to become smaller because we could no longer connect with the Davidson community in-person, and found it difficult to engage audiences with marketing material while many were so focused on the global pandemic. Additionally, some of the site design that we had envisioned ultimately needed to be removed due to accessibility issues (i.e. changing a scrolling arrow on the side of the page to a picture of an arrow which we could add alternative text to).

Our final major adaptation was in our target audience. While our initial audience was marketers, who we believed would have the power to change marketing strategies towards a more gender-neutral approach, our research found that marketing agencies rely on public demand to inform their marketing. We therefore broadened our target audience to include parents of young children who could call the marketers to change. Our social media platforms particularly called upon consumer audiences in the Davidson community, as this was our pre-existing network. While we reached out to several marketing professionals through DCAN, they have not yet responded. We believe that this is due to the stressful pandemic.

Going forward, we would like our audience to include both parent consumers and marketing professionals, and as such, will continue to seek marketing audiences through DCAN and through Marketing professors at other Universities. The age of our target audience is between 25-35 years old, the next generation of marketers and parent consumers who would aspire to give their children a bright, new future. We believe that our project will challenge our audience to think critically about the toys that they market and buy for their children, and that this awareness will spark change towards gender-neutral toy marketing.

Individual Roles & Responsibilities

Marion – Marion was responsible for writing a majority of the content, including the historical background, parents and consumer controversy, the marketer’s perspective, and the collection of gender-neutral campaigns. She was responsible for the content revisions and proofreading, and for reaching out to Davidson faculty for research guidance, including Dr. Good and Dr. Eiler. While Marion reached out to marketing professionals through the DCAN network, she did not receive any response, which was likely due to the hectic nature of the pandemic. Amelia acted as frontrunner for much of the website design, but Marion took on the responsibility to help explore the Elementor plugin, ultimately creating the transitioning buttons and the comments sections for audiences to engage with the material. Alongside Amelia, she petitioned online viewers to contribute to the “Childhood Toy” photo gallery and to engage with the project’s social media.

Amelia – Amelia was responsible for the majority of the design of the website, including any background, images, logos, and decisions to make each page on the website flow and look visually appealing. She was also the secretary of the operation, meaning she was responsible for taking meeting notes and keeping track of all other similar information about the project in a cohesive and organized fashion. The sections that she was responsible for in terms of content were the Innovation and Research sections, which meant that she was able to craft a lot of the scientific research behind the project. She also worked with canva to design all the images for the website as well as the social media campaign. A large contribution that had to do with this was the creation of the posters that were used on instagram as well as in the “spread the word” section, these were designed by her in an attempt to create pieces of media that were easily digestible and shareable.

Project Goals & Objectives

The primary goals for our project were to draw new connections within the gendered toy marketing debate across disciplines and to develop spaces for dialogue about gendered toy marketing in order to ultimately call marketers towards gender-neutral strategies. To accomplish our goals, we determined objectives for our project that would drive our website’s communication, design, content, and impact.

In our Literature Review and Wireframe sketch, we found that the disciplines studying gendered toy marketing were not conversing with each other. Our project therefore became a tool to synthesize literature about gendered toy marketing across disciplines into one platform. Our primary objectives in this area were as follows:

Develop a bibliography that draws from at least five sources within the fields of history, psychology, business, and marketing. By understanding how others in multiple fields have studied gendered toy marketing, we will be able to cohesively present multiple perspectives.
Develop a layout for our website that transitions through multiple fields of study. In this way, we will be able to present the connections in a clear format that audiences can easily engage with.

In our research of marketing strategies, we found that many marketing companies are highly influenced by public demand (Sommers 2012). As demand for gender-neutral marketing grows, toy tycoons like Target and Mattel are beginning to alter their approach (Sieczkowski 2015). We therefore wanted to create a space where the public could express their thoughts on the matter and where marketing professionals might see it. Our primary objectives to develop spaces for dialogue were as follows:

Create at least 2 comment sections on the website where audiences are prompted with direct questions and are able to respond to one another’s ideas. By asking audiences to engage critically with the material and to submit their own ideas, we create a platform to collectivize public demand for change while also welcoming opinions that are not our own.
Create a gallery of audience-submitted content on social media. We believe that allowing viewers to submit their own content will challenge them to critically examine how gendered toy marketing has influenced their lives and will increase community engagement.

We ultimately hoped that the dialogue and content on our website would reach marketing professionals and inspire them to alter their marketing strategies towards a more gender-neutral approach. Our primary objectives to reach an audience in the marketing sphere were as follows:

Contact 2 marketing professionals through the DCAN network and ask to share our project with them.
Spread awareness of our website to at least 10 professional marketers through the DCAN connections.
Use design principles to enhance the website’s interface. In this way, we will be able to make sure that viewers can easily engage and interact with the website’s content.

Project Activities & Process

The Gendered Toy Marketing project began with Marion’s initial proposal, which primarily focused on the historical tradition of gendered marketing. From this proposal, we were able to launch our research efforts into individual “Think Pieces”, an opportunity to explore what we envision for our project. Through our Think Pieces, we extracted our target audience: marketing professionals. As both my partner and I are hoping to go into marketing post-graduation, we thought that framing our readers as future employers would make this project relevant on a resume while also (ideally) positively influencing the field we hope to join. We also determined our project’s initial goal: to make our readers, marketing agencies, understand the implications of gendered marketing to children and to propose alternative, and equally profitable, solutions.

Our Think Pieces generated many questions that we hoped to answer through further research, including questions into the marketer’s perspective and the cognitive/developmental effects of gendered toy marketing. These questions drove us to explore the study of gendered toy marketing in multiple disciplines, from history to psychology and business. The sources that we found were compiled into provisional bibliographies, outlining the direction of our studies. We then created a Wireframe Sketch to draft the content layout in our website. This allowed us to determine how all of the content that we hoped to include would fit together to create one cohesive argument. We wanted our viewers to be guided through the material for full understanding while also having the autonomy to revisit pages or selectively read out of order. This goal was inspired by Website Evaluations, in which Marion found a beautiful, yet frustrating website with design elements that allowed a reader to flow easily from one concept to another but which also made it difficult to independently search for information on the site or go back to revisit pages. Such goals for our website were solidified within the strategic plan.

The Strategic Plan outlined all of the roles and steps that were necessary to develop the website that we envisioned. However, our planned goals were thrown off by the pandemic and transition to online learning. We were no longer able to meet in-person or access the Davidson community, and as such, a significant amount of time was spent trying to reconstruct what we would be able to do. In the end, we decided to focus on the research elements of our website rather than interactive outreach, as leaving campus also made it significantly more difficult to advertise our work to the Davidson community. Social media became a very useful tool to gain viewership and engagement after we had been sent home. By focusing on the critical analysis of previous literature, we aimed to deliver information from across disciplines on one platform. Our Literature Review synthesized these perspectives and found that many of these fields were not conversing with one another. We found the Literature Review to be a valuable step in our process because it allowed us to develop new discourse between different areas of study, and more importantly, highlighted the importance of our project in joining these perspectives.

The Design phase of our website began with the exploration of different plugins. We were inspired by the design capabilities of Elementor, but ultimately faced several accessibility challenges with the plugin’s capabilities. Several other plugins were tested but found to not be accessible, including “Smooth Scroll Page Up/Down Buttons” and “Contact Form 7”. Elementor allowed us to have control over basic design elements on the website, but a key turning point in our design efforts was instruction on the “inspect” tool. We spent a long period of time figuring out how to accurately identify the correct code, but once found, we could alter any aspect of our site to fit our vision. Once we had completed our first prototype, we began user testing, which yielded key findings. For example, Marion’s mom did not immediately scroll downwards on the homepage, which prevented the site from being able to guide her through the content. This issue was fixed by adding an arrow indicating that viewers should scroll downwards. We were happy to note in user testing that several of our viewers were inclined to click on the dynamic social media icons, leading them to our social platforms. Before turning in our project, we tested each page for accessibility as we have learned that this is one of the most important factors in creating a successful website. Accounting for accessibility was time-consuming, but ultimately worth it to make sure that all audiences are able to engage with our content.

Accomplishments & Lessons Learned

Although necessary changes were made to our project due to the constraints that COVID-19 introduced, we accomplished many of our overall goals. Our communication goal that we proposed in the beginning of the project was to develop spaces on our website that encouraged dialogue. We kept this goal in mind throughout the creation of the website. Our completed website was easily readable and our comment sections were fully accessible for readers to engage in what they had read on the page. Some readers have already left comments to begin the conversation. Our social media pages and campaigns contributed to this goal as well, as they expanded space for communication and engagement. It was very important to us to have a “Contact Us” page as well, where readers could ask us questions or share their thoughts directly.

Our content goal was to develop new information, and hopefully a theory, about why and how toy marketing has developed over time. Through the synthesis of information from many different sources and disciplines, we were able to create a platform that critically analysed the rise of gendered toy marketing and posited that marketers are ultimately swayed by their perception of public interest.

Our initial impact goal was for this content to reach its intended audience, marketing professionals. Over time, our target audience grew to include young parents, particularly within the Davidson community. We believe that the language in our website can be directed towards both audiences, and informs each audience of the perspective of the other. In this way, our website is prepared to engage both audiences, however, we know that our website must reach more people in order to have a true effect on toy marketing strategies. We will continue to push the website content and social media platforms towards consumers and marketers through Davidson networking platforms like DCAN throughout the summer.

Lastly, our design goal was to use principles of UX-design in order to make the website both user friendly and pleasing to the eye. This goal was reached without question. After spending countless hours working through the design of every aspect of our website, we were able to cultivate a layout that conveyed our message clearly and aesthetically. Furthermore, we were able to design a format that guided readers through the content, while also allowing our audience to have the autonomy to revisit pages and to read at their own speed.

We believe that our project is a work to be proud of. Like with all websites, there continue to be areas of improvement. Had we had more time, we would have increased our outreach efforts. We initially wanted our main audience to be marketing professionals, but found it difficult to get in contact with marketing professionals after COVID-19. We would have also campaigned on the Davidson campus to promote our website and social media presence. Throughout the summer, we will strive to enter marketing networks in order to promote our project, and upon Marion’s return in the fall, she will use the on-campus networks to promote our work. The trauma of the pandemic certainly acted as an obstacle to our project, however, we believe it would be an interesting lens through which to predict the future of gendered toy marketing. According to postdoctoral Sociology scholar and frontrunner of the gendered toy marketing debate, Elizabeth Sweet, gendered marketing strategies are heavily influenced by political and social movements (Sweet 2014). How, then, might gendered marketing be affected in the wake of a global pandemic? Would social unification end gender stereotyping or would we take on traditional roles and values as a coping measure?

Overall, we were able to complete the goals and objectives that we set out to achieve with this project. Through the pandemic, we learned to adapt to accomplish these goals in a new environment rather than let it inhibit our efforts.

Works Cited

Sommers, Christina Hoff. “You Can Give a Boy a Doll, but You Can’t Make Him Play With It.” The Atlantic, 6 December 2012, https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/you-can-give-a-boy-a-doll-but-you-cant-make-him-play-with-it/265977/ Accessed March 13, 2020.

Sieczkowski, Cavan. “Target Angers Customers With Its Stores’ New Non-Gendered Policy.” Huffpost, 11 Aug. 2015 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/target-gender-biased-signs_n_55c9ffe6e4b0923c12be0f96 Accessed May 2, 2020.

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Appendices

Prototype 1 Homepage

Prototype 2 Homepage

Prototype 3 Homepage

Pledged: MCM, AT

Gendered Toy Marketing White Paper

May 11, 2020 ·

Project Description

Individual Roles & Responsibilities

Project Goals & Objectives

Develop a bibliography that draws from at least five sources within the fields of history, psychology, business, and marketing. By understanding how others in multiple fields have studied gendered toy marketing, we will be able to cohesively present multiple perspectives.
Develop a layout for our website that transitions through multiple fields of study. In this way, we will be able to present the connections in a clear format that audiences can easily engage with.

Create at least 2 comment sections on the website where audiences are prompted with direct questions and are able to respond to one another’s ideas. By asking audiences to engage critically with the material and to submit their own ideas, we create a platform to collectivize public demand for change while also welcoming opinions that are not our own.
Create a gallery of audience-submitted content on social media. We believe that allowing viewers to submit their own content will challenge them to critically examine how gendered toy marketing has influenced their lives and will increase community engagement.

Contact 2 marketing professionals through the DCAN network and ask to share our project with them.
Spread awareness of our website to at least 10 professional marketers through the DCAN connections.
Use design principles to enhance the website’s interface. In this way, we will be able to make sure that viewers can easily engage and interact with the website’s content.

Project Activities & Process

Accomplishments & Lessons Learned

Works Cited

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Appendices

Prototype 1 Homepage

Prototype 2 Homepage

Prototype 3 Homepage

Pledged: MCM, AT

Gendered Toy Marketing White Paper

May 11, 2020 ·

Project Description

Individual Roles & Responsibilities

Project Goals & Objectives

Develop a bibliography that draws from at least five sources within the fields of history, psychology, business, and marketing. By understanding how others in multiple fields have studied gendered toy marketing, we will be able to cohesively present multiple perspectives.
Develop a layout for our website that transitions through multiple fields of study. In this way, we will be able to present the connections in a clear format that audiences can easily engage with.

Create at least 2 comment sections on the website where audiences are prompted with direct questions and are able to respond to one another’s ideas. By asking audiences to engage critically with the material and to submit their own ideas, we create a platform to collectivize public demand for change while also welcoming opinions that are not our own.
Create a gallery of audience-submitted content on social media. We believe that allowing viewers to submit their own content will challenge them to critically examine how gendered toy marketing has influenced their lives and will increase community engagement.

Contact 2 marketing professionals through the DCAN network and ask to share our project with them.
Spread awareness of our website to at least 10 professional marketers through the DCAN connections.
Use design principles to enhance the website’s interface. In this way, we will be able to make sure that viewers can easily engage and interact with the website’s content.

Project Activities & Process

Accomplishments & Lessons Learned

Works Cited

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Appendices

Prototype 1 Homepage

Prototype 2 Homepage

Prototype 3 Homepage

Pledged: MCM, AT

Gendered Toy Marketing White Paper

May 11, 2020 ·

Project Description

Individual Roles & Responsibilities

Project Goals & Objectives

Develop a bibliography that draws from at least five sources within the fields of history, psychology, business, and marketing. By understanding how others in multiple fields have studied gendered toy marketing, we will be able to cohesively present multiple perspectives.
Develop a layout for our website that transitions through multiple fields of study. In this way, we will be able to present the connections in a clear format that audiences can easily engage with.

Create at least 2 comment sections on the website where audiences are prompted with direct questions and are able to respond to one another’s ideas. By asking audiences to engage critically with the material and to submit their own ideas, we create a platform to collectivize public demand for change while also welcoming opinions that are not our own.
Create a gallery of audience-submitted content on social media. We believe that allowing viewers to submit their own content will challenge them to critically examine how gendered toy marketing has influenced their lives and will increase community engagement.

Contact 2 marketing professionals through the DCAN network and ask to share our project with them.
Spread awareness of our website to at least 10 professional marketers through the DCAN connections.
Use design principles to enhance the website’s interface. In this way, we will be able to make sure that viewers can easily engage and interact with the website’s content.

Project Activities & Process

Accomplishments & Lessons Learned

Works Cited

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Appendices

Prototype 1 Homepage

Prototype 2 Homepage

Prototype 3 Homepage

Pledged: MCM, AT

Prototype 2 Gendered Toy Marketing

April 23, 2020 ·

Home

Link to our Website seen above

Pledged: MCM, AT

Outreach and Sustainability Plan for Gendered Toy Marketing

April 21, 2020 ·

Outreach

Community Resources:

Kayla Corbin – Assistant Director for Marketing and Events at Davidson’s Center for Career Development
1. Share our project? Yes. Kayla Corbin is an on-campus resource with expertise in marketing and who is readily available to students through appointment. As such, she is a great first step to discuss how our project fits within the current field of marketing. We have already met with her to discuss our content, and will meet with her again to discuss how we can publicize our website.
Dr. Brian Eiler – Assistant Professor of Psychology at Davidson College
1. Share our project? Yes. Dr. Eiler has a background in social psychology and consumer engagement. We have already met with him for guidance towards relevant research in consumer behavior and its effects on social interaction. Dr. Eiler will be the mentor for Marion’s Senior Thesis in this area, namely studying parent consumer behavior towards gendered products.
Dr. Jessica Good – Assistant Professor of Psychology at Davidson College
1. Share our project? Yes. Dr. Good has expertise in stereotyping, social identities, and self-evaluations. We have met with her to discuss how our project fits within the current research studying the effects of stereotyping children’s products. She was able to direct us towards several relevant studies published in 2020.
Christopher Emond – Marketing Professional in the Davidson Career Advisor Network
1. Share our project? Yes. Chistopher Emond is a Davidson alumnus with experience working in both marketing agencies and with specific brands. His profile on DCAN states that he is “passionate about finding unique ways for brands to evolve.” We believe that his passion for evolution in marketing will make him a great connection for our project that argues for a revolution in marketing practices. We hope to meet with Mr. Emond while in the prototype stage in order to present something tangible that he can share with his marketing connections. This will bring the conversation to the marketing professionals. As he is a mentor through DCAN, it will be far easier to schedule a meeting through this network than to reach out to others in the field directly. We would also be interested in conducting an interview to learn his perspective on gendered toy marketing.
Meredith Tutterow – Marketing Professional in the Davidson Career Advisor Network
1. Share our project? Yes. Meredith Tutterow is another Davidson alumnus who graduated Davidson to later earn her MBA and become a marketing manager. Like with Mr. Emond, we hope to meet with her in the prototype stage so that we have a shareable, engaging format for our content. Through our meeting with Mrs. Tutterow on DCAN, we aim to conduct an interview on her perspective of the content and to place our project within new spheres of marketing professionals.

Social Media

Twitter : @toydebate

Instagram: @genderedtoys

By curating social media that establishes legitimacy to our project and goals, we will be able to reach out to other platforms with accounts that demonstrate our message and who we are. Social media accounts will also make our content more shareable, allowing viewers to share our project with their circles. We hope to expand our network through social media and through others sharing our work with their connections. In this way, we will reach our ultimate goal which is to spark dialogue about gendered toy marketing and its effects.

We will establish a legitimate and trustworthy identity on Instagram and Twitter by displaying accurate and professional information with the link to our website and our contact information freely available. We will also post regularly and engage with our audience by posing questions and responding to comments.

We establish credibility on our platforms by linking ourselves to Davidson College as students. Both platforms will show biographies of the authors (us) which will include the fact that we are both Davidson students, psychology majors, and have studied relevant work through our classes. We will provide profile photos of ourselves to link the project with both a face and a name, and will link social media to the main website where viewers can find more information. Finally, we will establish credibility by engaging with pages that have similar or relevant topics covered by following them.

Hashtags to use that are associated with our project’s work: #LetToysbeToys, #DavidsonCollege, #ToyDebate, #genderedtoys, #genderedmarketing, #morealikethandifferent, #smashingstereotypes, #samechilddifferentinterests

In order to join relevant conversations we are making sure to post relevant information and follow pages that are relevant to our interests. In that way we engage in relevant posts and conversations, and others can identify our work to engage with us. We can also take advantage of the Instagram story trend, where people post and tag 3 others to post the same content. In this way, we can broaden our network and build conversation.

We have found many relevant and similar groups/pages that go along with our topic, many of which we have found by locating a few accounts and identifying other relevant accounts that they follow. We are following these pages and engaging with their posts on instagram and twitter. We have been and will continue to retweet relevant information on twitter and like posts on instagram. We will engage with posts on Instagram that we find highly relevant by reposting them as stories on Instagram as well. There are also relevant hashtags available and being used that relate to our topic, such as #lettoysbetoys. It will be helpful for us to engage with these hashtags by using them in posts and following and commenting on posts that use them as well.

Relevant Social Media Accounts to Connect and Engage With:

@beyondpinkandblue is a Women and Gender Studies project by students from University of Alberta with a similar agenda: to highlight gender neutral clothing and toy options. We can connect with this account to share insights and hopefully learn of new applications/directions for our project.
@LetToysBeToys is a UK-based program that aims to end the gendering of toys. By connecting over social media, we can develop an international dialogue and agenda.
@thinkorblue is a feminist parenting resource that focuses on gender equality. We believe our project and findings could be shared to parents through this Instagram platform to increase awareness for gender-neutral options.

Sustainability

Sustainability Plan:

The website is built on Marion’s webpage, as she is the last author to graduate. Thus, it can stay in this domain until she graduates in 2021. We hope to have a record of this work for our own portfolios/profiles to show employers, which can be accomplished by moving the site to digitalprojects.davidson.edu. This platform will also allow our work to remain within the Davidson digital community.

The site will remain live through 2021, as Marion will be continuing research in this area for her Senior Thesis and will feature her findings on the website. She will update the site with new research that she finds while developing her thesis work. This will be re-evaluated in May of 2021 as Marion completes her work.

An important aspect of our website and social media is the dialogue that it will spark surrounding gendered toy marketing. We hope to provide a space for this dialogue on our website, and so will be asking questions and allowing comments. This interactivity will require us to respond and engage with viewers. We plan to engage with website comments weekly through the semester, and biweekly after the semester’s end. We will also have a contact page giving our current contact information, where our audience can reach out to the site authors directly.

Pledged: MCM, AT

Gendered Toy Marketing Lit Review

April 11, 2020 ·

Imagine yourself back in the toy aisles of your local Target. Walking down one aisle, you are faced with a world of pink. Dolls, building blocks, and costumes sparkle in every shade of one color. Around the next corner, a sharp divide transforms these same toys into a blazing blue. Every child inside every Target store knows exactly which side of the divide they are allowed to shop on, based on if they are a boy or girl. This is normal. However, the gender divide that permeates toy advertising has not been an enduring aspect of our culture nor a remnant from a more sexist time. Even as we see increasing change towards gender equality in the workplace, social spheres, and legislature, the toy aisle shifts towards a more gendered approach than has been seen in fifty years. Scholars in multiple fields are studying this trend: economists have analyzed the marketing strategy’s profitability and influence,historians have compared shifts in gendered toy marketing across time, and psychologists have examined its effect on child cognition and development. While each field presents significant findings to explain and examine gendered toy marketing, little action has been taken to synthesize the research from various disciplines in order to communicate a holistic view to the public.

The Science & Effects of Gendered Toys and Gendered Toy Play

If you happen to stumble upon a young girl and a young boy playing with toys in the same room, chances are the toys they are playing with, and their style of toy play is very different. The young girl may be engaging in a gentler quiet way. She may be playing with a doll, stuffed animals or even a toy house or kitchen. The young boy is likely engaging with his toys in a louder, rougher manner. He is playing with building blocks, and toy cars using all the appropriate sound effects. Even as societal gender roles and constraints have reduced in recent years, and gender expectations have lowered, these gendered play patterns are still very visible. These play patterns are of interest for a couple reasons. First, they demonstrate that girls and boys engage in different ways of play during their childhood. Secondly and most importantly, these different behaviors may have long-term effects on the development of cognitive skills. These effects will in turn have an affect on the individuals’ educational, occupational and personal lives.

Toys can be gendered in five ways: through labeled categorization, cultural marking, social partner messaging, observed or expressed preferences, or stereotypic beliefs. In addition to the toys themselves being gender-typed, there is also gender-typed play which is the way that boys and girls play with or engage with toys differently. Investigators have done extensive research in this area by observing the different ways that children engage with toys. There are a number of interesting findings. For example girls and boys have been observed to use the same toy in different ways when playing with it. Schau, Kahn, Diepold, and Cherry (1980) examined doll house play in preschool children, and found that when preschool boys played with a dollhouse, they spent most of their playtime playing with an item within it, the kitchen mixer. This is because they could turn it into a drill or a machine gun. Not only do boys and girls use the same toys differently, but when their play doesn’t involve toys at all they still play differently. Without props, boys are more likely to act out roles of something like Superman whereas girls will act out a role as a princess or a schoolteacher.

Playing with certain toys such as building blocks has an impact on development of spatial skills which then is positively correlated with math skills later on. What is problematic here is that many toys that fit this category are marketed as more masculine meaning they would appeal more towards boys. Jigsaw puzzles are another group of toys that contribute towards a great increase of spatial skills and cognitive development that are more popular among boys than among girls. Another category of toys or games that contribute towards increases in cognitive skills including spatial skills are video games or online games. Online games or video games see more engagement from boys than girls. These cognitive domains having more male representation through their toy play earlier on, contributes to the underrepresentation of women in STEM fields later on.

The Rise and Fall of Gendered Toy Marketing

As more children are exposed to gendered toy marketing, the greater effect this trend has on child development and society at large. One Sociology scholar, Elizabeth Sweet, found that gendered toy marketing has only increased in its popularity and pervasiveness over the past fifty years. In her article, “Toys Are More Divided by Gender Now Than They Were 50 Years Ago”, Sweet surveys the Sears catalog throughout the 20^th and 21^st centuries to showcase the rise and fall of gendered toy marketing. She finds that only fifty years ago, when gender discrimination and sexism were the unquestioned norm in society, approximately 2% of toys were differentiated by gender. By the 1990s, this number rose to 50%, and today, we see the Disney toy shelves coded by gender almost completely. Today’s toy aisle gender divide, Sweet states, acts as a societal regression to early 20th century norms when toys prepared girls for a life of homemaking and boys for the industrial economy. She concludes that “the ‘little homemaker’ of the 1950s has become the ‘little princess’ we see today.” The overt stereotypes of the 1920s are repackaged into implicit messages that present a false pretense of choice: blue or pink, G.I. Joe or Princess. Many who oppose a gender-neutral shift claim that it would take away choice, that gender-neutral toys would be bland and unexciting to children. To refute this claim, Sweet directs us to the 1970s, the height of gender-neutral toy marketing where children’s toys were brightly advertised in every color regardless of gender, as proof that neutral toys open up possibilities. While gender roles and stereotypes permeated the 20th century, an increased female presence in the workplace and the height of second-wave feminism caused the 1970s to become a decade that questioned what it means to be a boy or girl. While her analysis of Sears advertisements draws upon societal shifts in the workforce and in feminism to explain the varying prevalence of gendered toy marketing, Sweet does not connect these shifts to the business perspective in order to explain why gendering toys historically became more/less profitable, thereby causing marketers to alter their approach. Sweet’s historical analysis therefore allows us an opportunity to connect her research with the business perspective on our platform.

Why Companies Use Gender to Market & Exploring Brand Masculine Patterns

One such business scholar, Dr. Salim L. Azar, studies content that overlaps with Elizabeth Sweet’s arguments: consumer behaviors, brand perceptions, and gender. While he does not bridge his work to the Humanities research that Elizabeth Sweet relies on, Azar’s article “Exploring Brand Masculine Patterns: Moving Beyond Monolithic Masculinity” also studies gendered marketing, exploring the nature and structure of brands’ masculine dimensions and exploring different patterns in brand masculinity. This paper deeply analyzes why brands use gender as a means to categorize and sell their products. Azar claims that gender has historically been used by brand managers as a basis for market segmentation and targeting strategies because gender is easily identifiable, accessible and sufficiently prevalent to be profitable. Even today, gender is considered a central component for segmentation strategies when launching new products and brands, even when the product could be used by all audiences. This can explain why gendered toys are so often seen even with the decrease of societal gender constraints. To appeal to male consumers, for example, brands often attribute a masculine sexual identity for traditionally non sex-typed brands and products. Understanding a brands’ masculine dimensions (BMD) is important because many practitioners use masculine gender-based marketing strategies to develop and manage their brands, which consumers then take into account when interacting with the brand. The paper allows us to have a deeper understanding of gendered branding patterns to fully understand how brands and products released by brands are perceived.

Azar writes this article through the lens of marketing and business research, referencing many sources from journals such as The Journal of Brand Management or the Journal of Marketing Research to back his claims made about brand masculinity. Azar also cites a number of psychological studies and papers as well to back his claim. These psychological studies he references focuses on gender, masculinity and sex roles. In fact, everything written about gender throughout this article had substantial psychological research to back it up. He also cites a couple of articles that fit neatly at the intersection of psychology and marketing which is an interesting lens to look at brands, products and gender through. This article combines high levels of marketing research with Psychology literature, demonstrating the level of analysis that can be achieved when these fields are bridged.

Perspective of Marketing Professionals on Gendered Toy Marketing

While Azar analyzes previous literature in the field of marketing, other marketing experts have not surveyed this research. Due to this lack of understanding, marketing professionals are hesitant to alter their gendered approach, relying instead on stereotyped conceptions about children’s preferences. Our project will analyze archived responses from marketing professionals to the Marketing Society Forum monthly debate. In this forum, managing directors, chief executives, and others in marketing debate a new question related to the field each month. The question analyzed in this archived copy regards a pledge made by Marks & Spencer, a multinational retail company, to make its toy marketing gender-neutral. Overall, their responses reached agreement that no, a gender-neutral approach would not be beneficial. As stated by Tom Knox, the Chairman to DLKW Low, “Differences (between what boys and girls like to play with) pre-date the influence of marketers and their brands, but expecting marketers to ignore basic and profound differences in their audience seems ill-conceived and impractical.” If marketing professionals were to be exposed to research that demonstrates the cognitive and developmental effects of gendered toy marketing on the children exposed, they may not be so quick to argue that gender differences pre-date marketing exposure. More importantly, they may become more willing to shift their advertisements to a more gender-neutral approach. As of now, many responses to the debate question exhibit a “nervousness” to step into gender-neutral marketing. While no response mentioned profitability, it is simple mathematics that the ability to sell two versions of the same product (one for boys and one for girls) to one family is a more profitable approach. However, narrowing down a target audience for a product can also be harmful by cutting out potential consumers. We can provide a platform that both informs marketing professionals to the developmental consequences of gendered marketing and demonstrates how successful a gender-neutral approach can be by exhibiting successful campaigns that have already stepped into the new wave.

Our project’s significance lies in its ability to connect multiple areas of study that have not been in conversation with one another, synthesizing this information in a manner that is both engaging and persuasive to our audience: marketing professionals who can change how these products are promoted. Through this synthesis, we hope to develop a theory to explain the rise in gendered marketing in an increasingly progressive climate, and raise a call to action for our audience to change their marketing approach.

Works Cited

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Campaign UK. “Should All Marketing to Children Be Gender-Neutral?” The Marketing Society Forum, Campaign UK, 4 May 2016, www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/marketing-children-gender-neutral/1283685.

Azar, Salim L. “Exploring Brand Masculine Patterns: Moving Beyond Monolithic Masculinity: [1].” The Journal of Product and Brand Management 22, no. 7 (2013): 502-512.https://ezproxy.lib.davidson.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1691005068?accountid=10427

Liben, Lynn S., et al. “Cognitive Consequences of Gendered Toy Play.” Gender Typing of Children’s Toys: How Early Play Experiences Impact Development, American Psychological Association, 2018, pp. 213–55. APA PsycNET, doi:10.1037/0000077- 011.

Pledged: MCM, AT

Theoretical Ballroom:

This ballroom demonstrates the paths of conversation among our sources. Sources in the humanities converse with previous literature in the humanities, research in psychology cites previous research in its own field, and business articles speak to others in business (while relying on some psychology). The marketing professionals did not cite any outside sources in the Marketing Society Forum. We hope to synthesize the findings of each of these fields to create engaging and persuasive content.

SSRs

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Thesis: “Even at times when discrimination was much more common, catalogs contained more neutral appeals than advertisements today” (subheading for the article).

Restatement: Even as we see increasing change towards gender equality in the workplace, social spheres, and legislature, the toy aisle shifts towards a more gendered approach than has been seen in fifty years.

Rhetorical Structure:

The structure of this article is primarily organized chronologically by decade, beginning in the early 20th century and leading into the present. Sweet begins with an overall layout of the rise and fall of gendered toy marketing in Sears advertisements to exemplify the major shifts that permeated the entire industry. She then directs her focus to the early 1920s, where toy advertisements displayed overt stereotypes about gender, citing specific advertisements from the decade. She claims that this pattern continued until the 1970s, glossing over the decades in between so that she can focus on the decline of gendered marketing in this time. Here, she connects this decline to increases in second-wave feminism and in women in the workplace. The remainder of her article contrasts the themes seen in previous decades with gendered toy marketing seen today, concluding that today’s marketing strategy repackages the same gender stereotypes from the 1920s into implicit messaging and a false sense of choice. She points to the 1970s as an epitome of the gender-neutral approach and an example we should strive towards. Her theory builds upon the chronology of major social movements to explain why gendered toy marketing has risen and fallen throughout time.

Rhetorical Strategies:

1. The chronology of Sweet’s article makes her argument both easier to follow and more engaging in its story format. Rather than jumping back and forth through time, the audience is able to get a clearer understanding of how/why the trend has risen and fallen through time. I would like to incorporate this chronological story format in our work.

2. Sweet exemplifies marketing trends with real toy advertisements from the decade, rather than just speaking about the trends in general, abstract terms. This adds validity to her claims, and is something that I wish to incorporate in our writing.

3. Sweet’s writing is separated into small segments that makes each individual concept easier to grasp, and therefore makes the overall argument less overwhelming. I will also strive to break up heavy text in our content into smaller sections.

Thesis: “Should all marketing to children be gender-neutral? The Marketing Society Forum: Marks & Spencer has pledged to make its toy marketing gender-neutral in response to criticism about its ‘Boy’s Stuff’ and ‘Little Miss Arty’ lines” (Forum question).

Restatement: The Marketing Society Forum asks marketing professionals for their opinion about gender-neutral marketing to children, based upon the decision of one company, Marks & Spencer, to transition its marketing strategy to one that is gender-neutral.

Structure: This source follows a question-answer format. The page first displays the question: should all marketing to children be gender-neutral? The respondent’s answers are then shown, first with the heading of yes, no, or maybe, and then with a more lengthy description to explain their thoughts on gender-neutral toy marketing. As this is a questionnaire, the site itself merely displays these responses and does not develop meta-commentary on the answers. The site does demonstrate credibility by providing the respondent’s names, job positions, and Twitter accounts.

Rhetorical Strategies

1. As this source was merely an archive of responses to a debate question, it is difficult to judge the rhetorical strategies of the source itself (as most of the content is created by respondents). However, the use of “yes”, “no”, or “maybe” headers made the content much easier to sift through. With a brief sweep of the page, the audience is able to understand the general stance of marketing professionals on the debate. I would like to include frequent headers in our writing to break up the content and to make the content more digestible for our audiences.

2. Including the Twitter accounts of respondents not only increases credibility, but encourages further dialogue surrounding the debate. If I disagreed with or was interested in one of the opinions, I would only have to tag them on Twitter with a question. I would like to increase dialogue about the debate through our platform, and as such, will include social media accounts of my sources when possible to encourage this.

3. I appreciated the site’s use of tags to categorize the article and to connect it with similar content. I will also use tags on our platform to direct the audience to further information on our site.

Means of Improvement: While this forum allows for marketing professionals to engage in one question on the same platform, it does not allow for them to respond to each other. I believe that a very important aspect of a debate is being able to respond to others’ points, and as such, I would include a comments section for each response in this source. We hope to include comments sections at the end of every page on our website to encourage discussion.

Thesis: “The results indicate that brand masculinity is a bi-dimensional construct (i.e. “Male chauvinism” and “Heroic” dimensions). A cluster analysis performed on 45 brands revealed four brand masculine patterns: hegemonic, emerging, chivalrous and subaltern”.

“The results provide brand managers with a marketing tool to measure their brands’ masculinity and allow them to adapt specific, previously developed gendered marketing strategies”. “This research contributes to the brand personality and brand gender literature with new insights about the nature and structure of brands’ masculine dimensions. The study moves the conceptualization of this construct forward rejecting thus previous monolithic approaches to brand masculinity”.

Restatement: Brand masculinity is a bi-dimensional construct, with four brand masculine patterns. These findings are helpful for brands to use as a marketing tool in order to more effectively and deeply use previously developed gendered marketing strategies. There are more insights about brand masculine dimensions that will help brands with brand personality and gender-based marketing.

Structure: The structure of this article is interesting, it is almost like a lab report. There are many subheadings where the structure of the scale development is laid out in steps. There is also an introduction and a discussion and conclusion although the discussion and conclusion section is put together as one section.

Rhetorical Strategies:

1. It is helpful that this article has many subheadings as it successfully organizes the research and thoughts of the author.

2. The background research provided in the introduction of this paper is really helpful in understanding the research that is done later on.

3. The abstract was organized in a way I haven’t seen before, but it was helpful in terms of the structure of this paper especially when trying to make since of the findings that the scale was used to find.

Liben, Lynn S., et al. “Cognitive Consequences of Gendered Toy Play.” Gender Typing

of Children’s Toys: How Early Play Experiences Impact Development, American

Psychological Association, 2018, pp. 213–55. APA PsycNET, doi:10.1037/0000077- 011.

Thesis: “Despite many reductions in societal gender constraints over the last century (Liben, 2016), gender-stereotypical play patterns like these remain common, particularly during toddlerhood and the preschool years (Blakemore, Berenbaum, & Liben, 2009). These patterns are of interest not only because they demonstrate that girls and boys engage in different kinds of play during their childhoods but also because these different behaviors may have long-term effects on the development of cognitive skills, in turn affecting individuals’ educational, occupational, and daily lives” (213-214).

Restatement: Even as the culture around gender constraints has changed a lot in recent years, there are still gender-stereotypical play patterns that are common. These patterns of play can have long-term cognitive effects on children.

Structure: This resource is a chapter from a much longer book. It is structured in the way that many chapters are. This chapter also has a lot of subtitles and sections which is a helpful organization. It is organized in a way that very clearly explains everything to the readers. It has a lot of sections, with lots of information that is helpful for the reader to understand everything in the thesis.

Rhetorical Strategies:

1. The subheadings and subsections are really helpful organizationally.

2. The background on cognitive development is very useful in fully understanding the purpose and thesis of the chapter.

3. This chapter is extremely long, but has a lot of useful information.

Prototype 1, Gendered Toy Marketing

April 7, 2020 ·

Home

Gendered Toy Marketing Hyperlink

Our page has an over-arching design template and flows from one page to the next with links. In the screenshot above, you will see that our homepage links to the history, which links to the current debate, linking to successful gender-neutral toy ads, linking to previous research on gendered toys, linking to the future of toy marketing, and then our bibliography. We incorporated the plugin Elementor throughout our website to aid in our visual appearance. We would like to include a page about the marketing professional’s perspective, as well, possibly linked between the current debate and gender-neutral ads. We would also like to create a timeline of advertisements from one decade to the next because we think it would be an enlightening visual. Finally, we hope to increase our site’s aesthetic appeal as we continue to play with the design.

Pledged: MCM, AT

Gendered Toy Marketing Content Draft

March 29, 2020 ·

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lkGf37XScJFbc3nAx6ZBO_1b2B_Q60QJEunNeWGvGo0/edit#

Pledged: MCM, AT

Wireframe Sketch: Gendered Toy Marketing

February 23, 2020 ·

Wireframe sketch of website, the beginning outline of our website that we will be building. — Wireframe Sketch

Title Page

Title and brief description of the project with three questions that link to either the history of gendered toy marketing, the implications that it has on child development and proliferating gender stereotypes, and the future of toy marketing/what can be done. There is a dashboard overhead that can be used to get to any page on the site.

History

A timeline of toy campaigns through the years is formatted as a collage of images (once an image is clicked on, more information is given about its producer and year made). As one continues scrolling, text summarizes patterns found in campaigns through the years, citing secondary sources that have analyzed this. Next, there is a timeline that compares major toy campaigns with products marketed to adults and compares the gender stereotypes underlined in each. A link beneath this timeline asks: what do toy ads look like today?

This links the reader to “Top Selling Toy Companies and their Top Campaigns” which lists major companies in a visually pleasing way next to a video of their campaign. Next, the reader is shown the top-selling toys for boys versus girls today, which is analyzed. The site asks “What was your favorite toy growing up?” allowing for a comments section and directs them to a link to a gallery of submitted childhood photos that are dated.

Implications

Asks “what is science saying about the matter?” with speech bubbles encircling summaries of different studies that have examined the relationship of gendered toy marketing to child development. These findings are then consolidated into later text and the site introduces our own study: a link to a survey about one’s childhood consumer experience. The site then asks “what can be done to institute gender neutral marketing?”

Future of toy marketing

We give our main missions of change and provide examples of gender neutral advertisements. We can create a contest here to have readers convert unnecessarily gendered toy products into appealing gender-neutral campaigns. Finally, we provide ways that one can help both as a consumer and as an ad agent/marketing professional.

Contact us, Bibliography, and the White Paper will all be linked through the dashboard that can be seen on every page of the site.

Pledged: MCM, AT

Strategic Plan: Gendered Toy Marketing

February 22, 2020 ·

Strategic Plan for Gendered Toy Marketing for Children

Research, Writing, Design, and Outreach Goals

Communications Goal: Develop spaces on the website that encourage dialogue

Target Deadline: Month of April when the project is published online but not completely finalized. Should have this goal accomplished by 5/1

Create applications that allow for reader annotations in the writing
Develop a comments section and encourage people to respond by having a question(s) at the end of every page. Possibly have prizes for those who engage?
Have a competition for readers to make a de-gendered advertisement of a toy product that has been unnecessarily gendered. Feature the winning advertisement.
Make places for people to see themselves on the website so that they and others can see who is part of the conversation. One way to do this is with an art gallery of childhood photos with favorite toys throughout the years.

Content Goal: Put forward new information and (hopefully) a theory about why/how gendered toy marketing has developed throughout time.

Target Deadline: 4/2 – same time that prototype 1 is due

Research the history of toy marketing in the U.S. since 1950 and align this with patterns found in childhood photos throughout the years.
Three interviews with toy store managers and people in marketing agencies that promote toys. Disney?
Compare advertisements for toys and adult products, as well as how people react to them on social media.
Conduct survey on people’s experience with toys/ads in their childhood, and interview parents buying toys for their kids.

Impact Goal: For this project to reach our intended audience

Target Deadline: 4/27 – finish this by the time we are showing our close to final product to an expert in the field.

Sharing the project with 10 marketing firms and marketing departments.
Achieving a 50% response rate with those we share the project with.
Make sure the interface and design of the website is something that people enjoy engaging with and can easily engage with in order for the audience to be able to interact with it.
To add to #3, use design principles in order to achieve this.

Design Goal: For this project to use the principles of UX-design in order to be user friendly and pleasing to the eye design wise

Target deadline: 5/1 – when project is near completed.

Sharing the project design with 10 other people that aren’t involved in the project to get opinions on the design
Ask these people about accessibility of the site and if they enjoy interacting with the site.
Keep design principles in mind while working on the project.
Make sure the colors and images used fit with the overall theme of the project.

Schedule

MONTH	WEEK	WORK TO BE DONE	OTHER FACTORS
FEB.	Week 1 (2/10-2/15)	Brainstorm ideas for content and build collection of resources Brainstorm design ideas for website – create wireframe (2/20)Schedule weekly meetings
	Week 2 (2/16-2/22)	Wireframe (2/20) (in class) Meeting Tuesday 2/18 8:15-9:15pm, meeting to begin brainstorming website pages and networking → break up pages of website to work on content draft individually
	Week 3 (2/24-2/28)	Meet once this week to develop daily schedule Start working on content draft individually based on topic/page Each person has 2 meetings with Davidson faculty in a different department (child development, business career center, etc.) Develop and publish Strategic and Outreach/Sustainability plans	Strategic plan Outreach and Sustainability plan
	Week 4 (2/29-3/7)	SPRING BREAK Develop instagram page for content and create strategic plan for posts – at least 3 times per week Networking through DCAN to gain perspective of marketing professionals
MARCH	Week 5 (3/9-3/13)	Meet once this week to discuss progress on the content draft in order to create a daily schedule addressing areas that need more work Three interviews with toy store managers/ advertisers by this week
	Week 6 (3/16-3/20)	Meet once this week to discuss progress on the Lit Review, create transitions between material that we worked on separately Meet with digital design studio and experts to experiment with design concepts	Content Draft
	Week 7 (3/23-3/27)	Publish literature review Meet once this week to create basic layout of the website	Lit Review (3/27)
APRIL	Week 8 (3/30-4/3)	Develop materials for interactive elements – survey and gender neutral toy ad competition Experiment and individual research on website design	Prototype 1 (4/2)
	Week 9 (4/6-4/10)	Meet with professors to brainstorm areas of improvement for prototype 2
	Week 10 (4/13-4/17)	Work on Prototype 2 this week Begin thinking about the white paper and finalizing the project
	Week 11 (4/20-4/24)	Begin work on White paper Finish prototype 2 by the 23rd.	Prototype 2 (4/23)
	Week 12 (4/27-4/30)	Apply comments from prototype 2, show the final draft to an expert in the field Publish final project
May	Week 13 (5/4-5/8)	Verna Miller Case Symposium (5/6) Turn in final project by 5/5	FINAL PROJECT DUE NO LATER THAN 5/5
	Week 14 (Ends 5/11)	Finish everything and white paper Project Over!	WHITE PAPER IS DUE ON 5/11

Roles and Responsibilities:

ROLE	PERSON
Design	50/50 split
Outreach	50/50 split
Calendar	Amelia
Bibliographer	Marion
Proof-reader	Marion
Secretary	Amelia
Tech Explorer	Marion
Photography and graphics	Amelia
Surveys and interviews	Marion

Gendered Toy Marketing Strategic Plan

February 22, 2020 ·

Communications Goal: Develop spaces on the website that encourage dialogue

Target Deadline: Month of April when the project is published online but not completely finalized. Should have this goal accomplished by 5/1

Create applications that allow for reader annotations in the writing
Develop a comments section and encourage people to respond by having a question(s) at the end of every page. Possibly have prizes for those who engage?
Have a competition for readers to make a de-gendered advertisement of a toy product that has been unnecessarily gendered. Feature the winning advertisement.
Make places for people to see themselves on the website so that they and others can see who is part of the conversation. One way to do this is with an art gallery of childhood photos with favorite toys throughout the years.

Content Goal: Put forward new information and (hopefully) a theory about why/how gendered toy marketing has developed throughout time.

Target Deadline: 4/2 – same time that prototype 1 is due

Research the history of toy marketing in the U.S. since 1950 and align this with patterns found in childhood photos throughout the years.
Three interviews with toy store managers and people in marketing agencies that promote toys. Disney?
Compare advertisements for toys and adult products, as well as how people react to them on social media.
Conduct survey on people’s experience with toys/ads in their childhood, and interview parents buying toys for their kids.

Impact Goal: For this project to reach our intended audience

Target Deadline: 4/27 – finish this by the time we are showing our close to final product to an expert in the field.

Sharing the project with 10 marketing firms and marketing departments.
Achieving a 50% response rate with those we share the project with.
Make sure the interface and design of the website is something that people enjoy engaging with and can easily engage with in order for the audience to be able to interact with it.
To add to #3, use design principles in order to achieve this.

Design Goal: For this project to use the principles of UX-design in order to be user friendly and pleasing to the eye design wise

Target deadline: 5/1 – when project is near completed.

Sharing the project design with 10 other people that aren’t involved in the project to get opinions on the design
Ask these people about accessibility of the site and if they enjoy interacting with the site.
Keep design principles in mind while working on the project.
Make sure the colors and images used fit with the overall theme of the project.

Schedule:

Month	Week	Writing/Research/Design	Other factors
FEB	Week 12/10-2/15	Brainstorm ideas for content and build collection of resourcesBrainstorm design ideas for website – create wireframe (2/20)Schedule weekly meetings
	Week 22/16-2/22	Wireframe (2/20) (in class)Meeting Tuesday 2/18 8:15-9:15pm, meeting to begin brainstorming website pages and networking → break up pages of website to work on content draft individually
	Week 32/24-2/28	Meet once this week to develop daily scheduleStart working on content draft individually based on topic/pageEach person has 2 meetings with Davidson faculty in a different department (child development, business career center, etc.)Develop and publish Strategic and Outreach/Sustainability plans	Strategic plan Outreach and Sustainability plan
	Week 42/29-3/7	SPRING BREAKDevelop instagram page for content and create strategic plan for posts – at least 3 times per weekNetworking through DCAN to gain perspective of marketing professionals
March	Week 53/9-3/13	Meet once this week to discuss progress on the content draft in order to create a daily schedule addressing areas that need more workThree interviews with toy store managers/ advertisers by this week
	Week 63/16-3/20	Meet once this week to discuss progress on the Lit Review, create transitions between material that we worked on separatelyMeet with digital design studio and experts to experiment with design concepts	Content Draft
	Week 73/23-3/27	Publish literature reviewMeet once this week to create basic layout of the website	Lit Review (3/27)
April	Week 83/30-4/3	Develop materials for interactive elements – survey and gender neutral toy ad competitionExperiment and individual research on website design	Prototype 1 (4/2)
	Week 94/6-4/10	Meet with professors to brainstorm areas of improvement for prototype 2
	Week 104/13-4/17	Work on Prototype 2 this weekBegin thinking about the white paper and finalizing the project
	Week 114/20-4/24	Begin work on White paperFinish prototype 2 by the 23rd.	Prototype 2 (4/23)
	Week 124/27-4/30	Apply comments from prototype 2, show the final draft to an expert in the fieldPublish final project
May	Week 135/4-5/8	Verna Miller Case Symposium (5/6)Turn in final project by 5/5	FINAL PROJECT DUE NO LATER THAN 5/5
	Week 14 Ends 5/11	Finish everything and white paper Project Over!	WHITE PAPER IS DUE ON 5/11

Roles and Responsibilities:

ROLE	PERSON
Design	50/50 split
Outreach	50/50 split
Calendar	Amelia
Bibliographer	Marion
Proof-reader	Marion
Secretary	Amelia
Tech Explorer	Marion
Photography and graphics	Amelia
Surveys and interviews	Marion

Pledged: MCM, AT

Gendered Marketing for Toys Wireframe Sketch

February 21, 2020 ·

Title Page: Title and brief description of the project with three questions that link to either the history of gendered toy marketing, the implications that it has on child development and proliferating gender stereotypes, and the future of toy marketing/what can be done. There is a dashboard overhead that can be used to get to any page on the site.

History: A timeline of toy campaigns through the years is formatted as a collage of images (once an image is clicked on, more information is given about its producer and year made). As one continues scrolling, text summarizes patterns found in campaigns through the years, citing secondary sources that have analyzed this. Next, there is a timeline that compares major toy campaigns with products marketed to adults and compares the gender stereotypes underlined in each. A link beneath this timeline asks: what do toy ads look like today?

Implications: Asks “what is science saying about the matter?” with speech bubbles encircling summaries of different studies that have examined the relationship of gendered toy marketing to child development. These findings are then consolidated into later text and the site introduces our own study: a link to a survey about one’s childhood consumer experience. The site then asks “what can be done to institute gender neutral marketing?”

Future of toy marketing: We give our main missions of change and provide examples of gender neutral advertisements. We can create a contest here to have readers convert unnecessarily gendered toy products into appealing gender-neutral campaigns. Finally, we provide ways that one can help both as a consumer and as an ad agent/marketing professional.

Contact us, Bibliography, and the White Paper will all be linked through the dashboard that can be seen on every page of the site.

Pledged: MCM, AT

Website Evaluation

February 20, 2020 ·

Website: “Slavery Footprint” https://slaveryfootprint.org/

This website was created to call attention to “modern slavery” that many global brands use to create their products: forced labor. A survey determines the reader’s “slavery footprint”, tracing back the brands that you use regularly to potential or known forced labor, and how that labor profits off of you. This is done in a dynamic and non-threatening format: hands deliver new information to the screen and colorful cartoons are used to express abstract ideas. Justin Dillon, the developer of this website in partnership with the U.S. State Department, aims his content at a privileged audience, stating that “you have the power to change this.” He directs his message about modern slavery towards the wealthy consumers that ignorantly feed the unethical industry in the hope that awareness will lead to change. The non-threatening format informs while withholding blame. I hope to apply this non-threatening, engaging, and interactive format towards my own project that will also be aimed at those who can make a difference: marketing and sales professionals who have built an industry on gendering products. By seeking to inform rather than to blame, I hope to engage my audience with the message rather than put them on the defensive.

“Slavery Footprint” has a design that upholds its overall goal of engaging consumers with a survey that analyzes how each reader has played a part in this issue without inflicting blame. It is very easy to navigate through, as readers are directed through the website’s content with prompts and animation. However, the dynamic aspects of the website that allow a reader to flow easily from one concept to another also make it difficult to independently search for information on the site or go back to revisit. If I were to improve this website, I would like to strike a balance between the directed flow and a more open format that allows the reader to seek information freely. In addition, while the non-threatening tone, color palette, and animations are important to engaging privileged readers without defensive reactions, they fail to convey the gravity of the issue. Other documentations of forced labor are graphic and appalling; features which cannot be shown in a colorful cartoon. A website that highlights the grave consequences of forced labor may be more influential in recruiting readers towards change. Finally, some pages of the website were not compatible for all devices, which interrupted my viewing experience. It is highly important that my website be compatible and accessible through all devices in order to reach my intended audience: marketing professionals who take content design very seriously.

Despite its flaws in design formatting and its approach to the topic of forced labor, “Slavery Footprint” exemplifies many of Robin William’s principles of design. Elements of repetition and contrast were evident throughout the page. The same hands delivered new text as the reader scrolled, and the font remained constant throughout. However, the text alternated between two sizes and the larger, more important concepts alternated between two contrasting colors (blue and red). Each hand that delivered text brightened the screen with red, orange, blue, and green, conveying diversity within this global issue and adding contrast to the site’s appearance. To maintain alignment, all text is shown within one center column, directing the audience through a linear progression of the material. As the information is presented linearly rather than conceptually, the final principle (proximity of related items/text) is not drastically represented on this page. However, the space between lines of text that are meant to convey one thought have a smaller space between them than the space between the original and a new concept.

While this website and my project may be speaking to different societal problems, my project aims to change the mindsets of individuals who can make a difference on the issue, just as this project does. I hope to apply the engaging interactive elements, diverse color scheme, non-threatening tone, and animated format towards my own project of gendered toy marketing. I can also learn from the changes that I would implement on this site: making my content accessible and compatible for any device, allowing my readers to search independently on my site for information, and conveying the gravity of gendered marketing towards child development and learned gender stereotypes.

Pledged: MCM

Annotated Bibliography

February 11, 2020 ·

Primary Sources:

Asztalos, Joanne. “Gender Stereotypes in Children’s Television Commercials and the Effects on Consumer Purchasing Behavior.” West Virginia University, 2003. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/305278381/abstract/27A17A6C51134CC3PQ/5.

This study was produced by Joanne Asztalos as a graduate thesis for a master’s program at West Virginia University. It investigates the degree to which gender stereotypes are shown in children’s television commercials and its effect on consumer behavior. The study recorded gender roles, traits, products, and scripts of commercials directed towards girls, boys, and neutral audiences. It then developed focus groups to correlate the gender stereotypes in these commercials with child consumer behaviors. Results of this study found that children’s television commercials feature many gender stereotypes, and that significantly more male actors are shown with neutral products than female. While boys in the study had no interest in products marketed towards girls, girls showed an interest in masculine-marketed toys. My project will use this study as evidence towards how gendered marketing is being consumed by children, and the effect that this has on their perception of which toys are meant for them. Child consumer behavior found in this study will be contrasted with adult consumer purchasing behaviors for themselves and their children.

Idle, Tracey, Eileen Wood, and Serge Desmarais. “Gender role socialization in toy play situations: Mothers and fathers with their sons and daughters.” Sex Roles 28. 11-12 (1993): 679-691.

This study, conducted by three Psychology professors at Wilfrid Laurier University, examined the interactions between and within 20 families with children. They found that when parents were separated from their child, they preferred traditional roles: masculine toys for boys and feminine for girls. However, when in play with their child, parents did not follow this pattern and children eagerly played with all toys. My work will use this source to demonstrate one reason for the gendered marketing of toys: companies are catering to consumer behavior (parents). When parents go shopping for their child (often done without the child present) they will gravitate towards traditionally gendered products. This acts as evidence to explain the spike of gendered marketing in the 1990’s. As the study was conducted almost 30 years ago, it would be very interesting to repeat the study in today’s climate and compare results.

Secondary Sources:

Fine, Cordelia, and Emma Rush. ““Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?” The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate.” Journal of Business Ethics 149.4 (2018): 769-784.

This literature review, published in the Journal of Business Ethics, examines the ethical and scientific assumptions of the gendered toy marketing debate by critically analyzing three points of contention: the influence of gendered toy marketing on toy preferences, whether these effects are universally negative or positive, and the economic feasibility of gender-neutral marketing. The review determines that gendered toy marketing misrepresents toy interests of both genders as fixed and separate entities, that it increases stereotypical toy preferences, and that it reinforces gender stereotypes that then inform stereotype-driven interests, self-concepts, biases towards others. Finally, they conclude that gender-neutral marketing would open traditionally gendered toys to a broader market, and thus increase profits. This review is very useful to my project, as it cites many primary sources in order to determine these conclusions that we can draw upon in later analysis. The broad overview of research within this work culminates in a thesis that can be used as an initial hypothesis driving our own research. Finally, we will use this work to demonstrate the negative effects of gendered toy marketing to the professionals in the field that we will be in contact with.

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

The author, Elizabeth Sweet, is a postdoctoral scholar and sociologist at the University of California. Her article describes the history of gendered toy marketing and its ties to gender discrimination, asking the question: in a time when gender discrimination is supposedly at its lowest, why do we see the most gender micro-categorization in toys? This work surveys toy advertisements by decade to track the rise and fall of gendered marketing, citing toy advertisements throughout the years. My project will use this source to create a timeline of gendered toy marketing throughout the 19^th and 20^th centuries in order to develop theories to explain this rise and fall.

Tertiary Sources: These sources will be identified later in the research process.

Pledged: MCM

Annotations for bibliography

February 11, 2020 ·

Topic: Gendered toy marketing (children)

Sources:

1. Beyond the Dolls House? – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/2321178 767/D23B410B6501445BPQ/10?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

This article aims to examine the concepts of gendered, entrepreneurial identity and fetishism through Barbie entrepreneur products. This is used to examine how identity in this realm is constructed from childhood and exposure to these products can affect both identity and entrepreneurial identity. This is related to how female entrepreneurial identities are influence by socially constructed and arguably fetishized images and artifacts of identity in the workplace, and how these are represented in the form of things like Barbie Dolls. This article is extremely interesting and may bring a lot to the table for our website. Especially when it comes to how this gendered marketing for children affects women and girls.

2. Exploring Brand Masculine Patterns: Moving beyond Monolithic Masculinity: [1] – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1691005068/DBE7BC8DDA454DFAPQ/14?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

This article talks about how gender has been long used by brands as a basis for segmentation and targeting strategies. This is because gender segments are easily identifiable, accessible and large enough to be profitable. Therefore, gender is still considered an important and central component when it comes to segmentation. However, there tends to be many issues with this. One of them is the confusion between gender and sex. Another thing that is important when it comes to looking at gendered marketing is the brand’s masculine dimensions (BMD), because practitioners use masculine gender-based marketing strategies to develop and manage their brands. Looking at a brand’s masculine dimensions can bring a lot of important things to the table when it comes to marketing for a brand. This article can be really valuable to our project because it will help us look at things through the marketer’s perspective.

3. Wilkie, James E. B. Are Numbers Gendered? Numerical Gender Associations and Judgment. Northwestern University, 2012. ProQuest, https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1018061185/abstract/27A17A6C51134CC3PQ/6.

This article that explains that gender is an important factor in choice and judgment processes. This is because gender norms and gender identify are key concerns in decision making and femininity and masculinity are fundamental to social organization. The article then goes on to claim that all numbers are also associated with a gender based on whether or not they are even or odd. All odd numbers tend to be associated with masculinity while even numbers tend to be associated with femininity. This makes it so that these associations can influence the product judgments because of these numbers, even in things like pricing. The second part of this article examines why these associations exist by examining the potential metaphoric similarities between the two types of gender and numbers. This is a very interesting article with many important findings. Among the findings is the fact that people do go about their lives assigning inanimate objects gender identities and then interacting with them in ways that are congruent to their own gender identity. This comes into account while consumers are choosing what to buy. People tend to form their gender associations through metaphoric processes, for example when a product is described as “strong” or “gentle”.

4. Let Toys Be Toys: Increased Targeting Has Led to a Lazy, Stereotype-Driven Approach – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1954750058/D23B410B6501445BPQ/4?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

The company called John Lewis launched a gender-free children’s clothing line the year this paper was published (2017). It was kicked off in response to how extreme gendered marketing has become in the toy sector. Large companies like Lego are just beginning to respond to complaints about how extreme gendered toy marketing has gotten. In 2017 Lego agreed that they would begin to do testing in mixed groups, which surprisingly they haven’t done before. People fought back against the announcement of the gender-neutral clothing line that John Lewis put out, but mostly because of the terms being used.

This article states that when companies put out products that are gender neutral, this really makes a difference because telling boys and girls they are supposed to be different has consequences in terms of their development. Furthermore, many of the ways that products are marketed by gender can contribute the sexism.

This article also goes onto point out, that it is odd that companies think mostly by gender when many of the recent toy crazes have been popular with both boys and girls.

Provisional Bibliography

February 6, 2020 ·

Ads Improperly Represent Women – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/2227703645/DF7E52087E264DC4PQ/13?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

Asztalos, Joanne G. Gender Stereotypes in Children’s Television Commercials and the Effects on Consumer Purchasing Behavior. West Virginia University, 2003. ProQuest, https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/305278381/abstract/27A17A6C51134CC3PQ/5.

Beyond the Dolls House? – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/2321178767/D23B410B6501445BPQ/10?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

Exploring Brand Masculine Patterns: Moving beyond Monolithic Masculinity: [1] – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1691005068/DBE7BC8DDA454DFAPQ/14?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

Fine, Cordelia, and Emma Rush. “‘Why Does All the Girls Have to Buy Pink Stuff?’ The Ethics and Science of the Gendered Toy Marketing Debate.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 149, no. 4, 2018, pp. 769–784. davidson.primo.exlibrisgroup.com, doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3080-3.

Francis, Becky. “Gender, Toys and Learning.” Oxford Review of Education, vol. 36, no. 3, 2010, pp. 325–44. JSTOR.

Gendered Scholarship: Exploring the Implications for Consumer Behaviour Research – ABI/INFORM Collection – ProQuest. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1111642455/DBE7BC8DDA454DFAPQ/8?accountid=10427. Accessed 4 Feb. 2020.

Idle, Tracey, and And Others. Gender Role Socialization in Toy Play Situations: Mothers and Fathers with Their Sons and Daughters. 1993, pp. 679–91. ProQuest, https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/62777234/8464D9D2BF7C4B01PQ/2.

Liben, Lynn S., et al. “Cognitive Consequences of Gendered Toy Play.” Gender Typing of Children’s Toys: How Early Play Experiences Impact Development, American Psychological Association, 2018, pp. 213–55. APA PsycNET, doi:10.1037/0000077-011.

Wilkie, James E. B. Are Numbers Gendered? Numerical Gender Associations and Judgment. Northwestern University, 2012. ProQuest, https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1018061185/abstract/27A17A6C51134CC3PQ/6.

Provisional Bibliography – Gendered Toy Marketing

February 6, 2020 ·

Auster, Carol J., and Claire S. Mansbach. “The gender marketing of toys: An analysis of color and type of toy on the Disney store website.” Sex Roles 67.7-8 (2012): 375-388.

Sweet, Elizabeth. “Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago.” The Atlantic 9 (2014): 2014.

Owen, Patricia R., and Monica Padron. “The Language of toys: Gendered language in toy advertisements.” Journal of Research on Women and Gender 6 (2016).

Delprato, Dennis J., and Bryan D. Midgley. “Some fundamentals of BF Skinner’s behaviorism.” American psychologist 47.11 (1992): 1507.

Azar, Salim L. “Exploring brand masculine patterns: moving beyond monolithic masculinity.” Journal of Product and Brand Management 22.7 (2013): 502-512.

Francis, Becky. “Gender, toys and learning.” Oxford Review of Education 36.3 (2010): 325-344.

Idle, Tracey, Eileen Wood, and Serge Desmarais. “Gender role socialization in toy play situations: Mothers and fathers with their sons and daughters.” Sex Roles 28. 11-12 (1993): 679-691.

Asherbranner, Wesley. “Toys as an Agent of Change: A Historical Survey of the Sears Christmas Wish Book, 1940–2000.” The University of Regina (Canada), 2003. https://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/305315110/abstract/D23B410B6501445BPQ/8.

Pomerleau, Andrée, et al. “Pink or blue: Environmental gender stereotypes in the first two years of life.” Sex roles 22.5-6 (1990): 359-367.

Kumar, Payal, and Sanjeev Varshney. “Gendered scholarship: exploring the implications for consumer behaviour research.” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal (2012).

Seiter, Ellen. “Toys are us: Marketing to children and parents.” Cultural Studies 6.2 (1992): 232-247.

Williams, Christine L. Inside toyland: Working, shopping, and social inequality. University of California Press, 2006.

Think Piece for “Gendered Marketing for Children: A Critical Analysis”

February 4, 2020 ·

My project will research the relationships between feminist histories, gender stereotyping, labor representation, and marketing strategies throughout time so that we can analyze the gendering of children’s toy products and its societal effect in order to make our readers, marketing agencies, understand the implications of gendered marketing to children and propose alternative (hopefully, more profitable) solutions.

As we discussed in the previous class, our project “Gendered Marketing for Children: A Critical Analysis” could be directed towards one of two groups, which would determine the scope and tone of the project: towards consumers to make them aware of gendered campaigns, or towards marketing agencies to propose questions about why gender is such a major category in determining target audience, demonstrate the consequences of this technique, and propose alternatives. As both my partner and I are hoping to go into marketing post-graduation, we thought that framing our readers as future employers would make this project relevant on a resume while hopefully positively influencing the field we hope to join. Much of our evidence (ad campaigns) exists on digital platforms like Youtube and company websites; I hope to use our digital domain to directly link and promote a dialogue about these advertisements.

An important facet of this project is the history of gendered marketing for children and adult products, and to compare these histories. A dynamic means of sharing this information is to create a timeline of famous advertisements throughout the past century for children and adults to track what was successful. We could also generate a gallery of childhood photos from viewers of all ages (with their favorite toys/clothing) and categorize these photos by date to track trends in gendered products. Ideally, I would create and post video interviews with people involved in toy marketing to better understand how they decide to promote a product. The purpose of this project is to create a dialogue around gendered marketing: its pros and cons, its effects, and its future.

Questions for Consideration:

What did gendered toy marketing look like in the past? How has it changed?

What has caused the growth of gendered toy advertising and a pushback against unnecessarily-gendered adult products?

Which marketing agencies are responsible for toy branding and ad campaigns? Are any in the area?

How has the development of toy ads differed from adult products throughout the previous decades?

What were the top-selling toys for girls or boys each year?

How has gender stereotyping changed throughout the years? Has toy advertising adapted to reflect these changes?

Do the toys that one plays with in early childhood affect the way in which one learns? Do they affect later life interests?

What can we do to change gendered advertising? Is there a solution that will also increase profit margins?

What do adult consumers think of the gendered toys that they purchase for their kids: do they enjoy playing into gendered roles or is the limited supply of non-gendered products forcing them to buy?

Think Piece: Gendered Marketing for Children

February 3, 2020 ·

I will be working on a project called Gendered Marketing for Children a Critical Analysis. This was not my original proposal but when listening to everything this proposal had I was immediately drawn to it. This is because this was an interesting facet of marketing that I wanted to further explore. I would like to see this project go in a way that we are learning a lot about these things in marketing and then being able to use that to show future possible employers how we are savvy with this information.

I think there is a lot of ways this website could possibly go. I think there needs to be a lot of visual aspects to it, because that is important to the topic we are looking at. There are a lot of different ways we can go with this. It may be interesting to take a look at the animation tools and infographics would be interesting and easy to do. The tools that create maps and timelines may definitely be really useful if we explore this topic geographically or historically. I also think that the data visualization tools will be a necessity. I love the network analysis tools and think these could also be really useful in our website. When looking at our audience in class the other day we decided that we wanted to cater the website so that our audience is made up mostly of people in marketing, those at marketing or ad agencies or companies with marketing departments. So we will definitely craft our website and the tools we use with this in mind.

Questions about this topic:

What is gendered marketing for children?

Why does it matter?

In the changing political landscape, with gender stereotypes being more tired and out of date, how can we change marketing towards children to be something more effective?

How do we embrace gender neutrality in marketing and make it even more effective?

What do consumers say about this?

What do marketers and advertisers say about this?

We are researching gendered marketing for children because we want to know how to market in a more effective way that works with the more gender neutral current landscape so that our readers/users understand that there are more effective and helpful ways to market to children.

Project Proposal: Gendered Marketing for Children – A Critical Analysis

January 27, 2020 ·

Marketing is largely based on gendering products in order to target a certain group of consumers in advertising campaigns. This technique is based on the assumption that gender determines interest, which has been cause for public outcry in recent years. A well-known example of this is the pushback that Bic received for the company’s “For Her” pens, that were “designed to fit comfortably into a woman’s hand,” and were priced as 70% more expensive than the original pen (Ray, 2016). Some companies have accommodated this public demand, such as Axe deodorant company, who was once famous for its advertisements promoting masculine stereotypes. The brand has since released a “Find your magic” commercial that, while still marketing their product as “for men”, displayed individuality and non-conformity to stereotypes (Cooley, 2017). While modern adult consumers are “seeking brand experiences that are inclusive toward people of all gender identities and don’t judge their preferences based on stereotypes”, children’s products are becoming increasingly gendered (Powers, 2019). According to sociology professor Elizabeth Sweet, less than 2% of Sears children’s toys were marketed as gendered products in 1975 (Sweet, 2014). However, in 1995, half of all Sears toys were gendered in marketing, and this pattern has continued since (Sweet, 2014). Why is it that we hear public outcry against gendered adult products but turn a blind eye when they are directed towards children? As is stated by the multinational market research firm Kantar Millward Brown, “the toy industry is one of the first stops in the life cycle of a consumer, and it’s also an arena where gender stereotypes are built and internalized” (Powers, 2019). This project would be aiming to answer this question by building upon previous scholarly conversation, actual toy advertisements throughout the century, and through interviews with individuals about their consumer experience. Based upon my limited research thus far, I theorize that the de-gendering of toys in the 1970s is largely due to more women in the labor force and second-wave feminism coming to the national stage. Since then, a resurgence of children’s toy gendering can be seen.

What is particularly interesting about this project is that everyone is a consumer in our consumer-based culture, and can therefore be studied. It would be very interesting to create a gallery of photos of childhood photos from volunteers on the website to show gendering throughout time in a very dynamic way. We would collect their age, preferred gender pronouns, birth sex, and potentially one’s major/interests to examine the impact of early gendering on later life interests, as some experts, including Kantar Millward Brown, have claimed that the toys that one is exposed to in early childhood affect interest and the way in which one learns later in life (Powers, 2019). We will also interview about their experience as a consumer, both as a child and in present day: which media they were exposed to, what messages that media conveyed, what toy were you most excited about receiving or wish you’d received. All of these questions will be asked without revealing the intent of the interview. Finally, we will be examining toy advertisements throughout history in context of previous scholarly discussion on this topic. Some particularly interesting articles that I have found on this topic, in addition to the ones cited above, are Fine and Rush’s “’Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?’ The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate”, Owen and Padron’s “The Language of toys: Gendered language in toy advertisements”, and Liben et al.’s “Cognitive consequences of gendered toy play”. The links to these can be found below:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-016-3080-3

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6d30/a7e45d1b2cc8015eeeb477030588f2c18515.pdf

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-05827-011

This project is particularly relevant to the class because so much of modern marketing occurs within the digital and therefore can only be shared over a screen. Readers could therefore view the campaigns that we discuss on the website, create their own opinions, and share their thoughts. The internet is a place where people are constantly bombarded with marketing messages, and it would therefore be very interesting to critique these advertisements over the same medium. As someone who hopes to go into marketing, it is very important to engage with the assumptions and flaws of the business. I know that some others in the class are also hoping to enter the field after graduation, and so it is particularly relevant for them. However, it is also important for all consumers to be aware of the implicit messaging that they have been exposed to. This project will tie together history, feminist movements, gender stereotyping, and consumer culture all under the umbrella of marketing. On a campus full of consumers, it will be easy to recruit individuals for interviews and for the photo gallery. However, Davidson lacks diversity in age, education, and other demographically-relevant areas, and as such, the information gathered about this sample may not represent the overall population. I think the largest challenge of this project will be to reach and engage an audience/participant pool outside of the Davidson community. I do not know if we will come to an answer by the end of the project, but I hope to generate theories and, most importantly, raise dialogue about this issue.

Ray, B. (2016). Stylizing genderlect online for social action: A corpus analysis of ‘BIC Cristal for Her’ reviews. Written Communication, 33(1), 42-67.

Cooley, J. R. (2017). Disabling the Face of Advertising: Investigating Audience Response to Ability-Integrated Advertising (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Alabama).

Powers, K. (2019). Shattering Gendered Marketing. American Marketing Association. Retrieved from https://www.ama.org/marketing-news/shattering-gendered-marketing/

Sweet, E. (2014). Toys are more divided by gender now than they were 50 years ago. The Atlantic, 9, 2014.

Liben, L. S., Schroeder, K. M., Borriello, G. A., & Weisgram, E. S. (2018). Cognitive consequences of gendered toy play.

Owen, P. R., & Padron, M. (2016). The Language of toys: Gendered language in toy advertisements. Journal of Research on women and Gender, 6.

Fine, C., & Rush, E. (2018). “Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?” The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), 769, 784.