An awesome read on Co.Design on how the pink vs blue dressing for girls vs boys was not always the thing. It is a much more recent happening. What is more interesting is the fact that, it was originally the other way around – pink for boys and blue for girls. And then that changed too.
For example, a June 1918 article from the trade publication Earnshaw’s Infants’ Department wrote, “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.” Other sources said blue was flattering for blonds, pink for brunettes; or blue was for blue-eyed babies, pink for brown-eyed babies, according to Paoletti.
My opinion is on the same lines, but a little more brutal. I think this is similar to the whole “Hallmark” days (fathers day, mothers day, dogs day, neighbors dog day, dentist’s daughter day etc!). I think this came when the kids clothing manufacturers entered the game, and found that bleached white dresses didnt fetch them enough.
Read the Co.Design article here.
The article references a #longread Smithsonian article which is also a great read. Read that one here.
