What a slogan!

Not for girls.

Not for boys.

We make clothes for children.

I love this slogan. It sums up everything I want in a clothing store for my child. We gender children’s clothing way before there is much in the way of difference between body shapes, to the extent that even clothing that we might describe as “neutral” (no bows and ribbons; no skulls and crossbones) is gendered by the colour it is (olive green for boys, pale yellow for girls, for example; even blue clothing, for example, has a “girl” shade and a “boy” shade), and vice versa (and orange top, for example, will be marked as “girl” or “boy” by either a subtle puffing up of the sleeves or a small car motif, for example). And it will be gendered, in most shops, by actually putting clothes in different aisles according to gender. (In my local Asda, for example, “boy” and “girl” clothes are even separated by the service counter!) And I’m sick of it and have been sick of it for a long time. (Also, lest we forget, “boy” and “girl” are not the only two genders in the world; we also don’t know for certain that our female assigned child is a girl, and our male assigned child is a boy, until they tell us, which relies on them having the words and us listening. So talking about “children” makes much more sense!)

So in terms of slogan and the idea behind it, Polarn O. Pyret gets my vote. Also in terms of placement within online store; clothes are sorted by type (trouser, dress, top, etc) rather than by gender. This is exactly how I want to search for clothes for my child; does he need a new pair of trousers? Let’s look at trousers then; rather than having to sort by boy or by girl, I can get the full range and choose for myself.

The clothes also look to be of a good quality; outdoorsy, rough and tumble clothes rather than decorative (actually, I don’t have a problem with decorative, and most children enjoy self-adornment; it’s when it’s limited to one gender that I’ve a problem).

The only drawback? The price. And here’s the thing; once again, being able to afford to support a shop with such important ideals, being able to dress your child in good quality, ethically sourced clothing, is very much the privilege of those with a certain amount of money. For example, should I want to buy my child a pair of trousers, I’m looking at over thirty quid. I couldn’t even justify spending thirty quid on a pair of kecks for myself, let alone a child that’s going to grow out of them in about a year’s time.

I do understand why places like this are expensive; it’s not cheap to be ethical, it’s not cheap to care about who makes the clothes you sell and it isn’t cheap to care about where the material in your clothes comes from. I get that; I’m glad they exist even though they’re way out of my price range. I hope parents (and anyone who buys clothes for children) with money will support this store as much as possible.

What doesn’t cost a company money, however, is having a unisex slogan like Polarn O. Pyret; it also doesn’t cost money to sort clothes by size and type rather than by gender. I hope the kind of companies I can afford to shop at follow suit. I might even add one or two bought pieces to my child’s lovely pre-loved hand-me-down collection then!

I’d like to nominate Star Child shoes for the very first department of WIN award.

What’s the department of WIN?

Well, some time ago I wrote a blog post, Breeched from Birth, looking at how we use children’s clothing right from birth to push them into gender stereotypes.

I mused on why children’s clothes needed to be segregated into “girl” and “boy” clothes seeing as the basic shape of children is the same until puberty begins. Why couldn’t clothes for children just be organised by category, e.g. babygro, trouser, skirt, jumper etc.?

That would be a start, but I would also like to see less frillyfication of girls’ clothing (it gets to the point where the garment is impractical as the frills don’t wash well) and less, erm, blokification of boys’ clothing (“mummy’s little soldier” etc.) too.

I got chatting to Anji about it and she had the idea of coming up with a department of WIN, a department of FAIL (o hai Tesco!) and I wouldn’t mind a department of MEH too but maybe that’s pushing it!

So how to define WIN? Personally, I think in order to WIN a clothing shop, whether online or in real life, needs to meet at least two of the following criteria (and to get a MEH would meet just one, to get a FAIL would meet none):

1)      Clothes are separated by garment type or other way that isn’t based on gender

2)      No clothes that are so flimsy as to be impractical; no clothes that glorify violence (especially not if these are showcased as “girl” and “boy” respectively)

3)      Pictures of children in the clothes that include boys that aren’t wearing blue, grey, dark green or brown, and girls that aren’t wearing pink, purple or lilac.

But that’s just a rough idea. Any additions or subtractions are welcome. Of course, it also helps if the clothes wash well, are reasonably priced, do not use sweatshop labour to produce them, are environmentally responsible and so on.

Anyway without further ado onto Star Child shoes.

I was looking for some shoes for Bertie (my two year old) for a wedding. He was going in a maroon pair of flairs with maroon cravat and waistcoat and a white shirt (all from charity shops). I wanted something smart but quirky. I scoured the shops and found only clunky, ugly looking shoes, or incredibly flimsy, impractical looking shoes (can you guess which was intended for boys and which for girls?)

Via the natural parenting magazine Juno, I happened upon a company called Star Child shoes. Not only are the shoes organised by style (and not boy/girl) but they come in a wonderfully diverse range of colours and patterns, whilst all being the same basic shape.

They are also incredibly practical in that they are more like slippers, but with a solid suede base so they are not particularly slippery. They also allow a lot of room for feet to stretch; despite what the likes of Clarks might tell you to get you to part with your £20+, less is often more when it comes to shoes (with bare feet being best of all).

The price? Well, they’re not amazingly cheap, weighing in at around £17 a pair, but unlike shoes that come in sizes (e.g. 4, 5, 6) they come in months, so your child’s feet grow into them and they last about six months.

They are handmade in the UK, and use non-toxic dyes (you know how kids love to suck their feet).

And, you can fling them in the washing machine on a low heat (although, I did notice the dye did run a little on Bertie’s shoes, so take care to wash with other similar colours) and even when they dry (not in a tumble drier) they are still soft and pliable.

The one thing that does concern me is that the shoes have leather uppers, which is not an option for the majority of vegetarians and vegans.

Back to the beginning though, the thing I’m most impressed by is the sheer range of styles and the fact none of them are listed as “perfect for your little princess / soldier”. They feature styles that children love (bright, colourful, pictures of vehicles, animals and confectionary) and they don’t shoehorn (pun intended) children into stereotypical gender roles.

Star Child shoes = WIN!

(Well, you wanted to see the shoes on, didn’t you?)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.