The Horror of the Insidious “Pink Plague”

Published on January 3rd, 2009

PC CAMPAIGNERS want to stop girls’ toys from being made in pink because it forces them to become “little princesses”.

They say that girls are becoming so hooked on pink they stop thinking for themselves.

Child expert Sue Palmer, 60, says one study showed children can easily identify the colour blue, but when shown something pink they called it “Barbie”.

She added: “I’m worried about the pink plague.

It shows how commercial forces can get under their skin even by the age of three.”

“Forced” to be little princesses! And you thought child slavery was illegal. Here’s more on this nightmare. I say it’s time to start a telethon to combat the Pink Plague wherever it exists. Donate now! Where’s Sting and Bono when we need them?

34 users responded in " The Horror of the Insidious “Pink Plague” "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 tyates said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 6:47 am

… and let’s give them bicycles with bars while were at it.

# 2 bobbo said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 7:05 am

PC Campaigners????—or just one nutbag? I suppose if you search the web you can find, and therefore post, any idea/headline you can imagine===because somewhere someone believes it.

So, in this case, that one person is Sue Palmer. Thing is, she has some expertise:

# 3 Nemesis said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 am

In answer to your question. Down the toilet with the rest of their careers.

# 4 SN said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 7:28 am

2. “Thing is, she has some expertise”

Let me get this straight. Because she wrote a book she’s suddenly an expert in banning the color pink?!

# 5 bobbo said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 7:41 am

#3–SN==how to you get from “she has some expertise” framed in contradistinction that she is not an isolated nutbag that she is an expert in banning the color pink?

I’d call that a leap in logic, but there is no logic there–just some kind of word association.

I think to be fair, “in context” the pink color ban is more an effort to stop channeling little girls into subverient princess roles. Since I enjoy a good back rub and someone else to cook and clean for me==I’m against such progressive/liberal attitudes myself.

# 6 WmDE said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 7:53 am

I tag along with my wife when she goes shopping for clothes. This causes quite a stir as other women in the store keep commenting that their husbands would never accompany them on such a shopping trip.

I have a mission.

I don’t want to totally suppress her penchant for pink, but get her to notice that there are one or two other colors in the universe. If I didn’t she would spend her entire pension check on pink stuff. It’s not just little girls.

Pink affects language in my house. If I am asked if two colors go together. If I think they don’t it doesn’t matter if they are green and blue, I point to one and say “That one is too peachy.” It is a phrase a Princess of Pink understands.

# 7 Ron Larson said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 7:57 am

Back in the 70’s the comic strip Doonsbury made fun on this. In one strip a “progressive” mother decides that the best way to combat this horrible social ill was to refuse to buy her son “boys toys”. So instead she buys him a doll.

Next panel: The son is playing cops-n-robbers, pretending the doll is a machine gun. He is sneaking up behind her, using the doll’s head as the barrel and the doll’s arm as the ammo cartridge, ready to shoot his mom.

*sigh*. These people are idiots with way too much time on their hands, just like communist who haven’t a clue as to how humans really work.

# 8 dodgema said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 8:05 am

Frankly, I think the color pink should be banned in general. I am so sick of it!!!!

I’m surprised here no one’s accused it as being a pinko commie plot!

# 9 pedro said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 8:14 am

I’m shocked that the PC’s haven’t yet found the link between girls wearing pink & breast cancer. After all, why was the pink ribbon created, huh?

# 10 gquaglia said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 8:25 am

#7 Agree 100%

# 11 Incorrect said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 am

They’re all pink on the inside.

# 12 Chainring said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 8:47 am

So, by extrapolating, we can conclude that the color blue makes boys misogynistic. Or controlling? Perhaps green and yellow makes children androgynous.

# 13 contempt said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:10 am

This child expert (laugh, chuckle) is just another example of the problem and not the solution.

The wholesale damage to children can be fixed if “teachers” would stop treating boys like girls and girls like boys. No wonder children are so confused.

# 14 bobbo said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:14 am

#12–contempt==I think the experts real desire is to have the kiddies treated as “individuals” rather than a sexual category. That concept may interfere with traditional parental property rights and simple minded stereotypes.

# 15 Steve said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:18 am

So the study shows they’re able to identify blue but they call pink “Barbie”. And this is cause for alarm ? Blue is a color with endless names for the various shades and tints. Pink is a name for one of red’s tints. I like to call it Pepto Bismol.

# 16 comhcinc said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:28 am

as the daughter of a three year old girl and a one and a half year old boy i understand what this woman is getting at.

i don’t want my daughter thinking she is a princess. she isn’t that special to anyone else(she is to me). i don’t want her being taught that she needs to wait around being saved.

that is one part of it. the other is have you been shopping for toys lately? boys toys in in every color of the rainbow while most girl toys (at least the ones made for girls at this age) are pink. why should boys get a choice of colors (except of course for pink) and girls don’t.

yeah i really get what this woman is saying.

[Holy crap! You're the daughter of a three year old girl? - ed.]

# 17 green said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:40 am

Does this mean more pant suits in 20 years?

# 18 contempt said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:43 am

#13 bobbo
>>I think the experts real desire is to have the kiddies treated as “individuals”

If that’s the goal then someone is missing the mark by embarrassing margins. Kids and people in general are being forced to think and act in a certain way. Don’t say or think what is expected and you are barraged with (pick your favorite PC insult.)

Individualism… nope not the goal.

# 19 pedro said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:47 am

This “Expert” was not breast fed at all.

# 20 bobbo said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 am

#17–contempt==no.

Kiddies should be raised according to their natural interests and desires with “exposure” to social norms and whatnot. To raise the kiddie within some parental social norm is to miss that individuality.

Kiddies can deal with the stupidity you advocate when the time comes, they don’t need to be raised by it.

# 21 bud said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:02 am

I think there are plenty of parents who think they have a doll, rather than a child, so the pink plague genuinely concerns me. There are too many little girls whose moms have gone into debt entering them into ‘prettiest baby’ and “little miss” contests. This alternate reality that the child is bombarded with has to have some effect on them, not necessarily good.

Let the child pick their own toys, and own contests and activities, and discover life isn’t necessarily a rigged vanity contest or show business.

# 22 contempt said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:26 am

#19 Bobbo
>>Kiddies can deal with the stupidity you advocate when the time comes, they don’t need to be raised by it.

Bobbo, you are priceless. See how easy it was for me to get you to toss an insult just by disagreeing with you. You prove that individualism is not the goal. It’s your way or my observation is stupid.

Checkmate.

# 23 Angel H. Wong said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:38 am

FYI they already are Princesses. Lil’ girls are being conditioned on things like flat chested shemales like Zac Effron are the hottest things on earth and that in a relationship only their opinions count.

# 24 comhcinc said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:38 am

#21

maybe individualism isn’t bobbo’s goal i really don’t know his motives. but again speaking as a parent of a young girl i would like her to have more choices other than pink.

# 25 leftbankhook said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:50 am

As someone with a 2.5 year old daughter, I can tell you that this IS a concern…even though I wouldn’t have put it that way. My daughter would be happy with ANYTHING pink over any other color. I mean pink paper would be preferable over a toy of any other color.

…and don’t get me started with the Disney stuff!!! That’s another LEVEL of indoctrination. I’m going to have some very specific requests about appropriate gifts for her 3rd birthday.

# 26 contempt said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:55 am

#23 comhcinc
>>speaking as a parent of a young girl i would like her to have more choices other than pink.

Yes, pink is a hideous color and should only be used on the inside walls of a prison or the place bobbo calls home.

# 27 Bud said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 10:58 am

At least Disney Princess Roster includes Snow White, who has not been pink pantherized. Push the wicked stepsister and stepmother angles more, and read them Hansel and Gretel about the parents that could not afford them so sent them out to be eaten by a witch.

# 28 pedro said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 12:54 pm

#19 Unfortunately, nowadays this stupidity is pushed in front of kids way before they’re capable to deal with it. Gotta love modern, PC society.

#23 One thing is to have a choice and another is to ban a color altogether.

# 29 bobbo said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 1:19 pm

It “sounds like” most young girls like mostly pink? Nothing wrong with that. Offer a choice when it is available. I’d be as surprised this caused any harm/twist at all as I would be that contempt could make check in two moves.

In a very real sense, parents should leave their kids alone. That would be the area between supporting their own choices and protecting them from real harm. Course, if you did that, you’d be raising a whole bunch of cute little atheists, but – - – - If you are upset about pink, wait until they start dating.

# 30 Angel H. Wong said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 4:02 pm

#29 Bobbo,

Parents make sure their little girls don’t have sex in high school so that they can get all the sex they can in College.

# 31 Paul said, on January 3rd, 2009 at 9:39 pm

And remember: purple is gay! (Just ask Tinky Winky.)

# 32 pedro said, on January 4th, 2009 at 4:58 am

#31 Only Tinky Winky looked gay in that show?

# 33 Buzz said, on January 4th, 2009 at 6:24 am

Solution: Hand out Pantone color swatch books to ten thousand three to ten year olds and ask them to pick their favorite colors.

Since tastes may change by age, adjust fashion and accessory colors over age to reflect changing tastes.

Now all our children will be average.

# 34 Mr. Fusion said, on January 4th, 2009 at 10:28 am

#26, Contempt,

Aren’t you the guy who accidentally washed your white underwear with a red T-Shirt in hot water? I bet your husband liked the result.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!