On 09/30/2013 07:28 AM, Ole Palnatoke Andersen wrote:
More seriously: I guess pink is given the connotations
of cutesy,
little-girl-donesn't-know-a-thing and such.
I agree that's the case on that page. Little known historical aside
though, pink used to be thought masculine:
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/24/magazine/24princess.t.html?pagewanted=all>
Easier, that is, unless you want to buy your daughter
something that
isn’t pink. Girls’ obsession with that color may seem like something
they’re born with, like the ability to breathe or talk on the phone
for hours on end. But according to Jo Paoletti, an associate
professor of American studies at the University of Maryland, it ain’t
so. When colors were first introduced to the nursery in the early
part of the 20th century, pink was considered the more masculine hue,
a pastel version of red. Blue, with its intimations of the Virgin
Mary, constancy and faithfulness, was thought to be dainty. Why or
when that switched is not clear, but as late as the 1930s a
significant percentage of adults in one national survey held to that
split. Perhaps that’s why so many early Disney heroines — Cinderella,
Sleeping Beauty, Wendy, Alice-in-Wonderland — are swathed in varying
shades of azure. (Purple, incidentally, may be the next color to swap
teams: once the realm of kings and N.F.L. players, it is fast
becoming the bolder girl’s version of pink.)