Princess or Engineer? Why Not Both?
Note: I am not a parent, nor do I plan on having children. I am however a woman in a STEM career, and was at one point a young girl. So I do have some sort of perspective on this.
My husband and I were standing in line at box store one day, and there was a display of princess whatever on the endcap. He asked me “So what do you think of all this princess stuff?” I shrugged, “I had princesses and Barbies growing up, and I still went into tech.” That’s right, I had Barbies. I played dress up. I wanted pink Legos so bad I couldn’t stand it (mom said no, we already had buckets upon buckets of regular Legos). Twenty years later I’m still an engineer.
The astronaut Barbie I had as a kid. Photo from Fashion Doll Guide.
Seeing the rhetoric going around the internet now though, you’d think that was impossible. Look at the fury around astronaut Barbie. People are outraged her space suit is pink. Pink! People wanted to know why it had to be pink of all things. Well, because girls like pink. And girls like cute. Barbie has always had cute space suits, the one I had in the mid 90’s wasn’t pink, but it was girly. In the 80s her space suit had poofy shoulders.
What this is boiling down to is you can be smart or girly. You can’t be both. This is why when I was in college I didn’t dress cute, because I was afraid I wouldn’t be taken seriously. It’s why when I go to an interview I wear minimal makeup, hair in a low sleek ponytail, and pants (never skirts). Because I need to look masculine to feel I’m taken seriously. And talking about how “bad” princesses are, and how “good” other toys are, reinforces this belief.
The princess or engineer false dichotomy is why I love toys like GoldieBlox. It’s girly and engineer-y at the same time. Plus, it has a book so throw in some reading too. It’s also why I’m not against pink legos (but I am against the “Lego Friends” and Lego sets in general. Legos should be a free building toy). They’re both examples of what we should be doing. Making toys that are still girly but have a learning element to them as well. Because frankly, girls still want cute. But there’s no reason cute has to be restrained to dolls.
We as adults need to stop making this an “either or” situation. It’s not. There’s no reason a girl can’t play princesses one minute, and build things the next. It’s all about balance. I look at Claire’s Geekling running around building stuff in her tiara and tutu. Princess isn’t something that’s limiting to her, she’s a princess who can build her own castle. Princess doesn’t mean a weak woman waiting for a prince to save her (which is the connotation we adults add to it), it’s just a pretty dress.
Tell us again how all princesses are weak.
Written by
Nicole is a Software Quality Engineer, music collector, and chronic project starter. In her free time she enjoys reading trashy romance novels, catching up on her game backlog, and bourbon.
View all posts by: NicoleLeave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Also why I think Princess Bubblegum from Adventure Time is a great role model for young girls, even though it seems most fans are 20-somethings like myself, haha. She’s a princess AND a scientist and constantly boasts about the awesomeness that is science (while also being completely decked out in pink). Best of both worlds, yeah?
That’s awesome! I personally haven’t watched Adventure Time (I don’t watch much TV), but that’s a great example of where we should be heading.
Great perspective that definitely doesn’t get any attention these days!
Maybe times are changing a teeny bit … my 11-year-old girl is wearing a big, floppy pink bow to Math Bowl today! Good stuff. I’ve never been comfortable with the idea that if you’re into STEM you can’t enjoy girly things and be feminine, or that if you’re not into pink and princesses you’re somehow not a “real” girl, either. It’s one of the reasons I love the character of Bernadette on Big Bang Theory.
Your daughter is awesome! Bernadette is one of my favorites. Especially since I’m also petite and curvy with a squeaky voice, lol.
I agree wholeheartedly with your post. One of my parenting mantras is that I will never make my kids feel bad or weird for liking what they like. I don’t have girls, but I have two little boys that play with legos AND dolls, watch Spider-Man AND Powerpuff Girls, and play basketball AND do gymnastics. Life is not nearly as either/or as we try to make it out to be.
Two thoughts on your commentary.
First, I feel as if the marketing of the pink and purple is much more for the parents than it is for the kids.
Also, be careful with the “I did this and had that and look at me I turned out fine” approach. I know it comes from a good place, but the problem is that little girls everywhere envision themselves as princesses and NEVER as engineers. You were fortunate enough to see both. But, we can’t rely on others to arrive in the same place by chance.
Dave Janosz, teachingenuity.com, author of “Engineers Decide”
Those are fair points Dave. However, my point was that saying you can have girly toys or engineering toys is harmful. It feeds the stereotype that you can’t be smart and girly at the same time. It’s why we need more toys like Goldieblox which is both girly and engineer-y. It’s why we shouldn’t talk about how awful pink Legos are, but how awful simplified Lego kits like Lego Friends are.
Because of this post, was made aware of an awesome book “The Amazing Adventures of the Princesses from Planet Stem”, which I’ll be covering once it’s published. As these Kickstarters fill an obvious void, I’m looking forward to the day that girly engineering toys and books are just something that exists and not an exception.
My problem with your idea is that you have the same definition of girly as what’s out there. Your definition of girly is you must like pink, purple, and dresses. Try being the little girl who was teased for not being girly enough because I love rich and deep colors (blues, greens, and reds). Or because I was scarred from every outdoor activity I could get my hands on. We need to change the definition of girly so that girls aren’t restricted to a specific color or look. Or even restricted to dresses or tight fitting outfits. Just because I don’t choose the same template as you doesn’t make me any less girly. Or because I LOATHE being forced pastels or pinks when I want something feminine. I can be girly by being me and that’s what we need to teach children.
Thanks for sharing your experiences Mary! I was looking for books to get Claire’s daughter for Christmas and it seems that is a subject some authors have caught onto as well. I saw a couple of really cute books such as Not All Princesses Dress in Pink and Dangerously Ever After.
It is enormously empowering for girls (as it is for all kids) to know that they are smart and capable no matter how they dress or what their style. I love that GoldieBlox sends that message loud and clear.
Andrea Beaty
author of ROSIE REVERE, ENGINEER