Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My daughter learned early onin her pregnancy that she was having a boy. It seems ultrasounds are routine today and mothers know the gender of their baby before birth.
I have gone shopping for my future Grandson, and bought infant boy clothes, but my daughter said she wants some Unisex clothing , bedding, etc., in yellows and greens in order to pass down some things if her next child should be a girl.
Difficult. Everything today seems to be EITHER for a boy or a girl with very few things that are gender neutral. While mothers-to-be are aware of their child's gender, are the manufacturers really the ones benefiting from this? If things are only for either a boy or a girl, you will have to go out and buy all new things if you have a child of the opposite sex.
Having children is expensive. There is no need to make it MORE expensive than it needs to be.
I didn't have a problem finding unisex clothes and bedding etc (I didn't find out the gender during the pregnancy so had to get unisex), I can still find a lot of unisex stuff even in toddler sizes though not as much as the infant stuff.
I expect its a combination of being of benefit to the manufacturer but also that with lots of people finding out the gender beforehand and friends and family then wanting to buy gender-specific clothing for baby showers that manufacturers are responding to the increased demand for gender-specific items. I think that really might be a big part of it as we don't have baby showers over here so there might be less demand for gender-specific clothing (also possibly because manufacturers here have to make unisex clothing for the baby boxes so would want to sell them too to make good money out of them)
There is quite a bit at various stores. Of course, most blue can be handed down to either sex.
Yeah, it's kind of sad that baby boys cannot be seen in pink. My neighbor, who came from a big family herself, had a girl first and then a boy. She dressed the boy in pink sleepers once in a while.
Yeah, it's kind of sad that baby boys cannot be seen in pink. My neighbor, who came from a big family herself, had a girl first and then a boy. She dressed the boy in pink sleepers once in a while.
Boys can be dressed in pink...it's just a lot easier not having to tell everyone he is a boy when they tell you how pretty your daughter is...
Well, pink used to be for boys, and blue for girls - back in the mid-nineteenth century. Pink was seen as a sort of juvenile version of red, a distinctly masculine color, while light blue was viewed as delicate and feminine, so appropriate for baby girls. I'm not sure when - or why - it changed.
Actually, most babies of this era, and for many years afterwards, wore white the vast majority of the time, as it could be bleached and stains removed fairly easily - and it was definitely unisex, as far as color was concerned.
Of course, little boys wore dresses until they were three or so back then, too...so handing baby and toddler clothes down was considerably simpler.
I found it extremely difficult buying gender neutral clothing. I do think clothiers should make more items neutral for babies. It was easier 15 - 20 years ago. But now it's like it's assumed that the sex of the baby will be known and parents will only buy gender-specific items.
Here's a good site, you can browse by gender neutral items. Lovely colourful clothes and there's blankets and things like that too onesies & rompers - ittikid
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.