I love when this happens – when the more conservative (or even mainstream) pundits and newsbabblers reveal that, in their deepest heart of hearts, in the furthest reaches of their subconscious minds, they agree with me. The kerfuffle over the pink nail polish on the five-year-old boy in J. Crew is a case in point.
See, they’re (and by “they,” I mean the people Jon Stewart showed on his segment on this subject) saying that painting this kid’s nails pink will mess up his gender identity, will create chaos and psychological damage, blah blah blah.
But that’s only true if gendered behavior is NOT biologically essential! It’s only true if gender is socially constructed! And they apparently believe that not only is gender socially constructed, they believe the social construction of gender is so fragile that the mere act of putting pink nail polish on your five-year-old son can fuck up the whole thing!
And that’s what I’ve been saying the whole time! (Well, I think social construction is a little stronger than they do, because I think this kid will probably still identify as male later in life, or, if he doesn’t, it won’t be because of this, but still.) I DON’T think women are naturally inclined to like pink or shopping or nurturing, and I DON’T think men are naturally inclined to grunt or be violent or be in charge; I think we’re taught that via, say, pink nail polish! And so do they! Hah! I win.