It just never ends...

[The Ugly]

I sometimes wonder if the Coach actually reads the links he posts. Toy's are toys. When I was going up, I don't remember toy's being labeled by sections - girls toys and boy's toys. Obviously most toy stores display dolls in one area and trucks or action figures in another. Toy's are often labeled on the packaging as to what age range they commonly fit. Can't see where that's discrimination.

The other poster posted photos of gender neutral clothing supposedly from Target with no link to the source, therefore I suspect it is bullshit.

Most likely it is the parents or adults who pay for toys and clothes. I they want they can direct kids to what they consider appropriate. Most kids want the toys their playmates have anyway.

Little boy'd be equally happy with a Barbie or football then? Girl's cool with soldiers and toy trucks?

Really?

Normal kids, I mean.

[SF1900]

Two developmental psychologists (who were husband and wife) made observations of their own kids regarding gender stereotypes. These observations were done by them in the 70's, before all the PC stuff. The husband and wife attempted to raise their son and daughter from an early age in an a "neutral" home: meaning, they would not decorate their sons or daughters room according to specific colors or buy them specific toys according to their sex (boys get trucks, girls get dolls). Again, this had nothing to do with PC, as this "study" was conducted in the 70's (it wasnt really a study, just observations made by a husband and wife about their kids). The husband and wife specialized in researching gender roles and sterotypes, etc. They soon began to realize that, despite their attempts to raise their children (a boy and girl) in a neutral home, their son still preferred blue and still chose trucks, and their daughter preferred pink and chose dolls. Obviously, this was not a controlled study, but it does indicate that perhaps there is something very inherent that predisposes boys and girls for certain colors and toys. Via research, we already know there are distinct differences between the ways that men and women process language, emotions, cognitions, etc. But we also know via research, that both boys and girls play with toys that are made for both boys and girls. Growing up, I played "house" with the girls on my block--played with teapots and shit like that. It had no negative effect on me, besides posting on getbig. At the end of the day, its probably best to just let your child choose the toy he or she wants to play with, instead of forcing them to play or not play with a specific toy.

At the end of the day, your kid is going to pick out the toy he or she wants to, independent if its in the boys or girls section. Its what they are interested in.

[Walter Sobchak]

And........a boring, off topic, Alzheimer's PrimePedo post brings another thread to an end

[Primemuscle]

Little boy'd be equally happy with a Barbie or football then? Girl's cool with soldiers and toy trucks?

Really?

Normal kids, I mean.

Your reading comprehension is a bit off. I neither said nor implied what boys and girls would be cool playing with.

Who determines what is a normal kid, you?

Like I said kids want what toys their playmates have. When my son was a little kid, he was fascinated with the small army figures. He had several dozen of them which he'd use to set up dioramas in the back yard during the summer. In the winter he'd move them back to his room and do the same. My daughter liked dolls and stuffed animals, her room was full of them. As parents, we didn't direct our kids to want those toys, their friends might have though.

[Primemuscle]

Two developmental psychologists (who were husband and wife) made observations of their own kids regarding gender stereotypes. These observations were done by them in the 70's, before all the PC stuff. The husband and wife attempted to raise their son and daughter from an early age in an a "neutral" home: meaning, they would not decorate their sons or daughters room according to specific colors or buy them specific toys according to their sex (boys get trucks, girls get dolls). Again, this had nothing to do with PC, as this "study" was conducted in the 70's (it wasnt really a study, just observations made by a husband and wife about their kids). The husband and wife specialized in researching gender roles and sterotypes, etc. They soon began to realize that, despite their attempts to raise their children (a boy and girl) in a neutral home, their son still preferred blue and still chose trucks, and their daughter preferred pink and chose dolls. Obviously, this was not a controlled study, but it does indicate that perhaps there is something very inherent that predisposes boys and girls for certain colors and toys. Via research, we already know there are distinct differences between the ways that men and women process language, emotions, cognitions, etc. But we also know via research, that both boys and girls play with toys that are made for both boys and girls. Growing up, I played "house" with the girls on my block--played with teapots and shit like that. It had no negative effect on me, besides posting on getbig. At the end of the day, its probably best to just let your child choose the toy he or she wants to play with, instead of forcing them to play or not play with a specific toy.

At the end of the day, your kid is going to pick out the toy he or she wants to, independent if its in the boys or girls section. Its what they are interested in.

It is good to see someone intelligent and knowledgeable weighs in here. In my experience as a kid, parent and grandparent, what this couple in the 70's observed is what I saw too.

When my son hung out with the girl who lived behind us he sometimes play "house" with her and she'd occasionally play army stuff with him. My daughter tried to get her teenaged brother and his friends to play "Barbie" with her. She was unsuccessful. His buddies and he were too occupied the game, Dungeons and Dragons to be bothered with her.

[SF1900]

It is good to see someone intelligent and knowledgeable weighs in here. In my experience as a kid, parent and grandparent, what this couple in the 70's observed is what I saw too.

When my son hung out with the girl who lived behind us he sometimes play "house" with her and she'd occasionally play army stuff with him. My daughter tried to get her teenaged brother and his friends to play "Barbie" with her. She was unsuccessful. His buddies and he were too occupied the game, Dungeons and Dragons to be bothered with her.

Its really all about the context. When I worked in an Early Head Start school with children 3-5, I observed the boys play house with the girls. It was not uncommon. It was also not uncommon for the girls to play with the toys that were more designated for boys.

However, as children get older, 6-12, they begin to start hanging out with more of the same sex (boys will stick with boys and girls with stick with girls--at this stage, the opposite sex has cooties). Thus, if a boy has predominantly male friends, he will play with male toys.

But as I stated above, when they were 3-5, and there was no distinction (they all played together), I noticed that all of the boys would play house, then go play with blocks and trucks, then get bored, and go back over to the house area. Children this age RARELY picked one specific toy to play with. The gender gap between girls and boys toys seems to grow larger the more they starting hanging out with their own sex more.

[chaos]

Mate watch out Chaos is the Man...he will get upset, take a fit and ban you. Complete immature.

Unlike you, most here can have back and forth banter without getting their panties in a bunch. You on the other hand completely melt down, send threats and talk your online friends into starting threads for you. Other guys, like timfogarty can have brutal discussions with name calling and insults and be over it in a matter of minutes.
Maybe you should log off getbig and focus on saving what's left of your rapidly deteriating body?

Two developmental psychologists (who were husband and wife) made observations of their own kids regarding gender stereotypes. These observations were done by them in the 70's, before all the PC stuff. The husband and wife attempted to raise their son and daughter from an early age in an a "neutral" home: meaning, they would not decorate their sons or daughters room according to specific colors or buy them specific toys according to their sex (boys get trucks, girls get dolls). Again, this had nothing to do with PC, as this "study" was conducted in the 70's (it wasnt really a study, just observations made by a husband and wife about their kids). The husband and wife specialized in researching gender roles and sterotypes, etc. They soon began to realize that, despite their attempts to raise their children (a boy and girl) in a neutral home, their son still preferred blue and still chose trucks, and their daughter preferred pink and chose dolls. Obviously, this was not a controlled study, but it does indicate that perhaps there is something very inherent that predisposes boys and girls for certain colors and toys. Via research, we already know there are distinct differences between the ways that men and women process language, emotions, cognitions, etc. But we also know via research, that both boys and girls play with toys that are made for both boys and girls. Growing up, I played "house" with the girls on my block--played with teapots and shit like that. It had no negative effect on me, besides posting on getbig. At the end of the day, its probably best to just let your child choose the toy he or she wants to play with, instead of forcing them to play or not play with a specific toy.

At the end of the day, your kid is going to pick out the toy he or she wants to, independent if its in the boys or girls section. Its what they are interested in.

You let one set of peoples "observations" dictate your opinion here but need peer reviewed studies to form your opinion in other cases? Intersting.

[Donny]

Chaos you are a charlitan on the Training thread and not forthcoming in your so called "duties" as a mod. It shows your lack of character referring to my "failing body".

[chaos]

Chaos you are a charlitan on the Training thread and not forthcoming in your so called "duties" as a mod. It shows your lack of character referring to my "failing body".

1) Describe how I'm a "charlitan"
2) I follow all rules in my duties as a mod.
3) Lack of character? Did I say something untrue? Something you didn't want spoken about?

[SF1900]

Unlike you, most here can have back and forth banter without getting their panties in a bunch. You on the other hand completely melt down, send threats and talk your online friends into starting threads for you. Other guys, like timfogarty can have brutal discussions with name calling and insults and be over it in a matter of minutes.
Maybe you should log off getbig and focus on saving what's left of your rapidly deteriating body?
You let one set of peoples "observations" dictate your opinion here but need peer reviewed studies to form your opinion in other cases? Intersting.

Nice trolling, cone head. I only pointed to that study because it was pretty much a groundbreaking observation for the field at the time, and quite interesting because it was done by a husband and wife. There are plenty of peer reviewed studies that back up what I say.

[Donny]

1) Describe how I'm a "charlitan"
2) I follow all rules in my duties as a mod.
3) Lack of character? Did I say something untrue? Something you didn't want spoken about?

you are too easy, Pelious(however you spell it, guess he was banned) was correct.

[chaos]

Nice trolling, cone head. I only pointed to that study because it was pretty much a groundbreaking observation for the field at the time, and quite interesting because it was done by a husband and wife. There are plenty of peer reviewed studies that back up what I say.

Was it a study or an observation? I confuzed.

[chaos]

you are too easy, Pelious(however you spell it, guess he was banned) was correct.

That's a subtle way to admit defeat. You are dismissed.

[Donny]

That's a subtle way to admit defeat. You are dismissed.

you are melting big time chaos

[TuHolmes]

I don't think the term "meltdown" means the same thing to everyone.

[SF1900]

Was it a study or an observation? I confuzed.

I misspoke. It was purely observations--from what I know, it was not made into a study. But there are peer reviewed studies based on what I said.

Also, as a side note, observations can be studies. There are many studies that use observation for data collection. Its called Observational Research.

[chaos]

I misspoke. It was purely observations--from what I know, it was not made into a study. But there are peer reviewed studies based on what I said.

Also, as a side note, observations can be studies. There are many studies that use observation for data collection. Its called Observational Research.

I'd like to Observationally Research you!

[SF1900]

I'd like to Observationally Research you!

Go into more detail.

Can Donny be a part of it?

[chaos]

Go into more detail.

Can Donny be a part of it?

Donny can count the number of times you adjust your nutsack. Well as long as you don't do it more than 10 times, for 3 sets.

[chaos]

you are melting big time chaos

The other thread has been cleaned up out of internet respect for a competitor.

Listen you are a useless, noncontributing poster here and I had a short PM (private message) conversation with another poster, who obviously shared it with you (so much for being private and you want to challenge my character?) And disappointed I am, I didn't think he'd be so easily intimidated and coerced by someone like you that he would follow along blindly. I guess I was proven wrong.
Oh and I know what you've been up to "behind the scenes", you should be ashamed of yourself!!

[Donny]

Donny can count the number of times you adjust your nutsack. Well as long as you don't do it more than 10 times, for 3 sets.

never seen any other mod on here act like you

[chaos]

chaos as i wrote before i see you as a very immature man who lives his life in a very simple manner. I do not see you as a threat as such. just a bug i want to swat at times. Fact is you should be replaced on the training section as i doubt if you were really in shape in your life. If you resort to writing BS like in your last sentence then you really are clutching at straws.

Let's see your in shape pics. Let's see anything at all to prove you even lift. You're just another fat, out of shape "personal trainer" that got a certificate.

[chaos]

never seen any other mod on here act like you

So?
Like I told VinceB when he was whining about my posts, if someone posts your personal info and I see it, I'll delete it and ban that person. I knw you can't discern the difference between messing around and doing the right thing, but I can.

[Donny]

Let's see your in shape pics. Let's see anything at all to prove you even lift. You're just another fat, out of shape "personal trainer" that got a certificate.

so you are in shape chaos? i have a pic of you with ..well it looks like a rubbish tip behind you. Not in a Gym but in a Basement.

[irishdave]

I sometimes wonder if the Coach actually reads the links he posts. Toy's are toys. When I was going up, I don't remember toy's being labeled by sections - girls toys and boy's toys. Obviously most toy stores display dolls in one area and trucks or action figures in another. Toy's are often labeled on the packaging as to what age range they commonly fit. Can't see where that's discrimination.

The other poster posted photos of gender neutral clothing supposedly from Target with no link to the source, therefore I suspect it is bullshit.

Most likely it is the parents or adults who pay for toys and clothes. I they want they can direct kids to what they consider appropriate. Most kids want the toys their playmates have anyway.

You were probably buying the dolls anyway