"What Gender Do You See?"

From: Erica
Society today segregates children based on gender and encourages such separation so absolutely that two complete and distinct worlds or "cultures" develop. Boy culture, a world based in toughness, physical competition and assertiveness rivals the girl culture world that rewards niceness, cooperation and passivity. It would seem implausible and rather unlikely that this division exist so entirely (regardless of region, ethnic identity or generation), were the pink and blue proof not staring at us so directly in every department store, toy store and pre-school. 

This photograph aims to challenge the idea of childhood's "two cultures" and instead focus on the culture that is simply childhood. As clearly visible, the photograph was taken from a high angle. Such an angle was intended to convey height and the perspective of looking down, as this is the view adults have most often when interacting with and more specifically, when teaching, children. The photo was taken as sepia instead of the standard, automatic, colored mode that modern pictures usually use because I wanted to have a sense of the past consume the viewer of the picture. The past alludes to proceeding generations, generations who not only make up the parents and teachers who instill gender codes but who were once the very children that were being taught them. Another reason for the sepia was to shield the color of the objects being looked upon. Without color, (otherwise) ambiguous toys become completely gender neutral. The blanket draped over the back of the chair is without gender because there is no indication of it displaying greens and blues versus it exhibiting reds and pinks. Similarly, the color of the chair itself remains unknown. The variety of toys, books, stuffed animals, diapers, and wipes do nothing to divulge the gender of the child who wore the cow costume (hanging off the back left of the chair) last Halloween. The objects may present viewers with what they believe to be a suggestion of gender based on their own personal experiences or observed behavior, but are intended, when really considered, to cause hesitation and/or some sort of realization of bias. For example in the left lens is an action figure, a Power Ranger to be exact, and may lead viewers to assume the gender of the child is male. But what if the Power Ranger is a pink one? Is the same gender assumed? In the right lens is a stuffed giraffe, which, as it is a soft, stuffed animal may be associated with females, but what if the giraffe's name is Gerard and he is part of a safari set? Is the assumption still female? Finally, the glasses are an extremely important part of this photograph, as shown by their central and forefront placement in the picture. The glasses hold particularly great significance because they symbolize not just one, but a few things. Quite obviously, the glasses have been manipulated, the left lens made to resemble the male symbol, the right lens to resemble its female counterpart. The glasses not only act to remind viewers of the imperfection that is the human eye but of the separate but connected entities that are being a female and being a male. 

Childhood is divided into boys and girls, worlds of blue and pink, when it doesn't have to be. Gender becomes the sole identity children have when no child ever asked for one. What gender is the child in the photograph? Which gender do you see? If I told you he or she was a happy-go-lucky two and a half year old with a great family and a ton of love, would it really matter?