Years ago, when I worked at McDonald’s, they were doing that Hot Wheels/Barbie Happy Meal promotion they do every so often. I was told not to ask customers whether they wanted a boy toy or a girl toy, because that was sexist and little girls might want toy cars (besides, then you had another chance to mention that we had HOT WHEELS and BARBIES). To my surprise, I sold way more Barbies to little boys than Hot Wheels to little girls.
In any thread about the appropriateness of toys, boys or girls, I always like to link to the following short story, “The Toys of Peace” by H.H. Munro, aka Saki.
Why assume the manager is a man? 
Because I’ve never seen a Rite Aid with a kitchen.
[QUOTE=Aspidistra]
I mean, I’m not going to have a hissy fit over it but yes, labelling toy aisles with what they actually have in them rather than who you think will want to use them is a positive change. I know there are a lot of girly-girl pink-lovers out there, but why be pointlessly obnoxious to the outliers?
[quote]
Why be needlessly obnoxious to the majority of people who agree with the “Pink is for girls/Superhero Costumes are for boys” school of toy categorisation?
I don’t see it, I’m afraid. I have no problem with gender stereotypes for the most part, though, which may have something to do with it. Personally I think too much diversity and tolerance can actually be a bad thing, FWIW.
That doesn’t meant we shouldn’t have any diversity or tolerance for others, but there is a point at which I feel it’s acceptable to say “Right, Stop That, It’s Silly!”- and the OP’s objection to the situation outlined therein is one of them, IMHO.
Yep, must be cultural. But I don’t see an issue with Boys Toys. Neither would I see an issue with an aisle called Girls Toys. Could be cultural, as I’m also Australian and a female.
I agree with you Martini Enfield
Just to conclude the business end of things, here is my thank-you email and riteaid.com’s response:
Recently I wrote concerning an aisle sign that said “boys toys”, since I felt it was inappropriate gender stereotyping. Thank you very much for your response to this, as I see that the sign has been changed to read “toys”. I really appreciate your consideration of this concern and the quick response.
Sincerely,
gigi
gigi,
We once again apologize for the inconvenience this has caused.
Corey
Customer Support
However, all is right with the world. I found the following on riteaid.com
"Girls will love the new wire baskets with brightly colored butterflies and flowers (available in three sizes, ranging in price from $9.99-$5.99). And boys will be egg-static over their baseball, basketball or soccer ball shaped basket ($9.99). " [God knows girls don’t play sports.]
"Little boys will love the Remote Control Monster Ranger trucks and girls everywhere will enjoy the Emily Baby Doll set complete with carrier and accessories, both available for less than $20. "
Yay, Gigi! Thanks for fighting the good fight.
“Boys’ Toys” indeed. I guess I’m not only a cross-dresser but also a…what is the word for it?
Bless my father for buying me a Tonka dumptruck.
My brother and I each had our own toolset, with which we made our father bookends from scrap wood. He still has them. ::sniff
I hope I’m not alone in initially thinking this was going to be about dildos or other related sex toys.
No silly, that aisle is labeled, “Kitchen accessories”.
I’m really, really sorry…I just couldn’t resist!
Because cultrually-assigned gender roles are stupid.
Little girls should be allowed Tonka trucks and little boys should be allowed Barbie dolls (I mean, really - by cultural standards they’re already allowed GI Joe - is Barbie that much of a stretch?).
No matter how hard you wish for the EZ Bake oven to remain in the Girl Toys aisle most top chefs are men, and while GI Joe may hate it women are flying combat jets these days.
IMHO, any adult - parent or the guy who labels store aisles - who guides any child towards any toy simply on the basis of the child’s natural plumbing is misguided and stifling the child’s natural learning curiosity.
Last I checked, girls were still allowed in the “Boys’ Toys” aisles. Likewise for boys in the “Girls’ Toys” aisles.
Not at all, I thought the same thing except I was thinking more along the artificial vagina lines. In a RiteAid. That would be great.
Of course they’re allowed- I don’t think anyone is arguing otherwise. The signage just helps people (i.e., adults) to the right collection of toys that their intended recipient would prefer, so they don’t have to wander through the Polly Pockets to get to the Hot Wheels. But if they want to buy their son the Polly Pockets, they’ll look in the “Girls’ Toys” section.
Do people really think that the signage will keep parents from buying a particular toy for the kid, gender lines be damned? Sheesh.
Then why do we need the signs? We’re talking about a small drugstore with a small toy section. Turn head to right, pink frilly. To the left, navy killing machines.
What we really need are frilly, pink killing machines.
Maybe we don’t. But if they’re there, it seems unnecessary to make the store go through the trouble of chaging them.
Please everyone just re-read this and try to assimilate it.
Get it yet???