MARKETING FOR GIRLS

Someone realized girls & women have $$: DC & Warner Bros. Launch "DC Super Hero Girls" Initiative http://t.co/EQ8gSlj4B4 via @cbr
— Faith Erin Hicks (@FaithErinHicks) April 22, 2015

So, DC announced a DC super hero girls initiative, to which I say, THE FUCK? Mostly because um, why does it have to be so very gendered? Faith Erin Hicks, the comic writer/artist I MADLY adore, tweeted the above in the wake of the announcement, to which I agree: hooray, marketing that includes girls!

But that's the rub. It would be so much better if it was marketed to INCLUDE girls, not marketed FOR girls. There's a really big difference. Marketing FOR girls is the reason why Black Widow isn't included on any of the main Avengers merchandise, but we're supposed to be satisfied that we get a dress and jacket via HerUniverse. This article from an anonymous former Marvel employee perfectly explains the double standard of our merchandising.

It feels especially relevant today, because just last night I was walking through the mall with my friend and we stopped at the Build-A-Bear store, drawn in by some Avengers teddy bears. EJ, my godson, has been super into them lately. However, as I walked in the store I noticed another set of bears being advertised...


What's up with the weirdly gendered teddy bears? Why are Anna and Elsa's eyes so... cartoonish and female? This is a teddy bear! Just put some beady little black eyes on them and call it a day. That's what they did for the (exclusively male) Avengers team. Why can't they do that for the Frozen ladies? Marketing for girls means that only girls will be "allowed" to like these toys without ridicule. It makes it an exclusively "female" product to enjoy, which is ridiculous. My godson loves Frozen, Doc McStuffins, and Sofia the First JUST as much as he loves the Avengers and the Power Rangers. We don't have to make female protagonists gendered. Everyone can enjoy them.