I looked up from my carefully constructed Lego space station to see a boy towering above me clad in yellow overalls and a polka dot shirt. “Those aren’t your Legos,” he shouted. I thought, What? How could these Legos not be mine?

“I said those aren’t your Legos,” he repeated with a type of scrutiny specific to Midwestern 5-year-olds. “Those are your Legos. Those are the girl Legos” he said and pointed to a stack of dusty, unused blocks in the corner.

As he ruthlessly demolished my architectural masterpiece, I investigated the so-called “girl” Legos. They were bigger, less intricate and most importantly, bright pink. Unlike the Legos I had been playing with, the corresponding kit’s directions told me I was supposed to construct a shopping mall, not the space station I had wanted to build. It was as if these Legos weren’t for me as much as for the designer’s idea of what I should be: quiet, uncoordinated, unable to think for myself and in need of someone else’s pretty pink and purple plan to follow.

Society has forced condescending messages like these onto girls for generations, with devastating consequences on their self-image and confidence. For me, sexism first manifested itself as “girl” Legos, and for my mother it was the Easy-Bake Oven. For generations brands have marketed toys to girls teaching them to be softer, more submissive and more domestic than their male peers: what every woman is “supposed” to be.

When it comes to parenting, these subliminal lessons are particularly pronounced, and they aren’t unique to just gender-specific toys; they begin within many aspects of childhood, according to the Society for Research in Childhood Development, a research organization dedicated to developing knowledge on how parenting and other influences of children affect their mental and emotional development.

Traditional gender-based parenting involves inequality in the forms of`treatment, expectations and even colloquial sayings among boys and girls that further ingrain these sectionalized ideals of children’s future and behavior into the minds of youth across the nation.

Every one of these influences, as parents, family and society perpetrate, is present in one well known phrase caretakers use almost exclusively to justify the behavior of young, rowdy males: “Boys will be boys.”

My teacher called out this phrase in elementary school after I complained to her about a fellow student who pulled my hair while I was on the playground. I was confused, unsure about how to respond. It seemed as though it was easier for her to brush aside his action as simply the mischievousness of a little boy than to address the underlying problems that prompted his behavior.

Although this expression may seem quaint or endearing, its message is more nefarious than its face value. A boy who is disobedient or unruly is just a little boy whose gender has inclined him toward violence so much so that he simply can’t help himself. Rarely, however, have I heard someone use the same phrasing when addressing a girl’s actions. A girl who is rowdy or high-spirited is not simply a little girl; she is a brat.
In debate, often I’ll find on my ballots that judges describe my style as too aggressive while my male opponents will speak more forcefully than I. To win I need to play into their idea that women must be soft or kind in order for men to respect them and get their point across.

Additionally, as Dr. Elizabeth Meyer of Colorado University observed, “Saying ‘boys will be boys’ teaches children that certain behaviors are endemic to masculinity and exclusive to boys only. This form of thinking reinforces rigid binaries that cause us to develop more ingrained ‘either/or’ attitudes that allow our culture to ignore the true spectrum and variety of behaviors that individuals can exhibit.”

When we teach our children through the toys we give to them and what we say to them that certain characteristics, like bravery, strength, creativity and intelligence, are unique to boys, we rob our girls of the opportunity to embrace their own supposedly masculine qualities.

This problem begins at birth, when many parents buy nearly exclusively blue products for newborn boys and pink for girls. Although developing a system of parenting based on gender may be easy, it brings insidious repercussions for the child both in the short-term and long-term.

The manifestations of these condescending messages may differ among individuals, but they are all rooted in a phenomenon known as stereotype threat. Stereotype threat occurs when a person internalizes a negative personal stereotype so much so that he or she unconsciously conforms to it, according to the National Institute of Health.

My younger sister Clara was only 6-years-old when she came home from school describing how her first grade friend told her, “Math isn’t your thing.” I tried to convince Clara that with hard work and effort she could be good at anything she set her mind to. She, however, heard she wasn’t meant to be good at math and agreed.

She described herself as a reader, not as a math person. Her beliefs created a scapegoat for her efforts because she thought as a woman she wasn’t supposed to be good at math and science, so why bother trying?

The American Psychological Association performed a series of studies on subliminal messaging and concluded that even passive messages of intellectual inferiority can affect how an individual performs on a given task.

One study in 2017 involved having two groups of women complete a math test. In the experiment, the researchers told Group A there was no gender gap in performance and told Group B there was a significant difference between the performance of men and women on the test. The researchers found the women in the second group who were told that women performed worse than men did significantly worse than their Group A counterparts.

Clara isn’t the only one in my family who has experienced the effects of stereotype threat. Before the PreACT my sophomore year, I found myself expecting little from my performance. With this mindset, the math and science portions of the test seemed impossible to me, so I didn’t try as hard as I could have, scoring especially low on those sections.

As I saw the questions that I didn’t understand off the top of my head and required some deeper thinking, instead of taking the time to try to discern and contemplate the answers, I just filled in the bubbles because “Why waste time with questions I’ll get wrong anyway?” I would empower my friends to not shy away from challenges or internalize sexist rhetoric, but I still find myself in its grasp.

Examples of stereotype threat exist throughout our society. If such a seemingly insignificant comment could have a huge impact on the performance of a group of women, I hate to imagine the effect a lifetime of this stereotype reinforcement would have on family and friends.

Stereotype threat discourages women from pursuing traditionally masculine careers, leading to a disproportionately small number of women in math, engineering, science and medical fields, according to the American Association of University Women, a nonprofit dedicated to empowering women’s educational advancement.

Recognizing the harms of stereotype threat, I want to rid myself of my sexist monologue. No matter the career I’m interested in, or the Legos I play with, I know my gender never makes me less than, or less deserving than men. Even though I may doubt my own mathematical and scientific abilities, I am privileged enough to be able to follow my passions and go into a career in journalism or law.

I want to help my sister be more mindful of her own internalization of the hurtful comments people may make toward her because of her gender. I do not want her to experience the same self-doubt I have, and I hope to show her she can be anything or anyone she wants.

To finally end the days of gender-based restraints and allow our girls to grow up free of antiquated notions of forced femininity, we must all challenge the insidious stereotypes we spread. We are all the root of this evil because we push these ideas upon our children, whether consciously or not. As the philosopher John Locke noted, the mind is a “blank slate” on which our experiences are impressed.

A child’s environment shapes their mind, for better or for worse. It is our duty to create an environment that allows kids to embrace their qualities, whether traditionally masculine or feminine, and nurture their strengths free from gender confinements.
We must raise our children the same regardless of gender and instead embrace the individuality of each child.

It’s time we let our girls become astrophysicists, housewives, both or neither, but never force one or the other upon them on the grounds of tradition or bias.

Let’s stop using outdated sayings that demean girls and justify male superiority. Let’s stop convincing our girls that they are destined for a domestic life. Let’s stop telling our girls that their gender has somehow predetermined their aptitude for science, technology, engineering and math fields.

I am not saying we should force all our girls into stereotypically male pursuits; that’s the other side of the same oppressive coin. Instead, we all should understand that if our niece, or sister or daughter is truly inclined toward princesses and housework so be it, but the important thing is that we purchase our gifts, educate our children and speak to them not based on gender stereotypes but instead the individual qualities of each child.

Have you faced stereotype threat in your own life? Let us know in the comments below.