36 Children’s Clothing
One of the portions of Foucault that I found particularly fascinating and insightful for understanding discourse was the subject of silence. Recently, around June this year, Target released its “pride” collection to an overwhelming amount of backlash from conservatives, particularly related to a women’s swimsuit marketed as “tuck-friendly” to allow women with penises to “conceal their private parts” (AP, Anne D’Innocenzio, May 24, 2023). The negative and occasionally violent response Target faced for releasing gender-affirming swimwear was largely motivated by “several misleading videos” which claimed that the swimwear was “designed for kids or in kids’ sizes,” which it was not (AP, D’Innocenzio). Beyond this AP article, numerous major media outlets have called attention to the backlash Target faced for its pride collection, including the NYT, CNBC, the Washington Post, BBC, and (unsurprisingly) Fox News.
While this subject might not seem intimately connected with “silence,” it actually has deep ties with what objects of media, particularly clothing, are understood as “acceptable” (and therefore do not deserve discussion) in society, and which objects warrant attention and suppression in the public eye. While there is a veritable entire ecosystem (or, better, cesspool) of right-wing bigots dedicated to “defending children” from being ”sexualized” by clothing marketed as pride-wear, there is a lack of discussion surrounding the inverse: the “heterosexualization” of children’s clothing. I could find only three good articles on the subject: two Buzzfeed articles (one consisting entirely of examples with little accompanying content) and one Medium post (a website where users can generate their own articles, rather than a journal/news agency in its own right). Most of the discourse around heterosexual children’s clothing has occurred online on public forums like Twitter. Yet, these relatively few articles and social media posts demonstrate the egregious intrusions of heterosexuality on youths and the harmful gender stereotypes imposed on children from a young age that are tied with their sexualized positions within heterosexist patriarchy. Girls clothing emblazoned with a Superman logo and the caption, “I only date heroes.” Pink onesies made for infants labeled, “I’m not allowed to date…ever.” Boys t-shirts that say, “Ladies man,“ or “Little flirt.” Where is the backlash against this kind of clothing from those on the right who claim to advocate against sexualizing children? Crickets. And Foucault notes pointedly the importance of this silence in his discussion of discourse: “Silence itself…is less the absolute limit of discourse…than an element that functions alongside the things said, with them and in relation to them within over-all strategies” (Foucault, The Will to Knowledge, 27). Within the context of children’s clothing—and more broadly the deep, implicit assumption many hold that all people are ”born straight until proven gay”—silence acts as a normalizing agent, calling attention to the aberrant “other“—pride merch—for the purpose of suppression while maliciously enforcing the status quo through heterosexual apparel.
Sources:
- “The Heterosexualization of Youth,” Ashley Daigneault, May 22, 2016: https://medium.com/human-development-project/the-heterosexualization-of-youth-172dc4923671
- “15 Photos People Shared Of Straight-Up Offensive Kids Clothing,” Crystal Ro, March 17, 2021: https://www.buzzfeed.com/crystalro/offensive-kids-clothing
- “Sexual Innuendo Is Everywhere, Including…Baby Clothes?” Stephanie McNeal, April 19, 2022: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemcneal/baby-clothes-sexually-inappropriate
- “Target becomes latest company to suffer backlash for LGBTQ+ support, pulls some Pride month clothing,” Anne D’Innocenzio, May 24, 2023: https://apnews.com/article/target-pride-lgbtq-4bc9de6339f86748bcb8a453d7b9acf0