Not for girls. Not for boys.

(Image credit here).

A statement from the clothing company:

Our unisex collection (UNI) consists of clothing that is based on situation and function rather than on gender. As a clothing manufacturer, we want to make it our responsibility to offer an alternative to clothing that is based on gender. There is really no reason to design different models and fits for small boys and girls since there is no great difference in the way their bodies are shaped. We have taken an overall approach to unisex clothing, and consider not only color but also pattern and fit.

(I would love to personally support them but they only sell to Sweden and the United States of America).

Links via Welcome to dystopia. Cross-posted at blue milk.

Categories: gender & feminism, parenting

Tags: ,

6 replies

  1. Wow. AWESOME. About bloody time.
    (Do you think it’s a coincidence it’s a Swedish label who’s being this progressive?)

  2. Their clothes look lovely. I was also happy to see that when I did visit the section of their site that was “for girls” it was not at all a sea of pink — there were one or two pink items, just as there were items of many other colours.

  3. If I had little ones, and the money to buy retail clothing they would outgrow faster than bejeebus, I would definitely support them in more than theory.

  4. I may be quibbling, but I’m disappointed that they still feel the need to break it into boys, girls and unisex.

  5. We need more shops like this in the world. When I was a kid, only some of my clothes had pink. Most of them were in browns and oranges, reds and greens and blues. All sorts of different colours! I loved them.

  6. I’m still feeling quibbly. What we need is shops that don’t make a hoopla of offering “unisex” clothes alonside their gendered ranges. I want to visit a shop that sells “Children’s Clothes” broken down by size or type (tops, shorts, skirts etc.).
    And I agree, Napalmnacey, it’s got a lot worse since I was a kid.

%d bloggers like this: