For parents who have kids of various genders, you’ve probably noticed that shopping in the gendered clothing sections has some notable differences. Well one mom has gone viral with several TikTok videos pointing out the frustrating disparities between “boy clothes” and “girl clothes.”
Meredith Alston is a mom to three kids and she recently called out Target for selling kid’s clothes that are vastly different in functionality and durability in gendered clothing. In one video, which has reached more than 3.5 million views, Meredith shows the clothing she bought for her three kids. In the video – which has since been turned into an ongoing series – the mom points out the major differences between like-clothing for her kids.
“Target, if you’re listening, I need to ask you a question,” she said in her first video. “My daughter needed some new pants for school, so in the girls section we’ve got these nice, stretchy, airy, thin leggings. Now let’s look at what the boys have.”
Meredith then held up a pair of shorts she bought for her son. Ans there was a marked difference. “These are durable,” she said. These have an adjustable drawstring, and these have reinforced knees so they don’t fall apart every month.”
There is a big difference between the two. For her daughter, Meredith had a pair of thin leggings with no pockets. For her son, the pants were sturdy, had lots of pockets, and looks like it would have a chance of holding up to a kid who likes to run and jump. There is zero chance for the girl’s leggings to hold up to the same activity level without being shredded and torn.
In another video Meredith compares girl shorts to boy shorts after several people in the comments of her first video noted there were big differences there, too. And there were. Both in size (the girls shorts are several inches shorter) and durability, plus there are no pockets for girls while boys have several.
“My youngest daughter loves picking up rocks,” she explained. “And she uses my pockets because her clothes don’t have pockets. So, when I bought her the little boy pants that have the, like deeper pockets, she is so happy because her clothing is serving a purpose instead of just instead of just covering her up.”
Meredith also pointed out that there was a price difference between the girl shorts and boy shorts. Despite the boy style having more fabric that’s far sturdier and includes pockets, it was cheaper than the girl shorts – buy two dollars. The comment section called this out for what it is with one person writing, “the pink tax starts so early.”
The mom addressed some common questions she was getting in the comment section including being asked why she won’t just get her daughter clothes from the “boys’ section.” That’s something she has done, and it’s made her daughter happier, but that’s not really the point.
“This isn’t some inconsequential aesthetic dilemma,” she explained. “Girls face real-world consequences for what they wear from a young age, from dress code violations to justifying violence against them.” And she believes Target should be the one who addresses – and fixes – these issues.