When it comes to dressing babies, today’s parents often follow a familiar formula: pink for girls, blue for boys. But it wasn’t always this way. In fact, for a significant part of modern history, baby boys were often dressed in white, and surprisingly, sometimes even in pink. It’s only in the past several decades that rigid colour codes have shaped how we dress our infants. Why Parents Used to Dress Baby Boys in White or Pink.
So, what changed? And why did boys ever wear pink in the first place? Let’s explore the fascinating history of baby fashion and how cultural, social, and commercial forces shaped what colours our kids wear.
[ez-toc]
The White Years: Practicality Over Gender
Before the 20th century, babies, regardless of gender, were almost universally dressed in white. The reason wasn’t symbolic or aesthetic. It was practical.
Laundry was laborious, bleach was one of the few reliable cleaning agents, and white cotton garments were the easiest to clean and reuse. Dresses and gowns were also the norm for babies of all sexes, because they made diaper changing easier and allowed babies more freedom of movement. Plus, baby clothes were often passed down from sibling to sibling, so neutral, white clothing made financial sense for growing families.
Gender wasn’t yet emphasised through colour. It was considered unimportant in early childhood fashion. Clothing wasn’t about identity, it was about ease, cost, and survival.
Pink for Boys? Blue for Girls? A Surprisingly Recent Flip
One of the most surprising twists in baby fashion history is that pink used to be considered a colour for boys, while blue was reserved for girls.
This wasn’t an obscure trend. In 1918, the influential trade magazine Earnshaw’s Infants’ Department stated:
“The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a stronger colour, is more suitable for the boy; while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.”
At the time, pink was viewed as a diluted form of red, a colour associated with strength, war, and masculinity. Blue, on the other hand, had religious ties to the Virgin Mary and was considered a serene and gentle attribute that aligned with femininity.
Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, department stores across the U.S. and Europe sold pink clothing for boys and blue for girls. The idea that pink was a “girly” colour would have seemed foreign to people during that era.
You might also like: Why Kids Save Their Worst for Mom and Dad
Mid-Century Shift: Gender Roles and Consumerism Take Over
So, when did everything change?
Around the 1940s, the colour norms we now recognise began to reverse. Several factors contributed:
-
World War II brought a renewed emphasis on traditional gender roles. After the war, Western societies leaned into the ideals of the nuclear family, where men were providers and women homemakers. Gender became a central organising force in society, and marketing followed suit.
-
Mass marketing exploded in the 1950s. With consumer culture on the rise, retailers began targeting products specifically to boys or girls to boost sales. Creating a clear visual difference, like pink for girls and blue for boys, made it easier to sell more products, as parents could no longer reuse clothing across children of different sexes without seeming “off-trend.”
-
Hollywood and media influence also played a role. Female stars were frequently depicted in pink, while boys wore more traditionally “masculine” hues. These images filtered into advertising and everyday consumer culture.
By the 1960s, pink was deeply entrenched as a feminine colour, and dressing boys in it became increasingly rare.
A Brief Return to Neutrality in the 1970s
The 1970s saw a brief pushback against colour-coded gender roles, largely inspired by the feminist and civil rights movements. During this time, many parents consciously chose gender-neutral clothing to challenge stereotypes. Earth tones, yellows, greens, and unisex styles became popular.
However, this trend didn’t last long. By the 1980s, traditional pink-and-blue marketing had returned with force, largely due to one technological innovation: the prenatal ultrasound.
The Rise of Prenatal Gender Reveals
Once expectant parents could learn their baby’s sex before birth, retailers saw an opportunity to market entire gender-specific wardrobes and nursery items before the baby even arrived. Instead of passing down baby items from child to child, parents began buying new, sex-specific clothes, toys, and décor.
The pink-for-girls and blue-for-boys binary became more than just a trend, it became a multi-billion-dollar industry.
You might also like: Marsupi Baby Carrier
Why History Matters Today
Understanding this history reveals a key truth: our current gender colour coding isn’t timeless or natural; it’s cultural. Pink wasn’t always for girls, and blue wasn’t always for boys. These are relatively recent developments, shaped more by marketing and social expectations than any biological necessity.
Knowing this allows modern parents to question current norms and make more conscious choices. Whether they’re selecting gender-neutral clothes, mixing colours, or challenging traditional labels altogether, many families today are breaking free of outdated conventions.
In fact, the rise of gender-neutral baby lines from major retailers like H&M, Target, and even luxury brands shows that parents are increasingly choosing to prioritise comfort, individuality, and flexibility over strict colour codes.
Modern Attitudes: Rethinking Colour and Gender
Today, many parents are returning to the more practical and inclusive approach of earlier generations:
-
White and neutral tones are making a comeback in newborn fashion due to their versatility and timeless appeal.
-
Pink for boys is no longer taboo in many circles, with fashion influencers, celebrities, and designers promoting soft pastels for all genders.
-
Gender-neutral names and clothing are on the rise, with millennial and Gen Z parents embracing the idea that a child’s interests and personality are more important than their outfit’s colour.
Social media has helped amplify these shifts. Parents share photos of children dressed in every colour imaginable—rainbow wardrobes that reflect joy, not gender roles.
Conclusion
The way we dress our babies has always reflected more than just fashion it reveals our cultural beliefs, values, and even our economic habits.
The fact that boys once wore white and pink and did so proudly reminds us that current gender norms are neither fixed nor universal. They’re changeable, shaped by history and society, and open to reinterpretation.
As we move into an era that celebrates individuality and diversity, we can let go of limiting rules and embrace a broader palette for our children and for ourselves.
So the next time you see a baby boy in pink, or a girl in blue, remember: it’s not just okay—it’s historical.
