William wants a doll . . .

           "Free to be you and me" was an early 1970's project of stories and songs by then-current celebrities "to encourage post-1960's gender neutrality, saluting values such as individuality, tolerance, and comfort with one's identity.  A major thematic message is that anyone -whether a boy or a girl -can achieve anything." (Wikipedia)  One song by Rosey Grier, "It's Alright to Cry", I sometimes play for my male clients.

       Another favorite is "William Wants a Doll" sung by Marlo Thomas and Alan Alda ("Hawkeye" of MASH). Young William at five years of age announced that his choice for a birthday present was a doll.  Somewhat aghast, mom and dad attempted to steer him towards more 'gender appropriate' toys such as baseball bats and gloves.  While William liked these, they were not his request.  Peers also  teased and berated him.  Finally, Grandmother pointed out that he wanted a doll so that he could learn how to be a father.
One later critic asked why it was not o.k. for him to have a doll simply because he wanted a doll.  (These videos are readily available on YouTube.)

     The 'acculturation' of young boys to be real boys begins early ... often with the result of squelching and shaming their ability to experience what are usually regarded as feminine traits, such as tenderness, empathy, dependency, receptivity.  In their stead, we are encouraged, overtly and subtly, to value competitiveness, externalizing or outright denying our emotions, and bravery (or bravado ?).  The therapist, Terrence Real, calls this a form of trauma that begins early.  In his book, How Can I Get Through to You?: Reconnecting Men and Women, he cited a study that  indicated that boys and girls til the age of four or five "rest comfortably in the 'expressive-affiliative mode'" with girls being allowed to remain there longer while boys are subtly - or  - forcibly pushed out of it. (p. 123) (Young girls have yet another form of trauma that can move them away from their true selves.)  While it is o.k. for young girls, say 8-12, to be called Tomboy, think of the negative cultural connotations of calling a young boy, Sissy.  There have been many long-term effects of this process, which Real calls emotional amputations.

     So, back to the matter of little boys and dolls . . .  The late author, Reynolds Price, wrote of gifts received on his fourth Christmas. "Santa" brought  what Price termed "an odd array" that included an Indian outfit complete with Headdress, a Shirley Temple doll, as well as an imitation double-barreled shotgun.
There was also an unrequested "and perhaps as a slightly unnerved nudge toward manhood" midget car.  At that time an only child, he frequently told Shirley his "private woes".  (pp.94-96 of his Feasting the Heart).

    Some (much?) of the cultural objection to allowing young boys such "feminine" toys as dolls is homophobia.  While Price as an adult readily acknowledged that he was indeed homosexual, having a Shirley Temple doll was hardly a "cause".  And, what, then, of straight, heterosexual men such as my brother and I who had dolls in our early years.  Mine was Nancy Jane by now long lost but who bore a strong resemblance to the one at the top of this post.  My brother had (and still has) Bob Junior.  Along the way, we each received our share of masculine toys.  In addition, to those pictured below, I recall the complete football uniforms another brother and I received one Christmas when we were pre-teen.

The next Christmas. I have vague memories of this.

Probably age 3.  Note the boots and goggles

      But no pictures of Nancy Jane have been located.  I hope that she is doing well, wherever she may be.  She played an important part in my early years.


     Satchel  (my first name really is William)