might venture there if the "Girls" sign disappears. And the little girl might find herself browsing train sets if there's no "Boys" sign over that aisle to put her off having a look. Surely all of this could be good for the retailer? Given that the retailers are (perhaps) the most likely to make a change, can make a change as easily as re-stocking shelves and hanging a few new signs, and are the actual point at which children and parents finalise their decisions about which toys they want, I would argue that it makes sense to concentrate our efforts on them, at least to begin with. I'm not at all trying to stifle discussion on manufacturing / marketing, and I will still be very much on board if the consensus is that we should try to target all aspects of gender-based sales of toys, in the way that PinkStinks does. But my own view is that we should bite off one chunk at a time, starting with the retailers. Open to feedback on that, though OneHand is right. We have to make it sound potentially profitable to the retailer and selling the benefits of mixed shelving is the right way to go. It's also a very focused campaign which could make it more press-worthy. Gendered toys is already covered (well) by other campaigns. Plus we would avoid the "but pink is a NICE colour" criticisms. Of course I don't believe that women should be chained to the kitchen sink