Asking Google AI

[Damon]

I asked Google 'If there were dresses for boys would parents buy them and would boys wear them?'

Google replied:

Yes, if dresses were readily available and normalized for boys, many parents would likely buy them, and many boys would wear them, driven by comfort, personal preference, or simple exploration, though social acceptance and potential bullying remain key factors. Historically, young boys wore dresses (gowns/dresses) for practicality (easier potty training/diapers) and tradition until around age seven ("breeching") in Western cultures, showing it's a shift in fashion norms, not inherent gender, notes Wikipedia and Facebook.
Why Parents Might Buy Them:
Comfort & Practicality: Like historical reasons, simple ease for young kids can be a factor, say this YouTube video.
Child's Preference: If a child expresses interest, supportive parents often allow it, seeing it as normal exploration or a passing phase, notes a Reddit post and a Facebook post.
Challenging Norms: Some parents actively support gender-neutral clothing to foster individuality and fight restrictive stereotypes, say this Quora post and another Quora post.
Historical Precedent: Recognizing that boys used to wear dresses removes stigma and shows it's a cultural construct, according to Facebook post.
Why Boys Would Wear Them:
Play & Exploration: Children explore gender roles through play (e.g., princess dresses) without deep identity issues, say this Famly blog post.
Comfort/Feel: A child might simply like how a dress feels, feels better than pants, or enjoys twirling in skirts, as shared on this Reddit thread.
Choice: If given the freedom, boys make choices based on what they like, just like girls wear trousers, say this Quora post.
Barriers:
Social Stigma: Fear of bullying or being perceived as "different" often stops boys (and parents), notes this Psychology Today article.
Availability: Finding boy-specific dresses

And there at the end is the problem. Search Google for dresses for boys and you will find some Muslim Thobes some Indian outfits and one plaid shirt dress.

When I was a young dad in the 1960s, the swinging sixties, there were dresses for boys up to age 8 for sale in Bentalls in Kingston on Thames. A salesperson reported brisk business for under five, not many sales for older sizes. Unfortunately like the Dutch business recently, Boy Design who sold dresses in Bentalls also ceased trading.

[sellek]

Unfortunately, in recent years, gender differentiation between boys and girls has got worse not better. When our grandsons, now aged 6, go to a birthday party, the party bags given out at the end are strictly demarcated on gender lines, one of our grandsons loves the colour yellow and asked for a yellow party bag but this was refused as the yellow party bags were for girls and he had to have a boys party bag! In toy shops there seems to be a distinct boy/girl split between the type of toys and how they are marketed. A while ago they were keen on 'Frozen' lurid sparkly pink and purple Unicorns and Fairies but I think other boys made it clear to them that this was not the done thing and so they switched to monsters and superheroes.

In my view this early strict gender differentiation is not helpful, at that age they should be free to try out all sorts of things, wear all sorts of things and decide for themselves. This early gender differentiation seems to be adults projecting their own gender angst onto children who would be better off just trying everything without all this gender demarcation.

[Modoc]

Google replied:

"Yes, if dresses were readily available and normalized for boys, many parents would likely buy them, "

That two letter word cariies a lot of weight.

[FLbreezy]

In my parents/grandparents time (and older I presume) it seemed pretty common for young boys and girls to wear the same sort of baby/toddler dress. I imagine with large families it was common sense to just dress them all the same and not spend extra money or effort on making distinct clothing.

[Damon]

FL Breezy wrote.
[In my parents/grandparents time (and older I presume) it seemed pretty common for young boys and girls to wear the same sort of baby/toddler dress.]

On the grand piano of my grandparents house (mother's side) was a picture of my grandfather, born 1870, wearing a dress with petticoats. He was about 6. My father, born 1914 wore dresses until he was about 2. His young brother, born 1924 into a time of hardship came after several older sisters, and he wore dresses until just before he started school age 5. He grew up to be a normal man and landed on the beach on D Day. I was born 1941. And while there's a photo of me wearing what looks like a dress when I was about 6 months old, my mother said it was a bubble suit for boys. There's another picture of me age about 3 in the garden wearing my nightshirt. Those were common enough for boys in those days. And when I was about 4, I occasionally played with a boy of my age who always wore dresses. But he was an only child whose father died in the war. And I think either he or his mother liked him in dresses. As I have written elsewhere, in the swinging sixties my son often wore dresses bought in the boys Department of Bentalls in Kingston that were made and sold as being for boys and sizes went up to age 7 and for some dresses 8. At the same time, stars like David Bowie and Mick Jagger wore dresses sometimes on stage and you could buy skirts and dresses for men. Even in the 1970s men and boys had long hair and colorful clothes. Fashions change. Unfortunately the Overton Window now seems to be moving rapidly to the more conservative.

[STEVIE]

There is another "IF", the major retailers who don't consult Google when deciding on their marketing strategies.
Parents who are even vaguely likely to give their sons a choice will just provide from the girls wear and they know that very well.
Skirts and dresses which boys could wear are readily available right now, it's only societal attitudes and plain stupidity that says otherwise.
I knew this instinctively when I was 5 years old and my greatest sadness is that it is not much changed in 60 years.
I'm working on it though!
Steve