Sad Beige Trend

[Anonymous]

I just read an article about how "Sad Beige" has become a trend in parenting in the past few years. What it didn't explain was how exactly this came to be. I've always been a lover of colors, especially for babies and children. My two kids both had very colorful toys, nurseries and clothing when they were babies, and I couldn't imagine having them exposed to only muted tones and colors.

Is this really just an Instagram thing, or does it have other roots? Generally just curious about this trend, as I could have imagined this when I was a new mom 10 years ago. For those out there who have followed this trend, is there a reason you decided to?

[Anonymous]

I see this in some of the wooden baby toys these days. I personally don't understand it either. Does everything have to be for social media these days?

[Anonymous]

It's social media. There is a group of Mormon influencers obsessed with everything beige and for whatever reason, the general American population seems to think that there is something special about them and they want to be just like them.

PLEASE buck the trends, ladies, young children NEED bright colors and visual contrast!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's social media. There is a group of Mormon influencers obsessed with everything beige and for whatever reason, the general American population seems to think that there is something special about them and they want to be just like them.

PLEASE buck the trends, ladies, young children NEED bright colors and visual contrast!!

Actually no, babies just need real human environments to look at near and far things. They don't need any purchased products to develop normally. Just don't leave them alone in their crib staring at a blank ceiling all day.

Sad beige is grownup overreaction to adult overstimulation from clashing, garish primary-colored toys.

In the early 2000s, there was a lot of black and white stuff to help babies' eyesight. It was very ugly and clashing en masse.

Baby Einstein - now gone from the market - had a lot of primary colors and the b&w too.

Even "The Pink Aisle" of toy stores is a long-running, but still fairly recent, toy manufacturer color trend in girls' toys.

Sad beige is a trend that plays on interest in "safer", "organic", "natural" products. It's a way of showing wealth and sophistication by demonstrating how carefully you protect your baby. Expensive (European and US) wooden toys usually don't have dangerous finishes. (Painted Chinese toys were a source of lead exposure in past decades.)

The whole garish Baby Einstein thing targeted exactly the same kind of affluent moms but through insecurity about baby intellectual development.

This is all capitalism at work.

I bought so many more baby things and toys than I ever needed. And I was far from the consumption of my friends.

Sad beige is indeed kind of pathetic-looking to me, but many people think it looks calming and natural...so the market has spoken.

[Anonymous]

The market hasn't spoken, sweetie, influencers have spoken.

[Anonymous]

A of parents prefer more calming colors in the home and there is some pushback against the many big, noisy, brightly colored toys that used to dominate the toy market.

Like another poster said, I don’t think any of this matters, trends come and go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The market hasn't spoken, sweetie, influencers have spoken.

Save the "sweetie" for your granddaughter.

The market has spoken. There's a difference between aspirational looks and actual sales.

Aspirational looks make it to Pinterest. When people actually buy, then manufacturers make more and more of the trendy product, and drive the trend in retail stores.

Sad beige isn't coming only from Mormon influencers. For example, I consider gray nurseries part of this trend and Pottery Barn Kids was all over that. PBK is a major trendsetter in suburban nurseries, and that kind of company has their own market-scanning designers.

Expensive uncolored wooden European and American toys are classics, and have been popular with wealthy IYKYK types since the 1960s. I've been to the Maple Landmark wooden toy factory in Middlebury, Vermont. Have you? That kind of stuff is pushed in the few high end toy stores that still exist, right along with the Steiff teddy bears.

Here's a teacher with a fun article. She mentions the growth in popularity of beige as going back to the 1960s. And an interior design trend starting before the kid product trend. When your whole space is decked out in minimalist neutrals, it looks even worse to dump a whole bunch of primary-colored plastic into the space. Nobody with eyes needs to follow influencers to notice that.

https://piccalio.com/blogs/grow/the-science-behind-the-sad-beige-moms-debate#:~:text=The%20Origin%20of%20%22Sad%20Beige%20Moms%22,-The%20origin%20of&text=Many%20people%20call%20them%20out,at%20the%20beige%20mom%20aesthetic.

[Anonymous]

It is not an actual trend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The market hasn't spoken, sweetie, influencers have spoken.

Save the "sweetie" for your granddaughter.

The market has spoken. There's a difference between aspirational looks and actual sales.

Aspirational looks make it to Pinterest. When people actually buy, then manufacturers make more and more of the trendy product, and drive the trend in retail stores.

Sad beige isn't coming only from Mormon influencers. For example, I consider gray nurseries part of this trend and Pottery Barn Kids was all over that. PBK is a major trendsetter in suburban nurseries, and that kind of company has their own market-scanning designers.

Expensive uncolored wooden European and American toys are classics, and have been popular with wealthy IYKYK types since the 1960s. I've been to the Maple Landmark wooden toy factory in Middlebury, Vermont. Have you? That kind of stuff is pushed in the few high end toy stores that still exist, right along with the Steiff teddy bears.

Here's a teacher with a fun article. She mentions the growth in popularity of beige as going back to the 1960s. And an interior design trend starting before the kid product trend. When your whole space is decked out in minimalist neutrals, it looks even worse to dump a whole bunch of primary-colored plastic into the space. Nobody with eyes needs to follow influencers to notice that.

https://piccalio.com/blogs/grow/the-science-behind-the-sad-beige-moms-debate#:~:text=The%20Origin%20of%20%22Sad%20Beige%20Moms%22,-The%20origin%20of&text=Many%20people%20call%20them%20out,at%20the%20beige%20mom%20aesthetic.

Nailed it. Also this post reminds me of the cerulean blue speech from The Devil Wears Prada, well done! 😆

[Anonymous]

I cannot imagine how miserable I must get in life to care…no, not about if another child gets toys, or even what kinds of toys, but what *color* toys their mom buys them. Wtf? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

We went with a pale blue nursery with blues, purples, and pink bedding and artwork for our baby girls, but I didn't curate the colors of the toys we received and bought for them. Toys shouldn't have to match a child's bedroom or the color of the house. Put them away in a basket or cabinet if you don't want them out all the time, but it's sad to limit the colors that your child plays with purely to satisfy your own personal "aesthetic".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's social media. There is a group of Mormon influencers obsessed with everything beige and for whatever reason, the general American population seems to think that there is something special about them and they want to be just like them.

PLEASE buck the trends, ladies, young children NEED bright colors and visual contrast!!

Actually no, babies just need real human environments to look at near and far things. They don't need any purchased products to develop normally. Just don't leave them alone in their crib staring at a blank ceiling all day.

Sad beige is grownup overreaction to adult overstimulation from clashing, garish primary-colored toys.

In the early 2000s, there was a lot of black and white stuff to help babies' eyesight. It was very ugly and clashing en masse.

Baby Einstein - now gone from the market - had a lot of primary colors and the b&w too.

Even "The Pink Aisle" of toy stores is a long-running, but still fairly recent, toy manufacturer color trend in girls' toys.

Sad beige is a trend that plays on interest in "safer", "organic", "natural" products. It's a way of showing wealth and sophistication by demonstrating how carefully you protect your baby. Expensive (European and US) wooden toys usually don't have dangerous finishes. (Painted Chinese toys were a source of lead exposure in past decades.)

The whole garish Baby Einstein thing targeted exactly the same kind of affluent moms but through insecurity about baby intellectual development.

This is all capitalism at work.

I bought so many more baby things and toys than I ever needed. And I was far from the consumption of my friends.

Sad beige is indeed kind of pathetic-looking to me, but many people think it looks calming and natural...so the market has spoken.

I don't know why you're saying primary colors are "garish", PP. I think at the time, they were reacting to studies saying that babies were stimulated by contrasting colors (this is still accurate), and the early aughts might have gone a bit overboard with black and white and bright colors, but I would hardly call it garish, it was just bright colors.

[Anonymous]

People can do what they want, but observationally, kids prefer brightly colored items.

We had both when my kids were small, and they both always gravitated towards colorful items. Always.

Like we had two sets of blocks that were identical in every other way (same sizes and shapes and exterior texture) but one set was natural wood and the other was painted in bright primary colors. My kids always used the colored blocks exclusively and then would only use the natural wood if they totally ran out of colored blocks.

I'd let them choose clothes starting around 18 months or so and we had all kinds of clothes from various hand me down sources -- brights and pastels and patterned and plain, but also plenty of muted items like simple striped tees or plain leggings. They ALWAYS chose the bright items, preferably also with pattern.

And so on. Do you want a white plate or a blue plate? Blue. Do you want these black shoes or these purple glitter shoes. Purple glitter.

So I'm curious -- does anyone have kids who did the opposite? Who chose the "sad beige" over colors, even as babies? I have noticed many kids start to prefer much more muted colors and fewer patterns 2nd or 3rd grade, especially boys, but my perception is that this is somewhat driven by peer pressure and the need many kids have to look and feel more grown up at that age (thus they start trying to dress more like adults, who tend to where little color). But babies and toddlers seem to show a strong preference for color, which makes me a bit suspicious of the idea that it truly doesn't matter. I do think a beige nursery would be kind of sad, and maybe not great for a baby's development.

Just my two cents.

[Anonymous]

Sad beige has its place. Items should have colors distinguishing the differences for function, not at random (which, unfortunately, is how almost all kid toys are designed). Think of a real piano: white and black keys are different colors and sizes for a reason. Little kid pianos have red, white, blue, etc for absolutely no reason. It doesn't teach them anything. Even things like a letter puzzle--why are they all sorts of colors? You want your kid to focus on the differences between the letters; not the colors that serve absolutely no purpose. Even two colors (one for consonants, one for vowels) would be better than the absolute nonsense that these companies put out.

Think about a small puzzle with a yellow triangle, blue circle and red square. Triangles are not inherently yellow. The yellow is not a feature you want your kid focusing on. Is it harmful? Probably not. But is it helpful? No.

Here is a perfect example of the type of toy where adding colors would be a hinderance to learning: https://www.amazon.com/Cylinder-Montessori-Eductional-Materials-Preschool/dp/B087TYY87G/ref=asc_df_B087TYY87G?mcid=bf8bd41f1cb03c4a87cbe9e4ab9b6a91&hvocijid=8505274019129288505-B087TYY87G-&hvexpln=73&tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=721245378154&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8505274019129288505&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9007594&hvtargid=pla-2281435179338&psc=1

I love color in decorating. But asking little kids to focus on differences in size, shape, AND color when only two of those is relevant would be pointless. Don't knock all the wooden toys, just because you don't understand their purpose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sad beige has its place. Items should have colors distinguishing the differences for function, not at random (which, unfortunately, is how almost all kid toys are designed). Think of a real piano: white and black keys are different colors and sizes for a reason. Little kid pianos have red, white, blue, etc for absolutely no reason. It doesn't teach them anything. Even things like a letter puzzle--why are they all sorts of colors? You want your kid to focus on the differences between the letters; not the colors that serve absolutely no purpose. Even two colors (one for consonants, one for vowels) would be better than the absolute nonsense that these companies put out.

Think about a small puzzle with a yellow triangle, blue circle and red square. Triangles are not inherently yellow. The yellow is not a feature you want your kid focusing on. Is it harmful? Probably not. But is it helpful? No.

Here is a perfect example of the type of toy where adding colors would be a hinderance to learning: https://www.amazon.com/Cylinder-Montessori-Eductional-Materials-Preschool/dp/B087TYY87G/ref=asc_df_B087TYY87G?mcid=bf8bd41f1cb03c4a87cbe9e4ab9b6a91&hvocijid=8505274019129288505-B087TYY87G-&hvexpln=73&tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=721245378154&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8505274019129288505&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9007594&hvtargid=pla-2281435179338&psc=1

I love color in decorating. But asking little kids to focus on differences in size, shape, AND color when only two of those is relevant would be pointless. Don't knock all the wooden toys, just because you don't understand their purpose.

Love this mommy pretending to be a scientist, LOL