05 November 2026
|
Story Zinhle Vanda
|
Photo Supplied
Zinhle Vanda is master’s candidate and NESP scholar working in the Department of Sociology.
Opinion article by Zinhle Vanda, Department of Sociology, University of the Free State
The recent South African trend
#Abondli on TikTok, through which users publicly calling attention to fathers who allegedly fail to provide financial support for their children, has erupted on the popular social media platform. This trend has not only drawn public attention to allegations of fathers failing to provide financial support for their children but has also highlighted how fatherhood is often associated primarily with financial provision. This raises an important question: what about caregiving? Why is fatherhood so often measured by a man’s ability to provide financially, while everyday responsibilities such as feeding, bathing, nurturing and being emotionally present for children receive less attention?
These expectations reflect broader gender norms that position men as breadwinners and women as caregivers. The result is a narrow understanding of parental responsibility in which financial provision is treated as a defining feature for fatherhood, while caregiving continues to be regarded largely as women’s responsibility. The #Abondli trend therefore offers an opportunity to reconsider what it means to be a father.
A walk through any South African retail store reveals a striking and recurring pattern: one side is in pink, filled with dolls, kitchen sets, and baby carriages, while the other is blue and grey, stocked with cars, tools, and action figures. This physical division is not accidental. It reflects a deeply embedded cultural logic that assigns different object and by extension, different futures to children based on their gender. The question is whether this seemingly harmless commercial practice carries long-term social consequences? Specifically, does early exposure to gendered toys contribute to a society where women are expected to be caregivers and men are expected to be providers and consumers of material goods? This paper argues that gendered toys are not neutral objects but powerful instruments of early socialisation. They communicate to children what is expected of them, what they should value, and what roles they are meant to occupy in society. Understanding this connection is essential for any serious discussion about gender equality.
Toys as tools of socialisation
Socialisation theory holds that individuals learn social norms and roles through repeated interactions with their environment, including family, peers, media, and institutions. Toys form a central part of this environment during childhood. Toys marketed to girls consistently promote nurturing, domestic, and appearance-related activities, while toys marketed to boys emphasise competition, construction, and spatial reasoning. These categories do not merely reflect existing interests they actively create and reinforce them.
A boy who was never given a baby doll may grow up to genuinely believe that childcare is simply not his responsibility, not because he has reasoned his way to that conclusion, but because it was never presented to him as a possibility. Boys should be socialised to see caregiving as part of fatherhood, just as girls should not be taught that caregiving is their natural or exclusive responsibility.
The toys children play with are not simply entertainment; they are among the earliest and most consistent messages a society sends about who its children are expected to become. Gendered toy marketing reinforces a division of roles that persists into adult life, shaping who takes care of children, who builds machines, and who holds economic power. Addressing this requires more than swapping the colour of a toy box. It requires a fundamental rethinking of how society communicates value, capability, and belonging to its youngest members. If gender equality is a genuine social goal, it must begin in the playroom.
Zinhle Vanda is master’s candidate and NESP scholar working in the Department of Sociology. Her interest lies in society’s everyday experiences and how societal narratives and power dynamics shape people’s understanding of justice, equality and inequality. She writes in her personal capacity.