Pink, often associated with femininity today, was not always the color of choice for girls. In fact, it was once considered more suitable for boys. A 1918 article in Earnshaw's Infants' Department stated, "Pink is for boys, and blue is for girls."The reasoning? Pink, being a stronger and more assertive color, was thought to be more appropriate for boys, while blue, perceived as delicate, suited girls better.

The shift to pink for girls and blue for boys started gaining traction in the early 20th century but wasn't fully cemented until the 1940s. It became more pronounced in the 1980s, partly due to prenatal testing allowing parents to plan gender-specific color schemes for their babies. The rise of gender-specific marketing - like pink toys for girls and blue ones for boys - reinforced this divide.

However, the rigid association between pink and femininity has faced backlash in recent decades. Feminist parents in the 1970s rejected pink, and stores like Target have worked to eliminate gender-specific aisles. The rise of gender-neutral clothing further challenges this long-standing stereotype.

Ultimately, the pink-and-blue divide is a social construct - nothing intrinsic to biology links pink to femininity. It's simply a trend created by society.