Tomboy. It’s a phrase that gets widely used and one that’s accepted when referring to young girls who prefer to wear dungarees to dresses. But what happens when the roles are reversed?

Little boys, aged 10 and under who want to imitate their mother, carry her handbag or wear lipstick. When these events occur, the child is considered gay yet he’s only doing the opposite of a tomboy.

When a little girl is considered a tomboy she isn’t name called, it’s acceptable. It’s praised that the child can truly be herself, but why don’t we have a male equivelant? 

This opinion was sparked from a conversation at work about one of the girls daughters who openly asked if she’s a tomboy. To which her mother replied, yes. Without any worry or doubt over the use of the term.

Yet we don’t have a male equivelant, which is sad and such a shane. I don’t know what the answer is or the outcome but it makes for an interesting debate, don’t you think?