Part A: Reading Comprehension

Text 2

Pretty in pink: adult women do not remember being so obsessed with the colour, yet it is pervasive in our young girls’ lives. It is not that pink is intrinsically bad, but it is such a tiny slice of the rainbow and, though it may celebrate girlhood in one way, it also repeatedly and firmly fuses girls’ identity to appearance. Then it presents that connection, even among two-year-olds, between girls as not only innocent but as evidence of innocence. Looking around, I despaired at the singular lack of imagination about girls’ lives and interests.

Girls’ attraction to pink may seem unavoidable, somehow encoded in their DNA, but according to Jo Paoletti, an associate professor of American Studies, it is not. Children were not colour-coded at all until the early 20th century: in the era before domestic washing machines all babies wore white as a practical matter, since the only way of getting clothes clean was to boil them. What’s more, both boys and girls wore what were thought of as gender-neutral dresses. When nursery colours were introduced, pink was actually considered the more masculine colour, a pastel version of red, which was associated with strength. Blue, with its intimations of the Virgin Mary, constancy and faithfulness, symbolized femininity. It was not until the mid-1980s, when amplifying age and sex differences became a dominant children’s marketing strategy, that pink fully came into its own, when it began to seem inherently attractive to girls, part of what defined them as female, at least for the first few critical years.

I had not realized how profoundly marketing trends dictated our perception of what is natural to kids, including our core beliefs about their psychological development. Take the toddler. I assumed that phase was something experts developed after years of research into children’s behavior: wrong. Turns out, according to Daniel Cook, a historian of childhood consumerism, it was popularized as a marketing trick by clothing manufacturers in the 1930s.

Trade publications counseled department stores that, in order to increase sales, they should create a “third stepping stone” between infant wear and older kids’ clothes. It was only after “toddler” became a common shoppers’ term that it evolved into a broadly accepted developmental stage. Splitting kids, or adults, into ever-tinier categories has proved a sure-fire way to boost profits. And one of the easiest ways to segment a market is to magnify gender differences—or invent them where they did not previously exist.

26. By saying “it is ... the rainbow” (Para. 1), the author means pink

[A]

cannot explain girls’ lack of imagination. 

[B]

should not be associated with girls’ innocence. 

[C]

should not be the sole representation of girlhood. 

[D]

cannot influence girls’ lives and interests. 

27. According to Paragraph 2, which of the following is true of colours?

[A]

Colours are encoded in girls’ DNA. 

[B]

Blue used to be regarded as the colour for girls. 

[C]

White is preferred by babies. 

[D]

Pink used to be a neutral colour in symbolising genders. 

28. The author suggests that our perception of children’s psychological development was much influenced by

[A]

the observation of children’s nature. 

[B]

the marketing of products for children. 

[C]

researches into children’s behaviour. 

[D]

studies of childhood consumption. 

29. We may learn from Paragraph 4 that department stores were advised to

[A]

classify consumers into smaller groups. 

[B]

attach equal importance to different genders. 

[C]

focus on infant wear and older kids’ clothes. 

[D]

create some common shoppers’ terms. 

30. It can be concluded that girls’ attraction to pink seems to be

[A]

fully understood by clothing manufacturers. 

[B]

clearly explained by their inborn tendency. 

[C]

mainly imposed by profit-driven businessmen. 

[D]

well interpreted by psychological experts. 

答案解析 (Answers & Explanations)

26. [C] should not be the sole representation of girlhood.
解析：第一段指出：“并不是说粉色本质上不好，但它只是彩虹中极小的一部分（such a tiny slice of the rainbow）”。作者借此抱怨，世界丰富多彩，而女孩的生活和兴趣却被单调地限制在粉色上，粉色将女孩的身份固化在单一外表上。因此，这句话的意思是粉色“不应该成为少女时期的唯一代表（sole representation）”。选C。

27. [B] Blue used to be regarded as the colour for girls.
解析：第二段明确提到：“蓝色，因与圣母玛利亚、坚定和忠诚相联系，象征着女性气质（symbolized femininity）”。这意味着蓝色过去被视为女孩的颜色，选B。选项D错误，因为粉色过去被认为是更偏男性的颜色（more masculine colour），并非中性。

28. [B] the marketing of products for children.
解析：第三段首句作者感叹：“我之前没有意识到，营销趋势（marketing trends）如何深刻地主宰了我们对什么是孩子天性的认知，包括我们对他们心理发展的核心信念”。接着举了“toddler（学步儿童）”的例子，说明这个心理阶段也是服装制造商为了营销（marketing trick）而推广出来的。因此，选B（儿童产品的营销）。

29. [A] classify consumers into smaller groups.
解析：第四段指出，行业出版物建议百货商店“在婴儿装和大童装之间创造一个‘第三块垫脚石’（third stepping stone）”。紧接着作者总结：“将孩子或成年人划分为越来越小的类别（Splitting kids... into ever-tinier categories），已被证明是提高利润的万无一失的方法。” 这意味着百货商店被建议“将消费者分类为更小的群体（classify consumers into smaller groups）”，选A。

30. [C] mainly imposed by profit-driven businessmen.
解析：综合全文，女孩对粉色的喜爱并非先天基因决定（not encoded in their DNA），而是营销策略（marketing strategy / marketing trick / boost profits）的产物。商人为了细分市场以增加利润，放大了性别差异，甚至凭空捏造（invent them where they did not previously exist）了这些差异。因此，女孩对粉色的偏好主要是被受利益驱使的商人强加的（imposed by profit-driven businessmen），选C。

核心长难句精解 (High-Light)

1. Not that... but... 句型与让步状语：
"It is not that pink is intrinsically bad, but it is such a tiny slice of the rainbow and, though it may celebrate girlhood in one way, it also repeatedly and firmly fuses girls’ identity to appearance."
【解析】not that... but... 表示“不是因为……而是因为……”。在 but 引导的并列句中，嵌套了一个由 though 引导的让步状语从句。fuse A to B 意为“将A与B结合/捆绑在一起”，深刻指出了粉色将女孩的内在身份固化在外表上的弊端。

2. It was not until... that... 强调句型与时间状语从句：
"It was not until the mid-1980s, when amplifying age and sex differences became a dominant children’s marketing strategy, that pink fully came into its own..."
【解析】经典的强调句型 It was not until + 时间状语 + that...（直到……才……）。在时间状语 the mid-1980s 后面，跟着一个由 when 引导的非限制性定语从句，补充说明 80 年代中期的时代背景（放大年龄和性别差异成为主流营销策略）。come into its own 意为“展现出自己的真正价值/盛行起来”。

3. 宾语从句的嵌套：
"I had not realized how profoundly marketing trends dictated our perception of what is natural to kids, including our core beliefs about their psychological development."
【解析】how profoundly 引导宾语从句作 realized 的宾语。在这个宾语从句中，介词 of 后面又接了一个由 what 引导的宾语从句作其宾语（关于什么是孩子天性的认知）。这句话是全篇的“文眼”，点破了“看似自然的天性实则被营销所操控”的核心思想。