Boy Legos and Girl Legos

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Lego made a statement about how it spent millions of dollars on research to expand the Lego experience to include girls. And it came up with the 'Friends' theme which includes the beauty salon and a cafe as opposed to Hogwarts and pirate ships. The sets for the 'friends' are primarily pink and purple. The sets not for the 'friends' are all colors. The packaging for the 'friends' set is pink and purple. The sets not in the 'friends' line are either blue or a variety of colors.

And the 'friends' theme is Lego SPECIFICALLY marketing to girls. Where the game-play isn't focused on actually building the sets but playing with them after they're already built so there's less emphasis on being creative and playing with the kits as you please and much more do it this way so your dollies will be happy.

Right, and like I said I acknowledge that this product does nothing to improve the cultural preconceptions about gender identity and gender roles. But Lego is soft of damned if they do and damned if they don't here. Either they're preaching at little girls to do things the Girl Way, or they're preaching at everyone else to Stop Telling Little Girls What They Should Be. Being a company that exists primarily to sell toys and make a profit, they are obviously going to behave in a way that makes them money. And in this case, whatever research they did told them that they would make money selling to little girls this way.

Again, I'm not saying it's "right" for them to do it this way, only that it isn't Lego's job to tell society what it believes. Society sets the standards, and Lego responds with products that fit those standards, because that's what will make them money. There's a certain cycle there, where society bases its self-image on what's sitting on store shelves, but that doesn't mean it's Lego's job to make the first move.

Why not, when they had such a good thing going pre-80's? Why couldn't they have maintained that trend instead of morphing into a more gender-segregated stereotype enforcing experience?

Continue with an updated theme like this:



Instead of this:

Frankly, because there are people like my daughter who would love to have the product in the 2nd picture, and parents like me who aren't going to say "No you can't have that because it reinforces an exploitative and segregated notion of gender."

Or are we supposed to tell little girls they can't have girly things at all, because it is not in keeping with the New Way?

[Cardinal Pizza Deliverance.]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

[AFK]

Again, you can still get gender-neutral lego block sets so I don't see why this is an issue.  I mean, sure, it is an issue if you let the TV and the TV alone influence what your kids want to play with.  Otherwise, the parent has full control over that situation.

The TV . . . and the product packaging . . . and the product itself. It all serves to reinforce the idea that girl Legos are different than boy Legos and the two shouldn't be swapped. If you buy the regular buckets off of Amazon, it is less of a problem, unless your kid wants the sets or access to the customized minifigs and pieces. Pirate ships, Hogwarts, and fire-fighters are going to be slathered with male stereotypes including male minifigs and such. The cafe, vet's office, and beauty salon are going to be pink and purple and have those Bratz doll knock off figurines.

Gee, could maybe the parents step in and talk to their kids and guide them in their imaginative play wants and purchases?  If you are so worried that your son playing with a Harry Potter set is going to turn him unto some unempathetic, stereotypical Male monster, then steer him towards the generic sets.  Problem solved.

you are using a bullshit straw man argument.  please, shut the fuck up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZn_lJoN6PI

again, as the feminine is seen on a cultural level as being inferior or vapid, not all parents are going to offer their kids more than the blue or pink aisle or give them shit for choosing the "wrong" one.

It isn't bullshit at all.  The reason this is an issue at all is because too many parents relinquish control of their kids' minds to marketing machines.  THAT is the problem you need to fix first.  Otherwise you will be endlessly treading water.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I do have a boy, and he likes all kinds of things that would normally be reserved "for girls." And when the issue of someone giving him shit for it, it is very much "they're jerks, play how you want." The same goes when my daughter plays with Transformers or Thomas. We actively discourage any of that bullshit, because our kids should get to be and like whatever they want.

[AFK]

Lego made a statement about how it spent millions of dollars on research to expand the Lego experience to include girls. And it came up with the 'Friends' theme which includes the beauty salon and a cafe as opposed to Hogwarts and pirate ships. The sets for the 'friends' are primarily pink and purple. The sets not for the 'friends' are all colors. The packaging for the 'friends' set is pink and purple. The sets not in the 'friends' line are either blue or a variety of colors.

And the 'friends' theme is Lego SPECIFICALLY marketing to girls. Where the game-play isn't focused on actually building the sets but playing with them after they're already built so there's less emphasis on being creative and playing with the kits as you please and much more do it this way so your dollies will be happy.

Right, and like I said I acknowledge that this product does nothing to improve the cultural preconceptions about gender identity and gender roles. But Lego is soft of damned if they do and damned if they don't here. Either they're preaching at little girls to do things the Girl Way, or they're preaching at everyone else to Stop Telling Little Girls What They Should Be. Being a company that exists primarily to sell toys and make a profit, they are obviously going to behave in a way that makes them money. And in this case, whatever research they did told them that they would make money selling to little girls this way.

Again, I'm not saying it's "right" for them to do it this way, only that it isn't Lego's job to tell society what it believes. Society sets the standards, and Lego responds with products that fit those standards, because that's what will make them money. There's a certain cycle there, where society bases its self-image on what's sitting on store shelves, but that doesn't mean it's Lego's job to make the first move.

Why not, when they had such a good thing going pre-80's? Why couldn't they have maintained that trend instead of morphing into a more gender-segregated stereotype enforcing experience?

Continue with an updated theme like this:



Instead of this:

Frankly, because there are people like my daughter who would love to have the product in the 2nd picture, and parents like me who aren't going to say "No you can't have that because it reinforces an exploitative and segregated notion of gender."

Or are we supposed to tell little girls they can't have girly things at all, because it is not in keeping with the New Way?

We are supposed to empower our kids to be secure in who they are, however they decide to definemthat for themselves.  If they decide they like the girly, girl stuff, not out of peer pressure or marketing pressure, but just because it is what they like, we should empower them to make that choice. 

[Pergamos]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

why the fuck would you assume they had gender identity issues? I played with a lot of "boys" toys and I'm pretty much straight, cisgendered and have none of these issues.

or would you only assume that for a boy playing with "girly" toys?

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Lego made a statement about how it spent millions of dollars on research to expand the Lego experience to include girls. And it came up with the 'Friends' theme which includes the beauty salon and a cafe as opposed to Hogwarts and pirate ships. The sets for the 'friends' are primarily pink and purple. The sets not for the 'friends' are all colors. The packaging for the 'friends' set is pink and purple. The sets not in the 'friends' line are either blue or a variety of colors.

And the 'friends' theme is Lego SPECIFICALLY marketing to girls. Where the game-play isn't focused on actually building the sets but playing with them after they're already built so there's less emphasis on being creative and playing with the kits as you please and much more do it this way so your dollies will be happy.

Right, and like I said I acknowledge that this product does nothing to improve the cultural preconceptions about gender identity and gender roles. But Lego is soft of damned if they do and damned if they don't here. Either they're preaching at little girls to do things the Girl Way, or they're preaching at everyone else to Stop Telling Little Girls What They Should Be. Being a company that exists primarily to sell toys and make a profit, they are obviously going to behave in a way that makes them money. And in this case, whatever research they did told them that they would make money selling to little girls this way.

Again, I'm not saying it's "right" for them to do it this way, only that it isn't Lego's job to tell society what it believes. Society sets the standards, and Lego responds with products that fit those standards, because that's what will make them money. There's a certain cycle there, where society bases its self-image on what's sitting on store shelves, but that doesn't mean it's Lego's job to make the first move.

Why not, when they had such a good thing going pre-80's? Why couldn't they have maintained that trend instead of morphing into a more gender-segregated stereotype enforcing experience?

Continue with an updated theme like this:



Instead of this:

Frankly, because there are people like my daughter who would love to have the product in the 2nd picture, and parents like me who aren't going to say "No you can't have that because it reinforces an exploitative and segregated notion of gender."

Or are we supposed to tell little girls they can't have girly things at all, because it is not in keeping with the New Way?

We are supposed to empower our kids to be secure in who they are, however they decide to definemthat for themselves.  If they decide they like the girly, girl stuff, not out of peer pressure or marketing pressure, but just because it is what they like, we should empower them to make that choice.

not enough people are media savvy enough, and kids channels are CONSTANTLY bombarded with gendered marketing.

[Cardinal Pizza Deliverance.]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I do have a boy, and he likes all kinds of things that would normally be reserved "for girls." And when the issue of someone giving him shit for it, it is very much "they're jerks, play how you want." The same goes when my daughter plays with Transformers or Thomas. We actively discourage any of that bullshit, because our kids should get to be and like whatever they want.

That's cool. Have they asked why people say some toys are for girls and some are for boys, yet?

[Pergamos]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

why the fuck would you assume they had gender identity issues? I played with a lot of "boys" toys and I'm pretty much straight, cisgendered and have none of these issues.

or would you only assume that for a boy playing with "girly" toys?

Barbie dolls or raggedy ann, no.  Those legos yes.  If my daughter was heavily into guns I'd have the same concern, other than that, as you and others have said, being into boy toys is considered normal for girls, it doesn't indicate gender identity issues, being into girl stuff does for a boy.  It may not be right that society is that way, but it is that way and as a parent I need to be prepared to nurture and protect my child.  If I had a son who was playing with those legos, or some of the other excessively feminized toys that are out I'd assume he had gender issues and I'd be ready to deal with that by the time he came to terms with it enough to vocalize it.  And by deal with I mean reassure him that it is ok, that I know that he'll be facing more challenges than may of his peers and that I'll be there to support him through them.

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

why the fuck would you assume they had gender identity issues? I played with a lot of "boys" toys and I'm pretty much straight, cisgendered and have none of these issues.

or would you only assume that for a boy playing with "girly" toys?

Barbie dolls or raggedy ann, no.  Those legos yes.  If my daughter was heavily into guns I'd have the same concern, other than that, as you and others have said, being into boy toys is considered normal for girls, it doesn't indicate gender identity issues, being into girl stuff does for a boy.  It may not be right that society is that way, but it is that way and as a parent I need to be prepared to nurture and protect my child.  If I had a son who was playing with those legos, or some of the other excessively feminized toys that are out I'd assume he had gender issues and I'd be ready to deal with that by the time he came to terms with it enough to vocalize it.  And by deal with I mean reassure him that it is ok, that I know that he'll be facing more challenges than may of his peers and that I'll be there to support him through them.

right.

so assuming you have a trans kid if its a boy but not a girl isn't a bullshit assumption at all?

yea, right.

[Pergamos]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

why the fuck would you assume they had gender identity issues? I played with a lot of "boys" toys and I'm pretty much straight, cisgendered and have none of these issues.

or would you only assume that for a boy playing with "girly" toys?

Barbie dolls or raggedy ann, no.  Those legos yes.  If my daughter was heavily into guns I'd have the same concern, other than that, as you and others have said, being into boy toys is considered normal for girls, it doesn't indicate gender identity issues, being into girl stuff does for a boy.  It may not be right that society is that way, but it is that way and as a parent I need to be prepared to nurture and protect my child.  If I had a son who was playing with those legos, or some of the other excessively feminized toys that are out I'd assume he had gender issues and I'd be ready to deal with that by the time he came to terms with it enough to vocalize it.  And by deal with I mean reassure him that it is ok, that I know that he'll be facing more challenges than may of his peers and that I'll be there to support him through them.

right.

so assuming you have a trans kid if its a boy but not a girl isn't a bullshit assumption at all?

yea, right.

There's warning signs for girls but in our current society playing with boy toys isn't one of them. 

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I do have a boy, and he likes all kinds of things that would normally be reserved "for girls." And when the issue of someone giving him shit for it, it is very much "they're jerks, play how you want." The same goes when my daughter plays with Transformers or Thomas. We actively discourage any of that bullshit, because our kids should get to be and like whatever they want.

That's cool. Have they asked why people say some toys are for girls and some are for boys, yet?

They ask but not very seriously. We tell them some people like to be told what they like, and other people like to find out for themselves what they like, and in our house everyone is free to decide for themselves.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

why the fuck would you assume they had gender identity issues? I played with a lot of "boys" toys and I'm pretty much straight, cisgendered and have none of these issues.

or would you only assume that for a boy playing with "girly" toys?

Barbie dolls or raggedy ann, no.  Those legos yes.  If my daughter was heavily into guns I'd have the same concern, other than that, as you and others have said, being into boy toys is considered normal for girls, it doesn't indicate gender identity issues, being into girl stuff does for a boy.  It may not be right that society is that way, but it is that way and as a parent I need to be prepared to nurture and protect my child.  If I had a son who was playing with those legos, or some of the other excessively feminized toys that are out I'd assume he had gender issues and I'd be ready to deal with that by the time he came to terms with it enough to vocalize it.  And by deal with I mean reassure him that it is ok, that I know that he'll be facing more challenges than may of his peers and that I'll be there to support him through them.

I just... I don't even...

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

Out of curiosity, assuming you had a boy, would you let your little boy play with the set in the second picture? How would you respond if he was bullied by his friends for playing with it? Would it go more like "they're jerks, play how you wanna play" or "well that's what you get for playing with girl toys" ?

I'd say that they were jerks, and I'd also get ready to tell him that over and over as he got older, because I would suspect he had some gender identity issues.  Those girly legos are REALLY girly (and they don't sell them around here)

why the fuck would you assume they had gender identity issues? I played with a lot of "boys" toys and I'm pretty much straight, cisgendered and have none of these issues.

or would you only assume that for a boy playing with "girly" toys?

Barbie dolls or raggedy ann, no.  Those legos yes.  If my daughter was heavily into guns I'd have the same concern, other than that, as you and others have said, being into boy toys is considered normal for girls, it doesn't indicate gender identity issues, being into girl stuff does for a boy.  It may not be right that society is that way, but it is that way and as a parent I need to be prepared to nurture and protect my child.  If I had a son who was playing with those legos, or some of the other excessively feminized toys that are out I'd assume he had gender issues and I'd be ready to deal with that by the time he came to terms with it enough to vocalize it.  And by deal with I mean reassure him that it is ok, that I know that he'll be facing more challenges than may of his peers and that I'll be there to support him through them.

right.

so assuming you have a trans kid if its a boy but not a girl isn't a bullshit assumption at all?

yea, right.

There's warning signs for girls but in our current society playing with boy toys isn't one of them.

do you realise HOW sexist it seems for you to assume that "boy plays with girls toys, must be queer/trans*"