Maybe someone will do a story about socerors and ancient powers and a chosen warrior fighting against the darkness, but instead of the usual costuming everyone will be wearing slick as fuck 1920s fashion. Because that I would read.
But why do the women have to be represented with a ponytail? Otherwise that implies that without the ponytail the figures are automatically men. It's like putting a pink bow on something to designate it as "female".
DisruptedCapitalist on
"Simple, real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time." -Mustrum Ridcully in Terry Pratchett's Hogfather p. 142 (HarperPrism 1996)
0
Options
imdointhisI should actually stop doin' this.Registered Userregular
+7
Options
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
Ok but probably that line of toys will actually be more popular with girls as their focus groups have prognosticated
yeah lego friends sells really well with girls
According to NPR, Lego Friends are "one of the biggest successes in Lego's history ... The line doubled sales expectations in 2012, the year it launched. Sales to girls tripled in just that year." The success has caused other construction-set companies such as Mega Bloks to introduce girl dolls.[3]
edit:
The launch of LEGO Friends generated controversy upon its launch, with critics claiming the line gives in to gender stereotypes.
A petition on the website Change.org, started by Bailey Shoemaker Richards and Stephanie Cole of the activist group the SPARK Movement to demand an end to the sexualization of women and girls in media, condemned the sets and claimed that LEGO was "selling out girls." "Who populates commercials for LEGO? Boys!" the petition read. "Where in the toy store can you find original, creative, construction-focused LEGO? The 'boy' aisle!" The petition asked LEGO to end gendered marketing practices and begin marketing its other product lines to girls.[4] By the second week of January, more than 36,000 people had signed the petition.[5]
The LEGO group responded to the criticism by issuing a statement indicating that, in its research, there were requests from mothers and girls for more detailed sets, more realistic minifigures, a brighter color palette, role play opportunities and "a story line that they would find interesting." Mads Nipper, executive vice president of marketing, the LEGO Group, further stated: "We want to correct any misinterpretation that LEGO Friends is our only offering for girls. This is by no means the case. We know that many girls love to build and play with the wide variety of LEGO products already available. LEGO Friends joins this global collection of products as yet another theme option from which parents may choose the best building experience for their child’s skill and interest."[6] According to a sell-side analyst, Lego's research found that boys and girls play differently: "When boys build a construction set, they'll build a castle, let's say, and they'll play with the finished product on the outside. When girls build construction sets, they tend to play on the inside."[3]
By February the Change.org petition had gathered over 50,000 signatures, and LEGO accepted SPARK's request for a meeting to discuss their concerns. The meeting took place on April 20, 2012. Bailey Shoemaker Richards said of the event, "We are thrilled that the LEGO representatives expressed such a deep passion for creating healthy play patterns for children, and we hope to see them meet our expectations in the coming years."[7]
But why do the women have to be represented with a ponytail? Otherwise that implies that without the ponytail the figures are automatically men. It's like putting a pink bow on something to designate it as "female".
because a ponytail/long hair is maybe the second most common visual short-hand for female after a dress?
or boobs I guess
the main point of the comic is that to market legos to girls you just need girl lego people in the sets, and they don't have to be radically different bodies and paint/sticker pallets and a pop on ponytail is just a really easy way to show that idea
Kwoaru on
+7
Options
imdointhisI should actually stop doin' this.Registered Userregular
I oppose denoting anything for boys or girls. It seriously underserves and maginalizes us otherkin.
Our two boys (5 and 7) got the Lego Friends advent calendars this christmas, because they already have the bits to build a bunch of teensy star wars ships / more City stuff, whereas the Friends sets have a lot of parts they didn't have, and designs for things that they didn't know how to build. They are enjoying them all to pieces, if you'll pardon the pun.
But why do the women have to be represented with a ponytail? Otherwise that implies that without the ponytail the figures are automatically men. It's like putting a pink bow on something to designate it as "female".
because a ponytail/long hair is maybe the second most common visual short-hand for female after a dress?
or boobs I guess
the main point of the comic is that to market legos to girls you just need girl lego people in the sets, and they don't have to be radically different bodies and paint/sticker pallets and a pop on ponytail is just a really easy way to show that idea
Long eyelashes and lipstick work too. I remember as a child I had ONE lego head with long eyelashes and lipstick. She became the Ninja-Queen of Wolf Clan Pirates, who flew around in their magical spelljammer ship. She didn't have a pony-tail because it wouldn't fit under the ninja hood.
Decomposey on
Before following any advice, opinions, or thoughts I may have expressed in the above post, be warned: I found Keven Costners "Waterworld" to be a very entertaining film.
0
Options
CorporateLogoThe toilet knowshow I feelRegistered Userregular
GumpyThere is alwaysa greater powerRegistered Userregular
While more lego sets should have higher female representation (Galaxy Squad has like, 1 out of 6 characters as a girl) I don't like the idea that Lego Friends was Lego attempting to segregate girls from proper lego. If they were responding to focus groups made up of girls and that's the direction they were pointed in for a single line of what's a pretty vast selection then is it not catering for a broader audience?
It feels like Lego is being attacked for daring to cater to more traditionally feminine girls, which is something I'm pretty against.
I dunno. It just bothers me that for a woman to be considered human she must add something to herself, a ponytail, a bow, lipstick, or long eyelashes. The men get to be the default, and so girls will always feel excluded if "their" pieces don't exist in a lego set.
"Simple, real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time." -Mustrum Ridcully in Terry Pratchett's Hogfather p. 142 (HarperPrism 1996)
She says in the blog that LEGO Friends aren't compatible with other LEGO sets, but that isn't true. The LEGO Friends minifigures are different than other LEGO minifigures, yes, but all the other pieces are normal LEGO pieces. Just... in pastel colors and such.
I think you're all missing the real problem with the comic
A Lego representative referred to plural Lego (TM) bricks and toys as "legos"
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
+17
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
If all lego people were how they were in the 1980s there isn't really sufficient definition to gender the character pieces either way. Once they started adding hair and details it's really not all that hard to set the mass printer to "add lipstick" rather than "add 5'o'clock shadow." It's not just hair or other custom pieces that have to be added.
A good way to go about it would be to literally randomize the face/human printings in each box so at the same time encourage people to collect the same set multiple times (and find super rare faces!!?!?!) while also making it equally likely your box has a dude lego than a lady lego.
I dunno. It just bothers me that for a woman to be considered human she must add something to herself, a ponytail, a bow, lipstick, or long eyelashes. The men get to be the default, and so girls will always feel excluded if "their" pieces don't exist in a lego set.
Yup! Sucks doesn't it? Now just apply that to not just Lego, but pretty much every facet of human existance.
Before following any advice, opinions, or thoughts I may have expressed in the above post, be warned: I found Keven Costners "Waterworld" to be a very entertaining film.
0
Options
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
They only really started adding hair from the 90s onwards; before then it was the generic combed male hair, or the Debbie Downer female hair (or the hair shown below which was pretty rare).
As far as female faces go, at its earliest LEGO didn't bother to include make-up to distinguish female faces; that came as an option later. An example of one of the earliest female minifigures is seen here from the Castle theme (1978).
Honestly my cousin used to play with LEGO when we were little, and she just assumed the fairly mundane LEGO people were girls if she wanted to. Most of the headgear was gender-neutral (space-helmets, knight's visors, pirate bandanas, etc.). Looking around the wiki, it looks like Paradisa, which was in the early/mid-90s, was when they first started making explicitly female torsos and heads.
...and of course, as always, Kill Hitler.
+1
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
I said slick-as-fuck 1920s fashion, not "looks like a potato sack" 1920s fashion.
I do need to get around to watching that show, tho.
You haven't seen Korra?!
Oh man, Camby.
GO WATCH IT
Fair warning going into it, season 2 was rushed (and has problems) but 3 and 4 are super good.
I'm old, Goatmon. Anything I know will be longer than two hours of content makes me cringe and whimper. Only Bioware is able to really force me into 60hr long treks into content these days.
Maybe I'll get around to Korra sometime next year.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
If you really want to know if you're going to enjoy a cartoon, watch the third episode of Avatar: The Last Airbender. I believe it's called "The Southern Air Temple"
TLA skews younger than Korra does, but I think that experiencing Korra without seeing TLA at all would cheapen the experience at least somewhat.
Southern Air Temple should be pretty effective in telling you if you'll like the series (I think you would)
It feels like Lego is being attacked for daring to cater to more traditionally feminine girls, which is something I'm pretty against.
That's all the girls that companies EVER cater towards tho. That's the whole problem.
Yeah, basically toys for dudes get to have a variety of themes, whereas toys catered to girls pretty much are pretty princess and dolls and horses and shit. Some girls like that stuff, but that really doesn't address a wide variety of interests.
The only toyline I've seen acknowledges that girls also like fun action shit is the Nerf Rebelle line, which is basically just cool nerf toys with pastel colors.
Like this awesome crossbow.
Goatmon on
Switch Friend Code: SW-6680-6709-4204
+4
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
If you really want to know if you're going to enjoy a cartoon, watch the third episode of Avatar: The Last Airbender. I believe it's called "The Southern Air Temple"
TLA skews younger than Korra does, but I think that experiencing Korra without seeing TLA at all would cheapen the experience at least somewhat.
Southern Air Temple should be pretty effective in telling you if you'll like the series (I think you would)
I've watched some episodes of Avatar. I enjoyed it.
Like I said, the issue is with the amount of content.
If we were talking, a 2 hour movie for Avatar, and a 2 hour movie for Korra, and that's all the content, then I'd have watched it already.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
While more lego sets should have higher female representation (Galaxy Squad has like, 1 out of 6 characters as a girl) I don't like the idea that Lego Friends was Lego attempting to segregate girls from proper lego. If they were responding to focus groups made up of girls and that's the direction they were pointed in for a single line of what's a pretty vast selection then is it not catering for a broader audience?
It feels like Lego is being attacked for daring to cater to more traditionally feminine girls, which is something I'm pretty against.
I think that the tightrope that needs to be walked though is making sure that girls aren't excluded from the stuff that isn't coded "feminine" and that boys aren't dissuaded from the stuff that isn't coded "masculine".
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
edited December 2014
Or, you know, just toss out those assumptions altogether and just make a cool product without worrying about gendering at all. A fucking kick ass crossbow (like that rebelle nerf one) would be awesome for anyone. Just make a range of different colors. People like color options.
Enc on
+3
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
They only really started adding hair from the 90s onwards; before then it was the generic combed male hair, or the Debbie Downer female hair (or the hair shown below which was pretty rare).
As far as female faces go, at its earliest LEGO didn't bother to include make-up to distinguish female faces; that came as an option later. An example of one of the earliest female minifigures is seen here from the Castle theme (1978).
Honestly my cousin used to play with LEGO when we were little, and she just assumed the fairly mundane LEGO people were girls if she wanted to. Most of the headgear was gender-neutral (space-helmets, knight's visors, pirate bandanas, etc.). Looking around the wiki, it looks like Paradisa, which was in the early/mid-90s, was when they first started making explicitly female torsos and heads.
When we were kids my mom ended up writing a letter to Lego asking them to start selling packs of hair because me and my brothers would always fight over who got to use the brown boys hair (we had lots of black hair, but only one or two brown).
Apparently they listened, because like a year later they started selling a collection of hair/hats!
Or, you know, just toss out those assumptions altogether and just make a cool product without worrying about gendering at all. A fucking kick ass crossbow (like that rebelle nerf one) would be awesome for anyone. Just make a range of different colors. People like color options.
Eeeeh, I think companies should be loud about the move towards being more inclusive. There needs to be awareness when traditional brands become more inclusive.
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
It's ultimately the consumer that drives what the company does.
Lego gendered their products, which doubled their sales expectations for that line and tripled their overall sales with girls. The people spending money on their products don't seem to have a problem with what they're doing.
This is pretty much the opposite of what actually happened.
It's ultimately the consumer that drives what the company does.
Lego gendered their products, which doubled their sales expectations for that line and tripled their overall sales with girls. The people spending money on their products don't seem to have a problem with what they're doing.
This is pretty much the opposite of what actually happened.
That is not the entire truth though. Lego started gendering their products more than a decade ago, it was just that almost all of their stuff was heavily aimed at boys. It is not surprising that their sales increased when they evened the gap by doing a real investment in products for girls.
Posts
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
yeah lego friends sells really well with girls
edit:
or boobs I guess
the main point of the comic is that to market legos to girls you just need girl lego people in the sets, and they don't have to be radically different bodies and paint/sticker pallets and a pop on ponytail is just a really easy way to show that idea
Long eyelashes and lipstick work too. I remember as a child I had ONE lego head with long eyelashes and lipstick. She became the Ninja-Queen of Wolf Clan Pirates, who flew around in their magical spelljammer ship. She didn't have a pony-tail because it wouldn't fit under the ninja hood.
It feels like Lego is being attacked for daring to cater to more traditionally feminine girls, which is something I'm pretty against.
That's all the girls that companies EVER cater towards tho. That's the whole problem.
She says in the blog that LEGO Friends aren't compatible with other LEGO sets, but that isn't true. The LEGO Friends minifigures are different than other LEGO minifigures, yes, but all the other pieces are normal LEGO pieces. Just... in pastel colors and such.
A Lego representative referred to plural Lego (TM) bricks and toys as "legos"
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
A good way to go about it would be to literally randomize the face/human printings in each box so at the same time encourage people to collect the same set multiple times (and find super rare faces!!?!?!) while also making it equally likely your box has a dude lego than a lady lego.
You haven't seen Korra?!
Oh man, Camby.
GO WATCH IT
Fair warning going into it, season 2 was rushed (and has problems) but 3 and 4 are super good.
Yup! Sucks doesn't it? Now just apply that to not just Lego, but pretty much every facet of human existance.
http://lego.wikia.com/wiki/Hair
They only really started adding hair from the 90s onwards; before then it was the generic combed male hair, or the Debbie Downer female hair (or the hair shown below which was pretty rare).
As far as female faces go, at its earliest LEGO didn't bother to include make-up to distinguish female faces; that came as an option later. An example of one of the earliest female minifigures is seen here from the Castle theme (1978).
Honestly my cousin used to play with LEGO when we were little, and she just assumed the fairly mundane LEGO people were girls if she wanted to. Most of the headgear was gender-neutral (space-helmets, knight's visors, pirate bandanas, etc.). Looking around the wiki, it looks like Paradisa, which was in the early/mid-90s, was when they first started making explicitly female torsos and heads.
I'm old, Goatmon. Anything I know will be longer than two hours of content makes me cringe and whimper. Only Bioware is able to really force me into 60hr long treks into content these days.
Maybe I'll get around to Korra sometime next year.
If you really want to know if you're going to enjoy a cartoon, watch the third episode of Avatar: The Last Airbender. I believe it's called "The Southern Air Temple"
TLA skews younger than Korra does, but I think that experiencing Korra without seeing TLA at all would cheapen the experience at least somewhat.
Southern Air Temple should be pretty effective in telling you if you'll like the series (I think you would)
Yeah, basically toys for dudes get to have a variety of themes, whereas toys catered to girls pretty much are pretty princess and dolls and horses and shit. Some girls like that stuff, but that really doesn't address a wide variety of interests.
The only toyline I've seen acknowledges that girls also like fun action shit is the Nerf Rebelle line, which is basically just cool nerf toys with pastel colors.
Like this awesome crossbow.
I've watched some episodes of Avatar. I enjoyed it.
Like I said, the issue is with the amount of content.
If we were talking, a 2 hour movie for Avatar, and a 2 hour movie for Korra, and that's all the content, then I'd have watched it already.
I think that the tightrope that needs to be walked though is making sure that girls aren't excluded from the stuff that isn't coded "feminine" and that boys aren't dissuaded from the stuff that isn't coded "masculine".
Nerf did what I thought was a good line (Which you can see here: http://www.hasbro.com/rebelle/en_GB/) and they were hit pretty hard for it. While I think lego should do more things like their Ladies in STEM set the language in the comic leans quite heavily towards Lego Friends being the issue.
Are you talking about that movie by the sixth sense guy? I ain't watching that.
When we were kids my mom ended up writing a letter to Lego asking them to start selling packs of hair because me and my brothers would always fight over who got to use the brown boys hair (we had lots of black hair, but only one or two brown).
Apparently they listened, because like a year later they started selling a collection of hair/hats!
Eeeeh, I think companies should be loud about the move towards being more inclusive. There needs to be awareness when traditional brands become more inclusive.
Lego gendered their products, which doubled their sales expectations for that line and tripled their overall sales with girls. The people spending money on their products don't seem to have a problem with what they're doing.
This is pretty much the opposite of what actually happened.
kek.
videogames, amirite?
more like
iblowware and nontent.
That is not the entire truth though. Lego started gendering their products more than a decade ago, it was just that almost all of their stuff was heavily aimed at boys. It is not surprising that their sales increased when they evened the gap by doing a real investment in products for girls.
The Adventures of Dr. McNinja
guh i cant find the whomp where they make fun of video game humorists but that was what i was going for.