Do girls need "special" Legos?

[KimR]

Great post, not-so-DopeyDame!

 

[Pixiedust34]

A 5 page thread on legos!

I didn't read the thread, but both of my kids (1 boy, 1 girl) played with legos a lot. Dd was happy with the generic legos and the various sets (Star Wars, Pirates, Dinosaurs, Jack Stone, Indiana Jones, rescue vehicles, etc.) ds had, but what she loved most was a lego house that was sort of like a doll house. There's no harm in selling girl themed legos.

 

[JoiseyMom]

When my adult boys were little we bought them the buckets of legos and some sets. My DD played with them growning up. Now my youngest DS loves the blocks adn the new HP sets. I wish they had these new girl friend sets when my DD was younger. She would have loved them!

SOme girls like the girly stuff, and I see nothing wrong with the compnay going after that nitch. I mean they aren't taking the other legos away...,just adding more.

 

[DopeyDame]

Great post, not-so-DopeyDame!

Thanks!

 

[NBFUN]

Again-what happens to the child that picks the "wrong" set for their gender? How is that choice received?

Children are being not so subtlety told which toys are correct for their gender and which ones are not. IMHO, this new marketing move by Lego just adds to that trend and might drive children away from their natural inclinations and toward the "correct" toy in order to avoid disapproval from those around them.

I'm so confused by your posts, I don't understand where you think having a choice is "wrong." When my daughter received the Fisher Price Pink Castle last year for Christmas should I have been upset because it was pink? The main goal of all companies is to appeal to the greatest amount, thereby having choices.

It's just a choice...this year my daughter wanted Beyblades, so I bought her Beyblades, who cares...let them experience it all.

 

[MrsJackSparrow4Life]

Again-what happens to the child that picks the "wrong" set for their gender? How is that choice received?

Children are being not so subtlety told which toys are correct for their gender and which ones are not. IMHO, this new marketing move by Lego just adds to that trend and might drive children away from their natural inclinations and toward the "correct" toy in order to avoid disapproval from those around them.

The people who get upset over their children choosing "wrong" are going to get upset whether there are girly Legos or not.

The people who don't care what toys their children pick out are going to continue to not care whether there are girly Legos or not.

The only thing that will possibly change is Lego's sales numbers. The kids that want the girly Legos and had no interest in the more boyish Legos will now have an option, adding more people that will purchase Legos.

If it turns out there really is no market for this, then the Legos company will stop producing them.

 

[Neelloc]

I don't think that legos have been gender neutral for a long time. MOST of them are very masculine.

I totally agree with this!

When we were in the lego store in Chicago and Orlando recently, they had some more of the gender neutral sets like the 3 in 1 house sets, however, if you walk into Target, TRU and Walmart, it's heavily boy oriented legos. They have several themes I've seen over the past year: Alien, Star Wars, Pharoah's Quest, Ninjago, Harry Potter, Cars, etc. None of those seem too appealing to my 7 year old daughter who really wants to play with lego.

 

[Pooh67_68]

a pink Millenium Falcon.

I would so buy one and i am far from a girly girl, i just like pink. (even though my favorite color is blue).

 

[smitch425]

My DD is 9 and has never shown even the slightest interest in Legos. She and DS have an enormous bucket of Legos that I had actually bought for DD when she was probably 4. She did play with the Disney Princess Mega Blocks set when she was ages 2-4, so I thought she would enjoy the Legos. Well, they pretty much stay in DS's closet because neither of them are really interested in them.

When DD was 6, all she really wanted for Christmas was a fire truck. I hit Meijer in the wee hours of the morning on Black Friday to buy her a 3 foot Tonka truck. I didn't question whether it was appropriate for her gender or not--she wanted it, so I got it. Fast forward to this past Christmas, DD is 9. She got all 6 large Pirates of The Carribean figures from Target. There is only one girl figure in the bunch. They take her dollhouse under siege on a regular basis.

Okay, so I tell you all of that backstory to get to this...

We were in Target last week and she says, "Mom, look at these new Legos. I really like them. I might want to use some of my Christmas money to buy them".

The point of this lengthy post is this, more options=more sales. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the Lego company offering these toys. They will likely gain more customers like my DD. It is not up to the Lego company to police whether or not a child is playing with toys that express how they feel when it come to their gender-tendencies. That falls on the parents and caregivers of the child. If my DS wants to play with the girl toys then so be it, and my DD can continue to save her dolls from pirates via the power ladder from her fire truck.

 

[Sorsha]

I remember Boy/Girl sets of Legos being available back when my brother and I were kids.

He had a large set of red/blue/green/yellow ones, with a big booklet of instructions on how to assemble everything from race cars to space ships. It also came with assorted little Lego Guys in space helmets, fireman suits, etc.

I had a Lego Dollhouse set, complete with flowerpots, Lego Family, etc.

Eventually they all just got tossed together in one big box, and my flowerpots ended up on the decks of his spaceships, and his Space Guys came to visit my Dollhouse Family. I remember one memorable occasion; we removed all the teeny tiny flower tops from the little green flower stems - we then had three green sticks standing up diagonally from a single Lego point. We then wrenched the helmet off one of the Lego Space guys and stuck the green flower stems on top of his head. Presto! A Lego Space Alien for the spaceships! He came to visit the Dollhouse too.

 

[dngnb8]

I would rather see Lego stay gender neutral and let kids use their imaginations the way they want to and not see girls and boys guided into sets that are "right" for them.

JMHO

You have much product that is gender neutral, and then you have special product that targets boys. While there may be some girls who like battling pirates, sports, military, space battles etc, that is the exception, not the rule.

I dont mind Lego providing product that is geared towards little girls.

 

[icicle]

I am a woman and an engineer and I think these are great! In fact I bought the treehouse set for my daughter's fifth birthday last week.

Not only are these another option for kids to choose but it also fills a gap for kids that are too old for Duplo (which are gender neutral) and too young for Star Wars, Harry Potter and Pirates. Also, not every parent wants to buy something branded. To me these just balance out some of the City Lego and Ninjago sets.

My girls like to have girl action figures to interact with along with the building aspect to legos. The little girl figure that came with the Friends lego set is now best friends with my daughter's female ninjago and they frequently help my son's lego figures battle their enemies.

I think this new product line will be a bridge for many girls to explore other cool lego lines like Creator or themed sets.

 

[Jey12]

If they had come out with 'girly' doctor legos, scientist legos, teacher legos, chef legos, vet legos, race car driver legos, (as well as the friend legos) I wouldn't have a problem. It's not that the feminine legos exist--it's that the kits they come with and the activities they suggest are so limiting. As if the things girls should concentrate on (the only things) are beauty, shopping, and socializing.

Has anyone bothered to look at the sets or are they just going from what others are saying? Yes the friends has some girly girl sets like a little cafe done in a 50's soda shop style (although I don't find it to be all that girly) There's a beauty shop and a pool, but there's also....

A veterinarian office complete with a small horse stable area. The main colors of this set are blue and green.

There's a fashion design studio.

A pet patrol set complete with an ATV for the girl to ride. Again main colors are blue and green.

An inventors workshop that is focused on a girl into chemistry and science. How often is this found? WTG Legos!

Then a variety of other sets that have pink but also purple, blue, green, yellow and white.


Maybe I'm looking at a different website but what I'm seeing is a great variety that would appeal to many girls who have many different interests. They have the beauty salon, but there's also a science set complete with beakers and other great stuff. Then there's a little of everything in between. So which set is everyone so opposed to? It can't be the whole thing or idea because they are encouraging an interest in science, teaching, medical doctors, as well as the arts and other fun sets. Which one is going to make my daughter have identity problems?

Again-what happens to the child that picks the "wrong" set for their gender? How is that choice received?

Children are being not so subtlety told which toys are correct for their gender and which ones are not. IMHO, this new marketing move by Lego just adds to that trend and might drive children away from their natural inclinations and toward the "correct" toy in order to avoid disapproval from those around them.

Who is saying it's a wrong choice? Your posts are the only ones I see saying there's a right and wrong choice. I've found with my child that if I don't make a big deal out of something she doesn't either. For her 2nd birthday we had a Thomas the Train and Tinkerbell party. Thomas is generally geared towards boys. There's a few girl characters but not many. No one thought a girl liking Thomas was a "wrong choice" they thought ok cool she likes trains.

IMHO what is driving kids away from their natural inclination is adults and their absurd obsession with "proper" gender roles.

 

[TinkPinkPoem]

Just got an email about a new product line Lego is introducing for the "other 50% of the population." The sets are a cafe, a pool to lounge by, a club to sing in and of course...shopping.

Did the company really introduce the line by saying that? Didn't they already know that so many girls have been playing Legos for ages, regardless of the offered brick colours? That statement really threw me off!

Plus nobody says they are only for girls.

Should the company introduced the line by using the phrase bolded above, I'm afraid they're leading people to think they are.

The problem for me is not the 'girly' lego design (though I was always very happy to play with the old legos). It's the very, very limited range of things that these girly legos are set up to do.

If they had come out with 'girly' doctor legos, scientist legos, teacher legos, chef legos, vet legos, race car driver legos, (as well as the friend legos) I wouldn't have a problem. It's not that the feminine legos exist--it's that the kits they come with and the activities they suggest are so limiting. As if the things girls should concentrate on (the only things) are beauty, shopping, and socializing.

I totally agree. This is my biggest issue with this.

I think what bothers me is that we're in another situation where children are told-"this is for you because you're a girl" or "this is for you because you're a boy". I don't like seeing anyone being put into a box and being told by a toy company or anyone else what they are "supposed" to like.

What if a boy wants one of the new "girly" sets. How will that be received by his family and friends? Will he be sent the message that there is something "wrong" with him? Same with a girl going towards the "boy" sets. Now that there are specific "girl" sets, will she be sent the message that she's choosing incorrectly?

I liked Lego because even though there were sets that were clearly targeted to boys and clearly appealed more to boys than girls-there were also still gender neutral sets like Pirates or the Castle series and even Star Wars.

I agree. I've always been under the impression that Legos were probably the most gender-neutral toys out there. My father is an engineer and he bought me many kits and bricks while I was growing up. I was always fascinated by just how many things I could do with them and how little was there to "guide me". I know many people, both boys and girls who went on to study engineering or architecture and who showed their love of building things through loving Legos from a very young age. It saddens me that a game company that let so many people use their imagination in such a creative way or even find their calling through playing with its toys would think that girls' interests are so confined to the typical gender stereotypes. I know that a parent can always choose which sets he or she will buy for their child but I can't help but feel disappointed.

 

[Scurvy]

I don't see anything wrong with Lego coming out with new sets that might be geared more toward girls who are into more typically "girlish" things. More choices are always a good thing. And from a company standpoint, if Lego thinks that these sets will tap into a market that they've previously been unable to reach then obviously it's a good move for them to try to attract those new customers.

I am, though, really surprised that so many people don't consider most of the previous sets to be gender neutral. I definitely consider Pirates, Star Wars, Harry Potter, Ninjas, Indiana Jones, pharoahs, Cars and aliens to be equally appropriate for both girls and boys. Off the top of my head I can't think of any recent Lego sets that struck me as being intended specifically for boys, and I can't think of any I wouldn't have loved to have when I was a child. Most of my son's friends when he was smaller were girls and they enjoyed the same things he did. They'd all go to each other's houses and play with Pokemon, Playmobile, Legos, Matchbox cars and video games, and none of the girls seemed to care that nothing was pink. I have known a few girly girls who didn't like anything unless it was pink or purple and covered in sparkles and flowers and who refused to play "pretend" unless they got to be a princess, fairy or mommy, but they've been the exceptions. Most of the girls I've known enjoyed things like Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Harry Potter, and they pretended to be pirates, astronauts, adventurers and other things like that. None of those things strike me as being particularly boyish.

ETA - It does really bother me if Lego is really promoting these as being for "the other 50% of the population". I find that to be completely ridiculous and somewhat offensive. Are they trying to imply that girls shouldn't (or can't) enjoy Star Wars, Indiana Jones, space, pharoahs, robots, racecars, ninjas and Harry Potter? Or that they aren't supposed to enjoy building things with the generic Legos? Sure, there are girls who only like "girly" things but I think the vast majority of girls are much more well rounded than that. Girls have been a significant part of Lego's customer base for many years even without "girl-specific" Legos.

(Now that I've seen the sets I can say that I hate the new figures that come with them. One great thing about the previous minifigs was that they were mix and match, and almost any figure -with the exception of some aliens or droids- would work with any set and any accessories. These new things don't even look like Lego people!)

 

[smitch425]

Originally Posted by TinkerBelled
The problem for me is not the 'girly' lego design (though I was always very happy to play with the old legos). It's the very, very limited range of things that these girly legos are set up to do. If they had come out with 'girly' doctor legos, scientist legos, teacher legos, chef legos, vet legos, race car driver legos, (as well as the friend legos) I wouldn't have a problem. It's not that the feminine legos exist--it's that the kits they come with and the activities they suggest are so limiting. As if the things girls should concentrate on (the only things) are beauty, shopping, and socializing.

I totally agree. This is my biggest issue with this.

If this is your biggest issue, then take comfort in the fact that the above poster didn't know what they were talking about.

 

[NotUrsula]

This isn't the first time that Lego has come out with feminine-themed sets and products, and every single time that they have tried it the lines have been a dismal flop; anyone own any Belville? They have even tried giving those a different product name altogether (no mention of LEGO) and they STILL failed.

For jollies: this is Belville set 7585, from 2008; it is a slightly different colored reissue of set 5855, which was issued in 1997. Note the larger articulated figures and the pink bricks. You can still buy new Belville sets; Amazon has this one for $43.

The film tie-in sets are the things that make the most money for the company; LEGO would have gone under if they hadn't started making those. The coloring of those sets is normally determined by the art direction in the original films -- if the Millenium Falcon is grey in SW, then it will be grey in the LEGO set, too. (However, that doesn't seem to be true of the HP sets; since when has Hogwarts Castle been beige with a green roof?)

 

[Magic Mom]

Should the company introduced the line by using the phrase bolded above, I'm afraid they're leading people to think they are.

Being marketed towards one gender doesn't bar the other gender from enjoying that toy if that's what they want. As another poster said, it's up to the parent to decide what toys work best for their own child. I have no problem with DD playing with "girly" items (her tastes are so eclectic that I feel good about how well rounded she is), so why shouldn't those be available to us? If another family has a problem with what they see as a negative gender message, then they can opt to not buy that toy. Lego saw a new market and offered a toy to fill that market.

 

[Momvic5]

This isn't the first time that Lego has come out with feminine-themed sets and products, and every single time that they have tried it the lines have been a dismal flop; anyone own any Belville? They have even tried giving those a different product name altogether (no mention of LEGO) and they STILL failed.

For jollies: this is Belville set 7585, from 2008; it is a slightly different colored reissue of set 5855, which was issued in 1997. Note the larger articulated figures and the pink bricks. You can still buy new Belville sets; Amazon has this one for $43.

The film tie-in sets are the things that make the most money for the company; LEGO would have gone under if they hadn't started making those. The coloring of those sets is normally determined by the art direction in the original films -- if the Millenium Falcon is grey in SW, then it will be grey in the LEGO set, too. (However, that doesn't seem to be true of the HP sets; since when has Hogwarts Castle been beige with a green roof?)

Yes, this is one of the sets that my daughter found. She loved it. Of course, it did not stay as pictured....it is now apart of our huge collection of Lego.

 

[FigmentFinder]

http://www.lego.com/en-us/products/default.aspx
Looking at their products page, I would consider most of those products boyish not gender neutral. I even clicked on the creator sets. It's more cars than anything else. Although the lighthouse looks cool.


Girly sets are nothing new. My favorite Lego set was a Smurf set when I was a kid. Although after looking it up, I found it was some other brand and not actually Legos.