Jump to content

Is Lego Friends Sexist?


Toa Zaz

Recommended Posts

Frankly, I think so, and so do a lot of people. In fact, I heard there's some kind of campaign to end it by people who think it stereotypes too much. I mean, I guess more pink and stuff is good, but it's ALL pink... and the whole fashion/beauty obsession doesn't help.

Edited by Toa Zaz

Thank you, BZPower staff. In the past, I wish I showed more appreciation for all that you do. From one Bionicle fan to another, thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could make the case that it is, what with its use of typically female elements (pastel colors, focus on figures that are hairdressers and the like), but at the end of the day it's just Lego in different colors with different set designs. It's also important to remember that Lego did a lot of research, and they found that the audience they wanted - younger girls - actually wanted sets like this. If the cost of getting kids to build is to start them off on something 'girly', then so be it.

Edited by GSR

Hey: I'm not very active around BZP right now.  However, you can always contact me through PM (I have email notifications set up) and I will reply as soon as I can.


Useful Topics: The Q&A Compendium | The Official RPG Planning Topic
Stories: Fractures | An Aftermath | Three Stories | LSO 2012 Epics: Team Three | The Shadow and the Sea | The Days They Were Needed | Glitches | Transformations | Echoes | The Kaita and the Storyteller | Nui

BZPRPG: Komae · Soraya · Bohrei

Blog: Defendant Lobby no. 42

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sexism |ˈsekˌsizəm|nounprejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.

I don't think Lego Friends fits the bill here. How is making a line targeted towards girls being predjudiced against them? It's not even stereotyping since the girls in the focus group clearly wanted this.I would say no. It's not replacing any other Lego theme, and if girls want to play with regular Lego sets then they can play with regular Lego sets. This line isn't hindering them, it's actually allowing more options to play with. Because, you know, some girls actually do like pink, and that's not a common colour in most system sets.Oh, and there's not actually that much pink anyways. It's just spread out in key areas of the set to give that illusion.(I apologize if this is snarky or blunt. I'm just tired of everyone getting their pants in a twist because Lego decided to make some pink sets with girl figures.)

tumblr_inline_n50tp1mirL1r0vgjj.gif
「どこに行けばいいんだ・・・」「タ・コロ村はもうおしまいだ・・・」タ・コロ村の村人達
hey it's Studio Comic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sexism |ˈsekˌsizəm|nounprejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.

I don't think Lego Friends fits the bill here. How is making a line targeted towards girls being predjudiced against them? It's not even stereotyping since the girls in the focus group clearly wanted this.I would say no. It's not replacing any other Lego theme, and if girls want to play with regular Lego sets then they can play with regular Lego sets. This line isn't hindering them, it's actually allowing more options to play with. Because, you know, some girls actually do like pink, and that's not a common colour in most system sets.Oh, and there's not actually that much pink anyways. It's just spread out in key areas of the set to give that illusion.(I apologize if this is snarky or blunt. I'm just tired of everyone getting their pants in a twist because Lego decided to make some pink sets with girl figures.)
This. ^Also, if Lego Friends is successful as Lego thinks that it's going to be, than there will be quite a few girls out there (and parents who buy them) who don't think so. It's taking a different approach in bringing children (specifically girls) to enjoy and experience Lego, and then hopefully, slowly bring those targets into the other lego sets. (It's why some kids start out buying the Harry Potter sets, or Bionicle, or Knights Kingdom and whatever, because that's what they're into and then they branch out and try other sets.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. If LEGO had said that only girls are interested in the Friends range, and only Friends, then that would be sexist. As it is though, they are simply catering for an audience which likes so-called 'girl' things (fashion, beauty, horse riding, etc). It's just another option for people to buy. No-one's stopping girls from buying Friends or, say, Ninjago. Similarly Boys can buy Friends if they like. I probably will for the new-coloured bricks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.It's not like I don't see it that way, it's that I can't see it that way. It's really quite silly we're having this discussion in the first place. So a LEGO line has pink. What is the big kerfuffle? One could apply the same logic to literally any other line LEGO has made, except in reverse! Was BIONICLE sexist either way? Was Knight's Kingdom a stereotype of boys? Such rhetorical questions could go on ad nauseum.It's not like LEGO's previous lines haven't appealed to both genders. Sure, not all girls like pink, but should those that don't care for the color be able to legitimately decry sets that contain it? The Friends line would not be as popular without pink, because LEGO is a company that sure as heck knows that they're going to get more sales on a girl's line if said line has sets with pink parts.(Also, Clikits was worse. Thank your lucky stars they didn't rehash it.)

Edited by Sumiki

avatar by Lady Kopaka


tumblr_ng1pw4xLEM1tryxewo1_1280.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly it bothers me that nothing can have pink without being "sexist." Because, newsflash: Some girls do like pink (!!!!), and if they don't, there is a plethora of other regular (ie boy lines) LEGO lines. LEGO is neither forcing girls to buy Friends, or saying girls can only like Friends, they are simply broadening their selection to appeal to a greater crowd of female buyers.

AXKP5KC.png


 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*cracks knuckles*Card-carrying feminist, here. I've read and written more about women's rights, sexism, misogyny, feminism, and gender inequality than many of you will read period in your entire lifetimes (haha). And my verdict is.........................No. Lego Friends is not sexist.Let me quote S.E. Smith:

I want to live in a world where little girls are not pinkified, but where little girls who like pink are not punished for it, either. We can certainly talk about the social pressures surrounding gender roles, and the concerns that people have when they see girls and young women who appear to be forced into performances of femininity by the society around them, but let’s stop acting like they have no agency and free will. Let’s stop acting like women who choose to be feminine are somehow colluders, betraying the movement, bamboozled into thinking that they want to be feminine. Let’s stop denying women their own autonomy by telling them that their expressions of femininity are bad and wrong.Antifemininity is misogynist. What you are saying when you engage in this type of rhetoric is that you think things traditionally associated with women are wrong. Which is misogynist. By telling feminine women that they don’t belong in the feminist movement, you are reinforcing the idea that to be feminine and a woman is wrong, that women who want to be taken seriously need to be more masculine, because most people view gender presentation in binary ways. This rewards the ‘one of the boys’ type rhetoric I encounter all over the place from self-avowed feminists who seem to think that bashing on women is a good way to prove how serious they are when it comes to caring about women and bringing men into the feminist movement.

For those who found this tl;dr, I'll sum up:It's sexist to say that girls need to be interested in fashion, princesses, jewelery, the colour pink, and other "traditionally feminine" things. That's terribly sexist and misogynist. But it is equally sexist and misogynist to say that they can't like those things. That's still constructing an idea of "how women should be" rather than allowing every woman to decide for herself how she should be and what she likes. Some girls like things like that (and some boys do too!); some don't, and it's not always because of societal pressures. Who are we to decide what women can and can't like? That.........would be...........sexist.Now let's take a look at the Lego Friend sets themselves...Let's see, we've got a LEgo theme with a number of characters, with a theme stressing "who do you want to be?" - and the characters show a lot of varied passions, including science/engineering, writing/journalism, medicine, music, and fashion design.Hold up there. Interesting - the only "Traditionally feminine" aspiration listed there is the fashion designer, and other ones (particularly the character Olivia, who aspires to become an Engineer and has a set featuring her desigining and building robots) are flying against "traditionally feminine" stereotypes. Lego Friends are:
  • [*]Regular Lego sets in every way, built and packaged and played with just the same as the System sets people are now calling "Boy's toys"[*]Breaking apart misogynist stereotypes and showing women character excelling at a myriad of fields[*]Showing that it's okay to like clothes and fashion and it's also okay to like robots and science, etc

In case you don't get my drift, these sets are basically saying and showing that girls are just as good as boys and that women deserve the same opportunities as men. They're promoting sexual equality.And...and...isn't that...the cornerstone of feminism?Instead of trying these excellent and progressive sets are sexist, we should be praising Lego for making some "girl's toys" that are just as gender-neutral as their "boy's toys" (side note: I've bought two of these sets, and both times I saw little boys asking their parents for Lego Friends sets. These are breaking gender barriers), and that aren't promoting just the "pink pricess" traditional femininity.

Edited by McSmeag
bring back "an cool dude"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ungghh. I'm talking about the whole "beauty obsession" thing. This type of stereotype leads to an idealized image of girls that often ends up being unfulfilled and leads to low self-esteem.

Thank you, BZPower staff. In the past, I wish I showed more appreciation for all that you do. From one Bionicle fan to another, thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ungghh. I'm talking about the whole "beauty obsession" thing. This type of stereotype leads to an idealized image of girls that often ends up being unfulfilled and leads to low self-esteem.

The characters all have different aspirations and hobbies, with very few "beauty-related" ones thrown into the mix. I don't see how showing girls they can be anything they want is a stereotype or how it would lead into bad self-esteem. In fact, telling girls they can't like what they want, be it girly or not, is a probably a good way to give them low self-esteem, since you're basically saying liking these things demeans them as people.

AXKP5KC.png


 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ungghh. I'm talking about the whole "beauty obsession" thing. This type of stereotype leads to an idealized image of girls that often ends up being unfulfilled and leads to low self-esteem.

The characters all have different aspirations and hobbies, with very few "beauty-related" ones thrown into the mix. I don't see how showing girls they can be anything they want is a stereotype or how it would lead into bad self-esteem. In fact, telling girls they can't like what they want, be it girly or not, is a probably a good way to give them low self-esteem, since you're basically saying liking these things demeans them as people.
Really? The tagline is "the beauty of building." They've got a dress-up game now. I thing beauty is the main focus of this line... Unsurprisingly, considering Lego's past attempts at creating a line for girls.

Thank you, BZPower staff. In the past, I wish I showed more appreciation for all that you do. From one Bionicle fan to another, thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're saying that anything beauty-related whatsoever in a "girl's line" makes the line automatically sexist? As has been pointed out, each of the characters has their own interests and personality. A lot of females like clothing, beauty, etc. By including that type of character along with - and equal in status to - other characters (such as a scientist), equality between those roles is created, at least subconsciously.Yes, it would be sexist if every Friends character was a stereotype - but it's not, unless "scientist" was named a new female stereotype when I wasn't looking.

Edited by Sumiki

avatar by Lady Kopaka


tumblr_ng1pw4xLEM1tryxewo1_1280.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't find LEGO Friends to be sexist, I'd say quite the opposite and my reasoning on that can be found in Smeag's post above (Fairly far above). Personally, I do like the new sets -- the purples and pinks and pastel colors are simply wonderful to have, and I wish they were in more abundance amongst all of the lines (Although, purple is sprinkled about here and there). Of course, I'd like to see more pink/purples in Technic sets simply because I'm more familiar with that line, and the Technic lines do have a painful lack of pink (but I'm straying a bit, aren't I?).On a first glance, they can be seen as "sexist" but that's simply from a first glance. The characters, like Smeag pointed out, want to go into many different areas that aren't limited to female-stereotypes (Such as engineering and the sciences) and isn't trying to make a point that all girls need to be a certain way. In fact, the whole point of the theme feels like it points in the direction of "be who you want to be." I'd say that the only feminine-stereotypical things would be the hopeful fashion-designer and the colors in some cases, but even those inclusions work against the "sexist" thing simply because they don't limit who, or what, girls should be -- being a fashion designer, or beauty-person, or whichever, is a fair enough option for those who would like to play with something more "girly" (although I dread the word).So, they aren't sexist because they aren't being discriminatory. They aren't forcing all girls into one mold, and are actually offering a variety of options in terms of personality/profession. The things that differ in these sets, versus the others, are simply noted to sell better towards a predominantly female audience versus a male audience (which leads to generalizations in some cases, because a company produces a product for an entire group, not a single individual). I'll likely end up buying some when more sets come out, hopefully larger offerings with more pinks and purples (As, I have no pink and more purple would be welcome), but that's what I have to say on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's sexist to say that girls need to be interested in fashion, princesses, jewelery, the colour pink, and other "traditionally feminine" things. That's terribly sexist and misogynist. But it is equally sexist and misogynist to say that they can't like those things. That's still constructing an idea of "how women should be" rather than allowing every woman to decide for herself how she should be and what she likes. Some girls like things like that (and some boys do too!); some don't, and it's not always because of societal pressures. Who are we to decide what women can and can't like? That.........would be...........sexist.

Andrew, this is easily the most amazing thing you have written on BZP that isn't about how much you love me.This is something I get angry about whenever the issue of gender comes up in any conversation. More people need to realize that true gender equality isn't about going against the norm. The instant you try to argue that, you've lost focus of the whole point you were trying to make.No, Friends is not sexist. Let's make some robots, then ride some horses.

20383310448_7d514f8ffa.jpg

 

Spoiler Alert

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McSmeag, that was brilliant. Thank you for that.When making something that appeals to girls, the thing to keep in mind is diversity. Contrary to what most media would have you believe, girls are just as diverse, personality-wise as boys. Lego has clearly tried to capture that diversity, by producing characters with different interests and personalities. While many of them do lean towards traditionally feminine interests (cooking, singing, fashion, caring for animals), they contrast this with Olivia's passion for science and engineering. To me, it seems that they are playing it safe with four out of the five characters (they're the sets that are almost guarunteed to sell well), but Olivia is being used to test the waters, to see if the line can be extended far beyond the stereotypical stuff. After all, you can only make so many kitchens and salons. I hope the Olivia sets do well, so Lego will consider adding more characters with alternative interests.However, I think this diversity needs to be extended further- not just within the Friends line, but within other Lego lines. Friends does provide diversity to a certain extent, but the theme does mostly boil down to "Let's play house!". Not every girl is necessarily going to enjoy that, so it needs to be balanced by other options. Lego's ultimate goal should be to have a wide range of different products that appeal to girls, that should be on par with- and hopefully, one day intergrated with their products aimed at boys (my "Constraction for Girls" project was partly born out of this ideal). I hope to see fantasy, adventure, sci-fi, historical and a wide range of other themes that are tailored to appeal to a female audience (They won't necessarily all be girl-specific, but the female audience should be acknowledged and catered for.) One line for girls amongst dozens of lines aimed at boys is simply not enough.Anyway, as I said before, there's nothing wrong with having traditionally feminine stuff, as long as it is balanced by other options. You don't raise a little girl into a free-thinking, empowered woman by telling her she can't have pink stuff. Pink is fine. Pink is a great colour. Pink is not something that should be avoided at all costs when appealing to girls, and toy manufacturers should not be criticised for using it. It's only when pink is the only option given that it becomes problematic. When BZP featured my Cuusoo project, I was surprised to see some of the comments criticising it for being stereotypical and "pink-ifying" constraction. It's as though anything designed to appeal to girls is automatically evil. And there was only a miniscule amount of pink on one of the characters- it was by no means the predominant colour. I suspect that these people probably didn't even bother to look the project. It's pretty depressing when stuff for girls isn't even given a chance- I can almost see why it took Lego so long to come out with Friends. I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.Lego is trying to resolve the problem created by Bionicle and other lines: the fact that girls are being put off Lego by the lack of a female presence among the characters. Friends is going to help resolve that. And if it gets little girls into building, I'm sure their interest will extend to other Lego products. To me, it seems like a pretty good alternative to Barbie and Bratz, even if there is room for improvement.

3DS Friend Code: 0018-0767-4231

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ungghh. I'm talking about the whole "beauty obsession" thing. This type of stereotype leads to an idealized image of girls that often ends up being unfulfilled and leads to low self-esteem.

The characters all have different aspirations and hobbies, with very few "beauty-related" ones thrown into the mix. I don't see how showing girls they can be anything they want is a stereotype or how it would lead into bad self-esteem. In fact, telling girls they can't like what they want, be it girly or not, is a probably a good way to give them low self-esteem, since you're basically saying liking these things demeans them as people.
Really? The tagline is "the beauty of building." They've got a dress-up game now. I thing beauty is the main focus of this line... Unsurprisingly, considering Lego's past attempts at creating a line for girls.
"The Beauty of Building" doesn't, to me, connote the same type of "beauty" associated with unhealthy body image, but rather with aesthetic harmony, something that the actual product design in the theme stresses. TLG did more than just the typical market research for this theme-- they did genuine anthropological research, and they found that this sort of aesthetic harmony was something girls valued a lot in toys, even more so than boys. Hence the calmer pastel colors introduced primarily for this theme, as opposed to the bold primary colors so common in LEGO City.As for the "dress-up" game, is that really extremely sexist? I've had difficulty playing the game as it has no real tutorial or anything, and it's hard to understand all of the controls and button commands, but it doesn't seem like it's much more "sexist" than the design-your-own-minifigure functions in games like LEGO Star Wars, or the LEGO Minifigures iPhone app that lets you mix-and-match minifigure parts. Edited by Aanchir: Rachira of Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.Lego is trying to resolve the problem created by Bionicle and other lines: the fact that girls are being put off Lego by the lack of a female presence among the characters. Friends is going to help resolve that. And if it gets little girls into building, I'm sure their interest will extend to other Lego products. To me, it seems like a pretty good alternative to Barbie and Bratz, even if there is room for improvement.

Let me introduce you to Roodaka and Lariska. *sigh* Bionicle is not sexist. Friends is not sexist. Bionicle is not discriminatory towards me or females as a whole. If you were the Great Beings, would you want a bunch of girls running a giant robot? That sounds a little off to me, and I am a girl. There are real in-story reasons for why there isn't a ton of girls in the MU. Most human girls wouldn't want to end up in there. There are different things that appeal to different girls. I like Bionicle. I don't like Lego Friends much, and I am a girl. It doesn't discriminate against me yet, anymore than Bionicle did. Some girls like fashion and beauty and all that. Some girls like crazy fantasy worlds full of guys and giant robots. Do I agree with what Lego Friends promotes? No. Does that give me the right to tell all the girls who like it that they can't have it? No. Does it give Lego the right to tell me what I, as a girl, should buy or follow? No.The line itself isn't sexist, its what people do in response to the line that is. It says that girls should buy this, that regular Lego isn't good enough for girls, and that girls should only buy Lego Friends or lines like it. Friends was a backlash to Lego being viewed as sexist in general in the first place. It's the "solution" to sexism, not the problem.Lego is not sexist, and I'm getting tired of people yelling that Bionicle is sexist. It's not. And neither is Lego Friends.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't necessarily trying to claim that Bionicle is sexist, I was just trying to point out that it is hardly gender-neutral; it is clearly designed to appeal predominantly to boys in the same way that Friends is designed to appeal more or less exclusively to girls. And yet people claim that producing a Lego line to cater specifically to girls is sexist, while a line catering specifically to boys apparently isn't. Now, THAT's where you'll find the true sexism.

Edited by Alyska

3DS Friend Code: 0018-0767-4231

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gosh can any toy line for girls exist whithout some crazy person screaming SEXIST? On the pink note, many girls do in fact like pink. In fact it's my sisters favirote color. My sisters like pink and so do my friends sisters. Not all girls like pink, but many do. LEGO is trying to speak to maajority of girls and girls seem to like pink. On the beauty note, many little girls like dresses and makeup. I don't know any girl that doesn't like to use makeup and lipstick. Also everybody seems to forget that LEGO had been studying little girls and what they like. The majority liked pink, fashion, and animals. LEGO has put research into this. Not every girl might like it, but LEGO's researcgh shows that most little girls do. The sets are selling very well too, many little girls I know love them. Not every girl has to like pink, but not every girl should have to go against the norm because everything that is girly is deemed "sexist" and is not cool. These people are trying to make it so girls can't like pink, not trying to promote the individuals interests. Also as if there isn't enough proof, the girls on this forum don't think it's sexist at all. In fact most people screaming sexist are the women who somehow think it's "sexist" and boys who think that they are right without having any clue that these people who think it's sexist are the MINORITY. I wish all this would die down. LEGO is just trying to meet the interests of many young girls.

Edited by reptiman

Do you want to have a theme revolving around mythical beasts? If you do please support my Dragon Slayers project on CUUSOO link: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/7694

BZPRPG profile:

http://www.bzpower.c...opic=123&st=120

My latest MOC! http://www.bzpower.com/board/index.php?showtopic=9379

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see the argument if there were sets like "Housewife's Grocery Run" or "Linda the Secretary" (complete with a touchy, inappropriate male overlord), but I don't see that. Sure, one of them is a beautician, but you've also got an inventor, a veterinarian, a singer and a baker. Those are hardly sexist vocations. You could also point out that all of these girls are running their own businesses and/or careers rather than reporting to a higher-paid male, waiting tables or taking care of Bobby, Jr. Yes, they're girly. Yes, not every girl fits the cultural standard of "girly," we get that. But this isn't telling girls that they need to be pretty and get good at cooking so they can find Mr. Right, raise a family and never have a career. It's just exemplifying what a lot of girls (certainly not all), especially at a young age, actually like: animals, clothes, bright colors, etc. I don't see the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.

Wait... off topic, but where have you gotten that information from? I consider myself pretty knowledgeable of Bionicle's story, and I don't recall it ever being stated they were designed to be just peaceful. And what matriarchal societies are you talking about?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was made fort a girl fan base, but it doesn't mean boys won't buy.I'd have no idea why any boy would buy something pink, but they have their reasons.

I have mine. :)/comicsans------------------------------Do ALL girls like:Aliens that want to destroy stuffJustice robotsNInjasPolice dudesDinosaursFlying mummies and some ginger lady with a gun shooting at them(pharoah's quest)Racing?No. (not all of them, anyway)That's where Friends comes in to place.The girls who want to escape from all the above will buy these setsBe grateful! YEAH! Edited by WORT WORT WORT

. .

.

.

<--- kfghdjkfhdgmn;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The LEGO Friends line is simply catered to girls. After LEGO's four years of research, the company decided that girls would related to this sort of line; beauty and harmonic design aesthetics were important to the target audience (girls 5+). The characters are also based on this. Although you may think that it's somehow deleterious to allow girls to play with characters who are "only" cooks/singers/whatever, the T.A. really is interested in this. Bionickel also pointed out the importance of how LEGO Friends goes about depicting its characters' vocations. The characters are running their own businesses--not submitting to male overlords (sorry for sounding so alarmist) or raising kids.If LEGO Friends is sexist, then so are the focus groups and T.A. itself. The "Princess Phase" that girls go through is a real (if not universal) thing--not just made up by sexists. And LEGO Friends is trying to work with that to appeal to girls and get them interested in LEGO with all of its positive effects.Furthermore, I think that saying that LEGO Friends with its slightly more "beautiful" sets will cause eating disorders or low-self esteem. Really, all saying that does is to detract from the importance of actual low self-esteem in youth.The most important aspect of this discussion is to remember (as many have said before) that LEGO is not obscenely out of touch and just designing sets by guessing about what people like. They actually researched for four years, and that degree of near-scientific testing is not likely to have missed the mark by much.Now for the point that inspired me to post in the first place: apologism!

I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.

Wait... off topic, but where have you gotten that information from? I consider myself pretty knowledgeable of Bionicle's story, and I don't recall it ever being stated they were designed to be just peaceful. And what matriarchal societies are you talking about?
The one-in-ten thing is clearly a rough, relatively accurate estimate, as one-in-six heroes were female, and much fewer villains were female.As for being designed to be peaceful, that's basically the entire Ga-Matoran personality on Mata Nui and Metry Nui (end slightly hyperbolic statement). Gali, Nokama, and (at times) Hahli acted mostly as peacekeepers for their Toa Teams, which could come across as sexist. The "matriarchal societies" are the Vortixx and--to some extent the Skakdi, whose females are far stronger (but lack a real society)--both of which are "evil."That's just a result of trying to appeal to boys, though. LEGO knew (or thought, or something) that too many female characters would put boys off from buying BIONICLE. That may not have been true for us, but LEGO certainly has a lot of experience in making, marketing, and selling toys.~ BioGio

 

"You're a scientist? The proposal you make violates parsimony; it introduces extra unknowns without proof for them. One might as well say unicorns power it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.

Wait... off topic, but where have you gotten that information from? I consider myself pretty knowledgeable of Bionicle's story, and I don't recall it ever being stated they were designed to be just peaceful. And what matriarchal societies are you talking about?
The one-in-ten thing is clearly a rough, relatively accurate estimate, as one-in-six heroes were female, and much fewer villains were female.As for being designed to be peaceful, that's basically the entire Ga-Matoran personality on Mata Nui and Metry Nui (end slightly hyperbolic statement). Gali, Nokama, and (at times) Hahli acted mostly as peacekeepers for their Toa Teams, which could come across as sexist. The "matriarchal societies" are the Vortixx and--to some extent the Skakdi, whose females are far stronger (but lack a real society)--both of which are "evil."That's just a result of trying to appeal to boys, though. LEGO knew (or thought, or something) that too many female characters would put boys off from buying BIONICLE. That may not have been true for us, but LEGO certainly has a lot of experience in making, marketing, and selling toys.~ BioGio
Yes. Lack of female characters in the Bionicle universe is pretty accurate, and though it's never been officially confirmed, it's pretty obvious the ratio must be lower compared to the sexes. I completely agree. I also, do agree that the Bionicle toyline was generally directed at young boys. However, I disagree that females in Bionicle are stereotyped and felt like storywise and set wise, they were handled pretty darn well compared to many other storylines for children.For example, most Ga-Matoran on both islands were friendly, that's true, but the other Koros came across the same exact way. Le-Matoran, Po-Matoran, Onu-Matoran and Ta-Matoran all showed the same respect and hospitality for Takua in the MNOG, even though every village was suffering through a crisis. Ga-Matoran never treated him any differently. The only exception were the Ko-Matoran, but even still there's been characters who escape that norm. (Kopeke and Matoro)Gali, though she stressed unity for her team, was never strictly "peaceful" or always calm. The books portray her as getting frustrated many times over her team, and having temper issues just as much as the other Toa. Onua, Pohatu and even Tahu, as well stressed unity many times. The only instance I can see a change in her personality was in the Mask of Light Movie, but let's be honest, almost every character was completely off, besides Teridax who I felt was awesome. :PWith Nokama, I agree her patience and wise words are a part of her personality, but that's mainly evident as a Turaga. (Which, all the Turaga had to stress being peaceful on Mata Nui, with no Toa to protect them, unity among the Matoran was all they had) As a Toa she had her issues and wasn't just preaching peace. As Teridax stated, she was majorly flawed. Nokama was known for her anger and poor leadership skills as a Toa, and it wasn't until her whole team took over their Hordika side, that their flaws, concerns and fears were put to rest.I also fail to see how Hahli was a spokesperson for unity as well. Hahli is so often automatically placed as peacemaker because she's a Ga-Matoran, or as a strict fighter barbarian because of one scene in Legends 8, where she's shown to enjoy thriving and battling underwater. She's never pushed for unity as did any of her brothers, since they didn't ever need it. They were a team long before they became Toa and more importantly, friends, long before they became Toa.So when you throw in Helryx, Tuyet, Varian and maybe Chiara, who we don't have much info on, saying that the Matoran females in the MU are peaceable and what's worse, "designed" to be peaceable is pretty unfounded. =/While Vortrixx are considered evil (though we really have no information on how their society works, just like many many other species in the MU), the male Skakdi are considered just as evil as the females (Piraka, Naktann), it's a species trait, not a gender one. I also don't believe its been stated that Skakdi females have their own society, simply that personality wise, they are more aggressive.Alright, I ended up saying more than I wanted to. lol But I felt like that reoccurring statement about Ga-Matoran peacemakers, is just immediately compared to females who represent water in other franchises.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like the term "sexist." I prefer "Gender segregationalist."That aside, If Lego wants to produce an utterly stereotypically girly product, I see no reason why they ought not to. If they think they can make a profit off of the line, that's good for the rest of us, even if we don't like the line. As someone above said, no one is forcing anyone to buy these things.Even if Lego is gender segregating, I see nothing to stop them from doing so. There's stuff for the Tom-boys too, right? *disclaimer: I am not knowledgeable concerning my preceding statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, putting more females in the Bionicle universe is a little nuts. We don't put women on submarines, and we tend to avoid placing them in war zones. They also aren't in the construction trade much either. Considering that the GBs needed a bunch of soldiers and hard workers to maintain the efforts of the giant robot, there weren't a lot of female workers in there since they weren't needed. That's not sexism. That's realism. Plus, Bionicle professionally takes female stereotypes and runs them into the dust. "Mild" Gali conjured up a Nova blast that destroyed the entire realm of Karzahni. Hali played kolhii againest boys and won, busted Barraki...and then there is sly, manipulative Roodaka, Nokama who practically served as the Metru's leutinent leader, Helryx the battle-hardened leader, and Lariska the expert combat master. Not one stereotype. Every time they appear, they own the world (at least temporarily) and walk over the guys in their own small ways. Mask of Light is the prime example of this - watch it again and notice how the guy Toa get made fun of major league while Gali and Hali say and do one great thing after another. Also, I believe the GBs introduced the female mindset to allow their creations more adaptibility. Allowing females to impart knowledge to the males in a tight spot likely would be a good idea, but having too many of them would likely impair efficientcy and slow things down. Besides, having more female characters in Bionicle would make them less exceptional - the fact that there are so few of them makes them stand out and brings them more notice. Friends is a way of saying that all girls are okay, Bionicle's gender message is that girls are strong and awesome, and don't conform to sexist streotypes. And being a nonconformist, I like Bionicle's message better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.

Wait... off topic, but where have you gotten that information from? I consider myself pretty knowledgeable of Bionicle's story, and I don't recall it ever being stated they were designed to be just peaceful. And what matriarchal societies are you talking about?
I don't think it was ever stated in the canon, but it used to be Greg's default explanation when he was asked about why there were females in the MU (ie, the females were better suited to some roles, such as teaching and peacemaking. In later years, Greg seemed to realise the unfortunate implications of this, so if you were to ask him about it now, you would probably get a different answer). It's also backed up by the fact that all Toa of Psionics after Orde were made female so that they would be more peaceful. While many characters have thankfully broken away from that stereotype, the in-universe reasoning of the Great Beings was extremely sexist and flawed. (I suspect that this portrayal may be Greg's way of acknowledging that some of the decisions Lego made in this area were somewhat questionable).And as was mentioned, the only confimed matriarchy is the Vortixx society (who enslave their males), but there's also the Skakdi (in which the females are larger, stronger, nastier and possibly dominant), and The Sisters of The Skrall, (who hate the males of their own species and have formed an independent society). All three societies are unquestionably corrupt and evil.

Besides, having more female characters in Bionicle would make them less exceptional - the fact that there are so few of them makes them stand out and brings them more notice.

But see, I don't think female characters should be treated like some sort of special anomaly. They should just be there, and they should be defined by their individual personality traits, not by the fact that they're "the chick" of the team. It is their personalities which should make them stand out, not their gender.But that's probably for another topic. What were we talking about, again?Oh, right. Friends.I actually quite like the minidolls' design. It's cute and feminine, without being overly sexualised, unlike most toys aimed at young girls. There's a good project on LEGO CUUSOO that demonstrates how it can be used in other themes, in this case, a sci-fi/adventure theme: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/7853

3DS Friend Code: 0018-0767-4231

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it isn't. I wrote a blog post on my personal blog, but I don't think I'd be allowed to link to it. :/Edit: Actually, I looked through the advertising policy, and it shouldn't be a problem to link to my blog post. Here it is.

Edited by Meiko

--

Meiko - @georgebarnick

LUG Ambassador and administrator at Brickipedia

News reporter and database administrator at Brickset

Administrator at BIONICLEsector01

 

DISCLAIMER: All opinions and contributions made under this account are based solely on my own personal thoughts and opinions, and in no way represent any of the above groups/entities. If you have any concerns or inquiries about the contributions made under this account, please contact me individually and I will address them with you to the best of my ability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also find it interesting that Lego aiming a line specifically at girls gets called "sexist", when Lego has been marketing most of their lines specifically to boys for years. Just look at Bionicle. Only about one in ten characters is female, the female characters in the Matoran Universe were literally designed to be gentle peacemakers, all the matriachal societies are evil and corrupt, there are restrictions on what kind of powers each gender can have, and after we were told we were getting two of the female elements on the same Toa team, the gender rules were bent over backwards to ensure that that there wouldn't be more than one female on the team. It's not exactly enticing to most young girls. I liked it as a kid, but I was an anomaly, and as I grew older the undertones began to bother me a lot.

Wait... off topic, but where have you gotten that information from? I consider myself pretty knowledgeable of Bionicle's story, and I don't recall it ever being stated they were designed to be just peaceful. And what matriarchal societies are you talking about?
I don't think it was ever stated in the canon, but it used to be Greg's default explanation when he was asked about why there were females in the MU (ie, the females were better suited to some roles, such as teaching and peacemaking. In later years, Greg seemed to realise the unfortunate implications of this, so if you were to ask him about it now, you would probably get a different answer). It's also backed up by the fact that all Toa of Psionics after Orde were made female so that they would be more peaceful. While many characters have thankfully broken away from that stereotype, the in-universe reasoning of the Great Beings was extremely sexist and flawed. (I suspect that this portrayal may be Greg's way of acknowledging that some of the decisions Lego made in this area were somewhat questionable).And as was mentioned, the only confimed matriarchy is the Vortixx society (who enslave their males), but there's also the Skakdi (in which the females are larger, stronger, nastier and possibly dominant), and The Sisters of The Skrall, (who hate the males of their own species and have formed an independent society). All three societies are unquestionably corrupt and evil.
He did use the word "peacemaking"? :P Even if Greg used those terms, there aren't other references that suggest this. And though Ga-Matoran may be "peaceable" it's as strongly felt among other Matoran types.The Great Being's reasoning for making Psionics Matoran all female was from Orde's point of view. Did he actually speak to the Great Beings and quote them by saying females would be gentle? We have no idea what their true reasoning was, and have almost no information on them. Saying they designed females to be peaceable, especially considering how many females that make up the MU aren't strictly so, is just a theory, but not a stable one.Vortrixx I agree with you. But Skakdi still are just as nasty either gender. And you can't call the Sisters of the Skrall necessarily evil. They are on the brink of extinction just as the Skrall were, being controlled and followed by Angone (or whatever that floating jellyfish creature is called lol), the group has only shown distaste toward the Skrall as well, but has left the other Agori Tribes alone...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna go ahead and close this. As a policy I don't close criticism topics unless posts in them get way, way out of hand, but in this case, frankly, the claim is so ludicrous that -- no offense, because I assume none was meant -- the topic itself is probably inflammatory, and it's simply impossible.Sexism, and any other such "ism" is basically defined as either stereotyping (what's true of most is misunderstood as true of all, per se), or of simply assigning false attributes to someone or a group. It was reported in the news, however, that LEGO specifically asked girls, and mothers, what girls are looking for in a LEGO line. So their choices here are largely responding to answers given by female target audience members themselves.And frankly, posting a topic like this about a line aimed at girls, when there are so many lines aimed at boys and barely a peep of criticism of that (except that it was unbalanced, which was a very valid complaint the new line helps fix)... that double standard is in and of itself offensive, IMO. Again, no offense intended, and none assumed. But it's a very bad idea.Finally, McSmeag thoroughly nuked the fallacy here, so we might as well consider this question answered, topic closed. Words to remember, words to live by:

*cracks knuckles*Card-carrying feminist, here. I've read and written more about women's rights, sexism, misogyny, feminism, and gender inequality than many of you will read period in your entire lifetimes (haha). And my verdict is.........................No. Lego Friends is not sexist.Let me quote S.E. Smith:

I want to live in a world where little girls are not pinkified, but where little girls who like pink are not punished for it, either. We can certainly talk about the social pressures surrounding gender roles, and the concerns that people have when they see girls and young women who appear to be forced into performances of femininity by the society around them, but let’s stop acting like they have no agency and free will. Let’s stop acting like women who choose to be feminine are somehow colluders, betraying the movement, bamboozled into thinking that they want to be feminine. Let’s stop denying women their own autonomy by telling them that their expressions of femininity are bad and wrong.Antifemininity is misogynist. What you are saying when you engage in this type of rhetoric is that you think things traditionally associated with women are wrong. Which is misogynist. By telling feminine women that they don’t belong in the feminist movement, you are reinforcing the idea that to be feminine and a woman is wrong, that women who want to be taken seriously need to be more masculine, because most people view gender presentation in binary ways. This rewards the ‘one of the boys’ type rhetoric I encounter all over the place from self-avowed feminists who seem to think that bashing on women is a good way to prove how serious they are when it comes to caring about women and bringing men into the feminist movement.

For those who found this tl;dr, I'll sum up:It's sexist to say that girls need to be interested in fashion, princesses, jewelery, the colour pink, and other "traditionally feminine" things. That's terribly sexist and misogynist. But it is equally sexist and misogynist to say that they can't like those things. That's still constructing an idea of "how women should be" rather than allowing every woman to decide for herself how she should be and what she likes. Some girls like things like that (and some boys do too!); some don't, and it's not always because of societal pressures. Who are we to decide what women can and can't like? That.........would be...........sexist.Now let's take a look at the Lego Friend sets themselves...Let's see, we've got a LEgo theme with a number of characters, with a theme stressing "who do you want to be?" - and the characters show a lot of varied passions, including science/engineering, writing/journalism, medicine, music, and fashion design.Hold up there. Interesting - the only "Traditionally feminine" aspiration listed there is the fashion designer, and other ones (particularly the character Olivia, who aspires to become an Engineer and has a set featuring her desigining and building robots) are flying against "traditionally feminine" stereotypes. Lego Friends are:
  • [*]Regular Lego sets in every way, built and packaged and played with just the same as the System sets people are now calling "Boy's toys"[*]Breaking apart misogynist stereotypes and showing women character excelling at a myriad of fields[*]Showing that it's okay to like clothes and fashion and it's also okay to like robots and science, etc

In case you don't get my drift, these sets are basically saying and showing that girls are just as good as boys and that women deserve the same opportunities as men. They're promoting sexual equality.And...and...isn't that...the cornerstone of feminism?Instead of trying these excellent and progressive sets are sexist, we should be praising Lego for making some "girl's toys" that are just as gender-neutral as their "boy's toys" (side note: I've bought two of these sets, and both times I saw little boys asking their parents for Lego Friends sets. These are breaking gender barriers), and that aren't promoting just the "pink pricess" traditional femininity.

The Destiny of Bionicle (chronological retelling of Bionicle original series, 9 PDFs of 10 chapters each on Google Drive)Part 1 - Warring with Fate | Part 2 - Year of Change | Part 3 - The Exploration Trap | Part 4 - Rise of the Warlords | Part 5 - A Busy Matoran | Part 6 - The Dark Time | Part 7 - Proving Grounds | Part 8 - A Rude Awakening | Part 9 - The Battle of Giants

My Bionicle Fanfiction  (Google Drive folder, eventually planned to have PDFs of all of it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...