Friends "Controversy"

[UsernameMDM]

Feminism is about equality between the sexes.

But equality does not mean everything has to be the exact same between the sexes. Males and females are different.

[Aanchir]

But equality does not mean everything has to be the exact same between the sexes. Males and females are different.

True, but it's still not entirely clear how far-reaching these differences are, especially in cognitive areas like play and imagination. TLG has put forth an effort to study this, and I really respect that, but even so it's obvious looking at the Friends theme that even if some design aspects are based firmly on the differences between male and female play patterns as observed, others concede to stereotypes within the market for girl-oriented toys.

Furthermore, the issue of how different males and females are is muddied by the fact that individuals within each gender have very strong differences. So it's almost impossible to be sure which gender differences are genetically ingrained in girls and which are just paths they happen to have followed based on societal and cultural stimuli.

I do think the argument that girls and boys should just play with the same toys is a bit far-fetched, because there are things girls like that boys won't necessarily touch. There's nothing inherently wrong with purple packaging, but boys aren't that likely to buy a set with a purple box. This I think accounts for some of the seeming "stereotypes" in LEGO Friends-- TLG is taking advantage of the "freedom" that comes with designing a theme for girls, in that they can essentially ignore the preteen male demographic that is the core audience for most of their other themes.

Real equality would involve balanced gender ratios, appealing pastel colors, and gender-neutral product designs in all themes, but in doing that TLG would be gambling away a lot of the success they've consistently seen with young boys in the hopes that girls would take the plunge and start buying their existing themes. It's a much safer decision to create a theme that targets a new demographic while ignoring the demographic that they've already secured through their existing product lines. Additionally, this allows them to more easily tell if the theme is actually selling to the demographic it is designed for, since it has a sharper focus on this demographic rather than a broad unisex appeal.

And, of course, there's the image aspect I mentioned before-- a girl-oriented theme reinforces the notion that "it's OK for girls to play with building toys" with a much more direct message than a gender-neutral theme would send, since it specifically grabs the attention of those who harbor preconceived notions about what toys are acceptable for girls. Create a gender-neutral theme and place it on the same shelves as all the other LEGO toys, and parents of girls could easily just walk right by it on their way to the "girls" aisle without a second glance. A message of gender equality doesn't do any good if the message doesn't get to its intended recipients.

[Peppermint_M]

Big problem there in that you don't know what feminism is. Feminism is not sexism. It's the exact opposite. Feminism is about equality between the sexes. Period, end of story.

Ah, that is within certain circles of femenism. Others are all for superiority to men...

I got called a True Femmenist the other day. By my old Sociology lecturer. We bumped into each other in town and recognising me she asked how I was doing. When I explained my job (Working as a technician in an Engineers office) she was pleased for me, especially being in a rather male dominated profession. I am equal to others at my grade in both pay and qualifications. I do the same job as the boys, limited only by physical strength/hight and my qualifications (I have a Certificate, they have Degrees but they are 4 years older than me) I already beat a male colleague who dropped out before completing the course as the maths was too hard! I drink real ale and I enjoy rock music, I drive an Astra and I wear boots and jeans. I dress up in clothing styles and colours I like for more formal events and I have a nice selection of jewelry. While I myself do not at this point feel like motherhood is for me, I am perfectly happy being an older sister to my siblings and an and adopted aunty to my friends children.

Certain femenists think that they should earn more than the men at the same level, that they should never associate with traditional female roles, colours, clothing styles and jewelry associated with female. They call bras a tool of domination (I have to say, mine is very useful, as those who I have met IRL would agree ) they ignore that there are physical differences between men and women, claiming the mere mention of them to be sexist.

These are the ones who are even more sexist, decrying carefully researched toys to be promoting a gender aparthide when they themselves are claimg that the blue boxes mean they are for boys! Ninjago is Green, Spongebob is Yellow! Pharaoh's Quest was sand coloured, Kingdoms looks like a castle! Yet they were not selling to girls very well as those themes didn't appeal. Now their research has found what girls want from a toy and they have made their product, RadFems are pointing the finger of sexism at TLG, carefully ignoring the fact that retailers and parents are more at fault for any enforced colour to gender rules.

TLG have opened up a way for girls who would normally be uninterested (due to themeatic content) in a construction toy to the enlightening world of building. Following a sequence of construction phases, spatial awareness, fine motor skills, concentration, problem solving and physics.

Sorry about the wall of text, I read yet another worthy "article" online (I should stop Googling LEGO in the news section, at least for another month or so.)

[Itaria No Shintaku]

Big problem there in that you don't know what feminism is. Feminism is not sexism. It's the exact opposite. Feminism is about equality between the sexes. Period, end of story.

Probably you should learn more about feminism before starting this argument. Feminism is NOT about sexes equality. We're no more in the seventies, more than 40 years have passed. We are in 2012 now. Welcome. Male bashing is everywhere, in tv movies advertising etc, if a man hits a woman he's a monster, if a woman hits a man she's righteous and great. There's no free entry for men in discos, there's plenty for women. There's no men money contribute if you want to start your business. There's for women. There's not minimal men presence required in governments or companies. There's women's. I could go on forever on this topic, but it is senseless as these things are on the eye of everybody. Feminism is for female superiority, and it's reaching its goal. Period, end of story, and I won't reply more on this subject since it hurts my intelligence and it becomes widely off-topic, and flameable.

Certain femenists think that they should earn more than the men at the same level, that they should never associate with traditional female roles, colours, clothing styles and jewelry associated with female. They call bras a tool of domination (I have to say, mine is very useful, as those who I have met IRL would agree ) they ignore that there are physical differences between men and women, claiming the mere mention of them to be sexist.

[...]

Sorry about the wall of text, I read yet another worthy "article" online (I should stop Googling LEGO in the news section, at least for another month or so.)

No, instead you really did well in explaining what in some people is a great lack of knowledge. And since you're a woman, you must be thanked twice. People should learn that male and female are indeed different and uncomparable. There's no better. They're different. Period. Being sexist is even more stupid than to be racist.

I beg pardon if I got frenzied by this topic, but I really hate people supporting racism, sexism and the like.

[Aanchir]

Probably you should learn more about feminism before starting this argument. Feminism is NOT about sexes equality. We're no more in the seventies, more than 40 years have passed. We are in 2012 now. Welcome. Male bashing is everywhere, in tv movies advertising etc, if a man hits a woman he's a monster, if a woman hits a man she's righteous and great. There's no free entry for men in discos, there's plenty for women. There's no men money contribute if you want to start your business. There's for women. There's not minimal men presence required in governments or companies. There's women's. I could go on forever on this topic, but it is senseless as these things are on the eye of everybody. Feminism is for female superiority, and it's reaching its goal. Period, end of story, and I won't reply more on this subject since it hurts my intelligence and it becomes widely off-topic, and flameable.

This doesn't mean the meaning of feminism has changed, just that the old scars from when women WERE extremely discriminated against are still sore in many feminists. The knife has been pulled away but the wounds remain.

Meanwhile, to assume that the sexes are equal in this day and age is laughable. Just as some people still carry the wounds of past discrimination, some people still carry the biases that inflicted those wounds, and while nowadays they know better than to act on them consciously, old habits die hard. There are still a lot of jobs where, subconsciously, employers will have a bias towards men when hiring. There are still a lot of biases about women that haven't gone away in the slightest-- drivers, for instance, are still stereotyped by their sex here in America. And of course there are biases like the one that necessitated LEGO Friends in the first place, in which parents tend to think of building toys like LEGO as a boys-only interest.

There are radical feminists who go too far, and those are an extremely vocal subset of the feminist movement today, but that doesn't mean that feminism itself is inherently biased. Again, old habits die hard, and once a person is used to having to fight for equal treatment, it's not their fault if they have a hard time adjusting to a world where they don't have to fight as hard. And many gender-related statistics show that not having to fight as hard doesn't mean the fight feminists have worked so hard on is completely over.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Aanchir

[Itaria No Shintaku]

There are still a lot of biases about women that haven't gone away in the slightest-- drivers, for instance, are still stereotyped by their sex here in America.

Here, in Italy, you can easily guess the sex of a driver by his/her drive style.

1 - If you see someone driving in the middle of a two lane's road, not letting you overtake neither by left nor by right, she's a woman. 99% of the cases. WHICH doesn't mean that ALL women drive this way, just that given this behaviour you can spot a woman driving. Or parking, a classic.

2 - On the other hand, if you see someone overtaking you at 50 km/h MORE than the speed limit, he's a man. 99% of the cases. Which doesn't mean that all men break speed limits, but when you see at the TV News car accidents, the driver was nearly always a man.

Sorry I got back on topic and I said it was my last, but I really felt myself called in with that line.

EDIT: Part 1 is always good also for males over 70 years with an hat a glasses. I do not know really why old drivers need their hat, seems like they can't enter this statistic if they don't wear one.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Itaria No Shintaku

[fallentomato]

Ah, that is within certain circles of femenism. Others are all for superiority to men...

Certain femenists think that they should earn more than the men at the same level, that they should never associate with traditional female roles, colours, clothing styles and jewelry associated with female. They call bras a tool of domination (I have to say, mine is very useful, as those who I have met IRL would agree ) they ignore that there are physical differences between men and women, claiming the mere mention of them to be sexist.

Probably you should learn more about feminism before starting this argument. Feminism is NOT about sexes equality. We're no more in the seventies, more than 40 years have passed. We are in 2012 now. Welcome. Feminism is for female superiority, and it's reaching its goal.

You seem to be talking about feminist sepratism, which is a radical tail of feminism. All large groups contain radical fringes, who are often the most vocal. But considering the fringes to constitute the bulk of a group is dangerous. Saying that feminism is by and large about female superiority, is like conflating the civil rights movement with the Black Panther Party or conflating all Muslims with militant Islamists.

The feminist critiques I've seen (and given) of the LEGO Friends sets are primarily feminist arguments of the social-constructionist variety. That is, gender is socially constructed in an on-going basis and the LEGO Group's efforts to segregate their markets by gender are problematic (though obviously retailers and consumers are also part of the equation).

I agree that if LEGO Friends gets more children (girls or boys) playing with LEGO who wouldn't otherwise, that's a good thing. In particular I'm stoked to hear so many anecdotes of girls who have never shown an interest in LEGO before being interested in the Friends sets. I just wish that Friends was a little more like Fabuland and a little less like Belville. By which I mean that Fabuland was a line focused on role-play and story-telling that was marketed to both boys and girls. Obviously the building experience in Friends is better than either Fabuland or Belville.

And since you're a woman, you must be thanked twice.

?

[Peppermint_M]

Yeah, that was what I was trying to present FT, LibFems RadFems etc and so on. The vocal minority are far from the most representative but they are the loudest, sadly. There are branches who right now are simply seeking to break the glass ceiling and sorting out global rights for women. Then there are the noisy shouty ones who spam the internet and news media with outcrys against pink.

They get the most attention. It is easier to have a chuckle about the RadFems going on about pink than to address the uncomfortable issues of the glass ceiling, casual sexism and rather "important" trading partners who's female citzenry have less rights than cattle.

Itaria No Shintaku, I feel quite insulted. I was merely pointing out what a certain group that sits under the femmenist name want/claim and say. The bulk of what we would call femmenists are as mentioned before, while the loud ones who accost me in the street to sign petitions merely get an eloquent explanation on why I think they should focus abroad over banning pink from the toyshop.

As a driver and a woman, I am twice disgruntled. I have encountered male and female drivers on the road who are terrible, inconsiderate or just plane vexing. However, I can drive, I can park in circumstances that a lot of men would drive past (Possibly not in Italy from what I hear, I do drive a car larger than an oversized rollerskate, but I digress). Your casual sexisim is exactly the problem and common practice that we should focus on removing over decrying those who like a certain colour.

I do admit that these social causes are somewhat intertwined but physical difference is a medical and biological fact that in and of itself is not sexist (though often claimed as such) it is not an admission that women are less capable, able, intelligent, or have less potential to achieve. Which unfortunately is applied in some cases.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

Itaria No Shintaku, I feel quite insulted.

As a driver and a woman, I am twice disgruntled. I have encountered male and female drivers on the road who are terrible, inconsiderate or just plane vexing. However, I can drive, I can park in circumstances that a lot of men would drive past (Possibly not in Italy from what I hear, I do drive a car larger than an oversized rollerskate, but I digress). Your casual sexisim is exactly the problem and common practice that we should focus on removing over decrying those who like a certain colour.

I really don't get it why if I thank you heartly you feel like insulted, nor why you do insult me. Probably you got it all wrong, but really I don't want to get on the topic any more since it causes flames and problems. Furthermore when I pointed out that in driving the most dangerous behaviour is men's. Calling me sexist is really like calling Nelson Mandela racist. And you really didn't need to specify how you drive, this clarify me that you didn't read at all my message...

Actually I could blame you for racism calling italian cars "oversized rollerskates", but really pretend I didn't do that because we're on a minefield and I prefere to set this over. I wrote something, you felt insulted (though mine were compliments) and replied, you clearly insulted me, I replied, it's over.

[Peppermint_M]

I really don't get it why if I thank you heartly you feel like insulted, nor why you do insult me. Probably you got it all wrong, but really I don't want to get on the topic any more since it causes flames and problems. Furthermore when I pointed out that in driving the most dangerous behaviour is men's. Calling me sexist is really like calling Nelson Mandela racist. And you really didn't need to specify how you drive, this clarify me that you didn't read at all my message...

Actually I could blame you for racism calling italian cars "oversized rollerskates", but really pretend I didn't do that because we're on a minefield and I prefere to set this over. I wrote something, you felt insulted (though mine were compliments) and replied, you clearly insulted me, I replied, it's over.

I was joking about the size of Fiat 500s, I do apolagise but it is a common office joke as a colleague of mine has an Abarth version which he takes pains to inflate as superior as much as we joke about fuel consumption and tyre costs involved in such a small vehicle.

I felt a little like your post read as "Ah yes, the girl knows her place" which was what felt insulting, if I misconstrued your words then we are both even as my comment about cars and parking was just in jest.

Cultral diversity and language differences cause issue.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

I was joking about the size of Fiat 500s, I do apolagise but it is a common office joke as a colleague of mine has an Abarth version which he takes pains to inflate as superior as much as we joke about fuel consumption and tyre costs involved in such a small vehicle.

I felt a little like your post read as "Ah yes, the girl knows her place" which was what felt insulting, if I misconstrued your words then we are both even as my comment about cars and parking was just in jest.

Cultral diversity and language differences cause issue.

Of course I believe you know your place, it's wherever you want to be, isn't it? ;)

And we italians do produce Ferrari, Lamborghini, Alfa Romeo... among the best cars in the world, you can't stick on Fiat 500s lol... they are piece of furniture now ;)

Thanks for your kind reply.

[the enigma that is badger]

To get this thread back on track, there's been one major update: LEGO has apparently agreed to meet with representatives of SPARK.

On one hand, I credit LEGO for directly addressing the group and their concerns and being willing to meet with them to discuss the issues that have been raised in terms of the Friends line and the marketing of LEGO products. However, given SPARK and their supporters have seemingly engaged in willfully spreading misinformation about Friends line (complexity of the builds, nature of the figures, relationship to other LEGO themes, etc) and, in many instances, taken a hostile approach in addressing LEGO, it's hard, at least for myself, to image the meeting will be that productive.

[Lyichir]

To get this thread back on track, there's been one major update: LEGO has apparently agreed to meet with representatives of SPARK.

On one hand, I credit LEGO for directly addressing the group and their concerns and being willing to meet with them to discuss the issues that have been raised in terms of the Friends line and the marketing of LEGO products. However, given SPARK and their supporters have seemingly engaged in willfully spreading misinformation about Friends line (complexity of the builds, nature of the figures, relationship to other LEGO themes, etc) and, in many instances, taken a hostile approach in addressing LEGO, it's hard, at least for myself, to image the meeting will be that productive.

I don't know; in many cases misinformation starts as a lack of officially released information. This organization seems to have had trouble collecting the disparate sources that disprove them, but if that information is told directly to them from the heads of LEGO, they might come around. And as unlikely as it may be, if the organizers of the petition and spreader of much of this misinformation does a 180 and essentially says "we goofed", it could defuse a lot of the hysteria that has built up.

[KimT]

IS this for real?

An organization from the country that brought us stuff like Barbie and Disney's endless Princess stories.

This MUST be a joke

We've had Scala and Belville for ages and noone complained and now this

Whatever!

(must be my European mind not seeing what the issue really is)

[CMP]

(must be my European mind not seeing what the issue really is)

It's not a European thing. I don't see the issue either.

If you want them, buy them. If you don't, don't...now nobody gang up on me with a dozen posts arguing against it. LEGO isn't the first one to market a line specifically for girls, and it won't be the last. These sorts of things seem to sell well, so LEGO is selling them. I don't see how selling toys could ever be such a horrible thing. Those are my (current) thoughts on the subject.

In other news, we're on the second (giant) wave of Friends. And so far they haven't killed anybody.

[Gryphon Ink]

IS this for real? An organization from the country that brought us stuff like Barbie and Disney's endless Princess stories. This MUST be a joke

I'm having some difficulty understanding how it's relevant that Spark and Disney both happen to be American. Care to explain?

[Front]

The problem with the internet is that most people using it, has a keyboard only hosting the letters H, A, T, and E.

Erland

Part Design

[Mr Copperhead]

I neither know nor care much about this controversy, but I just bought some friends sets and they are awesome I even went back and bought some more the same day. The little kitchens worked great in the hillside house and the apple tree house now has a jacuzzi! The science lab with the robot fits really well in the second floor of the apartment next to the pet shop.

I kind of like the figures too, just wish they made some more dudes and that their wrists turned like regular mini figures. I'm going to have to buy the house now so I can get the guy mowing the lawn in a tie. Plus those really light powder blue plates are a really nice color, hope they make a bunch of different bricks in that color

[Peppermint_M]

I'm having some difficulty understanding how it's relevant that Spark and Disney both happen to be American. Care to explain?

It is strange that a country that gave rise to sanatised Princesses and an unrealistic body standard in doll form also kicked up a movement that is focusing on a recent toy produced outside of the US.

[def]

IS this for real?

An organization from the country that brought us stuff like Barbie and Disney's endless Princess stories.

This MUST be a joke

We've had Scala and Belville for ages and noone complained and now this

Whatever!

(must be my European mind not seeing what the issue really is)

Most women's organizations hate Barbie, and it has been protested a number of times and ways, which is one reason her body measurements have become a little more realistic these days. Anyway, one of the reasons for the complaint is the marketing, and not the sets themselves. A second reason is that LEGO was perceived as a 'better' company, and is being held to higher standards than Barbie or Disney Princesses.

In other news, we're on the second (giant) wave of Friends. And so far they haven't killed anybody.

No shit? Nobody died yet?

I think this quote accurately captures the degree to which people can't grasp the discussion around the sets. The notion that anybody taking any actions or making a complaint needs to be a life/death thing or it's invalid. I've read the petition. They've got some things right, they've got some things wrong. But, nowhere, not once, did they claim this is a matter of life and death.

People pick and choose their fights every day, and I don't think this is a valid way of dismissing the discussion.

[Ardelon]

We've had Scala and Belville for ages and noone complained and now this

Maybe it's just because the internets weren't as widespread as today, so it wasn't as easy to complain about stuff, for all the world to see.

(@ def: that's not to say the complaints can't be valid.)

[Aanchir]

Also, from my experience, Friends has received the most marketing of any girl-oriented theme to date, at least in the United States. I wouldn't have known that Scala and Belville existed if it weren't for catalogs and online databases like Bricklink, whereas LEGO Friends has been the subject of multiple press releases and news articles and is being promoted fairly strongly in toy stores. TLG is clearly going for publicity, so it's only natural that this would attract a certain amount of negative publicity as backlash.

[EM4CZ]

FIRE!!! call boys from CITY fire rescue.

[Lyichir]

FIRE!!! call boys from CITY fire rescue.

I don't see how that's on topic, but I don't mind because of how hilarious a 'shop that is.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Ricecracker
Don't quote images unnecessarily, as per site guidelines.

[Dreamweb]

That's pretty hilarious. Too bad that these girls do not notice the fire at all. I especially like the guy's behaviour (don't remember his name) - barbecuing like nothing's ever happened. "Screw the fire, I'm hungry dammit!"