DrJB Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) ... The damn tank is beige ... I should have been more specific. It is not the beige that they liked, it was the small pinkish details (wheels covers and round parts) all over the vehicle. I know that because I did ask them what they liked, and they pointed specifically to those parts. Edited January 30, 2015 by DrJB Quote
mahjqa Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) I think that a big part here is how traditional gender roles are completely messed up. Simply by knowing wether someone has boy parts or girl parts, we both consciously and subconsciously attach a BIG set of assumed qualities and traits to a person. Guys 'should' be into sports, rowdy, adventurous and so on. Girls 'should' be nurturing, pretty and demure. This creates a VERY narrow acceptable range where someone can express themselves. A sensitive guy who likes to take care of kids is often seen as gay or a pedo. A girl who is assertive and outgoing is quickly seen as bossy or a slut. That whole "technology is for MEN" thing just reinforces that stupid behaviour for no reason at all. If we're going to throw around statistics, here's one for you: change a male name on top of a resume to a female name, and this person will automatically be seen as less competent. So it's not just "women are less interested in technology and science", but more "women are actively discouraged to have anything to do with technology and science." We, as a society, are actively discouraging women to get into tech. And yes, I think that's a problem. Eh, why not try this discussion on mumsnet? Thanks for promptly demonstrating how it works. Any attempt to discuss the status quo is quickly branded as 'sensitive', 'touchy-feely' and thus completely unworthy of discussion. Care to explain what your issue is? Edited January 30, 2015 by mahjqa Quote
allanp Posted January 30, 2015 Author Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Why mumsnet? Do they have all the answers? Don't you have all the answers? Edited January 30, 2015 by allanp Quote
andythenorth Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Any attempt to discuss the status quo is quickly branded as 'sensitive', 'touchy-feely' and thus completely unworthy of discussion. Care to explain what your issue is? Eh, no, there's lack of cultural context here. If this discussion was to take place on mumsnet, it would be far from touchy-feely or sensitive; people proposing Lego for Men would rapidly get ripped apart with no mercy, and (to pre-empt a possible objection) it would be by women who do not self-identify as feminists (or any particular kind of 'ists'). And it's not (pre-empting other objections) because mumsnet posters are especially careful to be politically correct, nor do they especially hate men. Quote
allanp Posted January 30, 2015 Author Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) I think that a big part here is how traditional gender roles are completely messed up. Simply by knowing wether someone has boy parts or girl parts, we both consciously and subconsciously attach a BIG set of assumed qualities and traits to a person. Guys 'should' be into sports, rowdy, adventurous and so on. Girls 'should' be nurturing, pretty and demure. This creates a VERY narrow acceptable range where someone can express themselves. A sensitive guy who likes to take care of kids is often seen as gay or a pedo. A girl who is assertive and outgoing is quickly seen as bossy or a slut. That whole "technology is for MEN" thing just reinforces that stupid behaviour for no reason at all. If we're going to throw around statistics, here's one for you: change a male name on top of a resume to a female name, and this person will automatically be seen as less competent. So it's not just "women are less interested in technology and science", but more "women are actively discouraged to have anything to do with technology and science." We, as a society, are actively discouraging women to get into tech. And yes, I think that's a problem. Ah yes now this is a good argument from which people in the dark can learn something. Thank you It's true that by knowing someones gender we place many assumptions on that person just because of it. Is it wrong to make these assumptions? Well, in most cases probably not because statistically most of these assumptions will more often than not turn out to be correct, with some obvious and disgusting exceptions. Being male, someone could make a whole bunch of assumptions about me, many of which would be correct, not because I'm male, but because statistically it's more likely to be correct than not. I see a girl that is into fixing cars and there is a hint of surprise only because most women aren't into that (which in itself is not a negative judgement), and then a much bigger hint of "that's awesome!" (a positive judgement). However, to then go on to think that a person SHOULD for-fill these assumptions is definitely wrong. To make a negative judgement on a person for not living up to an assumption based on their gender is also definitely wrong. Basically to simply make an assumption and then be a little surprised when that assumption turns out to be wrong is an involuntary act that is natural. But to expect others to live up to that assumption is wrong. That thing of changing from a male name to a female name is disgusting, I hate it. There are many many areas of gender inequality that negatively affect both genders but I don't think we are talking about that here. It may well be that as a society we are discouraging women from getting into tech but again I'm not sure that is what we are talking about here. Or is it? I think this maybe the crux of why we disagree. I see TLGs particular use of the "for men" thing as nothing more than a bit of harmless humour. I don't see it as part of the major problem you are referring to where women are actively discouraged from getting into tech but maybe I am wrong. I think I can see where you are coming from now. When I see TLG's use of "for men", I see Mr T shouting "For men, UUURRRGGGHHH!" and it's funny. It seems that when you see it, you see some douche bag saying "this is not for you, because you are a woman and it's too difficult for you!". If that's how you see it then I completely get what you are saying. So the question is, how does Lego intend the "for men" thing to come across, like Mr T or like a douche bag? We can only guess but I'm pretty confident that it's the humorous Mr T. But regardless of how TLG intends it to come across, does it have the un-intended side effect of re-enforcing gender based assumptions? Maybe, but as I said, to make an assumption isn't in itself a bad thing, in the example of a girl being into fixing cars it only led to a good judgement being made of the girl. It becomes bad when it leads to gender inequality and negative judgements being made. In this case that would come in the form of a woman feeling bad or slightly unfeminine about being into Lego or having negative judgements made against her for being into Lego. I really don't see that as being the case here. No-one to my knowledge has ever made a bad judgement towards a woman for being into Lego, indeed we might think it's a little surprising but we all think it's ultimately awesome! I think women, being just as capable of having a sense of humour as men would just see the funny side. Edited January 30, 2015 by allanp Quote
Alasdair Ryan Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Men....do you need help keeping it up for longer? Why not try the new Lego linear actuators from Lego Technic (l'oreal womans hair advert voice) Because your worth it.... Edited January 30, 2015 by Alasdair Ryan Quote
nerdsforprez Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Men....do you need help keeping it up for longer? Why not try the new Lego linear actuators from Lego Technic (l'oreal womans hair advert voice) Because your worth it.... I think pneumatics would be more accurate :laugh: Quote
allanp Posted January 30, 2015 Author Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Men, tired of it taking forever to get it up? Tired of getting repetitive strain injury or having the need for an electric motor driven device? Try our new pneumatics, because LAs aren't worth it! Edited January 30, 2015 by allanp Quote
Ondra Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Lego 42030 commercial Kids version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ETLglsIjno vs. Mens version http://www.legomen.de/produkte/technic/radlader.html#video_tvc/0/ Find TV spot on page All in german language, there are huge differences between these two commercials.Im expecting something similar for arocs. Quote
DrJB Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Men, tired of it taking forever to get it up? Tired of getting repetitive strain injury or having the need for an electric motor driven device? Try our new pneumatics, because LAs aren't worth it! Have you tried our new pneumatics? It's very much like the old, but with enhanced performance (thanks to 'Sildenafil Citrate') Edited January 30, 2015 by DrJB Quote
Chilly Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 The first page of comments was funny, but I got bored and didn't read all the way down the second page. Not complaining, just commenting. Somewhere on FB a friend posted a video editorial by a women's rights journo about Lego adverts where boys feature with "boys creative" lego and girls feature with "Friends" and don't create anything, just bake cookies, or go to the nail bar. If I can find it, I'll post a link....... So sad that some people feel the need to differentiate between girls and boys at a young age. When I was young Lego was for kids. Found it - interesting reading - http://www.womenyous...-something-say/ Quote
robuko Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Without getting into the girls vs boys debate (my son and daughter both like Friends and Technic) Lego is a pretty nerdy hobby and does not play to conventional stereotypes of masculinity. Many AFOLs went through a dark age and came back because of a particular set that appealed to their other interests, or because of having children. A lot of AFOLs are men. Giving Lego MORE of a muscular "manly" image rather than "geeky" is a reasonably smart way to increase the reconversion rate of latent male fans who are not comfortable with a nerdy self-image, as long as it is done in a niche and segmented way that does not alienate existing user bases or women. Of anything in the Lego range, big machines or fast cars would strike me as the easiest win to do that. I don't know how widespread this campaign is, but it looks to me like smart and testable experimental marketing. Quote
Nalyd997 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 You know I was watching the Danish version of the 42009 advertisement and at the end it actually said 'for men'. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.