Removing gender bias

[Lego David]

I haven't read up this entire thread, so forgive me if I am not cought up to the entire discussion, but one point I keep seeing is that supposedly it is the parents who "enforce gender stereotypes". 

I do have to seriously question whether this is truly happening. From my experience, boys and girls have always been naturally attracted towards different things, both in childhood, and into adolescence. 

I don't think most parents have to tell their kids what kinds of toys they think they want... Kids will always just ran to the toy shelves they find attractive and pick something from there. In most cases, girls will just naturally be attracted to dolls and that kinds of stuff. Sure, some may like "boy toys" too, but most of the times, you shouldn't be surprised when you find out that your daughter doesn't really care about robots and spaceships as much as your son. 

If your daughter is indeed interested in "boy things" and doesn't care about dolls and that kinds of stuff, than by all means, buy her the toys she wants. But don't be surprised if some things are just naturally going to appeal to her, even if it is something that enforces "gender stereotypes". 

Going beyond just the realm of LEGO, ever noticed how the ratio of Teenagers who play videogames (particularly more "violent" games) is significantly higher among boys than it is among girls? Or on the flip side, the fact that on average girls like reading for entertainment far more than most boys? 

Even in the case of LEGO, the very fact that there are so few females as opposed to males on this LEGO forum (so much so that there even is a "Lady" tag) I think says a lot. 

I never really understood why so many people are so concerned about "gender equality" and trying to enforce a bunch of social changes that previously nobody could care less about, when they just can't accept the simple reality that boys and girls like different things. The two genders are different in many ways, and that is totally fine. 

As far as I am concerned, LEGO right now is doing nothing but submitting to the Woke Culture agenda, in order to be politically correct and maintain their brand image as such. 

But than again, this is just my opinion, based on my own experiences, so take that as you will. 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Lego David

[Peppermint_M]

Yet, my life experience was entirely different to your own (and I suspect is a lot longer than yours also...)

I have been in toy stores and sections in supermarkets and heard the parent/grandparent tell a child that they don't want the toy they chose because it is "wrong" for their gender. 

I have had friends of the family shocked that I played LEGO but my brother's favourite toy was one of my disregarded baby dolls. 

The Ladies group is a relic of ten years ago, created with good intentions at the time. Unfortunately no one agrees be when we try to retire it.

I welcome TLG cluing parents in that girls can enjoy their products. It is not "woke" but an unfortunate requirement in advertising.

[MAB]

38 minutes ago, Peppermint_M said:

I have been in toy stores and sections in supermarkets and heard the parent/grandparent tell a child that they don't want the toy they chose because it is "wrong" for their gender.

Yeah, I think this is fairly frequent. I was in a bike shop the other day and a boy about 5 years old wanted a pink bike and the mother kept saying no that he should get a blue one instead.

Same with presents. How many grandparents would buy a doll or a toy vacuum cleaner for a boy, or a football or an engineering type toy for a girl without being prompted that is what they want. And if even told that is what they want, I imagine many would still shy away from buying them.

 

[JaBaCaDaBra]

Oohhhh
My dauchter loved this set and my grandchildren still play with it.

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by JaBaCaDaBra

[Peppermint_M]

Cool, you are lucky to have a vintage set like that to play with! 

My uncle sold all his sets (including Yellow Castle!!!!) To buy a mountain bike when he was a teen-ager. Then the hand-me-down sets from a family friend didn't cover quite the same dates/years. 

Paradisa is a theme that attracted a lot of the current FFOLs who use the forum 

[koalayummies]

We could have prevented a lot of the knee-jerk reactions from those who immediately hit reply after seeing the term 'gender bias', by issuing a sort of cliff notes instead of that open-ended 9-word grab-some-popcorn-and-debate original post. It was practically salivating for controversy as many of these regularly occurring 'cUrReNt StAtE oF tHe LeGo GrOuP!" threads are designed. For example no where in the entire thing do the words "Friends", "Minidoll", "pink" or "purple" appear and at no point did they mention making Lego homogeneous or doing away with or consolidating themes.

What TLG said they will strive to do:

• foster and support play for girls
• encourage parents to let girls play with what is traditionally viewed as a 'boy toy' (building toys)
• highlight that boys are also dealing with gender stereotypes
• support girls liking 'boy' toys and boys liking 'girl' toys

Pretty simple.

[astral brick]

On 10/30/2021 at 9:35 PM, koalayummies said:

 instead of that open-ended 9-word grab-some-popcorn-and-debate original post.

Excuse me? The thread is about the pros and cons of privatization claiming to serve the public interest. Pretty clear - even starting from the tags - and made even more clear in another message that you didn't bother to read. Then it is up to people to discuss about Lego sets instead of politics.

On 10/30/2021 at 9:35 PM, koalayummies said:

Pretty simple.

Not really.

[williejm]

1 hour ago, astral brick said:

Excuse me? The thread is about the pros and cons of privatization claiming to serve the public interest. Pretty clear - even starting from the tags - and made even more clear in another message that you didn't bother to read. Then it is up to people to discuss about Lego sets instead of politics.

So ‘the pros and cons of privatisation claiming to serve the public interest’ is *not* politics? 

[JaBaCaDaBra]

On 10/29/2021 at 1:42 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Cool, you are lucky to have a vintage set like that to play with! 

My uncle sold all his sets (including Yellow Castle!!!!) To buy a mountain bike when he was a teen-ager. Then the hand-me-down sets from a family friend didn't cover quite the same dates/years. 

Paradisa is a theme that attracted a lot of the current FFOLs who use the forum 

I bought some Paradisa sets in the 90's for my daughter.
Now my grandchildren like them so much that I bricklinked all the other sets incl. manuals.

Somewhere... there is the Black Knight castle from the same era.
Lets have a look if the girls like this as much as the Paradisa sets.
 

Edited November 1, 2021 by JaBaCaDaBra

[koalayummies]

17 hours ago, astral brick said:

Excuse me? The thread is about the pros and cons of privatization claiming to serve the public interest. Pretty clear - even starting from the tags - and made even more clear in another message that you didn't bother to read. Then it is up to people to discuss about Lego sets instead of politics.

Hahaha! Every member's topic creation history is viewable to all; there's a distinct pattern here.

[Aanchir]

On 11/1/2021 at 4:00 AM, williejm said:

So ‘the pros and cons of privatisation claiming to serve the public interest’ is *not* politics? 

"Privatisation" is a weird word to use in this sort of context anyhow, seeing as LEGO has always been a private company. And I don't think anybody here is naive enough to think that LEGO would serve the public interest without considering how it benefits their own interests as a company (whether via improvements in their profits, sustainability, PR, or other metrics).

But I still see no reason to scoff at this sort of news. Imagine if tomorrow, LEGO announced plans to bring back the Castle, Pirates, and Space themes. Can you imagine any of us treating that news as an invitation for a cynical debate about "the thin line between a praiseworthy idea and profits" or "the pros and cons of privatization claiming to serve the public interest"?

I imagine a lot more of us would just be excited to see LEGO's interests aligning with our own. In fact, a lot of us would probably be hoping that it WOULD end up being a profitable business decision, since that would help ensure continued investment in those interests.

The same can just as easily apply to this situation. I imagine there are numerous ways that LEGO expects the efforts and investments mentioned in this article to benefit them as a business — besides being good PR, pushing back against gender bias could also help grow and diversify the audience of various LEGO themes, and reduce pressures that often DISCOURAGE kids from buying certain sets.

But that doesn't mean that LEGO investing in these sorts of efforts is a bad thing for the rest of us! Particularly when many of us have had firsthand experience with these sorts of biases, including in ways that have hampered or tarnished our experiences as LEGO fans.

[Peppermint_M]

On 11/1/2021 at 6:22 AM, astral brick said:

privatization

That word, I don't think it means what you think it means...

[astral brick]

22 hours ago, Aanchir said:

... And I don't think anybody here is naive enough to think that LEGO would serve the public interest without considering how it benefits their own interests as a company (whether via improvements in their profits, sustainability, PR, or other metrics).

Considering what I generally read in this forum, I wouldn't be so sure about that.

22 hours ago, Aanchir said:

But I still see no reason to scoff at this sort of news.

For the same reason why many people are criticizing Apple selling expensive phones without a charger and justifying its absence with environmental protection purposes. 

22 hours ago, Aanchir said:

But that doesn't mean that LEGO investing in these sorts of efforts is a bad thing for the rest of us! Particularly when many of us have had firsthand experience with these sorts of biases, including in ways that have hampered or tarnished our experiences as LEGO fans.

Thank you for the first answer in this thread not being ot, you made your point arguing your political stance.