Disney Princess 2014 Rumors & Discussion

[BlueberryWaffles]

Beauty and the Beast. REALLY want to see how they'd do the Beast.

[Mr Meleca]

the problem will be the big set of the 2014 winter...

must be a huge castle, cinderella maybe...

[kermit]

Im guessing the castle will have lots of pink.

[DrLegostar]

Is it too much to hope that these will be actual minifigures and not the minidolls?

[just2good]

Is it too much to hope that these will be actual minifigures and not the minidolls?

All of the rumors from different source said they would be minidolls, but whatever floats your boat.

The only way we'd get minifigures for the princesses would be through Cuusoo.

[Aanchir]

Sounds like a positively awful theme to me. Lego start moving forward with Friends by giving the girls plucky nature and proactive outlook and then Lego take a huge step backwards with the misogynistic, white supremecist world of Disney Princesses. Well done Lego. Way to go.

Well, let's be a bit fair here. A lot of the films the Disney Princess franchise draws inspiration from are pretty good and inspiring stories, particularly those from the last few decades (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, Mulan, Tangled, and Brave). Even if they have shades of generic fairytale romance, they also present some fairly positive and progressive messages.

Part of this really makes me wonder how this theme will be designed. Will it be authentic to the source material, like the previous Disney licensed themes, or will it be stylized and sanitized like a lot of Disney Princess merchandise, including the Duplo line? I'd love if it were authentic... can you imagine a set inspired by the royal palace in Agrabah?

The rumored set names DO make it sound like the sets will be inspired by actual movie scenes (including Merida's Highland Games, which also assures us not all the sets will be designed around themes of luxury, beauty, and romance), so hopefully that's a good sign.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

I feel the same. I enjoy the Friends theme and I love how the girls in the story are described as proactive and competent. It has gotten many girls young and old building and the toy is great! It speaks to me in so many ways. (Also I've learned it is the forth best selling theme for 2012 [City, SW, Ninjago, Friends]).

I dread the Disney Princess theme. I won't buy any Lego theme with them. I will probably find the sets attractive but I won't spend a dime. Anyways: it will be a money cow for lego and it will be interesting to learn more about the designs.

AFOLs won't but if you had a girl, you would probably end with some of them in your house.

Sounds like a positively awful theme to me. Lego start moving forward with Friends by giving the girls plucky nature and proactive outlook and then Lego take a huge step backwards with the misogynistic, white supremecist world of Disney Princesses. Well done Lego. Way to go.

Yeah, let's burn disney, Lego and even the Olympic Games because they get man and woman separated. How frustrating.

[Emma]

Super excited for this - although I'm picturing Lego versions of the scenes right from the movies (ie for one of Ariel's: the branches of a light teal willow surrounding a blue lagoon with lily pads and bull rushes, some glow-in-the-dark fireflies, and Sebastian); if they make it really princess-y with lots of pinks , that would be disappointing.

Like several others have said, I too would prefer minifigures over minidolls, but if the sets themselves are faithful to the source material, I'd be happy with that.

[Sisilisko]

AFOLs won't but if you had a girl, you would probably end with some of them in your house.

Ha ha ha: well now, well meaning grandparents are always a treat aren't they?

For me it's no problem: I have boys. We will escape all princesses with ease.

Plus, their mama is a Queen: who needs princesses?

[TheLegoDr]

This will be exciting. My daughter will flip out. She loves Friends and princesses...

Plus, I'm sure most of the pieces will come in handy for building other things, so that will work out for everyone.

[TJJohn12]

Yeah, let's burn disney, Lego and even the Olympic Games because they get man and woman separated. How frustrating.

I'm pretty sure that's not what was frustrating Jargo, and I'm pretty sure that was decidedly clear from his comment. I too think it's frustrating we've had the Friends line, a theme that, by and large, was about empowering girls and young women by offering independent role models who did science, built tree houses, ran businesses all without the need of a man in the picture to approve/supervise.

Contrast that underlying message of girl empowerment with the majority of Disney Princess fare: films centered around finding your prince to sweep you off your feet and present you a life of luxury and your most wanted desires. Snow White is about a prince having to save the damsel in distress. Ditto for Cinderella. Ditto for Ariel (with an added dash of selling out who you really are to get a flush man).

The only major film that bucks this trend, The Princess and the Frog, where Tiana is focused on making her own way in the world and discovers love along the way organically, is conspicuously absent from the set list. It's also the one sliver of racial diversity which Disney has introduced in the princess world and the one sliver LEGO could have included in the lineup. But no dice.

So I think Jargo's criticism of, "misogynistic, white supremacist world," is pretty spot on.

-John

[Itaria No Shintaku]

So I think Jargo's criticism of, "misogynistic, white supremacist world," is pretty spot on.

-John

I totally disagree and I believe that dismembering children's cartoons in this way trying to find a forced relation to misogynism is really facticious.

Even if you were right and we erased from the world the disney princesses... thinking what's best for us and not for our children (girls I know LOVE disney princesses and they do not care at all what a gender role is)... then our girls would raise without disney princesses but seeing everywhere the objectization of a woman, since I see butts and boobs nearly everywhere, on internet, on tv ads, in movies... at least the disney princesses give a model of a nice girl who behaves and loves... instead I really see teenage girls becoming like bratz...

I really fail to see why bratz are ok and disney princesses are evil... really.

[Jargo]

Thank you John.

To be honest, I kept my post brief because I didn't want to rant about this. I accept that Lego is a business and the pink and girly market is a huge cash cow. I expect Lego to tap into markets that yield large profits. They'd be stupid not to. However, if Lego take a stance against giving modern city sets guns and won't make real world military products then to me it seems hypocritical to produce sets that belittle the worth of females. That actually objectify them.

Yes I may be at odds with many people on this and I have to object to Itaria's sneering comment here, but I only want equality.I actually believe that fairytales can provide solid moral lessons that help ground a young mind, but not the sugar coated sanitised kind of fairytale Disney sells.

Anyway, enough of this. Disney sucks and Lego suck if they help in reinforcing gender stereotypes. That's my stance and that's the last I'm going to say on the matter.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

However, if Lego take a stance against giving modern city sets guns and won't make real world military products then to me it seems hypocritical to produce sets that belittle the worth of females. That actually objectify them.

a) IMHO thinking that "those lego sets would belittle the worth of females" is REALLY facticious. Sorry you're really pushing too far. I would understood if Lego made a Female Strip Club... or a "Miss America contest" set. But this is ... I mean I don't mean absolutely to offend you but I can't take you too seriously man. Lego uses to belittle the worth of males and nobody gives a damn... I am surprised to see the reverse argument on sets that are just speculated to appear in a future.

b) Being against war and SUPPOSEDLY being against gender equality are two arguments to me that can't be even compared. One phenomena is objective, the other is subjective.

EDIT:

Before someone asks me where TLC would have belittled the worth of males, here there are some examples just for you

1) In minifigures book pag.98 edited by lego : "Despite her superior brainpower (the cavewoman) is very fond of her lovably primitive mate and does her best to protect him" (never heard something on the other figures that was a counterpart for such a sexist sentence)

2) Lego scientists... if male, they are mad scientist (already FOUR examples of this), if female, normal ones (already 2 examples of this)

3) No female construction workers, the hard work is for stupid men only

4) No female burglars/thieves/convicts. Girls are good, men are bad.

5) The Lego Movie... the two main characters: a clumsy silly looking man and a bold resolute girl

... could go on forever...

Edited September 8, 2013 by Itaria No Shintaku

[Laura Beinbrech]

Sounds like a positively awful theme to me. Lego start moving forward with Friends by giving the girls plucky nature and proactive outlook and then Lego take a huge step backwards with the misogynistic, white supremecist world of Disney Princesses. Well done Lego. Way to go.

Yeah, because Jasmine, Rapunzel from Tangled, Tianna, Mulan and Merida were such completely submissive doormats.... Oh wait, they weren't Seriously, this kind of attitude reflects, at a minimum, a dismal lack of research into the subject matter (at least 3 of the "princesses" mentioned were the main character of the story and weren't even LOOKING for romance or to be rescued by Prince Charming.) Granted, some of the older movies like Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty and Snow White DO fit your characterization, however if you look at the time they were made (Snow White was made in the 1930's, close to 80 years ago!), they were pretty fair for their day.

That said, I'm actually excited for these sets. I'm hoping that the prince in Ariel's Enchated Kiss set is wearing his Naval Officer type outfit, because that would really be useful, and I'm likely to get at least one of the sets with Ariel to beef up my merfolk faction. I'd also like to get Merida's Highland Games and possibly Cinderella's Castle (depending on what the final version looks like) to represent Disney World in Orlando (Where my wife and I spent our honeymoon). I'd also get a few of the sets just so I could get some fancy minidoll dresses as well.

[badbob001]

This makes perfect sense. Now that LEGO has all these new girl fans via the Friends line, they need to introduce some 'compatible' non-Friends sets for them to expand their collection. I think once their girl audience is of sufficient size, then it will be more practical financially to introduce more progressive and less stereo-typical sets.

It's probably not too practical and realistic to put so much expectation on a pre-teen toy to have such a big influence on our children's lives. Wait until they are teenagers and then you'll worry about many other influences. Our children may not even want to buy our idealized version of the toy. I've seen so many comments about pink, lip color, breasts outlines, etc that I'm starting to think that some of us just don't want to change the status quo and want everyone to buy into the same Star Wars and Ninjago sets. It seems unfair why we aren't constantly complaining that most of the sets, especially the popular ones, are all about violence and conflict.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

This makes perfect sense. Now that LEGO has all these new girl fans via the Friends line, they need to introduce some 'compatible' non-Friends sets for them to expand their collection. I think once their girl audience is of sufficient size, then it will be more practical financially to introduce more progressive and less stereo-typical sets.

It's probably not too practical and realistic to put so much expectation on a pre-teen toy to have such a big influence on our children's lives. Wait until they are teenagers and then you'll worry about many other influences. Our children may not even want to buy our idealized version of the toy. I've seen so many comments about pink, lip color, breasts outlines, etc that I'm starting to think that some of us just don't want to change the status quo and want everyone to buy into the same Star Wars and Ninjago sets. It seems unfair why we aren't constantly complaining that most of the sets, especially the popular ones, are all about violence and conflict.

Agreed!

[Blakstone]

I have no issue with the Disney minidoll line. Yes, the criticism leveled at the older Disney films are true. But Snow White came out in 1937. In the last several decades Disney has made much progressive changes to their newer movies. Though I still have an issue with Beauty and the Beast where she has to change a man with anger management issues. I would want my daughter to walk away from a man like that.

I still believe that it is better to introduce more kids to LEGO. If this Disney line gets more girls into building, it is a good thing. LEGO has proven adept to handling concerns about gender stereotypes with the Friends line and I believe that they will do it with this line as well.

[Gryphon Ink]

Yeah, let's burn disney, Lego and even the Olympic Games because they get man and woman separated. How frustrating.

Here we go again!

Even if you were right and we erased from the world the disney princesses... thinking what's best for us and not for our children (girls I know LOVE disney princesses and they do not care at all what a gender role is)...

Do you really think it makes any difference if they know what a gender role is? They are forced into those roles regardless of whether they're aware of the influence. Most preschoolers I know don't know what gravity is, but they still fall down and not up, and if the fall is hard enough it can hurt them badly. Gender roles can do the same thing. It just takes longer.

And no, it doesn't matter in the slightest what kids LOVE. Kids generally love sugar and chocolate and hate vegetables of almost every kind. A parent who gives hir kids nothing but sugar and chocolate to eat because, hey, that's what the kid LOVES! is no kind of parent at all. Our job as parents is to give our kids what's good for them, not necessarily what they want. And it is our job to figure out how much "junk food", whether it's actual food or metaphorical food like TV or books or toys, it's good for them to have. I let my kids have some candy here and there, but they certainly don't need to have it all the time. I let them eat sweetened cereal for breakfast sometimes, but I'm not about to buy them Super Sweetness Honey Sugar Coco Rainbow Frosty Pops. Would my 5YO daughter like to have some SSHSCRFP instead of the mildly sweetened healthy cereal? You bet your buns she would. Are you going to try to tell me I'd be a better father if I gave her what she wanted? Likewise, I let her watch Disney movies sometimes, too. (I know; shock, horror, what a hypocrite!) That doesn't mean I'm going to sit back and watch Disney take over every aspect of her childhood without at least serving up a contrary opinion and a little bit of commentary.

Yes, we make judgement calls. That's how parenting works. If you do not exercise your experience and your intellect to judge what is best for your children, you are not a parent. Sure, kids need to have some fun and they need room to grow. They do NOT need to be set loose on the world without protection and without boundaries and told "go do whatever you want, sweetie! It's all good!"

then our girls would raise without disney princesses but seeing everywhere the objectization of a woman, since I see butts and boobs nearly everywhere, on internet, on tv ads, in movies... at least the disney princesses give a model of a nice girl who behaves and loves... instead I really see teenage girls becoming like bratz...

Really, you're seeing a lot of gratuitous butts and boobs in children's movies? Can you tell me where exactly? I'll grant you the TV ads, and I'll give you a solution: turn the damn TV off and keep it off. Shazam, no more TV ads!

I really fail to see why bratz are ok and disney princesses are evil... really.

Show me one person anywhere on this website who said "Bratz are OK". We are talking about Disney Princesses because that's speculated to be the subject of this theme. This discussion is not a quantitative listing of the world's most evil toys and most toxic entertainment franchises. It's a discussion of a certain franchise that happens to be rumored as the upcoming Lego girls' theme. WTF do Bratz have to do with it?

[Gryphon Ink]

Before someone asks me where TLC would have belittled the worth of males, here there are some examples just for you

1) In minifigures book pag.98 edited by lego : "Despite her superior brainpower (the cavewoman) is very fond of her lovably primitive mate and does her best to protect him" (never heard something on the other figures that was a counterpart for such a sexist sentence)

2) Lego scientists... if male, they are mad scientist (already FOUR examples of this), if female, normal ones (already 2 examples of this)

3) No female construction workers, the hard work is for stupid men only

4) No female burglars/thieves/convicts. Girls are good, men are bad.

5) The Lego Movie... the two main characters: a clumsy silly looking man and a bold resolute girl

... could go on forever...

No, you really couldn't go on forever, because that's IT. That's all the examples you can give. As opposed to:

1) Every boss of every faction of every "non-girly" theme TLG ever produced (except for Chima, which has ONE female-led faction): MALE.

2) Every "hero figure", i.e. the main protagonist of every "non-girly" theme TLG ever produced: MALE.

3) Every chief of police, Mayor, Fire Chief, pilot and top medical personnel in every theme TLG ever produced: MALE.

4) Well over nine-tenths of all minifigs, and 3/4 of all CMFs: MALE.

5) Every person whose "job description" was to get into trouble and be rescued by the almost overwhelmingly male heroes in Lego themes: children or women.

[DrLegostar]

Oh my gosh! It's almost as if some men are dumb and some are competent and skilled at their jobs, and some women are damsels in distress and others are smart and kick butt. That doesn't sound like the real world at all.*

*Or at least every cliched stereotype covered by all kinds of other media.

Edited September 10, 2013 by DrLegostar

[Itaria No Shintaku]

No, you really couldn't go on forever, because that's IT. That's all the examples you can give. As opposed to:

1) Every boss of every faction of every "non-girly" theme TLG ever produced (except for Chima, which has ONE female-led faction): MALE.

Including the bad guys. But not an hint at hit?

2) Every "hero figure", i.e. the main protagonist of every "non-girly" theme TLG ever produced: MALE.

Wrong. Nya, Pippin Reed, etc...

3) Every chief of police, Mayor, Fire Chief, pilot and top medical personnel in every theme TLG ever produced: MALE.

Depicting the real world. And mostly wrong. Name a MALE medical personnel in the CMF series, whereas the nurse and the surgeon are FEMALE.

4) Well over nine-tenths of all minifigs, and 3/4 of all CMFs: MALE.

Do this surprises you for a MALE toy?

5) Every person whose "job description" was to get into trouble and be rescued by the almost overwhelmingly male heroes in Lego themes: children or women.

Probably you are not reading what I wrote.

I am a little bit tired in explaining this, but adults are mostly biased and can't see with the eyes of a child.

I CLEARLY remember when I was a child I disliked and found USELESS most of the female minifigures. As an adult I find a use for them, but as a kid I really though "Hey what the heck... another female minifigure? I mean, I just bought the Black Seas Barracuda, what's a FEMALE PIRATE doing here? They could have made another cool pirate, what a waste of plastic".

And actually that was it, name famous female pirates that jusitfy them into a lego set, I dare you.

Lego is ALWAYS siding with feminist as far as the points that I just cited, mostly in the minifigure book, all the rest are conjectures and ideas, on the minifigure book they unveil their feminist (sexist) side written down black on white, you can't miss it or can't be misunderstood. That's it, clear, easy.

They are so siding with feminists that they have to insert female characters even if they know that they are going AGAINST their selling market.

Picture this: very same set, same pieces, same things, one from Lego, one from Mega Bloks, except: LEGO has 1 female minifigure swapped with MegaBloks which has the same number of minifigures, but all males. Which one will the random boy buy? The mega bloks one.

So lego is already siding with feminists! I can go on forever on this topic, you seem mostly all failing to understand that lego is MAINLY a male toy.

You do not understand this because most of you is convinced, wrongly, that there are no male and female toys, that our brains are the same (which is totally a scientific heresy).

Plus all your five examples say the very same thing: most minifigures are male, most important roles are male.

WOW! I'm amazed! I never thought that a MALE toy would have portraited mostly MALE figures.

Do you happen to complain at the "Masters of the Universe" because they only hade Sorceress as a female character?

Do you happen to complain at the Ghostbusters because they are, well, four and 100% male?

Do you happen to complain at Ninja Turtles because... well among 4 turtles they could have make a female one... yet they didn't.

I recalled 3 of my best toys from my childhood and whassup, all male characters...

I think you should take it easier, really, you wouldn't end complaining over and over with toy companies if you didn't accept that boys prefere male characters and girls prefere female characters.

[Itaria No Shintaku]

I want to add two more lines to summarize it:

I find ridicolous that Lego should avoid doing Disney princesses because they are supposedly mysoginistic, that they should put more female characters in their sets because our children must learn that females do exist (I bet they have eyes on their own to understand this) and that Lego should put female leaders in factions. I am mostly sure that boys would just ignore those minifigures or have little play for it. I am mostly sure that NYA ha sold VERY LESS than the other ninjago minifigure.

I found examples on sweets vs vegetables absolutely not fitting and I find it stupid that I have to point stuff like:

Really, you're seeing a lot of gratuitous butts and boobs in children's movies? Can you tell me where exactly?

I can tell trillions of examples, the first that comes to my mind is the Transformers movie. TRANSFORMERS ARE A TOY, so I would supposedly take a kid seeing such movie, for having the boobs and butt of Megan Fox spreaded all over? What?!!? And you complain about Lego doing Disney Princesses? This can't be serious.

I repeat, I sell toys, and I know what I am talking about.

I just tell, say, and repeat that boys will like male minifigures. That's it.

Then we can politely discuss about the fact: "Should we force them to play with female miniifigures?"

This is a whole completely different case.

Provided you understand that boys will like more male minifigures, we can start from this point over and discuss the fact wheter is right or wrong to force them to play with female minifigures, to place a female police chief in their fantasy imaginary town and so on.

It has been discussed for years if it was right to force a lefty boy to use the right hand, and now they say we don't have to force him.

So following the very same rule I don't believe it's right to force a kid to play with female minifigures. That's my point of view and I don't think anybody can tell me I'm wrong.

[Gryphon Ink]

I find ridicolous that Lego should avoid doing Disney princesses because they are supposedly mysoginistic...

I find it equally ridiculous that Lego should avoid making female pirates because Itaria No Shintaku thought they were a waste of plastic when he was eight years old, and his adult counterpart believes that Lego is a boys' toy.

... that they should put more female characters in their sets

Nobody was saying anything like this until you came in and derailed the discussion with the old "TLG are female supremacists and this is why" song and dance. We were discussing the pros and cons of Disney Princesses, believe it or not.

... because our children must learn that females do exist (I bet they have eyes on their own to understand this) and that Lego should put female leaders in factions.

That's not why they should include more female heroes and leaders, and nobody ever said it was. It's because some children, only something like 50% of them, are not boys. And the ones who are not boys deserve some playtime with positive role models too. All of your points seem to revolve around the idea that boys shouldn't be forced to play with female toys. That's fine. Nobody said they should have to. If 8YO INS doesn't want to play with that poor lone female pirate minifig, he can chuck the thing in the trash. What is your random 8YO girl who likes Lego supposed to do if her new pirates set doesn't include one single female minifig? Is it totally okay for her to have to play with male toys?

I can tell trillions of examples, the first that comes to my mind is the Transformers movie. TRANSFORMERS ARE A TOY, so I would supposedly take a kid seeing such movie, for having the boobs and butt of Megan Fox spreaded all over? What?!!? And you complain about Lego doing Disney Princesses? This can't be serious.

And somehow you missed the thousands of complaints, articles and negative reviews from many, many people, including disgusted parents, who were deeply unhappy with the way Megan Fox was sexualized in those movies, not to mention all the other inappropriate content that they featured. Well, since you didn't notice it, let me tell you, we did indeed complain about it every time. And for the most part, we were outvoted by millions of men who told us we needed to lighten up because it was just a harmless action movie and we were totally imagining the sexism and racism in the movies and we should stop trying to force our evil feminist, antiracist agenda on the entertainment world. Does this sound at all familiar?

Then we can politely discuss about the fact: "Should we force them to play with female miniifigures?" This is a whole completely different case.

Actually, if it's all the same to you, this discussion was about Disney Princesses.

[Haltiamieli]

I think the theme has much possibilities and many possible trapfalls. But I'm not very familiar with Disney princesses and even less so with the Disney Princesses franchise, so I'll try to keep an open mind... Calm now, outraged later.

I CLEARLY remember when I was a child I disliked and found USELESS most of the female minifigures. As an adult I find a use for them, but as a kid I really though "Hey what the heck... another female minifigure? I mean, I just bought the Black Seas Barracuda, what's a FEMALE PIRATE doing here? They could have made another cool pirate, what a waste of plastic".

I clearly remember when I was a child I liked and found useful most of the female minifigures - though back then the figures tended to be rather unisex, of course. But I certainly I didn't scorn the pigtail hair piece nor the long hair piece. I did dislike the female pirate (I didn't have BSB, sadly, but had the figure from a pirates figure pack), not because of its sex but because the face was so atrociously designed.

And actually that was it, name famous female pirates that jusitfy them into a lego set, I dare you.

From the top of my head I can name four pirates, two of which are female: Blackbeard, Calico-Jack, Anne Bonny and Mary Read. That's not a list a typical kid would utter, of course, but Bonny and Read are famous (if not nearly as famous as the two males I mentioned), though much of it stems from the very fact of them being exceptions in the predominantly male world of pirates.