Recommended Posts

Wait...so you are saying Lego shouldn't include a female knight because they weren't common, from a purely real-world historical reference point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cherry picking.

I can say that there sheeps are white, as they normally are.

One black over thousands doesn't change the matter.

Thanks.

That is just not true, but it could be a language issue.

All sheep are white: False

Most sheep are white: True

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two aspects to female warriors in toys. Historically speaking female warriors were less common than their mail counterparts. That even goes on now. Yesterday the first US Army Ranger class to admit women graduated two of the nineteen that began the training. However, this has varied in different cultures. I do not believe that women were uncommon warriors in Viking culture for example. Nexo Knights being sci-fantasy can decided for themselves how common female warriors are in that fictional world.

The second aspect is how will the target demographic (boys) respond to the inclusion of female characters. I never had any such problems as a kid and I know that my niece will love Nexo Knights (she also loves Ninjago, Star Wars, and Friends). But Itaria's experience comes from working in a toy store in Italy so his experience is different than mine.

But even in the United States, I have seen mothers drag their daughters away from the LEGO ailse because it was boy toys. Is it LEGO responsibility to change how parents gender program their children? I don't think so. But it is a good business decision for LEGO to make Nexo Knights appeal as broadly as possible. That includes adding female hereos and villians to NK as well as stuff for AFOLs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want to talk history, I can delve into pre-Roman Celtic social equality. This isn't the place for that discussion, though.

Modern sensibilities drive TLG's choices in character development. Female knights in a fantasy realm that includes some technology makes enough sense as anything, given modern attitudes about children's toys.

This theme isn't going to please everybody, but it could be popular with the target kid audience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gedren, make no mistake, I am in favor of female knights or other warriors in Nexo Knights and other LEGO themes. However, I had lengthy and I believe respectful discussions with Itaria on his opinion.

Keep in mind LEGO is a global brand so modern sensibilites vary depending on the part of the world. Itaria has pointed out in the past that he has often seen boys deciding against a LEGO set because it included a female minifigure. And he is not the only one that has seen it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was that we don't need to hash out that discussion here.

Nexo Knights; what is rumored, what is known. We have a banner, some set and character names with price points. The likelihood of a major media campaign. I see a theme centered on play, like I used to with my old He-Man toys. I had Teela, by the way.

I will probably be able to adapt much of this to my GOH building, but some will have to go into my sci-fi collection. I have a grand space station market build planned for some time in the future, so adding to that selection while acquiring parts for other themes just makes good economic sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep I just said that, in my personal humble opinion, I hope that they are all males.

And that, and this is not arguable, female knights are less historical, as there weren't such in the middle age.

(1 every 100000 doesn't count as I'ave already explained, as this NK Female Knight would be 1 out of 4, not 1 out of 100000).

I think that forcing a gender into a role that did not appear is sexist. As much as I found sexist to forcefully include female pirates, I do think it's sexist to forcefully include female knights.

I didn't want to start a fight, but I think I have totally my rights to be less or more disappointed from TLG's choices.

After all there were also feminists disappointed over Friends' theme (still asking myself why) or Disney Princesses (please...)

Just my 2 cents.

Edited by Itaria No Shintaku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to argue Earth historical context, which probably has no bearing here anyway. That is all I am saying. Not your cup of tea, okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last time we got a female knight was before most of the modern printing advancements, so I'll be interested to see the new interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone noticed the puns in the names? :tongue:

Clay - claymore

Macy - mace

Robin - Robin Hood

Aaron - arrow

Very nice! I love me some meaningful names.

Yep I just said that, in my personal humble opinion, I hope that they are all males.

And that, and this is not arguable, female knights are less historical, as there weren't such in the middle age.

(1 every 100000 doesn't count as I'ave already explained, as this NK Female Knight would be 1 out of 4, not 1 out of 100000).

I think that forcing a gender into a role that did not appear is sexist. As much as I found sexist to forcefully include female pirates, I do think it's sexist to forcefully include female knights.

I didn't want to start a fight, but I think I have totally my rights to be less or more disappointed from TLG's choices.

Well, as others have said, this is fantasy, not history. Fantasy means freedom to imagine things in terms of what makes for the best storytelling, not just in terms of what used to be realistic back when society was more ignorant. Specifically, this seems like it's futuristic science-fantasy — it has robot horses, for crying out loud! So there's no reason to expect it to adhere to gender roles that even in the present day are centuries out of date.

I'm really pleased that it seems like one of the main characters (not just a supporting character) will be female. Obviously this isn't some bold new stride for the LEGO Group — Legends of Chima also had one female character among its main heroes — but it at least indicates this won't be a step backwards when it comes to gender representation. I hope there are also some female supporting characters and villains in order to help avoid "token girl syndrome". Again, Legends of Chima was somewhat good about this — even though only around a sixth of its characters were female, it still had enough VARIETY of female characters that no one character had to be a stand-in for girls and women in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a father of a 8 year old girl, the female eagle character from Chima (Eris?) was a huge part of her interest in that product line.

Also as a father of a 4 year old boy, I distinctly remember him turning up his nice at the 2 female lions in the Lion Tribe troop box. He promptly traded them to his older sister, regardless of any cajoling on my part to accept this minifigures.

So I see both sides here on this gender debate. I don't envy the line Lego has to walk.

Btw, as an AFOL parent I dread having to watch any Nexo Knight cartons. The Chima one had me wanting to claw my eyes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Itaria has pointed out in the past that he has often seen boys deciding against a LEGO set because it included a female minifigure. And he is not the only one that has seen it.

I am male, and as a kid I practically sought out sets with female minifigs in them, no matter what the theme. Luckily my relatives had no qualms about me wanting Paradisa sets etc. And this all happened in the early 90's, when the male-to-female ratio for minifigs was far more unbalanced than it is today.

I'm saying that kids are different, so LEGO sets should be varied as well.

Yep I just said that, in my personal humble opinion, I hope that they are all males.

Not a very "humble" opinion.

And that, and this is not arguable, female knights are less historical, as there weren't such in the middle age.

I think that forcing a gender into a role that did not appear is sexist. As much as I found sexist to forcefully include female pirates, I do think it's sexist to forcefully include female knights.

Wow... Just wow... There were inarguably female knights and even more female pirates, so to say they are historically inaccurate is simply false.

Sexism, on the other hand, means discrimination based on gender, which is exactly what you are advocating here. It is particularly harmful since LEGO is aimed mostly towards children who are just learning about the world and the way it works. If they never see a female knight or a female pirate featured in any popular media or product, they will start to think they have never existed - just like you.

In any case, as others have pointed out, LEGO sets are fantasy-based, and they have never been based on actual historical events. So why couldn't there be female knights or female pirates, even if they hadn't been historically accurate? Have you got no imagination?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. This theme is making no pretenses of being historical, and today's sensibilities call for gender diversity. Having a leading female protagonist is expected these days. I also enjoy female characters more. Usually, they're more interesting.

And there were always exceptions. Females in history were not universally out of the action. There were a few female knights, gladiators, and pirates. Wanting to keep heroic females out of the theme to represent historical accuracy is questionable, but in a theme that's not trying to be accurate, asking for that is discriminatory.

I hate how frequently AFOLs forget that LEGO is first and foremost for children. If these kids grow up thinking that females aren't capable of the same things as males, then it will shape their views and beliefs as an adult.

Edited by 8BrickMario

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really pleased that it seems like one of the main characters (not just a supporting character) will be female. Obviously this isn't some bold new stride for the LEGO Group — Legends of Chima also had one female character among its main heroes — but it at least indicates this won't be a step backwards when it comes to gender representation. I hope there are also some female supporting characters and villains in order to help avoid "token girl syndrome". Again, Legends of Chima was somewhat good about this — even though only around a sixth of its characters were female, it still had enough VARIETY of female characters that no one character had to be a stand-in for girls and women in general.

I am very pleased with this as well. If their names are any indication to their choice of weapons, "Macy" could even be wielding a huge mace. :grin: And "Lavaria" sounds like the name of a female villain to me. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, myself really just want to see the villains and castles, as far as females go, I'm all for it, because over the last few years TLG has made some pretty cool female mini figures:

pic81A08FE1B6C0C0A48B24421EF16AF0E9.pngLego-Zombie-Bride-300x300.jpg11981.jpg$_35.JPG$_35.JPGcas421.jpglego-banshee-series-14-minifigure.jpg717lVW1ZrNL._SY355_.jpg41exb1fgr6L._SY355_.jpg250px-Spylyn.jpg8627795494_2709251ddd_m.jpg$T2eC16V,!ysE9sy0iOwqBR+WbR4+D!~~60_35.JPGloc039.jpg

P.S. I would really like a real female antagonist, as the main villain.

Edited by Dr.Cogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still want that Troll Sorceress...She appealed to me because she was the main villain and she was female!

So I'll be happy to see Macy be female. As long as her personality is realistic and not a stereotype, then I'll be pleased.

When will we see pics? I need to know what Jestro looks like!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the line includes "mechanical printed horses" a'la 70172 shark then it is fine by me. Also if they have normal castle-usable helms and armors then they are fine as well. And last but not least, they better have buildings made out of stones and bricks and not sci-fi spaceships...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am male, and as a kid I practically sought out sets with female minifigs in them, no matter what the theme. Luckily my relatives had no qualms about me wanting Paradisa sets etc. And this all happened in the early 90's, when the male-to-female ratio for minifigs was far more unbalanced than it is today.

I'm saying that kids are different, so LEGO sets should be varied as well.

Not a very "humble" opinion.

Wow... Just wow... There were inarguably female knights and even more female pirates, so to say they are historically inaccurate is simply false.

Sexism, on the other hand, means discrimination based on gender, which is exactly what you are advocating here. It is particularly harmful since LEGO is aimed mostly towards children who are just learning about the world and the way it works. If they never see a female knight or a female pirate featured in any popular media or product, they will start to think they have never existed - just like you.

In any case, as others have pointed out, LEGO sets are fantasy-based, and they have never been based on actual historical events. So why couldn't there be female knights or female pirates, even if they hadn't been historically accurate? Have you got no imagination?

I am surprised how I can be target of such strawman arguments.

I never told that there weren't female knights or pirates, but that was "as if".

As much as we didn't have black people as knights.

History went this way. Whether we like it or not.

68 female knights over zillions of male knights do only confirm what I was saying.

That if LEGO wanted to introduce a girl knight, if historically, they should have released hundreds of male kinghits before releasing a female one.

Same for pirates.

Instead, why ONE out of FOUR?

If we like gender equity, and we usually have more women in the world, out of four knights we should have had 2 or 3 women.

My argument is the same of making, in the new movie of the fantastic four, the human torch as a black guy. Why? It always have been a blonde white man.

This is reverse racism. Which is indeed racism.

And what I was talking is reverse sexism. (Mostly like the all-female ghostbusters).

I am only displeased when something is being changed for a reason that is the opposite of what is meant.

By the way if you want to continue on your argument, I'm over with it.

I was told that I cannot be entitled to have an opinion and this is ridicolous in my way of viewing the world.

So I will chit-chat about LEGO and no more about what I like or dislike, since I see that some people have unappropriate reactions when someone just express his flavours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it bad to be more diverse? My understanding is that you're saying a female knight is wrong because it didn't happen often. But we live in a society where diversity is accepted, and so we are expected to represent that in media. Since this is not historical in any way, there's nothing wrong with a female in the group.

As for changing a character's race, that's really tricky. While diversity is good, shoehorning it in like that and changing the race of a character is obviously trying too hard. But then there's the other question: Why should their race matter at all?

I do agree that the "token minority" stuff is annoying and clumsy. I would appreciate another female knight instead of just one out of four.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That if LEGO wanted to introduce a girl knight, if historically, they should have released hundreds of male kinghits before releasing a female one.

By this logic LEGO needs to make hundreds of peasant figures before they can make one knight. LEGO figures are not a statistical sampling of a population, they are meant to be fun characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the interest of historical accuracy, TLG should introduce sets based on the plague, leper colonies, witch trials, and church schisms. Castle moats should be filled with reddish brown 1x1 round plates simulating sewage. Only one in 10000 minifigures should be equipped with plate armor. Swords would likewise be very rare. There wouldn't be much uniformity in soldiers' clothes, except maybe for palace guards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.