The position and future of Friends and minidolls in Lego?

[Dorayaki]

Article revision: 2018 May

Before the main topic, here is a simple showcase of how the issue looks like:

This thought was hidden in my mind when The LEGO Movie was announced early in 2013. As a person who grew up ith Belville after by dark age, I was very glad that LEGO shed more light and eventually reintroduce a minifigure-scale theme for girls. However, everything begins to turn out and show that LEGO's plan might not be what we really expected.

Introduction to the "Minidolls"

So before the discussion, I'd like to go back to the origin of Friends and their minidolls. Sorry to quote Pandora's comments about the interview with the LEGO Friends designers.

Quote

Did you consider using the standard minifigure?

Actually we started with designing models with the existing minifigures, but when we tested with the girls, they kept telling us that they were not appealing to them. And we also realized how important figures are for the girls play. When girls play they project themselves onto the figures they are playing with, making the figure beautiful and feminine means it is easier for the girls to relate to.

How did you come up with the idea and design for the minidoll?

After we found out that the minifigure did not work for most of the girls, we simply started with designing different concepts of figures with different looks and different types of functionality.

We learned that it is a must that figures are beautiful. It was also important to us that the figure had recognizable LEGO DNA. This meant that the figures should have almost the same functionality as the minifugure, but also features like the hands should be recognizably LEGO. The modularity of the figure is also important and girls really like that they can change the figures hair, they like to change the figures parts like torsos and legs so that they can wear different clothes.

Most of the controversies pointed their fingers at how TLC tried to differentiate girls from boys in their toys because some of the AFOLs believe that Lego is still acceptable to girls. But Lego is somewhat correct in their viewpoint of market---- the current Lego products have a limited effect of appealing younger girls, so they must do something to make up. The ultimate result is the birth of minidolls.

So, if minidolls didn't appear alnog with Friends, what would have happened? The answer is the difference between Friends and our traditional City/Town sets, which are both based on our daily modern life. Many elements from Friends are actually what City sets seem to lack of: distinctive and colorful female citizens, indispensable buildings (school, family house). However, due to the fact that both themes don't share the same figures, it results in difficulty of visually mixing the two themes together due to police officers mainly being minifigures and teenagers mainly being minidolls.

We regard the rise of Friends and minidolls as "inevitable" in order to give younger girls a choice . But is this the end of story? Perhaps no, because what the controversies worry about still continue: a market segmentation by gender. Friends have brought about some potential side effects of thoughts: Friends are for girls only, so traditional consumers, AFOLs and boys can't touch them. On the other hand, since girls have their Friends sets, they don't have to be interested in traditional Lego sets that include minifigures. Oh, TLC didn't say anything direclty, but so far many commercials and shows still often hint that traditional Lego sets and minifigures are the truth to Lego, while Friends and minidolls are just some marginal products that were "particularly" made in order to meet those critical needs from girls.

Now the contradiction between minifigures and minidolls is, the former is a historical, iconic figure of Lego franchise, while the latter is a successful pioneer to the market where TLC had been never actually made it to. Minidolls and minifigures seem to become "competitors" even though their creators want both of them to cover the whole toy market peacefully. It becomes more tragic when TLC just tend to keep the light on only one of them.

The cover catalogues seem to be one of the rare peaceful zones that can put friends and other themes together (unless TLC plan to publish an independent catalogue that only include Friends).

There is no standard answer, obviously, but it should be an issue that TLC consider. I like Friends and minidolls as independent products, but they would create a problem if TLC want to have longterm plan with them along with traditional sets (and especially licensed themes). The best result should be a win-win: let girls love what TLC had brought, and let old consumers love what TLC will bring. Don't just think about how to draw attention from a limited range of customers.

Look into other LEGO media advertisings:

The other main topic we focus is, do minidolls successfully strike into public's eyes? And, do LEGO actively bring minidolls into public's eyes? Here are some of the LEGO media tools we've seen so far and let's see how they work this thing

The LEGO Movie

The very first LEGO theatrical film features an original story with all LEGO themes making guest appearances...... well, only some of them. Friends is one of the obviously missing member, which is a difficult guess cause it could be a huge letdown to girls who enter the theater and want to give cheers to the Friends girls. Anyway, I don't really think it bothers to give a Master Builder seat to Olivia.

Some of the discussion suggest that if Finn's sister appears in the future sequel TLM2, could she bring the girls' theme topic into the movie as well? It's a possibility, but the worst chance could be that LEGO just introduce more girly / pink character like Uni-Kitty to "represent" girls' voice.

LEGO Dimensions

The new crossover game title between multple LEGO franchises is currently the number one topic among LEGO fans this year. Although there are some other iconic LEGO themes absent so far, Friends' absense could also mean that LEGO Dimensions loses a huge advantage ---- introducing their original female cast in order to balance the gender ration of current Fun Pack characters lineup.

Some discussions indicate that this game would cater more to videogamer market or licensed fans, but somehow, I think LEGO Dimensions fail to label itself as "best family game" since they're unable to include any license or character that represents major girls. (Disney Princess is unfortunately one of the conflcit license, though) Would future expansions do a better job? I'm not sure about it.

How LEGO view the figure systems, officially?

The LEGO Movie did trigger a series of discussion about minidolls and their characters--- how would they really look like if they officially appear in The LEGO Movie world?

THEORY 1: Minifigures co-exist with Minidolls and other figures

Some of the official videos show such examples:

 

Coincidentally this series of fun video also use the stop-motion technique similiar with LEGO's theatrical film series. And also regarding to the story setting of The LEGO Movie where the LEGO toy collection exist as realworld materials, as there's no restriction to include any specific figure type such as Duplo bricks, this could be what reall happens in the The LEGO Movie canon. Some of the suspection tell that perhaps Finn's father or sister might already owns the minidolls, so if LEGO wants to stick to the real thing setting, that means, it's very possible for the co-existence of minidoll-minifigure to become the real canon.

The major defect is, just as stated above, there's still very little official souce encouraging FOLs to play and mix minidoll themes with minifigures. And if TLM2 wouldn't focus on this point as well, then this theory still doesn't help too much for the minidoll-minifigure issue.

THEORY 2: Based on user's viewpoint:

This theory is simply derived from the real figures we have on hand, since Disney and DC comics both happen to have minidoll and minifigure toys lineup:

 

As we can see, a character can simlutaneously show his/her minidoll and minifigure form. We can enlarge this to actually assume that every LEGO character is supposed to have both minifigure and minidoll form, even if the phsyical toy lineup doesn't show that. This theory can of course apply to other known figure types such as Duplo figures and BrickHeadz.

And actually, this is also an officially-proven theory comes from LEGO News Show which really shows the "transformation" between minifigures and minidolls:

This may have a very good explanation about why certain characters, like The Flash and Wonder Woman, only show up as minifigures in crossover media but not minidolls---- because the media has set the viewpoint in a minifigure-only world. This theory would help decreasing confusion between themes and figure types, especially to those FOLs who don't adore minidolls that much..

But regarding to The LEGO Movie again---- as it strictly based on the real-world viewpoint where only physically made and existed LEGO toys can be represnted, not quite sure if the current minidoll-only characters can show up as minifigures.

Conclusion

There some plans I can come up with, which can be achieved together:

Solution 1: Keep Friends and minidolls, but add more elements that girls like to regular sets and City theme. Girls can have more choices just like most boys can choose between Ninjago and Chima. We see that many girls are also obsessed with collectible minifigures, Ninjago and maybe the upcoming Lego Movie, which proves that there are still some potential to please girls in traditional regular sets. Don't make them think "girls should just go play Friends and leave the others alone".

Solution 2: Let minifigures share spotlights with Friends and minidolls, at least some appearances in some advertising, TV shows or films. When minifigures and minidolls are able to stand together, there is no need to attack each other.

Solution 2.2: Or physically include both minidolls and minifigures in the same set? Uh, it could be an uncceptably terrible, and more controversial idea, I can imagine. Maybe they can consider it if there are some licensed characters fit in that idea.

Solution 3: Endow the "characters" from minidolls with alternate minifigures: we might be unhappy with the minidolls, but not actually with the original / licensed characters which the minidolls represent, because they're not born to be blamed. If we produce minifigures and minidolls together, this could allow consumers to exchange between them or combine City and Friends sets, and the themes can compensate each other.

 

 

 

Regarding to the upcoming The LEGO Movie 2: the second part

We know it's close, and as long as Friends has actually become one of the most popular LEGO theme as well as the second long-running franchise, also LEGO Elves, the second original minidoll theme is also doing a good job, would The LEGO Movie 2 eventually cast a positive light and bring these girls-targeted themes into the theater? What do you think?

Edited May 25, 2018 by Dorayaki

[CptPJs]

I can only tell you my views as a child, I suppose? My first Lego was hand me down assorted bricks, I loved it. Belville arrived when I was 5 and I needed it. Santa came through that year. Later on I got into Pirates and other "boy" themes, but I longed for Belville to be minifig scale so I could mix them together.

As an adult, I do mix minidolls and minifigs, partly because I've longed for them for two decades I suppose. My point being, I don't think most kids think about it too much, if they like it, they like it. Belville never ever made me feel excluded from "boy Lego", toys were just toys. But I may have been very lucky that my parents didn't enforce gender stereotypes and let me play what I wanted.

[Robianco]

The thing for me is the target audience on these is girls. There's no getting round that. In the same way that the Megabloks Barbie set is aimed primarily at girls although the Minidolls are much better designed as figures than the Barbie equivalent.

If TLG's research pointed them to the design of the Minidoll then that is all they needed to know. TLG has it's target audience but it obviously has huge overspill... hence Eurobricks itself... a Lego site for adults. We're not the target audience for any Lego product but we're still here... talking, debating, liking, disliking, contributing... so the minidoll is simply part of the Lego range... one that's now being expanded with the Disney Princess range. Whether or not they have crossover to City is up to the end user.

People were disappointed that the Princess range didn't seem to fit with their current castle themes... that's not the point of the range. People seem to think it's a missed opportunity to put out a product that has cross series usage... I don't. It is what it is and it's aimed at it's audience. I think the Disney Princess stuff will fly off the shelves and my 4 yr old daughter loves her Lego Friends figures... she still has her 'princesses', which seems to be any female minifigure, but she's been concentrating on her Friends figures so they must resonate differently to her... but I'm sure the DP stuff she'll be getting for Christmas (or whenever released) will be an extension of her Friends sets. She'll still want all the female figures I have in my collection to join hers but I'm expecting her interest in actually building sets to grow with her so when/if she gets into building cities/environments I'll see how the minifigures and minidolls work for her.

Ultimately I don't think they fight each other... there's no conflict. But the TLG mini figure has been around a very long time and is such an iconic design that you can't expect a new product range of alternative figure types to get equal billing on advertising or in catalogues. Look at the whole range is a Lego store and the minidoll makes up such a small proportion of the range that it's presence in marketing material is probably proportionate.

The fact that there may be no minidolls in the Lego Movie may be down to a few things. It's probably been under production for quite a while and the Minidoll is such a new addition to the TLG family that there was essentially no need to introduce it to a movie that is based around the iconic figure... To a wider audience the addition of Minidoll character may have just confused the viewer.

Personally I find the character of the figure the most important thing. The personality of a minifigure is what attracts me to it and hold my interest. It's why I don't have any CMFs in my collection. Mine are SW, LOTR and SH characters... and others that I've customed. It's the wider personality that is somehow captured by the figure (and the new detailed design and print helps). Even the 1980s SAS member I created reminds me of being a kid watching the news about the Iranian Embassy siege here in the UK and of the Action Man I had of that figure. Other modern warfare figures don't interest me at all so it's not just down to a theme. As such the Friends figures offer no interest the same as the CMF figures... but the Princesses actually do. Having a 4 yr old means watching a LOT of Disney Princess films and Disney do that very well... Tangled and Brave are two films that we watch over and over again so I actually quite like the minidolls of those figures... it's the personality they capture rather than just their physical design. I'd also like them if they were minifigures but as I said earlier... I'm not the target audience. The older Princesses not so much... I'm not really a fan of Cinders etc but I'm sure my little one will love them.

[tkatt]

My kids have no problem mixing the Friends sets in with all the other Lego they have. Batman and Andrea are good friends. Mia has donned the Iron Man helmet and saved the day. The ewoks have partied at Oliivia's house along with dozens of other minifigures. My son has nothing against the Friends line and usually helps his little sister put her Friends sets together.

I personally wish the Minidolls were slightly more like regular minifigures. I don't mind their shape, but if they could move their legs independently and rotate their hands they would be much better.

[Blakstone]

I am in favor of solution one. I am a guy but I enjoy MOCing buildings.

I had bought some small Friends sets on clearance for the brick. I don't mind the bright colors but since I find the minidolls incompatible with the minifigures, I gave them to my younger sister (30 years old). Although she was an avid LEGO fan as a kid, she did not immediately recognize them as LEGOs. If I told her they were a new Polly Pocket figure, she would have accepted it. After I told her, she removed the hair and recognized the top of the head as well as the hands.

I find that the minidolls lack a distinctiveness to be immediately recognized as LEGO. However, if their success continues, that may change in the future. I know that my niece has no problems mixing minidolls and minifigs.

[skcheung]

I suppose the minidolls are perfect for fathers who have daughters, like me. I also love to play LEGO Friends with my daughter to the extent that I am doing some MOCs for her -- the Friends' Theme Park. LOL

[dr_spock]

I think minidolls and minifigs can work together just fine if your imagination permits it.

rotary snow plow by dr_spock_888, on Flickr

[aurly]

I think minidolls and minifigs can work together just fine if your imagination permits it.

That's the Lego spirit.

The link in the OP's signature shows why Friends were an excellent idea. Never did like the original minifigs much (as a boy) and I actually hope they'll start adding them (well, boy versions) to non-girly Lego sets.

Let's see some LOTR minidolls :D

[GregoryBrick]

aurly gets at the fourth solution: put minidolls in non-Friends sets instead of minifigures. Would AFOLs and EB members buy a Town set, or a space set, or an action theme, if the characters were minidolls (of all genders, with theme-appropriate gear and apparel) and not minifigures?

[Robianco]

I think the minifigure is one of the greatest pieces of design in modern culture. It's up there with the Mini, the angle poise lamp and the London Underground map.

It's simplicity and flexibility is basically perfect. It doesn't need to change or be replaced in any way. The minidoll is it's own entity... Designed for a particular purpose and ideal for that.

I for one don't wish to see LOTR or SW sets with minidoll figures. Nothing is broken. Nothing needs fixing.

[Aanchir]

Yeah, I would not like to see mini-dolls work their ways into themes that currently use minifigures. I would not be at all opposed to new themes, aimed either at girls or at both genders, using mini-dolls instead of minifigs when the time is right.

I can't help but feel mini-dolls would be right at home in a manga-inspired theme like Exo-Force — after all, that theme already had minifig face designs that were incompatible with other LEGO themes, so why not go all the way with a more naturalistic-looking figure?

The issue with using mini-dolls in themes that are aimed at boys, currently, is that they have a reputation as dolls or "girls' toys", and there's a stigma against boys playing with dolls. I remember reading that this was a secondary motivation for creating the mini-doll — there was somewhat of a concern that if a minifigure-based theme aimed at girls became truly successful, boys would start thinking of the minifigure as a type of doll itself. But it's a stigma that can be averted — after all, the term "action figure" originated as a means of selling boys a toy that was ostensibly a sort of doll. And as the world begins to become more progressive with regard to how we define gender, this concern will probably begin to diminish as the years go on.

[Pandora]

As made clear from the interview with the Friends Designers I conducted (that the OP quoted), Minidolls were brought into existence to satisfy a market need - young girls liked the sets but didn't like the Minifigures so much because they couldn't relate to them. This might explain why they are now being used in other lines aimed at girls, namely the Disney princesses line.

I love the Friends sets, and I'm more than happy to incorporate Minifigs (which I also love) into Friends sets. With these sets we get such a wonderful array of colours and parts, and we also get the buildings we really want for our own town, too. To me, the figures that go with a set matter very little, and didn't matter at all when I was a child. My Fabuland were just as much a part of the small town I built as a child as my Minifigs; neither I nor my Minifigs batted an eyelid at a Fabu Raccoon riding a bright red scooter down the main street because it just didn't seem to matter.

I hope it's very clear here in Town that the Friends sets are as much part of Town as City sets are - this is very much how Rick and I see things when we talk about the forum. We want to integrate rather than separate. The ideologies for both Friends and City are pretty much the same:- everyday buildings and everyday life in Minifigure/Minidoll scale, and they both actually integrate really well. I don't at all see the Minifig and Minidoll as rivals, and if having Minidolls means that producing the Friends line makes business sense and thus continues, then I am all for them as I truly believe the Friends sets have been far more interesting than the recent City releases. I personally don't think there needs to be just one or the other and that there is certainly room in our hearts for both.

[Faefrost]

My biggest, and probably only complaint with the Minidolls is their height. I wish they were closer in size height wise to traditional minifigs. That would avoid the issue where friends sets just feel slightly off scale to system or city sets. Granted this is an AFOL concern. The kiddies seem to have no issues with it.

[Lordofdragonss]

I will just add that in the trailer when they showed us the road, the one sign says Heartlake. So it's clear they mixed the universes :)

I think that would be very cool if they made at least one of the Friends girls as a secondplan character in THE MOVIE.

It's also interesting to see that Friends theme won where Scala and Belivile failed. Is reason that they are more in minifig scale? Or the movies?

aurly gets at the fourth solution: put minidolls in non-Friends sets instead of minifigures. Would AFOLs and EB members buy a Town set, or a space set, or an action theme, if the characters were minidolls (of all genders, with theme-appropriate gear and apparel) and not minifigures?

YES. Give me Friendly Castle! (Figs showed are made by me)

Edited November 12, 2013 by Lordofdragonss

[Dorayaki]

People were disappointed that the Princess range didn't seem to fit with their current castle themes... that's not the point of the range. People seem to think it's a missed opportunity to put out a product that has cross series usage... I don't. It is what it is and it's aimed at it's audience.

Personally I find the character of the figure the most important thing. The personality of a minifigure is what attracts me to it and hold my interest. It's why I don't have any CMFs in my collection. Mine are SW, LOTR and SH characters... and others that I've customed. It's the wider personality that is somehow captured by the figure (and the new detailed design and print helps). Even the 1980s SAS member I created reminds me of being a kid watching the news about the Iranian Embassy siege here in the UK and of the Action Man I had of that figure.

Ultimately I don't think they fight each other... there's no conflict. But the TLG mini figure has been around a very long time and is such an iconic design that you can't expect a new product range of alternative figure types to get equal billing on advertising or in catalogues. Look at the whole range is a Lego store and the minidoll makes up such a small proportion of the range that it's presence in marketing material is probably proportionate.

The fact that there may be no minidolls in the Lego Movie may be down to a few things. It's probably been under production for quite a while and the Minidoll is such a new addition to the TLG family that there was essentially no need to introduce it to a movie that is based around the iconic figure... To a wider audience the addition of Minidoll character may have just confused the viewer.

Well, the introductions of CMFs also look like that they're independent identities with personalities. I really like the personalities and designs of the Friends characters, but it could be one reason why they become the issue. Licensed themes are different stories, though I personally think that Disney franchise have a wider range of stories rather than "princess" stereotype only.

I could agree some of your saying about minidolls. However, we also treat Friends as an important current "theme", it's not just about the relationships between minifigures and minidolls, but more like what you said: treat them as characters. Having a complete and successful collection of products doesn't mean that TLC is done and have nothing more to do with the implementation of Friends in the Lego system, or there is nothing different from that minidolls or their characters are indeed "additional" to what the Lego world represent.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Dorayaki

[kermit]

The friends line has been a huge success among both girls and boys and mainly due to the quality of sets produced. We are now able to get sets which we wished were produced in the city theme as well as new animals such as the squirrel and penguins which will be the closet thing we will ever get to getting a zoo with animals in lego. The same can also be said for the wide variety of accessories and new pieces like the upcoming chocolate chip cookies. As far as the minidolls are concerned although they may be bigger that a regular minifigure they are not too big to render them absolute in play among kids and to adults its another way to get new hair pieces to use on their figures.

[aurly]

My biggest, and probably only complaint with the Minidolls is their height. I wish they were closer in size height wise to traditional minifigs. That would avoid the issue where friends sets just feel slightly off scale to system or city sets. Granted this is an AFOL concern. The kiddies seem to have no issues with it.

They're fragile enough at this size, I think they made them as small as they realistically could. I'm already afraid to touch them with my big hands D:

It's also interesting to see that Friends theme won where Scala and Belivile failed. Is reason that they are more in minifig scale? Or the movies?

The reason is simple: their looks.

[lightningtiger]

You know when a theme works when Chinese knock-off's start appearing......link to the clone images....http://www.aliexpress.com/item-img/2013-NEW-6pcs-friends-Olivia-beautiful-girl-toys-plastic-Building-Blocks-Sets-children-Educational-toys/1373733704.html

[Hoexbroe]

In my totally personal opinion, these minidolls are a missed oportunity. I´ll explain; I´ve long longed for better minifigs, instead of the short fat gnomes that currently inhabit our cities.

Alas, the minidoll, -which looks a lot better, and is much better proportioned (anatomically)- has less funcionality (no moving of legs independantly, no moving of hands) -and STILL occupies 4 studs wide (instead of ideally 2). In addition it is highly incompatible with the minifigs. (only hair-pieces and head-wear can be used) -and the hands can at least grip the same things.

But other than that, it is much more difficult to use them. In addition there are also almost no male characters.

I would have preferred a new universal figurine, to substitue the existing minifig WHILE at the same time being acceptable to girls.

Nevertheless I recognize the huge success this product is, and I am thankful for all the nice new colours we have been blessed with. -So I am happy for TLC, that things are going well for them...

[finnbricker]

I don't really see the OP's point here.

I love it that the Friends theme is (almost) on scale with the minifigs, giving us lots of great sets not only for a city layout but also for a modular-based layout. Two Corner Bakeries make a wonderful corner bakery modular style when you add some details (and a couple of floors above, which is still in progress...). The City Café likewise.

What I do is I simply ditch the minidolls. No one forces me to display them in my layout and I have plenty of minifigs who can staff the bakery etc.

A kid will probably happily mix minidolls with minifigs – I loved the way tkatt described it, the ewoks partying at Olivia's house. No problems there either.

I find Friends compatible enough with minifig scale themes and do not understand what exactly would be the problem with the minidolls.

[SweetiePie88]

I think they win over scala and belville since the parts are way cooler.

[LukeWarmTea]

Love this topic! I'm a new AFOL who's fallen in love all over again with Lego due to my daughter, now 5, learning to love the little bricks. I'm also very much aware of the Friends debate and gender definition in toys, something as a parent I am hyper aware of. It's how I discovered Feminist Frequency and several great Lego blogs - their arguments opposed, and for one very good reason. One (the feminist viewpoint) was discussing the marketing of the product. The other, AFOL group, was discussing the toy. I think we've all seen since the release of Friends that both groups are correct! I grew up with the basic Creator style bricks, but was often given 'girls' sets like Paradiso as presents, and when asked I went for Robin Hood and Knights sets (I really wanted the castle!). Later I fell in love with the horses of Belleville and had to have them, but they never mingled with the boys from the hood.

I'd like to second the call for Solution 4.0 - Non-Friends sets featuring mini-dolls, and go one step further and suggest a new, more gender neutral range, that would be the 'bridge' Lego kept insisting Friends would be for girls. Friends should continue, I think it's a great range, and so should the mini-doll, for all it's faults. I've given the idea of a new range heaps of thought, to the point where I am constructing some models for Cuusoo. I call it 'Lego Neighbourhood' and it features a softer side to City, but more realistic than Friends - like the Lego Town we all once loved. Unlike Lego Town, it'll retain some elements of Friends and City - notably the story. You'll have seen it - all the new sets targeted to kids feature a scene, or a backstory. This is missing from Creator - which is a great range of gender neutral sets, but sadly not always age appropriate and very rarely advertised. (Never, if you're in NZ like me!)

Friends was touted as a 'bridge' or 'link' to other Lego, and as a parent, early childhood teacher and caregiver I have to say that really hasn't happened. Yes, it has brought (back) many girls to Lego, but it takes the individual kid and their family to cross the boundary into the 'boys' sets. Many comments above suggest that the kids 'don't mind' or 'notice' the size, and that's fair to a point - but they do in some really important ways. When Mia put on the fire helmet yesterday, Bella (5) attempted to also 'put the uniform on'. She couldn't, so Mia wasn't 'meant to be a fire-fighter'. Bella also has a tonne of city vehicles, none of which the 'girls' could fit, so again, they can't be ambulance drivers, police officers or motorcyclists. Changing the mini-doll isn't really an option at this point. A gender neutral mini-doll range would give the mini-dolls a wider scope for imaginative play - and maybe break the 'boys can't play with dolls' mantra as well.

TL/DR?

Mini-dolls should stay and be used in other, new ranges, with more gender-neutral options suited to the 'mini-doll'. Girls aren't crossing over automatically and need a bit of encouragement.

[Dorayaki]

I don't really see the OP's point here.

I love it that the Friends theme is (almost) on scale with the minifigs, giving us lots of great sets not only for a city layout but also for a modular-based layout. Two Corner Bakeries make a wonderful corner bakery modular style when you add some details (and a couple of floors above, which is still in progress...). The City Café likewise.

What I do is I simply ditch the minidolls. No one forces me to display them in my layout and I have plenty of minifigs who can staff the bakery etc.

Maybe my statement isn't clear, but you miss the point. It's not that you're "forbidden" to put minidolls and minifigures together, but it's TLC who should play a more active role in how to market minidolls and improve the entire system.

As I said, TLC indeed started to add more elements that can interest girl, though overall it's slow.

[aurly]

Many comments above suggest that the kids 'don't mind' or 'notice' the size, and that's fair to a point - but they do in some really important ways. When Mia put on the fire helmet yesterday, Bella (5) attempted to also 'put the uniform on'. She couldn't, so Mia wasn't 'meant to be a fire-fighter'. Bella also has a tonne of city vehicles, none of which the 'girls' could fit, so again, they can't be ambulance drivers, police officers or motorcyclists.

It seems that your kids are learning an important thing - something that many of today's young adults never picked up : don't wear clothes that don't fit!

Seriously though, I don't expect we'll see many "uniforms" in the Friends range beyond teachers and parents since the theme is based around young girls below the working age. Who really shouldn't be driving motorcycles or firetrucks. For that, "grown up" dolls will have to start appearing in other themes.

[Lordofdragonss]

It seems that your kids are learning an important thing - something that many of today's young adults never picked up : don't wear clothes that don't fit!

Seriously though, I don't expect we'll see many "uniforms" in the Friends range beyond teachers and parents since the theme is based around young girls below the working age. Who really shouldn't be driving motorcycles or firetrucks. For that, "grown up" dolls will have to start appearing in other themes.

Actualy it seems like sets depic Friends-girls as 18. Mia is working in bakery all alone, some of them have cars...

And now we get motorcycle in Mia small set!