Itaria No Shintaku

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...

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.

Actually, I found the pattern for feeling the bags in this serie so easy that I went to the store without preparing myself on which pieces to feel. I have recognized two entire boxes for a friend, no errors on 120 feels in 15 minutes. Not bad. :D

Exactly, same thing to me, when I capsize them, the hair will fall off... too bad...

This is in Italy since the last week of august. I already have the full collection, +6 extra tiki warriors, +12 extra yetis, +6 extra scarecrows +6 extra barbarians. Plan to take more.

I have felt and opened more than 3000 packets and never found neither 2 minifigs nor random pieces. Very strange!

I am a toy seller, I see every day what boys like more and what girls like more. I even had the chance to do the "build your minifigure" stuff and it ended up with boys building boys, girls building girls, very rarely a crossover. And 90% of my Lego buyers (if not more) are boys. City sets are very "action" ones, lots of vehicles (which are prefered by boys) and action. Upon asking girls and boys which town sets they would love to buy, I found a clear distincion. Boys would like to buy race stuff, policemen, firemen, and so on. Girls would like to buy a zoo or a farm, an hospital, a city park. How many non-Duplo Zoos did they produce? City parks? Decent hospitals?

Because girls mostly do not like minifigures, because girls mostly do not like Lego the way it was portraited. Now they like it because of friends.

AFOLs won't but if you had a girl, you would probably end with some of them in your house. Yeah, let's burn disney, Lego and even the Olympic Games because they get man and woman separated. How frustrating.

You are the exception for the rule. AFOLS keep on complaining for the male vs female rate of minifigures even in CMFs, like as if 5/6 are bad, they should be 8, but male kids usually dislike female minifigures. They boo at them. This explains why TLC made up new minifigures for the Friends theme instead of using the old ones like for paradisa for instance.

This has been discussed a lot of times, it ends up always the same way: most people have difficulties to recognize that Lego is mostly for boys. Girls would love female minifigures, but they prefere Friends and they are quite less in numbers. AFOLs would like an even number of minifigure among sexes, but AFOLs are quite less in numbers. I have experienced selling miniifgures, and 9 out of 10 buyers are boys, and 99 out of 100 wants to buy male minifigures. So I would say that 89% of the minifigures should be male ones, instead they are more leveled... TLC's interests are not being equal, it's not their job. They have to sell toys. A boy would deinitively buy less if the number of female minifigures would be increased.

Nowadays news would do anything to relate anything to sexism. That's totally weird. I don't think so. Reasoning like that, they always made male robbers/thieves. Should they make a female robber too to teach boys and girls that robbers ain't only males? I just don't find it normal to return such products. If they are sealed, they can't say either "It's damaged" or "I discovered I already had it". If you buy it, you keep it, that's it. They shouldn't absolutely allow CMF to be returned, that's it.

Boxes I feel are full of them.

Actually mine was pretty different. It was: if Lego had to produce an army builder character in one of the future series, which one should it be? The old one was instead: among the already produced characters... which is your army builder? To me they address totally different topics.

I already wrote this. It's a very lame choice.

Feeling the bags is 10 times easier. By the way I have to really complain about this serie. I've bought 2 barbarians today and both have the same problem: the hair fit loosely on the head, it detachs very often and easily...

You actually were rude. You not recognizing it doesn't mean you weren't. You have your opinion which I do not share, yours are not data, just your view of the situation, which for instance is as valid as mine.

Hello... probably I was misunderstood. What I meant was: what minifig would have Lego to produce to make you buy hundreds of it? To me, a CMF orc with the pointy ears hair like the ones from LoTR, or a wraith, like dementors/ringwraiths... To you?

Ok, just a random question that crossed my mind today: Minifigures Series XX, a new minifigure is out and you love it, you grab one, two, it doesn't seem enough. You always want for more. Which minifigure should it be? Describe it. Of course, if you already went into this with one of the previous series, you can reply with that (I got 30/40 dunno black knight for instance). Thanks ^_^

We don't share the same thoughts, there was no need to act rudely.

What I see it's a slow downfall of the CMF, alas, probably the best line I've ever bought. In series 3 they were forced to remove the barcode due to extreme ease in recognizing the bags. In series 5 they had to raise the price. In series 10 they had to put a Mr. Gold. In series 12 they will cast figures from the movie... I really see the end of this, alas...

Yesterday I saw them in Italy. I took three tiki warrios and three scarecrows because there are only 2 per box and I like those minifigures, so I have to get them before the others. By the way I was disappointed as I didn't read that the tiki warrior's mask is in flexible rubber... it just bends over, too bad, it was such an interesting new mold. I also noted, correct me if I am wrong, that the spear of the Tiki Warrior is regardably more "flexible" than the usual ones, see, the castle spears. Did anyone also note this?

Sorry I don't like your attitude so I'm not going to reply. I wasn't unpolite and unmannered. You are. And most of all I don't endorse strawmanning or "ad hominem" attacks.

Yes it does, if you read me I cleary said that it doesn't depend on your parents but on who you spend your time with.

This is the point that I think it's important. Nowadays, if a girl wants to become just an "ordinary housewife" she should be entitled to. Instead probably she would be seen as wrong. And what if a BOY wants to become a "househusband"? He should be allowed to, instead he would be seen VERY wrong, 100 times more than the girl. What you suggest about the freedom to do whatever we want to do is interesting, even if I find it theoretically right but practically utopian (I don't think my parents or friends would accept me in quitting my job of programmer after years of study in computer engineering for becoming a clown...) Bias are in all directions, in fact we started all argument this because people is doing exactly what you are suggesting to be wrong: they are criticizing TLC for the roles they give to girls in the Friends theme. This is the main point: you insist that everyone should be allowed to do what they want to do with their life without being criticized. But... the same time you (and most people here) are criticizing TLC designers for the Friends line. This is nonsense, I hope you get me right. It's not any more the male vs female argument, it's about freedom to act and choose a job or more. In the same time I would like to add two points: 1 - Genetic and society are not influent at 100%... ok... but at 95% yes. We would have had no Beethoven if his family wasn't about musicians. We would have had no Chopin if his family wasn't about musicians. We would have had no Mozart if his family wasn't about musicians. I can go on forever... but three of the best talents I get to my mind in music were the best just because their family lead them that way. You can tell me that sons of great musicians may not have become great musicians themselves, that's true, but in the meantime it's more unlikely to find famous artists/painters/musicians/sculptors and so on that followed their path to art coming from a family of NO artists. Just for fun, if we take the Ninja turtles' inspiring artists... Raffaello Sanzio was son of another artist. Michelangelo Buonarroti wasn't, but he was given to his nanny which was from a family of stonecutters. Donatello Bardi is a particoular case in which this doesn't apply/work. Leonardo da Vinci was sent to a "Bottega" in early age. So mostly this is the case. 2 - you say: Like as if they have to ben pinned down for some reasons. This is mostly where I fail to understand you. Why? Why should society want to level male and female? Pin down the inner differences we have and make us special? There are many big differences between male and female that society is already trying to level, creating more aggressive women and more submissive men, driving most people to the path of homosexuality for this reason, trying to convince you that sexual desire is the same within men and woman (which is one of the most idiotic things I've ever read, but a lot of people seem convinced in this for their own purposes), there is a sexual confusion in the last 30 years that is to last a lot of time, sending a wave of damages we can't see the end. I agree with most things you said, of course, but really I fail to see why we should nullify the peculiarities of our different genders. If we have biological differences there has to be a purpose, and I don't like messing with nature, but I again don't tell that doing that is generically wrong, I just don't see the reason why all this efforces are taken in this direction and why the mainstream trend is that we have to pretend to zero the differences among genders.