Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Friends Direct to Consumer Set?

2

Comments

  • chrisalddinchrisalddin UKMember Posts: 3,014
    you know it is funny,
    i did a test on the BBC webpages some years back.
    the test was to tell you what type of thinking your brain had Male or Female.
    it was shown as a Graph at one end was 100% male then when to 0% midway on the graph then at the other end of the Graph was 100% female.
    after a lot of questions. my brain showed up as right in the middle of the graph a balance of male and female thinking.
    which surprised me a little but only a little.
    i did like Care Bears as a kid.  and i did not like Action Man (still don't).
  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,536
    eggshen said:

     And it isn't just the men, it is mostly women that I hear that from. I grew up with that, I had older sisters that were just as smart as me (one of them was definitely way smarter than me) and they got pushed into being stay at home moms (I'm sure not intentionally, but 30 years ago life was hard for smart women). 



       What's wrong with being a stay at home mom?  Seriously. Does that automatically mean you are stupid and lack ambition?
    MattsWhattamamahmdougtskiki180703
  • MattsWhatMattsWhat Studley, UKMember Posts: 1,643
    edited February 2016
    eggshen said:
    MattsWhat said:
    Male and female brains are completely different, ... 
    Then you said a bunch more stuff.
    It is exactly this concept that is the root of the male/female divide
    *some other stuff*
    End rant.

    I don't know how what you said changes the fact that men and women are different. I didn't say I think women shouldn't play with lego and should collect shoes or not get jobs. I simply stated that lego in its nature appeals to systemising brains (that are more common in men) more. Which is true to a point but there are loads of exceptions. I don't think that lumps me in with careers advisors in schools telling girls to become stay at home mums.
    Trying to force men and women to be the same is a ridiculous idea, they are good at different things (like getting pregnant ;) ) and are physically and mentally different, why shouldn't that be celebrated by not all having to enjoy the same toy? 
    dougtspharmjodkiki180703
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,854
    edited February 2016
    dougts said:
    I think the other thing to consider for the future of the AFOL community is that adult men tend to engage in "play" behavior at a much higher rate than women do.  Not just LEGO:  video games, comic collections, tabletop gaming, Fantasy sports, etc.  Sure, more women are getting involved these days in those things as well, but I don't think it's anywhere near parity and I question if it ever will be.

    Even if the KFOL number even out over the next decade or two, I'm not convinced that it will mean a similar evening out of AFOL numbers.  Women tend to "grow up" and engage in more adult hobbies, while men continue to enjoy acting like children.  ;-)
    I think we're more visible now in both the fandom and pro sections of those fields than we've ever been, and that's fantastic and is helping to attract more people - it's a lot easier to buy comics/play Xbox/go to cons and to talk about it on the internet and/or in real life if you know that other teenage girls/women you know are already fannish. I'd say the same is true of the urge to play - it's a profoundly human thing, but one that gets directed in very different ways as we feel pressure to conform to social expectations for our age and gender. 

    I'm 34 and I spent my teenage years being deeply embarrassed that my hobbies were stuff like Lego and X-Men comics, and that I still loved toys, whereas other girls around me had more socially accepted interests. Getting into online fandom changed my life enormously for the better, and I've noticed that for teenage girls now it's much, much more common to call yourself a geek, be into comics and genre stuff, collect toys etc. When they're older and have the disposable income to support it, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some adult-aimed DCS Friends sets aimed at their generation.

    This whole discussion makes me think of my mum - she's 70 now, and when I was growing up she used to tell me how she played with her brother's Meccano more than he did. I suspect she thoroughly enjoyed buying me Lego. She enjoyed playing with me and with my toys - otherwise, play was something she didn't really have an outlet for in everyday middle-aged-woman life. She was also very against limiting kids by gender roles - how much this had to do with her having studied child development for work, I couldn't tell you, but I think she'd also been told off for being insufficiently "ladylike" a few times too often... I only realised how lucky I'd been when I was older and realised (on my visits to the Lego sections of toyshops, natch) how often I was hearing mums, in particular, telling their little girls that they couldn't have a particular toy because it was "for boys"...
    AanchirLostInTranslationLyichireggshendougtskiki180703
  • khmellymelkhmellymel United KingdomMember Posts: 1,276
    Fauch said:
    eggshen said:

    Sorry for the long reply, this is just a topic that hits close to home for me, having seen so many very intelligent women I have known in my family and at school get shoeboxed into being a "mom" and having to love shoes because that is what society expects of them.
    girls don't naturally love shoes?? oO
    Shoes no.  Handbags on the other hand... ;-)
    oldtodd33 said:
    eggshen said:
     And it isn't just the men, it is mostly women that I hear that from. I grew up with that, I had older sisters that were just as smart as me (one of them was definitely way smarter than me) and they got pushed into being stay at home moms (I'm sure not intentionally, but 30 years ago life was hard for smart women). 
       What's wrong with being a stay at home mom?  Seriously. Does that automatically mean you are stupid and lack ambition?
    I've been struggling with this one myself lately.  I'm in a very lucky position  -  it is not necessary for me to bring in income.  I am perfectly able to be "stay at home" (no children - yet!), and in fact my boyfriend preferred it, as I was able to manage all the projects at home (we bought a flat and are doing up, slowly - I am much handier than my other half!).  And when we do have kids I'm sure he would not mind in the slightest if we decided that I should stay home and care for them.  In my head, I know that should be an absolutely fine thing for me to do.  But actually, it really, really bothers me.  I'm unsure why, because I certainly don't think being a SAHM is a job to be sniffed at!  So I went and got a pretty dire job that holds no challenge for me whatsoever because being stay at home bothered me so much. Seriously I'm like a piece of furniture at this place.  I find the tasks I had at home were much more engaging and fulfilling but there's this thing in my brain telling me I'm stupid because I was at home and not in the workforce.  Now I have a job and I still feel stupid.  It's absolutely crazy.

    But at least now I have funds to buy a D2C Lego Friends set.  Which I would love.  

    I kind of think the popularity of Lego amongst females could probably come close to that of males, but for some reason I find a disparity of acceptance of being a FAFOL between where I used to live (Canada) and where I live now (Britain).  It's likely just anecdotal but I get FAR more flak for my Lego fandom here than I ever did in Canada.  
    catwranglermr.pigglesbandit778BOBJACK_JACKBOBkiki180703
  • eggsheneggshen Middleton, WIMember Posts: 571
    edited February 2016
    oldtodd33 said:

       What's wrong with being a stay at home mom?  Seriously. Does that automatically mean you are stupid and lack ambition?
    Before this goes off the rails too far, I just want to say that my wife is a stay at home mom, and she is wonderful and ambitious and very smart. My mother and all of my sisters were/are stay at home moms, and they are pretty awesome too. I have nothing but respect for all people that devote their time to raising their kids, male or female.

    That being said I think that it is pretty clear that for a very long time women have been overlooked when it comes to STEM. I'm just saying that there are probably way more Grace Hoppers and Marie Curies out there but we won't find them if we continue to hand dolls to girls and telling them that LEGO blocks are for boys. 

    When I say that 30 years ago life was hard for smart women, I meant that it must have been excessively difficult knowing that you were expected to grow up to keep your husbands house ready for him to come home when you REALLY wanted to know how Crick and Johnson discovered DNA. I remember growing up knowing that my grandfather was going to pay for me to go to college (never actually happened) but he never ever extended that offer to my sisters. That's pretty messed up but pretty normal for the time.

    And what does that have to do with a Friends D2C set? I think that due to the changes we are seeing in society that we are ready for a big 'ol Friends set. I would not have said that with confidence a few years ago, but times are a'changin'. I think it will sell.
    catwranglerdougtsthedingman5kiki180703
  • mr.pigglesmr.piggles Snow FortMember Posts: 326
    Well, we all know Canadians are just nice about everything. ;)
    chrisalddinSumoLegokiki180703
  • bandit778bandit778 Docking Bay 94. Member Posts: 2,176
    Not to slander anyone or cause any offence but I am quite glad that my wife (boss or SHMBO) is what would be classed as girly and enjoys hand bags shoes and dresses as I dread to think what the Lego bill would be like with 2 AFOL's in th household.
    mr.pigglesdougtsYodaliciouskiki180703
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,967
    MattsWhat said:
    eggshen said:
    MattsWhat said:
    Male and female brains are completely different, ... 
    Then you said a bunch more stuff.
    It is exactly this concept that is the root of the male/female divide
    *some other stuff*
    End rant.

    I don't know how what you said changes the fact that men and women are different. I didn't say I think women shouldn't play with lego and should collect shoes or not get jobs. I simply stated that lego in its nature appeals to systemising brains (that are more common in men) more. Which is true to a point but there are loads of exceptions. I don't think that lumps me in with careers advisors in schools telling girls to become stay at home mums.
    Trying to force men and women to be the same is a ridiculous idea, they are good at different things (like getting pregnant ;) ) and are physically and mentally different, why shouldn't that be celebrated by not all having to enjoy the same toy? 

    Again. There is a fundamental question, though, of how much this is due to nature or nurture or both.  From day one, how many little girls at 12 months are given a dolly, and how many little boys are given a car? One can argue that is the toy the child wants, and one can argue that by giving those specific toys to different genders it makes a large difference. The truth is probsbly somewhere in the middle, and we need to be very careful with assumptions as to what boys and girls may be better at. It is not about forcing men and women to be the same, but making sure that what some may attribute to natural difference is not actually due to socialization, marketing, etc. I mean look at Lego... They figured out that girls like building toys. They have a nice monetary figure behind that. If men simply had brains that were more 'systemizing' to be prone to liking Lego more and girls necessarily didn't, then those monetary numbers would be quite different.

    Lyichircatwranglerkiki180703
  • eggsheneggshen Middleton, WIMember Posts: 571
    MattsWhat said:
    eggshen said:
    MattsWhat said:
    Male and female brains are completely different, ... 
    Then you said a bunch more stuff.
    It is exactly this concept that is the root of the male/female divide
    *some other stuff*
    End rant.

    I don't know how what you said changes the fact that men and women are different. I didn't say I think women shouldn't play with lego and should collect shoes or not get jobs. I simply stated that lego in its nature appeals to systemising brains (that are more common in men) more. Which is true to a point but there are loads of exceptions. I don't think that lumps me in with careers advisors in schools telling girls to become stay at home mums.
    Trying to force men and women to be the same is a ridiculous idea, they are good at different things (like getting pregnant ;) ) and are physically and mentally different, why shouldn't that be celebrated by not all having to enjoy the same toy? 
    I understand that you didn't say that women should or shouldn't do any particular thing. Totally get that. LEGO definitely does lend itself to certain types of people, and for the most part that does not include women. I agree with that also.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you are saying that men and women are fundamentally different on a biological level, and that is what makes us like different things as adults. 

    I completely disagree with that idea (if it is what you are saying). It is my firm belief that girls like "girly" things and don't excel at STEM (for the most part) not because they are biologically predisposed to dislike the fundamental theorum of calculus, but because by the time they get into middle school they find math difficult because they don't have the skills you pick up from building a tree house or playing with LEGO (you know, "boy" things).

    Again, if I have misunderstood what you are saying, I apologize. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.
    mr.piggles
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,305
    Fauch said:
    eggshen said:

    Sorry for the long reply, this is just a topic that hits close to home for me, having seen so many very intelligent women I have known in my family and at school get shoeboxed into being a "mom" and having to love shoes because that is what society expects of them.
    girls don't naturally love shoes?? oO
    Shoes no.  Handbags on the other hand... ;-)
    oldtodd33 said:
    eggshen said:
     And it isn't just the men, it is mostly women that I hear that from. I grew up with that, I had older sisters that were just as smart as me (one of them was definitely way smarter than me) and they got pushed into being stay at home moms (I'm sure not intentionally, but 30 years ago life was hard for smart women). 
       What's wrong with being a stay at home mom?  Seriously. Does that automatically mean you are stupid and lack ambition?
    I've been struggling with this one myself lately.  I'm in a very lucky position  -  it is not necessary for me to bring in income.  I am perfectly able to be "stay at home" (no children - yet!), and in fact my boyfriend preferred it, as I was able to manage all the projects at home (we bought a flat and are doing up, slowly - I am much handier than my other half!).  And when we do have kids I'm sure he would not mind in the slightest if we decided that I should stay home and care for them.  In my head, I know that should be an absolutely fine thing for me to do.  But actually, it really, really bothers me.  I'm unsure why, because I certainly don't think being a SAHM is a job to be sniffed at!  So I went and got a pretty dire job that holds no challenge for me whatsoever because being stay at home bothered me so much. Seriously I'm like a piece of furniture at this place.  I find the tasks I had at home were much more engaging and fulfilling but there's this thing in my brain telling me I'm stupid because I was at home and not in the workforce.  Now I have a job and I still feel stupid.  It's absolutely crazy.

    But at least now I have funds to buy a D2C Lego Friends set.  Which I would love.  

    I kind of think the popularity of Lego amongst females could probably come close to that of males, but for some reason I find a disparity of acceptance of being a FAFOL between where I used to live (Canada) and where I live now (Britain).  It's likely just anecdotal but I get FAR more flak for my Lego fandom here than I ever did in Canada.  
    You'll probably find the same thing if you were a MAFOL too. Quite a few people in the UK stoll see Lego fandom as stupid. But think nothing of collecting blu-rays or dressing up as superheroes or playing video games or drinking a week's worth of alcohol on a Friday night and missing Saturday.
    bandit778LostInTranslationSumoLegokiki180703
  • MattsWhatMattsWhat Studley, UKMember Posts: 1,643
    eggshen said:
    MattsWhat said:
    eggshen said:
    MattsWhat said:
    Male and female brains are completely different, ... 
    Then you said a bunch more stuff.
    It is exactly this concept that is the root of the male/female divide
    *some other stuff*
    End rant.

    I don't know how what you said changes the fact that men and women are different. I didn't say I think women shouldn't play with lego and should collect shoes or not get jobs. I simply stated that lego in its nature appeals to systemising brains (that are more common in men) more. Which is true to a point but there are loads of exceptions. I don't think that lumps me in with careers advisors in schools telling girls to become stay at home mums.
    Trying to force men and women to be the same is a ridiculous idea, they are good at different things (like getting pregnant ;) ) and are physically and mentally different, why shouldn't that be celebrated by not all having to enjoy the same toy? 
    I understand that you didn't say that women should or shouldn't do any particular thing. Totally get that. LEGO definitely does lend itself to certain types of people, and for the most part that does not include women. I agree with that also.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you are saying that men and women are fundamentally different on a biological level, and that is what makes us like different things as adults. 

    I completely disagree with that idea (if it is what you are saying). It is my firm belief that girls like "girly" things and don't excel at STEM (for the most part) not because they are biologically predisposed to dislike the fundamental theorum of calculus, but because by the time they get into middle school they find math difficult because they don't have the skills you pick up from building a tree house or playing with LEGO (you know, "boy" things).

    Again, if I have misunderstood what you are saying, I apologize. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.

    You didn't misunderstand, the biological differences are exactly the reason we like different things. Psychologists have shown in monkeys that the gender differences are still there and the same as they are in humans so we know it is not all society. That is as close to a fact as you can get in psychology terms.
    I will point out however, that society does plays it's part with the pink and fluffy ideas. I am currently lecturing in early years development and training early years practitioners. We try really hard to make sure that children are presented with an even playing field but the data shows year after year that boys like boys things, develop slower, are not school ready at 5, achieve well in the stem subjects and lag a long way behind girls in writing and social skills. That data is from a million children a year nearly and is freely available to the public (it's called the eyfsp if anyone cares). 
    So those differences are there, from birth,  whether people like it or not. And they do determine what people like to play with and how they behave etc. Yes there are exceptions but that's what makes it fun. 
    Now does this make girls dislike maths and fail at it automatically? No, not at all, in fact they hands down beat boys academically even in stem subjects at every level up to the age of 16. So I'm not saying that at all.  But you can't compare a compulsory subject to a toy that people choose to play with in their spare time. That is entirely down to the individual. Building toys fit more into the pattern of a systemsing brain, so people with this type of brain choose them. Again with exceptions obviously. 
    dougtspharmjodBrickfan50kiki180703
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,305
    But then girls cannot choose to play Lego if their parents or grandparents won't buy it for them, and instead buy them teasets or pretend vacuum cleaners or irons. (All things my little one was given by my mother in law). 
    catwranglerSumoLegotamamahmkiki180703
  • MattsWhatMattsWhat Studley, UKMember Posts: 1,643
    CCC said:
    But then girls cannot choose to play Lego if their parents or grandparents won't buy it for them, and instead buy them teasets or pretend vacuum cleaners or irons. (All things my little one was given by my mother in law). 

    This is true, and then they won't like it as an adult. But let's assume that children do get exposed to a range of toys through friends, siblings, nursery and school.
    oldtodd33kiki180703
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,892
    edited February 2016
    MattsWhat said:
    CCC said:
    But then girls cannot choose to play Lego if their parents or grandparents won't buy it for them, and instead buy them teasets or pretend vacuum cleaners or irons. (All things my little one was given by my mother in law). 

    This is true, and then they won't like it as an adult. But let's assume that children do get exposed to a range of toys through friends, siblings, nursery and school.
    Exposure isn't necessarily enough for a kid to develop a love of a particular brand. When I was in preschool and elementary school, a lot of my classmates loved Power Rangers. I even caught a glimpse of some episodes of Power Rangers and similar shows while visiting friends. But my parents told me it was a dumb show that I shouldn't watch, and because they were my parents, I believed them. I missed out on a lot of stereotypical "90s kid" experiences during my childhood because they were shows or movies my parents didn't think were wholesome or appropriate. I was too young at the time to even consider rebelling against them, so I just took them at their word and, embarrassingly, became somewhat arrogant because I was convinced my upbringing was much more wholesome than that of my peers. These colorful action shows resonated with me on some level, as feeble imitations of them based on what little I knew started to crop up in my make-believe play, but I never felt drawn to actually WATCH them, because I was told that I shouldn't and would feel embarrassed even to see them at other people's houses.

    The first show I really got into that wasn't based on my parents' approval was Pokémon when I was 8 years old or so. After that, I finally started taking part in more of the same sorts of fads and fandoms as other kids my age. I'd watch cartoons on Saturday morning. Still, my parents would talk condescendingly about some of the shows I watched. One time after watching Hamtaro (a shoujo anime about talking hamsters who go on fun adventures), my dad told me what a dumb show it was. "It's a fun show!" I told him. "Yeah, if you're a little girl," he scoffed. And as much as I loved the show, I never watched it again. I couldn't enjoy it the same way anymore without the nagging feeling that what I was doing was wrong, somehow.

    I'm not going to pretend I entirely understand what it's like to grow up as a girl, but I can imagine that girls face a similar pressure to fit in. Even if they have male classmates who enjoy playing with LEGO, even if they have opportunities to experience and enjoy it through siblings or school activities, they're not necessarily going to beg and plead for their own LEGO if their parents have said "no, that's not for you", or if other girls their age don't share the same interest. When I was in college and would talk about LEGO with my classmates, I can't tell you how many girls told me "I enjoyed playing with my brother's LEGO when I was a kid, but my parents wouldn't buy me my own" or something along those lines.

    tl;dr: it takes more than "exposure" to a toy for you to develop a passion for it. Being able to share that enjoyment with other people, having that enjoyment encouraged rather than discouraged by your parents, etc. makes a BIG difference, especially when you're still very young. Once you hit age 8 or 9 it's a lot easier to fall in love with something that doesn't get your parents' approval — my parents never did understand Pokémon or Yu-Gi-Oh or even Bionicle — but those pressures to fit in are still there.
    eggshenLyichircatwranglertamamahmkiki180703
  • eggsheneggshen Middleton, WIMember Posts: 571
    MattsWhat said:
    CCC said:
    But then girls cannot choose to play Lego if their parents or grandparents won't buy it for them, and instead buy them teasets or pretend vacuum cleaners or irons. (All things my little one was given by my mother in law). 

    This is true, and then they won't like it as an adult. But let's assume that children do get exposed to a range of toys through friends, siblings, nursery and school.
    I checked out the eyfsp, if I am correct this is an assessment of a child's development at the end of the academic year where they have turned 5. If that is the case, then they have already been taught what to play with by their peers and family. The problem starts at birth and is reinforced throughout childhood. By the time kids are studied at 5, they have already been set on a path. I don't know if you can conclusively say that studying behavior after 5 years of development to be evidence of biology.

    Exposure is not the same as encouragement. Most parents encourage their kids to play with gender specific toys, starting at birth.
    catwranglerkiki180703
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 13,450
    Anyway, my point was that Lego invested the time and resources to carve out a profitable market that will incidentally break down some older societal stereotypes.

    Is is perfect? No.  Is it gender neutral? No.  But it is certainly a step in the right direction for a more egalitarian society.  

    (Particularly if it prevents one person from immediately discounting a gender's ability to accomplish a given task.)
    pharmjodeggshenKingAlanIkiki180703
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,967

    eggshen said:
    MattsWhat said:
    CCC said:
    But then girls cannot choose to play Lego if their parents or grandparents won't buy it for them, and instead buy them teasets or pretend vacuum cleaners or irons. (All things my little one was given by my mother in law). 

    This is true, and then they won't like it as an adult. But let's assume that children do get exposed to a range of toys through friends, siblings, nursery and school.
    I checked out the eyfsp, if I am correct this is an assessment of a child's development at the end of the academic year where they have turned 5. If that is the case, then they have already been taught what to play with by their peers and family. The problem starts at birth and is reinforced throughout childhood. By the time kids are studied at 5, they have already been set on a path. I don't know if you can conclusively say that studying behavior after 5 years of development to be evidence of biology.

    Exposure is not the same as encouragement. Most parents encourage their kids to play with gender specific toys, starting at birth.

    On the part in bold...This is very true. We see this sort of thing seem to play out when the Clark Experiment has been repeated in recent years. Very young kids are forming opinions about race/toys, which is not an opinion a child is born, but is an opinion that occurs and is reinforced throughout very early childhood via media, socialization, society, etc.

    I also do not get the concept of "Let's assume kids are exposed.".  Why are we assuming that? Just because a kid has a chance to play Lego at a cousins house on one visit, does that really change the continual subtle message that is pushed on a girl that may mainly receive dolls, and princess items for her birthday or Christmas? Just because a kid has a chance to play with cute little toy animals or a doll at a cousin's  house, does that really change the subtle message that is pushed on a boy that may receive mainly cars, trucks, sports equipment for his birthday or Christmas?
    It has really bothered me when I have seen a girl being told Chima Lego was for boys, or a boy being told that cute animal or that pink toy is not for boys. Interestingly, I have seen more boys than girls told a toy is not for them.


    MattsWhat said:
     

    Building toys fit more into the pattern of a systemsing brain, so people with this type of brain choose them. Again with exceptions obviously. 


    Aren't a boatload of girls choosing Lego Friends? Isn't that  a building toy? Their brains did not suddenly change a few years back when Lego Friends was released. ;-) 
    mr.pigglescatwranglerLegoPegasister2015AanchirLyichirSumoLegokiki180703
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,967

    SumoLego said:
    Anyway, my point was that Lego invested the time and resources to carve out a profitable market that will incidentally break down some older societal stereotypes.

    Is is perfect? No.  Is it gender neutral? No.  But it is certainly a step in the right direction for a more egalitarian society.  

    (Particularly if it prevents one person from immediately discounting a gender's ability to accomplish a given task.)
    I very much agree with the above, and I think it is something that some forget out there. 
    Things do not have to be perfect to be good, and I do think in many ways it is a step in the right direction. I do think a few of the sets have swung too far into stereotypes, but overall the sets have some fun characters, one can actually find female characters, and the building is generally not wimped down building. I also love the range... Pop stars to camp to jungle to karate to science. Then there is Elves, which has a few sets that interest my son as much as my daughter.  
    catwranglerSumoLegomr.pigglesdougtskiki180703
  • sklambsklamb speaker of American EnglishMember Posts: 506

    I wish people would remember that the studies are describing the average boy and the average girl. That is a very different thing from saying all boys are like this and all girls are like that! One reason I wasn't upset over the minifigures in the Research Institute having several "stereotyped" feminine elements is that it emphasizes that you can like STEM subjects and still enjoy wearing makeup or having pretty clothes. The assumption at the moment seems to me to be that "girlie girls" can't do math and girls that like math or science are going to have no interest in "girlie" things. That's not only as much a stereotype as the simpler one that says "girls can't do math," it might even be more likely to keep a girl from trying to do math because she already knows she likes "girlie" things and thinks the two are incompatible.

    Adults should be able to do what they want to do, enjoy doing, and are good at doing--but with more weight on the desire and the enjoyment. Children should be encouraged to try as many different activities, fields of study, and experiences as is safely possible, so they can find out what they enjoy doing and are good at doing. What's important to remember is that it isn't just that boys and girls, in general, have different approaches to life--it's that each one of us is different from everyone else, each one of us is a unique mixture of masculine and feminine impulses, and there's nothing wrong with being what we are.

    If Lego can help us learn that, wonderful!

    catwranglermr.pigglesAanchirLyichirdougtsricecakekiki180703
  • KingAlanIKingAlanI Rochester, NYMember Posts: 2,092
    Aanchir said:
    I've seen way more raised eyebrows about adult men and women enjoying My Little Pony than about adult men and women enjoying Transformers.
    I think a lot of criticism of MLP fandom is not because it's girly, but rather because bronies often sexualize it, ruin it for the target market.
    SumoLego said:
    Anyway, my point was that Lego invested the time and resources to carve out a profitable market that will incidentally break down some older societal stereotypes.

    Is is perfect? No.  Is it gender neutral? No.  But it is certainly a step in the right direction for a more egalitarian society.  

    (Particularly if it prevents one person from immediately discounting a gender's ability to accomplish a given task.)
    I do tend to approve of a step in the right direction, and get frustrated with all-or-nothing idealists.

    SumoLegodougtskiki180703
  • VenunderVenunder Nottingham, UK.Member Posts: 2,547
    edited February 2016
    It will be interesting to see what that 71040 {minifigures} set turns out to be....
    Maybe it will be a Giant UCS Minifigure? Something on the scale of R2D2?

    Regular Minifigure collections, so far, seem to get a 6 digit number beginning with 850???
    Although they are generally quite small sets.

    A purely Friends based set of this scale is hopefully going to be a Hospital, 
    Museum and Town Hall seems like more of a City theme set?
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,967
    I am still hoping that 71040 matches the upcoming Disney minifigs. 
  • bricktuarybricktuary Krakozhia (temporarily stuck in London)Member Posts: 562
    Men and women are different? What fresh controversy is this?

    Anyhoo, I would love a D2C Friends set. Friends is the best thing Lego have done in years. 
  • MattsWhatMattsWhat Studley, UKMember Posts: 1,643
    edited February 2016
    The eyfsp data shows that childrens brains are massively different. As far as I am aware no credible research has ever shown otherwise. Logically therefore they like different things. People can spout that this is societies fault all they want but there is a lot of data to show that it isn't. People can believe what they want and do the research they want, it doesn't matter to me.
    The thing I am frustrated by is that people seem to want to make everyone play with lego whatever their brain is like. We don't want people to be the same, we want them to be equal. And all things being equal, girls and boys will play with different toys.
    As for friends sets doing well and being marketed at girls. One theme versus the 6(at least) themes aimed at boys (total sales), total space in the shops.  The average data speaks volumes and agrees with what I am saying. But there is nothing wrong with this, girls and boys are not the same and everyone can play with whatever they like. 
    I don't want to do something that is my job on the forum, I can't be bothered and for that reason, I'm out. 
    pharmjodkiki180703
  • chrisalddinchrisalddin UKMember Posts: 3,014
    OMG. this tangent is still going?
    please don't let this devolve in to a fight.
    this is one of them subject that is never going to be solved with out some very questionable stuff being done as baby's grow up. even then there will still be question marks.
    what is that quote? "ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do and die."
    don't remember ware that quote is from. but i feel some subjects are best left alone.
  • Toc13Toc13 Member Posts: 1,086
    MattsWhat said:
     And all things being equal, girls and boys will play with different toys.

    As I understand it, they will play with the same toys, just in different ways (again, taken as an average). Boys will tend to play with the object whereas girls tend to play using the object

  • bricktuarybricktuary Krakozhia (temporarily stuck in London)Member Posts: 562
    Any parent will confirm, boys and girls are, generally, different.

    Ninjago though is interesting, because it's story-driven and has strong characters,  and my girls love it, despite it appearing a bit "boy"-ish. 
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,854
    And yet, scientists have found that there's a lot more in common between men and women, brain-wise, than might be expected if we were basing all our assumptions on that EYFSP data:

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds

    Here's some info about EYFSP, too - or, to give it its full title, the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile. I don't think you can reliably extrapolate from it to make claims about the brains of male or female children:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-foundation-stage-assessment-and-reporting-arrangements-ara/the-early-years-foundation-stage-profile

    And thank goodness for that, too: otherwise, to judge by this thread, many interesting people wouldn't be on this forum, because their female brains would have led them away from Lego.

     


    mr.piggleskiki180703
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 13,450
    Anyway, with respect with a D2C set, I generally consider the Friends line to essentially be marketed and managed like the City Theme.  

    To the best of my recollection, other than perhaps a large train set, I don't remember their being a D2C.  
    chrisalddinkiki180703
  • bricktuarybricktuary Krakozhia (temporarily stuck in London)Member Posts: 562
    ^ I think it's closer to Ninjago. It has a cartoon and everything. 
    chrisalddinSumoLegokiki180703
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,305
    Plus it has named characters.
    chrisalddinSumoLegokiki180703
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 13,450
    Chase McCain and Biker Bob aren't named?

    But, I agree.  The one outlier is the Airjitsu D2C, so who knows.
    chrisalddinkiki180703
  • mr.pigglesmr.piggles Snow FortMember Posts: 326
    So anyway, after a lot of thought, I agree with whoever up there that a big ol' Friends hospital would be cool. 

    I could see a large Friends D2C set being sold and successful for both adults and kids... after all, parents buy giant dollhouses and the like, why not a big brick built play set?
    chrisalddinkiki180703
  • BumblepantsBumblepants DFWMember Posts: 6,649
    The current Friends hotel is a great set and about as close to D2C level as possible in a regular set. I actually prefer that for a theme like Friends as the possibility of discounts in the US is greater than zero.
    mr.pigglesSumoLegosklambkiki180703
  • DedgeckoDedgecko Seattle, WAMember Posts: 800
    I asked a designer last year about the possibility of a Friends D2C set, and (IIRC) they said that basically, the line was probably still a bit too young to support it. Those who got Friends sets when they first came out are still too young a demographic to really support a D2C set, but that it could happen in a few years time when that demographic is older.

    That's the jist as I remember the discussion 6 months ago. Details may have been slightly different.
    $150 American Girl Doll or $150 Epic Lego Friends / Elves set

    tough question in my house
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,892
    Any parent will confirm, boys and girls are, generally, different.

    Ninjago though is interesting, because it's story-driven and has strong characters,  and my girls love it, despite it appearing a bit "boy"-ish. 
    Doesn't entirely surprise me. According to an interview with the Hageman brothers (who write the show), "there’s a real large growing girl audience for the show—something like 30% of our viewers are female."

    To be honest it's an audience that I sometimes wish the Ninjago designers would do more to capitalize on, since the gender ratios in LEGO Ninjago still tend to be rather male-heavy even compared to, say, Legends of Chima. This year's "Skybound" sets do a better job than others, with three female characters out of fifteen characters total. But then the summer sets reverse that, with seemingly no new female minifigures out of at least 22 new minifigure designs.

    Named characters and story aside, the target audience for Friends sets tends to be closer to City (5 and up) than Ninjago (7 and up). Elves is a better comparison to Ninjago both on account of being a fantasy-adventure theme and hitting that 7-and-up age marking a bit more consistently.

    Although, something I still can't entirely understand is why girl-oriented themes in general consistently mark the MAXIMUM recommended age as 12, regardless of the minimum age. In other themes, sets for ages 8 and up will usually be marked 8–14, but in Friends and Elves, advanced sets like #41078 and #41106 are still marked for ages 8–12.

    Granted, this is a lot like how LEGO used to mark age ranges back in the 80s before the TFOL and AFOL community was much of a thing, so maybe it's just another sign that LEGO still feels new to the girls' market in general and lacks confidence in their grasp on the older segment of that market.
    catwranglerkiki180703
  • tallblocktootallblocktoo CanadaMember Posts: 497
    Oops I guess I am the wrong gender and age to be buying Elves sets.  Personally I would love a huge Elves set.  Perhaps a Ewok village type setting.  A guy can dream can't he?  
    mr.piggleskiki180703
  • VenunderVenunder Nottingham, UK.Member Posts: 2,547
    In a way I would prefer this to be a big Elves set.
    I can probably avoid buying that?

    A Friends Hospital would certainly empty my wallet.
  • LostInTranslationLostInTranslation UKMember Posts: 5,583
    I can't see them doing a Friends hospital. Everything seems to indicate a City medical theme or possibly hospital modular soon (new wheelchair,  crutches,  head bandage). I'd love to see a return of the x ray tile and surgeon from series 6 CMFs too.  

    I'm thinking maybe something like a Friends ski resort could make a good D2C. Chalet, cafe,  ski lift,  maybe a cable car.  Plus maybe opportunities for some animals too,  which seems like a Friends essential. 
    Jennicatwranglersklambkiki180703
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,967
    I would so buy any version of a large ski resort like that. 
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 13,450
    I must say that the initial photos of the rollercoaster set do not give me much faith in a larger D2C set.  

    Some themes may not lend themselves to large exclusive sets.  Not to minimize the Friends theme, but I slot it with City theme.  
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,854
    I have to admit it would probably be more marketable as a City thing, since they could emphasise the increased play value of integrating it with a kid's existing police and fire sets...
  • sklambsklamb speaker of American EnglishMember Posts: 506
    The Friends rollercoaster set is fine for what it is--a suburban children's play area, not a mega-theme park. The fact that it includes a small Ferris Wheel keeps me hoping there will be a larger set someday, though I'd definitely prefer a full-sized carousel.
  • brumeybrumey AustriaMember Posts: 1,002
    my niece is starting to dig ninjago more and more. esp pixal and nya! but it could also just be my influence!
  • KingAlanIKingAlanI Rochester, NYMember Posts: 2,092
    I have to admit it would probably be more marketable as a City thing, since they could emphasise the increased play value of integrating it with a kid's existing police and fire sets...
    Friends sets can fit with traditional sets on the same topic, though color scheme can clash, and there's no direct match for police, fire or some other common themes.
    catwrangler
  • KingAlanIKingAlanI Rochester, NYMember Posts: 2,092
    brumey said:
    my niece is starting to dig ninjago more and more. esp pixal and nya! but it could also just be my influence!
    Apparently those are major female Ninjago characters. I figured Macy, Lavaria and the queen from Nexo Knights would help LEGO with girls, same idea?

  • monkyby87monkyby87 Member Posts: 315
    I like Friends because of the animals, not because of the colors or anything else.  But I'm not really sure if the demand for Friends caters to a D2C set.  Though I can't say what determines what becomes a D2C set and what doesn't.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy Brickset.com

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.