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

Women of NASA - Can of Worms

1356710

Comments

  • JenniJenni JapanMember Posts: 1,390
    @tmgm528 Me too :). Actually, I'm Australian, so that doesn't even begin to cover it.

    I was encouraged in science by my mother and the vast majority of my teachers, including professors who'd try to recruit me to their programs. While I don't think that boys refusing to talk to me because I was smarter than them discouraged me from science I do think my codependence drove me to study law so I could help people. I believe my gender was a factor in being taught that it was my responsibility to put everyone else's needs first. I wonder how many people in the "caring professions" have similar stories.

    I made sure to point out the Spanish teacher's age, which I don't actually know but she's just out of college, so people know it's still going on. Her constraint was her family.


    tmgm528catwranglerOmastar
  • flordflord CanadaMember Posts: 795
    Mountains out of molehills.

    If you don't like this set, you vote with your wallet and don't buy it. Personally, I'm fine with it, even if the builds don't end up being great and it is just a minifigure pack.

    If the issue is it takes up an Ideas slot, well, First World problems much? You can just go make your own "Ideas" out of Lego.

    I do hope Voltron gets made though. Love the new TV show.
    KingAlanIRogerKirkOmastar
  • tmgm528tmgm528 Member Posts: 457
    Jenni said:
    @tmgm528 Me too :). Actually, I'm Australian, so that doesn't even begin to cover it.

    I was encouraged in science by my mother and the vast majority of my teachers, including professors who'd try to recruit me to their programs. While I don't think that boys refusing to talk to me because I was smarter than them discouraged me from science I do think my codependence drove me to study law so I could help people. I believe my gender was a factor in being taught that it was my responsibility to put everyone else's needs first. I wonder how many people in the "caring professions" have similar stories.

    I made sure to point out the Spanish teacher's age, which I don't actually know but she's just out of college, so people know it's still going on. Her constraint was her family.


    Actually also in school for law myself. Similar reasons to you, want to make the world a somewhat more decent place! Plus as someone hoping to move into politics Law is definitely a plus.

    I guess the main point here is I dont want to sound preachy to anyone else here, I dont want all sets to become all gender specific as a fair and equal inclusion would be best for all. However, with what the Ideas system is I think this is an awesome bit of recognition for a very talented and overlooked group of people
    MattPetersencatwranglerOmastar
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    edited March 2017
    sklamb said:

    Someday we'll be at a point when having a "Women in..." set won't be necessary or desireable, but we certainly haven't reached it yet. 

    Yeah I'm sure tired of all those "men of ..." sets I've collected over the years.  Oh wait, never mind.   No Shepard. No Glenn. No Armstrong. No Von Braun. No male minifigs at all based off real life NASA men. (Any real life men at all of any kind?) The imbalance has sure been awful though!

    On another note, i guess I subscribe to the theory that attempting to correct a previous societal imbalance by completely tipping the scale the oppposite direction is a pretty damn bad (and ineffective) way of going about it. 
    RecceBlueTaco
  • BumblepantsBumblepants DFW/BGMember Posts: 7,341
    I think someone already touched on this but one of the big factors in this set getting chosen was likely size. The upcoming rocket and fishing shop are both massive ldeas projects back-to-back and there was probably no way they could produce anything else of that size without cutting into their primary product lines. Picking the small vingette set allows them to produce something, generate some buzz, lure in non Lego fans etc. without having to divert lots of resources away from all the police helicopter sets they need to sell at Christmas.
    Johnyk668stluxcatwranglerpharmjodBillyBricks84SumoLegoOmastarsnowhitievizzitor
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,476
    dougts said:
    Yeah I'm sure tired of all those "men of ..." sets I've collected over the years.  Oh wait, never mind.   No Shepard. No Glenn. No Armstrong. No Von Braun. No male minifigs at all based off real life NASA men. (Any real life men at all of any kind?) The imbalance has sure been awful though!


    The NBA sets featured exclusively male minifigs based on real people, same goes for the German football CMFs - you can argue that that's the result of the source material but the fact that we don't have (popular) mixed sporting leagues is still down to a casual level of sexism that most people don't realise they carry around with them.

    I don't particularly like that this Idea passed review but it's nothing to do with the politics, it's just the poor design. Had there been decent builds with it I'd have no problem with it - after all it highlights people who haven't had the level of recognition in the past that they deserved.
    catwranglerKingAlanIOmastarvizzitor
  • mr_bennmr_benn United KingdomMember Posts: 914
    It wouldn't have been my choice for an Ideas set.  

    But then I'm not in charge of the Lego Ideas team, with knowledge of the restrictions and budgets that they have and the research that TLG have actually done about all these sorts of things.  There is a reason it's been chosen, I'm sure there would have been internal arguments in meeting rooms in Billund about it already, and hopefully we will get a nice Lego vignette set out of it (I can't see this staying a minifig pack, we can all cobble together minifigs from parts and print out a sticker with a name on it).  

    Will I buy it?  Maybe, if it looks nice.  I've boughyt the ideas sets that I've liked and ignored the ones I haven't.... I can't tell if there's a bit of an Ideas completist mentality that is making some people who might have all the Ideas set a little disappointed that there's one they will 'have' to buy that they don't like... maybe go chat to the SW UCS collectors who had to buy the Hoth set to see how they got over it :)
    catwranglerpharmjodOmastarsnowhitievizzitor
  • AyliffeAyliffe the UK innit?Member Posts: 322
    Do I like the idea behind the set? Yes, 'cos it's not something that TLG's done before and that's pretty much what ideas is about.

    Do I like the execution of the set itself? Not really 'cos it's a bit lacking, but the set designers will be redoing it anyways so that's not really much of a concern.

    All in all: not something I'll buy myself (not my area of interest), but I appreciate it's existence and the fact that it got through.
    catwranglerMegtheCatOmastarvizzitor
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 20,365
    Ayliffe said:
    Do I like the idea behind the set? Yes, 'cos it's not something that TLG's done before and that's pretty much what ideas is about.
    I guess that depends on your perspective of what they have done before.

    Have they done female only minifigure sets? Yes.
    Have they done science based vignettes? Yes.
    Have they done female only scientist based sets? Yes.
    Have they done real people before? Yes.
    Have they done NASA people before? They are coming in Saturn V.
    Have they done female only NASA minifigure based sets? No.

    Exactly the same could be said of the Saturn V rocket. It is not really anything new.

    But if I had to choose between a decent brick built rocket (with or without minifigures) and a Women of NASA minifigure set, I know where my money would go. It would be the same place as if I had to choose between a decent brick built rocket and a (behind the scenes) Men of NASA minifigure set, or a (behind the scenes) People of NASA minifigure set.


  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,985
    Take a look at the sets that were up....

    Adams family Mansion
    Banks of Plum creek
    Mountain observatory 
    Merchant's House
    Modular Construction set
    Star Wars Landspeeder

    These were never going to be approved right now. These are large sets. Lego has the first large Lego Ideas set coming up. They were never going to do two large Lego Ideas sets so close together without seeing how well this first one does.  This is without even taking into account what size/manufacturing capacity the Lego Ideas line has been given. 

    This cuts the list down by 1/2, and really knocks almost all the ones out of the gate that I would really like to see( and I suspect many AFOLs would want to see) 

    From a sales point what was left...
    voltron, SpaceBalls, hadron collider, Babbage and Lovelace, race car and women of NASA.
    Women of NASA is the easiest set they could possibly get out, and one that will sell well. I think the Lamborghini was the other they could have considered. I never saw SpaceBalls or hadron collider having a chance (license, and I do not personally think there is enough of an audience for these). Lovelace/Babbage, which looking at... I do love the charm of a black and white set, and the size of it looks right for this release. I do wonder if the overall look of the computer hurt this project. It is hard to tell what that is, and so is not necessarily going to have as much display appeal or play appeal. 

    At the end of the day choosing this set was really not about most the reasons given on this thread. As has been mentioned Lego Ideas is not really what most AFOLs want it to be. If it was, multiple of those large sets would have been made. Instead, there are going to be capacity limitiations and bandwidth limitations put on the ideas team. There are marketing considerations, and yes they are going to also be looking at what sets are coming out and what sets are in the pipeline still. 
    AyliffeBumblepantsspepperstluxAanchircatwranglerOmastarsnowhitievizzitor
  • AllBrickAllBrick UKMember Posts: 1,490
    Yes the builds COULD be poor and yes, putting the word women in the title is a touch patronizing but, until I know more I will be taking advice from this guy...


    Is it possible that the name will change to 'Scientists of NASA' and will include a male character or two?
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,453
    MaffyD said:

    ^^ There's a Ridiculous thread? Where? How could I have missed it? 90% of my posts should probably go in there. Actually, how come @pitfall69 has been allowed to leave it? :-)

    No, I'm in the "Ludicrous" thread. 
    stluxbandit778Bumblepantspharmjodgmonkey76LegoboyOmastarvizzitor
  • monkyby87monkyby87 Member Posts: 316

    I don't have a problem with the set, but I can't see that I see it selling all that well.  A lot of people who aren't really into Lego will see it and say "oh, people, that's boring" and move on.  And then there are those of here who think the set is cool, but won't actually buy it ourselves. 

    You can argue any ideas set will fall into those traps, and it's hard to sit here and say that just because it got 10,000 votes means it will sell well.  Voting is free; buying is not.  The only Ideas set to this date that I bought was the Back to the Future car, and that was before it was actually Ideas.  For the given price it will likely be and what you're getting out of this set, I just don't see it selling very well. 

  • stluxstlux LuxembourgMember Posts: 2,450
    stlux said:
    @Paperballpark Valentina Tereshkova spent 3 days orbiting earth in 1963.
    Ah yes, that famous NASA astronaut...
    I scrolled through the tread too quickly, and missed that the conversation was now back to NASA, AND that Tereshkova had already been mentioned. Apologies! That's what you get from trying to keep up with this forum while spending time in hospital waiting rooms.

    Anyway, personally I don't mind this set. It will likely be a nice companion set to the Saturn V one. I'm sure to buy several as gifts; hopefully TLG will beef up the vignettes a bit so I'll be more eager to add it to my personal collection as well.

    Too bad Grace Hopper only indirectly contributed to NASA's success and hence is not part of this set. I would kill for an official minifig of her in Rear Admiral uniform.
    catwranglerKingAlanIvizzitor
  • SithLord196SithLord196 Member Posts: 1,161
    @SithLord196 Neither of them had the PR gold of being easy to tie in with a successful film. There's been so much buzz about Hidden Figures, and the specificity of the set being women in NASA (not women scientists in general, or even NASA luminaries in general) is a gift, timing-wise.

    Science Adventures is indeed more like Research Institute in that you get three characters, each with a vignette showing them in action in their own scientific field. And it's really cool and I would've loved to own that set, but marketing-wise it doesn't get the bounce of being the first time Lego's done a set of women scientists. I'm not so sure we'd be seeing this set if not for the combination of the Hidden Figures phenomenon, and the release of the Saturn V.

    The reason to reject the National Parks set is obvious - it's a very country-specific set, designed for the centennial of the US National Parks Service. NASA might be the North American Space Agency, but the average person outside America is going to have much more knowledge of/ability to relate to it than to the US National Parks Service. Ditto the movie/TV/Beatles sets that get approved - they're based on properties that are widely known and loved internationally. 
    So the set is a PR stunt? 
  • stluxstlux LuxembourgMember Posts: 2,450
    I have seen the news that this Lego Ideas submission will become an official set covered by media that hardly ever talk about Lego, let alone Lego Ideas. I expect several of them to highlight this set again once it is released.
    I also expect organisations promoting STEM to actively push this set.

    Not claiming demand will be huge, but there's definitely demand. And just like not all Lego sets appeal to AFOL's, I don't expect all Ideas sets to appeal to (all) AFOL's.
    catwranglerMattPetersenRogerKirkOmastarvizzitor
  • AyliffeAyliffe the UK innit?Member Posts: 322
    tamamahm said:
    At the end of the day choosing this set was really not about most the reasons given on this thread. As has been mentioned Lego Ideas is not really what most AFOLs want it to be. If it was, multiple of those large sets would have been made. Instead, there are going to be capacity limitiations and bandwidth limitations put on the ideas team. There are marketing considerations, and yes they are going to also be looking at what sets are coming out and what sets are in the pipeline still. 
    As the guy who runs Worst of LEGO Ideas (hello!), I can very much agree with this overview here - LEGO Ideas is less a place for AFOLs to post their super-intricate MOCs and more for the wider general public to work on pitches for lego sets they'd like to happen. I'd argue that although some people have identified that they didn't put as much effort into the build as they could've, they instead directed this effort towards explaining their ideas and the reasoning behind the project.

    It's pretty clear that they'd put actual, identifiable effort into their project so the fact that it won out doesn't overly bother me - the main issue I've got with Ideas is the absolute slog of sloppy, rushed projects caused by the Ideas team lowering the minimum age to 13 years old and their refusal to do anything long-term to fix the problem. In contrast, this latest project passing is barely an issue.

    AllBrick said:
    Is it possible that the name will change to 'Scientists of NASA' and will include a male character or two?
    I could see the former happening (remember the female scientists set?), but the latter would be a massive PR backfire for TLG so I'm guessing that's outta the question.
    tmgm528datsunrobbiestluxJenniOmastar
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,894
    @SithLord196 Neither of them had the PR gold of being easy to tie in with a successful film. There's been so much buzz about Hidden Figures, and the specificity of the set being women in NASA (not women scientists in general, or even NASA luminaries in general) is a gift, timing-wise.

    Science Adventures is indeed more like Research Institute in that you get three characters, each with a vignette showing them in action in their own scientific field. And it's really cool and I would've loved to own that set, but marketing-wise it doesn't get the bounce of being the first time Lego's done a set of women scientists. I'm not so sure we'd be seeing this set if not for the combination of the Hidden Figures phenomenon, and the release of the Saturn V.

    The reason to reject the National Parks set is obvious - it's a very country-specific set, designed for the centennial of the US National Parks Service. NASA might be the North American Space Agency, but the average person outside America is going to have much more knowledge of/ability to relate to it than to the US National Parks Service. Ditto the movie/TV/Beatles sets that get approved - they're based on properties that are widely known and loved internationally. 
    So the set is a PR stunt? 
    I don't think so. I think it's a set that REALLY doesn't appeal to you (which is fine), and you're struggling to see how it could appeal to other people widely enough to sell well. Or, if it does sell well, will you just frame it as a successful PR stunt? More generally, are PR stunts the sort of thing TLG tend to go in for? 
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 993
    We don’t accept projects that request only LEGO Minifigures, a new LEGO Minifigure series, LEGO Minifigures with accessories, “battle packs,” or “army builders.” We only consider Minifigures as a part of a set that includes a substantial LEGO model.

    STILL trying to work out how this was ever accepted as a submission (let alone passed). And now having read TLG's requirements for the first time in a while am also wondering why Existing properties are allowed as submissions.
      It's easy to see why they passed this one but I miss the ethos of 'Only the best is good enough'.  The more I see moves like this (accompanied by all the issues we all already know regarding quality) can't help feeling the motto these days is 'Only the most is good enough'...
  • BumblepantsBumblepants DFW/BGMember Posts: 7,341
    Pitfall69 said:
    MaffyD said:

    ^^ There's a Ridiculous thread? Where? How could I have missed it? 90% of my posts should probably go in there. Actually, how come @pitfall69 has been allowed to leave it? :-)

    No, I'm in the "Ludicrous" thread. 

    eggshenbandit778SprinkleOtterPitfall69gmonkey76ricecakeOmastar
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,980

    We don’t accept projects that request only LEGO Minifigures, a new LEGO Minifigure series, LEGO Minifigures with accessories, “battle packs,” or “army builders.” We only consider Minifigures as a part of a set that includes a substantial LEGO model.

    STILL trying to work out how this was ever accepted as a submission (let alone passed). And now having read TLG's requirements for the first time in a while am also wondering why Existing properties are allowed as submissions.
      It's easy to see why they passed this one but I miss the ethos of 'Only the best is good enough'.  The more I see moves like this (accompanied by all the issues we all already know regarding quality) can't help feeling the motto these days is 'Only the most is good enough'...
    This is not just "LEGO Minifigures with accessories" or "battle packs" — it includes four pretty substantial vignettes/mini-models. By comparison, a "battle pack" of four or five minifigures might include just one or two vignette-sized builds.

    And always remember, "only the best is good enough" generally means the best that is feasible, not the best that is imaginable. Nobody ever takes "only the best is good enough" to mean that, say, any gold-colored bricks will be plated with actual gold. So they shouldn't expect it to mean "we'll produce and sell only the coolest models fans propose to us, regardless of whether they have a good business case or we expect them to make money".

    I think other people have correctly assessed that pretty much none of the other projects in this review were likely to pass. Spaceballs couldn't get made since Mel Brooks made a deal never to produce any Spaceballs merchandise; Addams Family Mansion, the Observatory, Little House, and the Construction Site were probably way bigger than the expected market for those sets could support; LHC had negligible play value and a concept that isn't nearly as trendy as space exploration; Landspeeder was both massive and probably something LEGO had already considered on their own; and most of the play value of Lovelace and Babbage came from compatibility with non-LEGO hardware (a Raspberry Pi computer) that LEGO was not likely to endorse as a kids' plaything.

    As to anyone wondering where the "men of NASA" are, we're likely to get three "men of NASA" in the Saturn V Rocket set.
    BumblepantsstluxcatwranglerAyliffetmgm528LyichirOmastarsnowhitievizzitor
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 20,365


    STILL trying to work out how this was ever accepted as a submission (let alone passed).
    Rules don't matter when it is in the rule setter's interest to break them.

    stlux said:
    I have seen the news that this Lego Ideas submission will become an official set covered by media that hardly ever talk about Lego, let alone Lego Ideas. I expect several of them to highlight this set again once it is released.
    I also expect organisations promoting STEM to actively push this set.

    The same happened with the Research Institute, loads of news agencies picked it up. It is only really a story if you believe that lego is for boys only. "Boys-toys company break the mould and makes a set featuring girls. Shock horror." is a headline whereas "Company that already makes stuff for girls makes more stuff featuring girls" is less interesting. Obviously replace girls with women or females depending on how sensationalist you want to be. I don't think it is the science aspect of it that the pres cares about, they wouldn't have a story if it the headline is "Lego makes (another) scientists set" or "Lego does a set of math(s) nerds". Even "Lego makes a NASA set" is just an advert rather than a headline.

    It is a shame really that things haven't changed much since Research Institute, there still seems to be a perception that lego is for boys and that it is a shock and even newsworthy when lego makes a set likes this celebrating women. Although most news outlets these days will publish anything, once it is on one site everyone has to have it to make sure they get the advertising clicks when people search for it. I've seen it on the BBC and Telegraph websites already today.

    The funny thing is ... how do The Telegraph categorise such a news story ...

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/lego-celebrates-nasas-female-space-pioneers-new-set/

    It is in the Lifestyle > Women section. Nothing for men to see here. This is a women's story. Although obviously cut and pasted by a male journo, they don't want women doing men's jobs like serious journalism. Oh, wait a minute ...


  • binaryeyebinaryeye USMember Posts: 1,765
    More generally, are PR stunts the sort of thing TLG tend to go in for? 
    Ideas itself is basically a publicity engine.
    ShibcatwranglerBumblepantspharmjodKingAlanIOmastarvizzitor
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 20,365
    Aanchir said:

    As to anyone wondering where the "men of NASA" are, we're likely to get three "men of NASA" in the Saturn V Rocket set.
    I thought it was going to be just two. Although the problem then is that the men are the "heroes", and everyone behind the scenes are women.

    There is the quote from the designer (grabbed from the BBC, but probably the same elsewhere) ... "I hope it sets a new example for both girls and boys," said Ms Weinstock. "Girls, in that they can and should be engineers, scientists, and mathematicians, and boys, in that they internalise at an early age that these careers are for everyone, not only men." Isn't there the problem that what they are showing is that the STEM jobs are for women, in a women only environment, and that men have to strive to be the heroes (like astronauts).  Surely a better way to internalise that these careers are for everyone is to celebrate the success of and show both sexes, working together.
    tmgm528lentildougtsOmastar
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,894
    Broadly speaking, I agree, and I think that's already working well in, for example, the Volcano and Police sets, or sets like (to name one I'm toying with buying right now) #60152. It's becoming standard that of course there's a woman in the set, or two women, and that's great. 

    I think the difference with things like the three men from the Apollo 11 mission and the Women of NASA set (of whom two, Mae Jemison and Sally Ride, are/were astronauts, so it's not only commemorating women in backroom roles) is that they're commemorating specific people rather than generic volcanologists/police officers/whatever. It didn't bother me that the Yellow Submarine set was all male figures, because the Beatles were indeed all men. Same with Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins being in the Saturn V in Lego, as in real life...
    vizzitor
  • SithLord196SithLord196 Member Posts: 1,161
    edited March 2017
    I don't think so. I think it's a set that REALLY doesn't appeal to you (which is fine), and you're struggling to see how it could appeal to other people widely enough to sell well. Or, if it does sell well, will you just frame it as a successful PR stunt? More generally, are PR stunts the sort of thing TLG tend to go in for? 
    While you are correct that the set does not particularly appeal to me, I actually expect it to sell quite well. I expect it to have a wide appeal, because people nowadays want to be seen as promoting diversity and under represented groups, regardless of how that is accomplished. This submission certainly ticks that box.

    Your argument was that this was a PR gold mine for Lego because of a recent feature film. If that is the reason this set was approved, then it is a simple PR stunt for sales, and nothing more. I personally think it was going to get approved with or without the feature film, because as I stated earlier, the ridiculous amount of negative press they would have received for rejecting it was simply not worth it.

    The rejection of both the Science Adventures and National Parks submission also make this clearly more of a PR stunt from my point of view. The National Parks set could have been very educational, and considering the very first Ideas set was for Japan only (and indeed the second set was also of a Japanese spacecraft), I have a hard time buying the argument that it was too region specific. This approved submission is essentially just Research Institute 2.0 with real life people. Since Science Adventures got rejected due to its similarity to the Research Institute, it only stands to reason that this submission too should have been rejected. 

    Yes, Lego will go for PR stunts. The prime example of this is the Research Institute, and to a lesser extent the entire Ideas platform as a whole. 

    Lego is a company first and foremost. Approving this submission is a giant positive PR stunt, in my opinion, that will produce quite a few sales for them. As a company, their purpose is to make profit while providing goods to consumers. Approving this submission allows them to do that, with a little bit of good press thrown in. As a fan, I recognize their right to pull a PR stunt like this to make profit, but I am also allowed to point out that I see nothing altruistic in their actions and criticize them for not approving similar submissions (Science Adventures and National Parks) I would have been interested in purchasing. 
  • monkyby87monkyby87 Member Posts: 316
    Aanchir said:

    This is not just "LEGO Minifigures with accessories" or "battle packs" — it includes four pretty substantial vignettes/mini-models. By comparison, a "battle pack" of four or five minifigures might include just one or two vignette-sized builds.

    Not trying to be that person, but I really wouldn't call these substantial vignettes or mini-models.  The Star Wars Microfighters and DC/Marvel Mighty Micros I would consider substantial mini-models.  These are vignettes that, quite honestly, aren't super interesting.  The mini space shuttle is probably the best of them.  Because of the subject matter, it's hard to make vignettes that are genuinely interesting that aren't just a bunch of little rockets, and those would be rather bland in design.  The fact of the matter is the mini-models are there solely to compliment the minifigures and help make it pass, not the other way around, and nobody voted for this set because they also liked the models; they voted because of the minifigures.

    I'm not saying the set shouldn't be made in some fashion or another.  I'm really not against the idea.  But you're on shaky ground when you defend the set on the basis of the mini models. 

  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 20,365
    Yet in real life, there were also many other men in NASA outside of the astronauts. They are not celebrated, based on their sex. The women in this set are not there because they were great scientists, they are there because they were great scientists and female. If they were male, they would be forgotten if not in one of the "hero" roles.

    Things like this clearly set an example to girls that they can do science. Yet note in the quote above, an example to girls and boys. If they make sets that airbrush out achievements based on gender (or include only achievements based on gender, however you want to look at it) there is the danger that the set is ignored by boys. It becomes a historically irrelevant piece, or it is just there to be politically correct, or not interesting as it is just for women. Then it fails in half of its mission, a half that is just as important as the first half. Not just to show girls that girls can do science, but also to show boys that girls can do science too. Much of the problem still is not individual but societal.

    It almost shows that five women did work that should be celebrated by lego whereas only a smaller number (2 or 3) of men did the same. So where is the problem with women in STEM? People say it is hard for women in science, yet if 5 women are celebrated but only 3 men, then women must have it relatively easy. When of course the reality is far different.

    lentildougtsOmastar
  • playwellplaywell UKMember Posts: 2,242
    edited March 2017

    ^ Yes this is a contradiction we see a lot. First we rightly hear woman didn't have the same opportunities as men but then we are told if we recognise a group of people historically we must have an equal number of men and women. Which completely ignores that fact the women were disadvantaged.

    I don't think its the case that these 5 are not household names because they were women, I think if they were men they would still be unknown.

    And as for Legos track record:

    http://brickset.com/sets/6456-1/Mission-Control

    A large premillennial town space set with only a women Astronaut!

    (the fact we only know she is a women because she is going into outer space with lipstick on is another matter)

    KingAlanI
  • MaffyDMaffyD West YorkshireMember Posts: 3,283
    Pitfall69 said:
    MaffyD said:

    ^^ There's a Ridiculous thread? Where? How could I have missed it? 90% of my posts should probably go in there. Actually, how come @pitfall69 has been allowed to leave it? :-)

    No, I'm in the "Ludicrous" thread. 

    Those are for my remaining 10% then! :-)
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 993
    Outside of the figs all I see are brick built accessories and a frame that (with no intent to offend) my 10 year old thinks "Is that something a kid made?".  I don't see it qualifies in any way as a 'substantial build'.
    My comments regarding wanting the best aren't the "best imaginable" -  I'd be more than happy with the quality and consistency the elements provided me two decades ago.
    i TOTALLLY get why they did it, just the fact they felt they had to is a bit sad to me.
    Theres been Ideas rounds in the past where no projects were passed and based on the guidelines - I really feel this should have been one of them.
  • tmgm528tmgm528 Member Posts: 457
    Outside of the figs all I see are brick built accessories and a frame that (with no intent to offend) my 10 year old thinks "Is that something a kid made?".  I don't see it qualifies in any way as a 'substantial build'.
    My comments regarding wanting the best aren't the "best imaginable" -  I'd be more than happy with the quality and consistency the elements provided me two decades ago.
    i TOTALLLY get why they did it, just the fact they felt they had to is a bit sad to me.
    Theres been Ideas rounds in the past where no projects were passed and based on the guidelines - I really feel this should have been one of them.
    Really? 

    You're saying you would have rather Lego not put out a set that doesn't appeal to you but serves to educate and empower then get something? 
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 993
    edited March 2017
    @tmgm528
    It's got nothing to do with whether I like the set or not - in fact I'm entirely ambivalent and would be equally harsh if they were 5 figs I was really wanting to see.  The set dilutes the Ideas theme (and guidelines) by the CONTENTS of the submission.  There's nothing wrong with the SUBJECT of the submission - and (as someone mentioned earlier) TLG may well alter the submission enough to include a buildable part of the submission worthy of the Ideas theme.
    It would be no different in my mind than if the original Ghostbusters Ideas set was the four figs with proton packs and ghost traps.
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 993
    ^Or the approved Beatles submission was the Fab Four with some brick built instruments.
  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,632
    ^ Agreed, I would be just as baffled and perturbed by this set if the minifigures were men instead.  
  • tmgm528tmgm528 Member Posts: 457
    @tmgm528
    It's got nothing to do with whether I like the set or not - in fact I'm entirely ambivalent and would be equally harsh if they were 5 figs I was really wanting to see.  The set dilutes the Ideas theme (and guidelines) by the CONTENTS of the submission.  There's nothing wrong with the SUBJECT of the submission - and (as someone mentioned earlier) TLG may well alter the submission enough to include a buildable part of the submission worthy of the Ideas theme.
    It would be no different in my mind than if the original Ghostbusters Ideas set was the four figs with proton packs and ghost traps.
    This is remarkably similar to the Research Laboratory set. A few figures and small vignettes. Sure, the vignettes are less detailed in the actual fan product then that other set, but we haven't even really seen what it will look like. 

    Why not wait to see what's actually done? And still, any argument that NOTHING is somehow better than something is a bit odd...
  • tmgm528tmgm528 Member Posts: 457
    Aanchir said:
    I have no doubt that many people would still hate this set if the minifigures were men or a mix of men and women. Plenty of Ideas sets have been divisive, going all the way back to the Minecraft set that was the first approved after the service went global. I certainly wouldn't consider it sexist just to dislike the set.

    That said, there is something uniquely frustrating (and I dare say, a bit sexist) about how a lot of the negativity towards this and the research institute alike has been framed as LEGO kowtowing to "political correctness". I don't think there's anything inherently more political about the message that "women in science are cool" than that "Minecraft is cool" or "The Beatles are cool". But there's this prevailing attitude that if people like a project for feminist reasons, it's less legitimate than other reasons to like a project. While people have questioned the legitimacy of other projects that sought support outside LEGO fan circles, such as the aforementioned Minecraft project, I have never seen anybody try to blame it on politics like they have with this or the Research Institute. I see no reason why liking toys with positive female role models should be seen as a political statement.
    Probably because we live in a horribly divisive political climate where for some reason 'Political Correctness' can mean something as simple 'women in science are cool' and to top it off be perceived as a bad thing.
    KingAlanI
  • ecmo47ecmo47 North CarolinaMember Posts: 2,101
    I keep looking at the calendar and thinking it's April 1st in the hope that Lego is just trolling us. 
    oldtodd33
  • mdtvandymdtvandy USAMember Posts: 61
    edited March 2017
    ...
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,453
    ^You may have had the best points of the day ;)
    MaffyDOmastar
  • monkyby87monkyby87 Member Posts: 316
    tmgm528 said:
    And still, any argument that NOTHING is somehow better than something is a bit odd...

    Well, to argue that, you have to look at what it does for the Ideas brand, if you can call it that.  Sure, if they didn't produce anything, then we don't get a set.  But that's something physical.  If there aren't any good sets, and Lego doesn't make any, that means it didn't meet what they felt was appropriate for the Ideas brand and "preserves" what it's about.  It's an odd way to think about it, but it is possible that nothing can be better than something. 

    Having said that, I don't necessarily agree that this is the case with this submission, and that this one shouldn't be produced.  But I see logic in nothing producing something.

  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,453
    A lot of the same comments made in this thread were made in the Research Institute thread:

    http://bricksetforum.com/discussion/15210/21110-research-institute/p1
    KingAlanI
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,894
    Aanchir said:
    I have no doubt that many people would still hate this set if the minifigures were men or a mix of men and women. Plenty of Ideas sets have been divisive, going all the way back to the Minecraft set that was the first approved after the service went global. I certainly wouldn't consider it sexist just to dislike the set.

    That said, there is something uniquely frustrating (and I dare say, a bit sexist) about how a lot of the negativity towards this and the research institute alike has been framed as LEGO kowtowing to "political correctness". I don't think there's anything inherently more political about the message that "women in science are cool" than that "Minecraft is cool" or "The Beatles are cool". But there's this prevailing attitude that if people like a project for feminist reasons, it's less legitimate than other reasons to like a project. While people have questioned the legitimacy of other projects that sought support outside LEGO fan circles, such as the aforementioned Minecraft project, I have never seen anybody try to blame it on politics like they have with this or the Research Institute. I see no reason why liking toys with positive female role models should be seen as a political statement.
    It reminds me a lot when Fun in the Park came out and there was a lot of media focus on a) it being the first set (yes, I know this is technically not accurate) to include a wheelchair user, and b) people having campaigned for it who were now happy that it was happening.

    I saw a lot of people on here who were incensed that the mainstream media and general public did not know that TLG has years-long leads times for set design, and therefore the campaign wouldn't have driven TLG to include the disabled character. People were furious that this belief existed, and would now flourish, that one could campaign for representation in Lego form, and get it.

    And then there were people who were just plain annoyed that representation was felt to be necessary at all - questions about why disabled people would need to see ourselves in Lego sets, wouldn't it just depress us to be reminded of our disabilities while playing with Lego, "I know a disabled person who doesn't like/want it," etc. etc. 

    And then some time passed and the set became available to buy. It started being mentioned when people compiled lists of favourite sets of 2016 in various categories, people posted photos of how they were modding it... life went on. More recently, we found out that the new bus station set for 2017 includes a woman with a wheelchair, and people are going, "Oh, nice detail, and look, they made the bus wheelchair accessible. Cool, I wonder how exactly they've implemented that."

    The fact people are so chill about it now makes me wonder if the problem was ever the disabled character in the first place, so much as the possibility that the general public might get the idea of Lego as an inclusive place, even a deliberately inclusive place. But it also makes me wonder how big a problem people will have with this set once it's actually out - quite apart from the issue of whether the vignettes are substantial enough to merit the name, which I agree is a perfectly reasonable thing to be concerned about.

    And now @Pitfall69's pointed out that people raised a lot of the same political questions about Research Institute... it feels like we as a community have a pattern with this stuff, and I wonder if the level alarm has ever turned out to be merited.

    tmgm528stluxAanchirOmastarsnowhitievizzitor
  • William_TownsleyWilliam_Townsley Perth, Scotland Member Posts: 880
    It's a terrible set. It's just some Minifigures in a frame with a few small models. I thought Lego ideas was about creativity there isn't much creativity about this set. The only positive is the possibility of a NASA logo printed on bricks
    KingAlanI
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,985
    It is a vignette set. Personally, some of my favorite sets have been vignettes. There really is a range of sizes as well for vignettes. Some are smaller like the research institute, some slightly larger like the seasonal sets and some are bigger like Big Bang Theory was. You may not care for this particular build, but others will. On the flip, there have been other Lego Idea sets that i have thought were awful choices. That is okay.

    Lego is about many thjngs and it is not a one size fits all model. This is another thing that really does go into Lego Ideas and something that has been left out of the conversation here. They really have picked a variety of sets... just to name a few..... micro build, a large build, vignette, game, licensed, science model etc.

    minecraft micro builds
    maze 
    Fisherman
    Back to the Future
    Doctor Who
    Birds


    Lego Ideas is more of a balance between releasings sets that might not be normally made, what they can market and sell, and what fits into their manufacturing line and design time.



    Aanchir
  • TikiLukiTikiLuki ChicagoMember Posts: 64
    Yeah, I don't think this is a great set. It's more of a display piece than a set with play value. A display piece is nice when it's an Architecture set, but not when the focus of the set is people.

    I actually think the Katharine Johnson vignette is pretty darn cool for something so small, but I would rather have seen a whole NASA control room set with her in it than these four discrete mini vignettes).
    KingAlanI
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. Sign in or register to get started.

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.