Skepchick Quickies 12.16


Amanda works in healthcare, is a loudmouthed feminist, and proud supporter of the Oxford comma.

Related Articles


  1. Yeah, it does bugs me that LEGO thinks they have to split the genders that horribly. Boys get firemen and policemen. Girls get boobs and pink.

    The good news is that Friends is a little bit less stereotypical than previous attempts. I think set: http://www.brickset.com/detail/?Set=3933-1 is the first time the girl LEGO theme has a robot.

    Here’s an article that explains LEGO’s ‘reasons’ for this: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/lego-is-for-girls-12142011.html

    Regarding the last quote, in reality I think most AFOLs would keep the new minifig’s hair and try to sell the rest. It is always very useful to have new hair styles for real female minifigures as they are scarce.

    1. What is really horrible about the Lego thing is that they think because it make marketing sense it excuses this type of stereotyping.
      An aweful lot of repugnant things can, and are, justified every day.
      Slavery, for example, makes very good economic sense (if you are the slave owner) but that doesn’t mean it is any less reprehensible.

    2. So true, I was going to say something about LEGO myself, being an AFOL (adult fan of lego). I really, really have mixed feelings about this new line. On one hand, it is so much better than their past offerings. See: http://thebrickblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/The-LEGO-Girl-Graveyard-by-Bloomberg-500×175.jpg On the other hand, it’s not nearly as progressive as it could be and still “others” girls.

      But is that bad if it gets girls to play with LEGOs, and explore building? I just don’t know.

    3. It’s not as bad as I thought it would be. It’s like lego are making an effort they just don’t fully understand the problem.

      1. Maybe they don’t understand the problem because they don’t higher enough women and/or the women that are there aren’t taken seriously and don’t have the power to direct things. If they don’t understand, it’s their own fault for excluding the voices they need to hear. I’m not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt here.

  2. Each time that LEGO does this, it flops. Past a certain age, girls want to play with the same LEGO sets that the boys play with. That’s why LEGO Belleville was such a commercial failure here in the U.S. I know this because I sold the toys for five years at the old Chicago location of New York’s signature toy store.

  3. Hmm. Kinda surprised LEGO would do this. I keep hearing that LEGOs are the most popular non gendered toy in psych studies with small children.

  4. Amanda,

    Those Lego figurines for girls actually look kind of nice, better than the other ones. They should make some more of them like that, for boys, as well as both girls and boys. I’m a guy, and I play with Sims 3 all the time. That’s kind of like playing with dolls, in a way.

  5. I don’t even know why they felt they needed lego for girls. Has that been a problem before, that girls don’t want to play with lego?

    I don’t really have a problem with pink lego in and of itself. If they want to market that, go for it. But it’s the whole “for girls” bit, insinuating that there’s something wrong with the girls that play with the regular lego (or with boys that want to play with the new, more realistic ones). I really don’t get why that’s a problem for toymakers to understand.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button