LEGO Friends - LEGO for girls

My daughter would be appalled by this. (I'll ask her over to look at the screen right now to see what she thinks of the link.) My daughter (third grade age) says "What?!? Lego's gone girly. What did they do that for?" I asked her what she thought about that, and she said, "I don't like it."

My daughter plays just fine with the regular Lego products we've had in the house for years. Ever since my sister gave my oldest son (an occasional HN participant, now living on his own) a Duplo set for his second birthday, all the four children who live or have lived under my roof have been confirmed Lego maniacs. They can make Lego configurations of various shapes and sizes into action figures for fantasy play with dialog, and love to combine pieces from the dozens of Lego sets we've accumulated over the years. It's very hard to see what new interest there is in Lego Friends for anyone in our family.

As long as the company stays in business making the classic Lego stuff, I wish it well in any other business venture it pursues in a free-market economy. But I think for true Lego lovers, it has never been necessary for Lego products to have girl appeal, as they already have plenty of builder appeal, and every child can grow up to be a creative builder.

Lego is launching a product line for girls. Someone should tell them that they already have one; its called legos.--Michael Labriola

https://twitter.com/#!/mlabriola/status/148497407972352001

That’s pretty horrible but also nothing new. Lego Scala (basically Barbie dolls from Lego, late 90s, early 2000s) was much, much worse†.

What they are selling now are at least real and interesting Lego sets. You can actually build something. In that respect they are very similar to the Paradisa line of Lego sets (early to mid 90s)∆.

Sexism is an old hat for Lego, here’s Dolls Kitchen from 1971: http://brickset.com/detail/?Set=261-4

Not that that makes it any better, but we shouldn’t pretend like that’s a recent development.

—

† How about Emma’s Chill-Out Kitchen from 2001: http://brickset.com/detail/?Set=3123-1

Lego also sold bracelets and pendants under the Scala brand in 1979: http://brickset.com/detail/?Set=308-1

∆ I always wanted Dolphin Point: http://brickset.com/detail/?Set=6414-1

But since I was a boy I didn’t dare and express that wish and consequently never got the set. Oh well, the Space Shuttle was cool, too.

I had plenty of female cousins come over and play Legos with me when I (male) was a child, and vice versa. This is just corporate thinking it can make more money by trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

One of the biggest problems with lego's is that they are too good. You only needed one decent sized set to ever make anything really neat. In order for a product like that to be sustainable, you have to introduce new sets, or collectable stuff, and when that becomes your primary source of income, it gets all of your marketing focus, and the brand loses its original identity and appeal. I don't think that they are doing this to market to girls as much as they are to people who think lego's are ugly, much in the same way that the collectable sets are to people who want something impressive and complex to build but do not have the time or energy to come up with designs themselves.

I hate that it came to this. =[

I don't really see the problem here.

Look at LEGO's product page: http://www.lego.com/en-us/products/default.aspx

They have tons of theme kits. This is just one product line that has some pink and purple crap in it. If your daughter wants to play with "LEGO Alien Quest" or "LEGO Star Wars" then good for her. This is just a set targeted towards the girls who might otherwise be playing with dolls. Why not give them an option?

I always thought that Lego was genderless and that was one of the points that made them strong and appealing to boys and girls, they can use it for whatever they want is adaptable. I can understand the branded sets from SW or Harry Potter but this is beyond my understanding.

Given the choices - either stick with the aisle full of Star Wars, ninjas, and pretty much all gun-based LEGO sets aimed purely at boys (the company admitted it was focusing solely on boys in mid-2000's), OR add some girl-focused sets with things like tree-houses and an invention factory and a veterinarian office and yes some "girly stuff" like a salon?

Seriously? You don't want your girls to have an option that doesn't involve clone troopers?

I have a girl, and I am very happy by this new option for girls to choose from.

Google the old SNL commercial "Chess For Girls."

Even independent of the fact that the product line is absurd, this website is absurd. Although the intimacy between the characters is sort of positive, overall it's just ridiculous. they all have the same body, the black girl is the only asymmetrical one and has a music note in her hair? They all have bare arms and shoulders, only one is wearing pants and the skirts are shorter than I imagine any parent would want their daughter of target age to wear. Although I guess the characters themselves are young women so maybe that's not so bad... but even then, it's absurd that these characters have such strong sexuality.

HOWEVER: let's compare this to Barbie. It's better than Barbie in every single way.