Beauty Tips, for Girls, from Lego
March 17, 2015 3:45 PM Subscribe
God damn it, Lego. How stupid do you have to be?
This is a damned shame, considering the fact that the Lego friends line has clearly been adjusted over time in response to the criticisms. There are fewer and fewer beauty-related lines, a bigger diversity of brick color, and more male minidolls. So freaking disappointing that they keep falling back on this stuff (similarly, the mostly-awesome elves line features a baffling "spa").
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 4:09 PM on March 17, 2015 [5 favorites]
This is a damned shame, considering the fact that the Lego friends line has clearly been adjusted over time in response to the criticisms. There are fewer and fewer beauty-related lines, a bigger diversity of brick color, and more male minidolls. So freaking disappointing that they keep falling back on this stuff (similarly, the mostly-awesome elves line features a baffling "spa").
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 4:09 PM on March 17, 2015 [5 favorites]
I'm glad to know that Lego finds representing actual women in the public sphere too political, but finds promulgating beauty standards for girls to be A-OK.
posted by MonkeyToes at 4:12 PM on March 17, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by MonkeyToes at 4:12 PM on March 17, 2015 [6 favorites]
I miss the Lego people from my first set.
posted by phunniemee at 4:14 PM on March 17, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by phunniemee at 4:14 PM on March 17, 2015 [1 favorite]
What the fuck, Lego. Stop gendering your fucking bricks. They are bricks.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:15 PM on March 17, 2015 [21 favorites]
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:15 PM on March 17, 2015 [21 favorites]
How did Lego go from being actively gender neutral to this sorry state of affairs?
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:17 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 4:17 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
To be fair, bricks do have gender in many languages.
posted by overeducated_alligator at 4:19 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by overeducated_alligator at 4:19 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
What's odd is that the recent minifigure collections seem to have lots of gender-neutral-ish stuff going on - you get a male version of a character in one series, then a female version in another. And there's very little stereotyping in terms of which characters are male or female - I think we can allow the occasional pink spacesuit if she also gets to shoot a laser.
But the Friends stuff seems to have been created to sell to parents who are actively seeking out gendered toys.
posted by pipeski at 4:31 PM on March 17, 2015
But the Friends stuff seems to have been created to sell to parents who are actively seeking out gendered toys.
posted by pipeski at 4:31 PM on March 17, 2015
Lego told me I have too many blackheads.
posted by 7segment at 4:35 PM on March 17, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by 7segment at 4:35 PM on March 17, 2015 [2 favorites]
Not awesome.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:51 PM on March 17, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:51 PM on March 17, 2015 [1 favorite]
Lego told me I have too many blackheads.
I have some good news for you!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 4:58 PM on March 17, 2015
I have some good news for you!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 4:58 PM on March 17, 2015
Honestly, even with liberal parenting, my kids are pretty heavily gendered, this is something many of my friends have experienced as well. My kids both like Star Wars, but my daughter is drawn to elaborate storytelling about Jedi training academies and my son likes explosions and fighting. My kids both love Lego, and the Lego friends sets have appealed to my daughter. She likes being able to create stories with more realistic looking girls and their animal friends. And the elf series is cool as well. Gendered play is not always bad.
But then there are these throwbacks to to older, more sexist tropes that are upsetting. But I will defend the overall concept of Lego girls, which is not inherently bad.
posted by blahblahblah at 5:03 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
But then there are these throwbacks to to older, more sexist tropes that are upsetting. But I will defend the overall concept of Lego girls, which is not inherently bad.
posted by blahblahblah at 5:03 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
I'm glad to know that Lego finds representing actual women in the public sphere too political, but finds promulgating beauty standards for girls to be A-OK.
We're talking about an international toy company that has a brand policy of not doing stuff related to "politics and political symbols, campaigns, or movements". In what way is the Supreme Court of the United States, part of the United States government, not a political entity?
(Also, if they're going to do female supreme court judges, why not do their own supreme court? It has five women at the moment. Or they could go with Norway, which has eight.)
posted by effbot at 5:07 PM on March 17, 2015 [1 favorite]
We're talking about an international toy company that has a brand policy of not doing stuff related to "politics and political symbols, campaigns, or movements". In what way is the Supreme Court of the United States, part of the United States government, not a political entity?
(Also, if they're going to do female supreme court judges, why not do their own supreme court? It has five women at the moment. Or they could go with Norway, which has eight.)
posted by effbot at 5:07 PM on March 17, 2015 [1 favorite]
I liked this Nerds of Color piece about Lego Friends (plus, those Lego Elves sets are awesome and I would've been obsessed as a child. I kind of am now but I'm a little too broke to buy them.)
I don't know -- other than, no, maybe a 7-year-old should not be concerned about how she looks, this feels like a little bit like "girls liking fashion is bad!" and sort of falling into the whole "boy stuff is better!" trope. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with wanting a flattering haircut -- for yourself -- honestly, if you're a girl or a boy (or a man or woman). This kind of feels like a lot of nothing to me.
Girls should be given more options. But so should boys. Rather than doing the whole "How dare they tell girls what haircuts may be flattering on them!" thing, I think it's better to ask why there isn't one for the boys, too. (After all, if this character is running a salon, she's likely cutting men's hair too.)
Oh, I totally get women get standards of beauty shoved down their throats from an early age. But I really hate acting like girls showing any interest in any of that is somehow terrible in and of itself.
posted by darksong at 5:18 PM on March 17, 2015 [7 favorites]
I don't know -- other than, no, maybe a 7-year-old should not be concerned about how she looks, this feels like a little bit like "girls liking fashion is bad!" and sort of falling into the whole "boy stuff is better!" trope. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with wanting a flattering haircut -- for yourself -- honestly, if you're a girl or a boy (or a man or woman). This kind of feels like a lot of nothing to me.
Girls should be given more options. But so should boys. Rather than doing the whole "How dare they tell girls what haircuts may be flattering on them!" thing, I think it's better to ask why there isn't one for the boys, too. (After all, if this character is running a salon, she's likely cutting men's hair too.)
Oh, I totally get women get standards of beauty shoved down their throats from an early age. But I really hate acting like girls showing any interest in any of that is somehow terrible in and of itself.
posted by darksong at 5:18 PM on March 17, 2015 [7 favorites]
Rather than doing the whole "How dare they tell girls what haircuts may be flattering on them!" thing, I think it's better to ask why there isn't one for the boys, too.Fuck. That. Shit. Seriously. Fuck it. No 7-year-old, of any gender, needs to be told that their face shape is bad and needs to be fixed with a "flattering" haircut. None. It is great to encourage kids' desire to be pretty and dress up and enjoy fashion, but that can be done in a way that emphasizes fun, rather than through negative messages. No 7-year-old should be scrutinizing their jaw to see if it should be softened or deciding whether their face is too long and could be made to look shorter. Little girls will spend the rest of their lives being told that their bodies and faces need fixing, but there's just no reason to start giving them that message when they're in elementary school.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:32 PM on March 17, 2015 [57 favorites]
effbot: "(Also, if they're going to do female supreme court judges, why not do their own supreme court? It has five women at the moment. Or they could go with Norway, which has eight.)"
Dude, which part of "The US is the entire world, or at least the only important part" memo did you not read?
posted by signal at 5:44 PM on March 17, 2015 [2 favorites]
Dude, which part of "The US is the entire world, or at least the only important part" memo did you not read?
posted by signal at 5:44 PM on March 17, 2015 [2 favorites]
Yeah, I'm okay with there being the presence of some fashion/beauty stuff--it can be fun! Who doesn't like to paint you face wacky colors with make-up?!--but telling little girls that they need to disguise their "flaws" with a perfect haircut is superduper gross.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 5:54 PM on March 17, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 5:54 PM on March 17, 2015 [6 favorites]
The sad thing is it seems like they were trying really hard to not be offensive. "Experiment with barrettes! Be less nervous at the salon! You are beautiful! If you are ready to change up your look! There is a formula to guarantee a haircut you will be happy with!" Like they knew they wanted to/had to do some kind "kids learning about how to live by impersonating adult things" Mommy Magazine Junior thing while also keeping it positive, fun and light. Unfortunately there is no way to scale down the kind of harmful body image messages that women get into something that's acceptable for little girls' toys. Or if there is some way to do this I haven't seen it. I can't think of any way to say "How to change your look" without also saying "You should change your look" and "Your current look is insufficient". They tried this and failed at it.
posted by bleep at 6:33 PM on March 17, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by bleep at 6:33 PM on March 17, 2015 [6 favorites]
Actually I disagree with myself. I had the Klutz book "Braids and Bows" when I was little and that was fine because it was a very straightforward "Here is how to do stuff with your hair". That probably would have been a more on-brand message for Lego in this context - more about fun and creativity rather than worrying about how acceptable your face is to other people.
posted by bleep at 6:59 PM on March 17, 2015 [7 favorites]
posted by bleep at 6:59 PM on March 17, 2015 [7 favorites]
No 7-year-old, of any gender, needs to be told that their face shape is bad and needs to be fixed with a "flattering" haircut
but telling little girls that they need to disguise their "flaws" with a perfect haircut is superduper gross.
As bleep says it strenuously avoids saying "your face shape is bad" - it says stuff like "long straight hair make[s] pretty square faces even prettier!" It just carries a distinct implication that of course everyone knows an oval face is the best. The overall effect is weird and condescending.
posted by atoxyl at 7:02 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
but telling little girls that they need to disguise their "flaws" with a perfect haircut is superduper gross.
As bleep says it strenuously avoids saying "your face shape is bad" - it says stuff like "long straight hair make[s] pretty square faces even prettier!" It just carries a distinct implication that of course everyone knows an oval face is the best. The overall effect is weird and condescending.
posted by atoxyl at 7:02 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
Also, if they're going to do female supreme court judges, why not do their own supreme court?
OK, who else got confused for a second thinking the Lego company had its own supreme court?
posted by dirigibleman at 7:42 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
OK, who else got confused for a second thinking the Lego company had its own supreme court?
posted by dirigibleman at 7:42 PM on March 17, 2015 [3 favorites]
Sometimes it's good to read the comments on a news article, because then you get this hilarious parody.
posted by rednikki at 8:55 PM on March 17, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 8:55 PM on March 17, 2015 [8 favorites]
How did Lego go from being actively gender neutral to this sorry state of affairs?
Market research suggested that the kids buying Lego (or, the kids asking their parents for Lego) were overwhelmingly boys. From Wikipedia:
posted by EndsOfInvention at 4:05 AM on March 18, 2015
Market research suggested that the kids buying Lego (or, the kids asking their parents for Lego) were overwhelmingly boys. From Wikipedia:
According to the company, boys comprised 90% of Lego's customers in 2011 before the launch of the Friends line.So they wanted to target girls, and... well this is where we ended up, for good or for bad.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 4:05 AM on March 18, 2015
there is no way to scale down the kind of harmful body image messages that women get into something that's acceptable for little girls' toys
Exactly.
Dear Lego: Make Friends about what these girls do in the world and not how they appear.
posted by MonkeyToes at 5:32 AM on March 18, 2015 [9 favorites]
Exactly.
Dear Lego: Make Friends about what these girls do in the world and not how they appear.
posted by MonkeyToes at 5:32 AM on March 18, 2015 [9 favorites]
To be fair, bricks do have gender in many languages.
Not in Danish, it doesn't have grammatical gender (or rather it does but the genders are "common" and "neuter").
posted by nat at 6:05 AM on March 18, 2015
Not in Danish, it doesn't have grammatical gender (or rather it does but the genders are "common" and "neuter").
posted by nat at 6:05 AM on March 18, 2015
Sometimes it's good to read the comments on a news article, because then you get this hilarious parody.
Linked in the original post.
We're talking about an international toy company that has a brand policy of not doing stuff related to "politics and political symbols, campaigns, or movements". In what way is the Supreme Court of the United States, part of the United States government, not a political entity?
The Women of the Supreme Court concept was rejected for being related to politics.
(Also, if they're going to do female supreme court judges, why not do their own supreme court? It has five women at the moment. Or they could go with Norway, which has eight.)
The set concept didn't come from Lego's design team, it was submitted to Lego Ideas, which is a fansourced kickstarter kind of thing for set concepts.
In the past, I have tried to defend Lego Friends, because I feel that generally, most of their sets are positive. The most recent "Jungle Rescue" sets feature girls driving vehicles to rescue animals, which is a step up from the typical beauty shop Barbie themes.
However, the hair/face type article seems especially tone-deaf given the criticism of Friends.
posted by Fleebnork at 6:10 AM on March 18, 2015 [1 favorite]
Linked in the original post.
We're talking about an international toy company that has a brand policy of not doing stuff related to "politics and political symbols, campaigns, or movements". In what way is the Supreme Court of the United States, part of the United States government, not a political entity?
The Women of the Supreme Court concept was rejected for being related to politics.
(Also, if they're going to do female supreme court judges, why not do their own supreme court? It has five women at the moment. Or they could go with Norway, which has eight.)
The set concept didn't come from Lego's design team, it was submitted to Lego Ideas, which is a fansourced kickstarter kind of thing for set concepts.
In the past, I have tried to defend Lego Friends, because I feel that generally, most of their sets are positive. The most recent "Jungle Rescue" sets feature girls driving vehicles to rescue animals, which is a step up from the typical beauty shop Barbie themes.
However, the hair/face type article seems especially tone-deaf given the criticism of Friends.
posted by Fleebnork at 6:10 AM on March 18, 2015 [1 favorite]
I have never been able to figure out what my 'face shape' is, or what my 'colors' are, or my 'undertones' or whatever. It's all just completely baffling to me.
posted by showbiz_liz at 7:12 AM on March 18, 2015
posted by showbiz_liz at 7:12 AM on March 18, 2015
As bleep says it strenuously avoids saying "your face shape is bad" - it says stuff like "long straight hair make[s] pretty square faces even prettier!" It just carries a distinct implication that of course everyone knows an oval face is the best.
It's way worse than that. Because what it's actually communicating above all else is that pretty is the goal.
And also: what the fuck is this communicating to people who cannot grown straight hair? Like every single person with afro-textured hair?
And also: fuck this product.
posted by DarlingBri at 2:26 PM on March 18, 2015 [5 favorites]
It's way worse than that. Because what it's actually communicating above all else is that pretty is the goal.
And also: what the fuck is this communicating to people who cannot grown straight hair? Like every single person with afro-textured hair?
And also: fuck this product.
posted by DarlingBri at 2:26 PM on March 18, 2015 [5 favorites]
« Older Milk and cookies kept you awake, eh, Sebastian? | Over or under? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by phunniemee at 3:47 PM on March 17, 2015 [31 favorites]