Thanks, lol. I dunno, I just like things that are awesome and purposeful, without insulting my intelligence. Which can be done in almost any way, if you just put some thought into what you're doing.SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Feminist Frequency needs a fact check?
- Thread starter James Ennever
- Start date
What exactly is stopping little girls from buying the "boys" Lego sets? I don't see "No girls allowed" plastered anywhere but in this person's video. What is so male oriented about, say, a Harry Potter themed Lego set? or a dinosaur themed Lego set? a medieval themed Lego set? or a city themed Lego set? Why shouldn't a girl want to play with a toy excavator? I didn't see anything in that ad saying "btw this is only for boys!".MrMan999 said:
But they went too far, its one thing to appeal to a market, its another thing to segregate your markets. Why aren't there girls in lego city ads? Why does Heartlake city even exist when there is a whole other Lego city that could do with model pieces for cafes and actual housing?Buretsu said:
But more importantly, why is the end-user experience advertised as being distinctly different?
Just because the larger share of your market is for boys doesn't mean there isn't a market there for girls, but actively segregating the 2 eliminates potential profits all their products.
It doesn't cost them any more to open up their currently established worlds to girls, but it denies growth and costs more to create new worlds, models and functionalities, just for a smaller market.
Its not good business.
In my opinion, the height of laziness in all of this is when female characters in games are designed purely for the visual pleasure of the audience with no obvious connection/consequence within the game world. In pseudo D&D terms it's creating a visually pleasing character but dropping the charisma rating from the rolls. Tomb Raider for example they're great games but you could probably swap out Lara Croft with Nathan Drake and it wouldn't make any difference in the story/cut scenes. Bayonetta on the other hand is another 'sexy' character, but in this case she knows it and acts it. Not every female character needs to be an Alyx Vance, there's sexy people in the world so there's nothing wrong with making a sexy video game character, just don't do it in a vacuum and/or have some contrast in the game.Chemical Alia said:
As for the kick starter project that's causing all the fuss... one thing that I know is going to bother me is picking out Princess Peach. In my opinion, this is one compared to others is a relatively harmless trope, one that is thousands of years old. It works because it's simply a common, almost universal male fantasy. In pursuit of gender equality/feminist ideals must we scourge every last little thing until nothings left? To me going after Princess Peach is like going after Harry Potter for corrupting Christian ideals, it's just downright silly.
You quoted the wrong person, that was my post.geK0 said:
We'll take this one step by step.
Tell me, as a young boy would you buy lego Friends if you saw this:
If not, why wouldn't you buy it. Use specific reasons from the ad to explain what put you off.
If you do, tell us what it was that made you feel apart of this experience, what aspect resonated with you or made you desirable for the product.
Tch silly people, Lego doesn't have to BE for a gender. I fucking loved legos when I was small. My parents bought it for me. Y'know why? Becuase they didn't have some dumbass pre-programmed-notion of what 'for girls' means.
Legos are awesome.
Escapist y so many sexism threads recently? Are we all not getting laid enough or something? What's the deal? Can we all just make some tea and chill out?
Legos are awesome.
Escapist y so many sexism threads recently? Are we all not getting laid enough or something? What's the deal? Can we all just make some tea and chill out?
It really irked me when she cited Femme Fatalle of the Powerpuff Girls in her Straw Feminist argument. Yes, she's a blatent straw feminist archetype...but she was beaten when Sarah Bellum, whom I'd consider a more 'real' feminist, called her out how how she's exploiting the feminist cause for attention and benefits. or citing Sil from Species...I never saw her as much as a dark seductress as an example of nature vs nurture..it was how the people who had been her 'parents' reacted to seeing the results of treating her like a lab experiment had kept her from developing any real humanity, leaving her just a creature left to its baser instincts as the aliens had intended.
It seemed like there were minimal references to sexism and gender roles as a more general problem.Ragsnstitches said:
No, lego is ones of the worst cases to look at. Because their catalogue extends to all genders and tastes even if their screen time does not (which is debateable).Ragsnstitches said:
Don't get me wrong. Western culture (perhaps even human culture) has a deep problem with sexism and gender roles. But I don't think we should be condemning lego for catering to the demand for gender-role based products, when their core product is everything that's good about children's toys.
Basically, I don't blame lego for this, I blame our culture.
The switch to more movie licences will have been purely a fiscal one. Think about it, a parent that has enjoyed Star Wars or Indianna Jones is much more likely to buy a toy based on it for their kids. Harry Potter is enjoyed by children and adults alike, they are very careful on which licences they pick up.Ragsnstitches said:
I will certainly agree with you that these series (probably excluding the latter) do not have the best representations of women. But I feel that the issues with sexism in these series can hardly remain when everyone is reduced to a yellow plastic person. The fact that you can remove Obi-Wan's head and replace it with one of your choice (aka. a female one,) makes it seem like the issues of sexism in these series is actively reduced in lego form.
Yes, and I'm of the opinion that all advertising aimed at children is immoral. Unfortunately the culture we live in disagrees, and I don't blame the lego company for that.Ragsnstitches said:
That is really not going to stop a little girl from making her own jedi. The fact that she's not seen her gender play with the toy on television. This stuff is only an issue when a gender-role has already been forced upon the child. And seen as our culture (and therefore the parents within it) seem to think of this as a good thing I cannot blame lego for catering to such people.Ragsnstitches said:
My 3 year old niece prefers 'male' toys. Batman lives in the Farm I bought her for christmas. Batman is her favourite toy lol. She also loves Buzz Lightyear and spent a month telling people she was Puss in Boots from Shrek. I was the same when I was little.
I think feminist frequency is right in pointing out disparities in marketing campaigns. As an adult some of my close friends are a female crane driver, a microbiologist and a fire fighter. Where is that real world representation in the toys.
If anything OP perhaps you should write to her as a big lego fan and politely point out the things you think she has missed. I think she might appreciate the constructive criticism.
I think feminist frequency is right in pointing out disparities in marketing campaigns. As an adult some of my close friends are a female crane driver, a microbiologist and a fire fighter. Where is that real world representation in the toys.
If anything OP perhaps you should write to her as a big lego fan and politely point out the things you think she has missed. I think she might appreciate the constructive criticism.
I actually see now where your coming from, so I redact that "trying to be obtuse" remark and apologise.Smeatza said:
Personally I don't see her condemning lego. She makes a lot of positive remarks about lego, like how it develops creative thinking and motor skills in young kids. On several occasions she even mentions what Lego has done right, but its overwhelmed by what they keep getting wrong over the last few years. Despite several public announcements where they promised to break down the gender barrier, they have in fact reinforced it by creating separate worlds for boys and girls.
But she also remarks on how Lego was once a genderless product, with everyone with an interest in coloured blocks being the target. I saw an ad where an entire family sat down to play with lego, mom and daughter, father and son. That was an early 60s video. Then I saw another video that showed a man and his son making a house, with words like "nothing can stop a father and sons imagination" or something like that, which was released less then 20 years ago. What happened to the girls, both daughters and moms?
Based on my own observations:
Lego released a product which was basically lego board games. Completely gender neutral, allowing the family to play again or girls to contribute too.
A few years later they release this:
Look at them grizzly men, with their axes and the shouting! Because we all know girls don't partake in mystical adventures.
Lego shouldn't be punished for being a company, but they need to be shook a bit because they have lost sight of what lego is.
EDIT: And your right, there is nothing wrong with or anything stopping a girl from, under her own power, playing Jedi or flying the millennium falcon... its just that Lego doesn't tell them that its okay, instead its for boys and Friends and Belleville are for you so be happy about that.
Yeah, I can certainly get behind this.Ragsnstitches said:I actually see now where your coming from, so I redact that "trying to be obtuse" remark and apologise.Smeatza said:
Personally I don't see her condemning lego. She makes a lot of positive remarks about lego, like how it develops creative thinking and motor skills in young kids. On several occasions she even mentions what Lego has done right, but its overwhelmed by what they keep getting wrong over the last few years. Despite several public announcements where they promised to break down the gender barrier, they have in fact reinforced it by creating separate worlds for boys and girls.
But she also remarks on how Lego was once a genderless product, with everyone with an interest in coloured blocks being the target. I saw an ad where an entire family sat down to play with lego, mom and daughter, father and son. That was an early 60s video. Then I saw another video that showed a man and his son making a house, with words like "nothing can stop a father and sons imagination" or something like that, which was released less then 20 years ago. What happened to the girls, both daughters and moms?
Based on my own observations:
Lego released a product which was basically lego board games. Completely gender neutral, allowing the family to play again or girls to contribute too.
A few years later they release this:
Look at them grizzly men, with their axes and the shouting! Because we all know girls don't partake in mystical adventures.
Lego shouldn't be punished for being a company, but they need to be shook a bit because they have lost sight of what lego is.
I just really dislike the idea of lego (or any company) being written off as a completely sexist when if you get passed the advertising, their core product is so wonderfully multi-gender and all encompassing.
And it did seem to me that she was picking on lego specifically, rather than using lego to highlight the larger problem.
My bad, must have made that error when clipping out the other quotes(I hate having quotes within quotes).Ragsnstitches said:
Point taken though, I can't honestly say that I'd see that an anything other than a girl's toy. Still though, A lot of the Lego sets are based off of movies which are popular amongst both genders and I stand by my statement that there really isn't anything exclusively male about Lego city.
The thing is, almost all "girl" toys are like this; try going to a Toys R Us and visit the girls section, almost everything in there is pastel coloured (mostly pink), and has an emphasis on either pets, princesses or house role playing (cooking, baby care etc). Is it any fault of Lego as a brand that almost everything without these qualities is automatically considered a "boy's" toy? I'll say it again, it's "Lego city" not " Lego Brofist robbers construction and action extreme town", just gender-neutral "Lego city".
I think 'femfrequency' would have been better off discussing the toy industry as a whole rather than attacking Lego specifically.
Oh, and just to prove a point, here are some things I enjoyed as a young boy
-2.jpg)
Now, normally I've been just lurking most forums recently, sticking more to my RPs and such and not bothering with much of the rest of the Escapist, but I'm going to point a few things out in your post right now, which annoyed me.Owyn_Merrilin said:
1) If you're going to quote someone on something, ACTUALLY QUOTE THEM. Leave in their usename and such. Hell, it's the EXACT reason why I'm doing it to Owyn now. That way he can be notified that someone has responded to him instead of just being blindly ripped into without being told. I don't care what the topic is, it's just underhanded if you're going to take someone's post and attack them for it, then not even include it so they're aware of it. You won't get any debate back from them, and my first thought when it comes to that is "They're just doing that because they don't want rebuttal". Whether that's true or not, I don't know, but it's just decent etiquette to at least notify someone if you're going to debate what they're saying.zefiris said:
2) Honestly, I didn't get the impression that he was attempting to downplay the issue of rape in his post. That's just me though. I going to be nice here and assume the wording he used wasn't the best and that he's a decent guy who knows that "Rape is bad" and just venting a bit of annoyance that it seems to be brought up as the biggest/only issue by some. I got more of a vibe that there was annoyance at the fact that it's an issue that's brought up and focused on more despite there being more common issues that play a larger effect in society that people don't seem to be as worked up about.
3) You took an entire part of his quote (over 2/3 of it) out as well which tied more into the slut walk thing being about the 'slut' angle and the meaning of the word in our culture. In my mind, I really have no opinion on slut walks and such, but the term of it to me seems rather stupid. There won't be success found by attempting to change the meaning of a word with brute force.
6) And oh my god, it's the end of my post and the time for the Shyamalan twist at the very end of it all, you're the EXACT type of fucking person who is crucifying someone rather than criticizing. I likely would have agreed before that the over-reaction to the posts so far was a bit strong, but man, did you ever prove me wrong. You're the type of person who undermines their own goals by being such an asshole to the people they're wanting to convince/argue with to the point that they then associate the argument with people like you, and automatically come to dismiss more valid points due to the conditioning you're putting on them. Whether it is religion, politics, or whatever, you're giving people a knee jerk reaction that makes some people think less of "Feminist" and more of "Femanazi". If you're going to use mudslinging in your argument, and come off with an extremely condescending and smug tone, all you're going to have people do is dismiss you're entire post as the trash it is.You're not being crucified, you face something called criticism. This happens if you speak in public.
You are crying about being crucified for people saying to you what you say about this youtube person. Your hypocrisy is completely off the charts. You seriously have the audacity to attack a youtube video maker with clueless, trite arguments, and then turn around and whine when people poke holes into your mess?
That's pathetic.
Also, helpful tip: You will not be accused of being a woman hater if you stop dismissing misogynist hate campaigns. You could also stop using misogynist arguments. It'd help a ton
So please (And I hope the sarcasm shows here), prove me right. Crawl back into the "I'm the victim" style of argument. Call me a misogynistic asshole for something I've said in this post, slander me all you want, you'll only be proving my final point all the more correct, and you?re doing little more than shooting yourself in your own foot.
Or, come back to this with a calm, and level minded head, approach supposed ignorance with tolerance and discussion rather than looking down on them from the false pedestal you've placed yourself on top of and you might actually get somewhere rather than just fueling the flames.
I just reached a consensus with another poster on that exact point about focusing on Lego.geK0 said:
Lego has more history based around a single product then any other toy company. Lego is both world famous and readily identifiable. It is also touted as being a gender neutral toy, since its core attributes are creativeness, constructiveness and roleplay, 3 readily ambiguous traits.
Lego is a microcosm for the whole industry.
They can be used to point out all that is wrong in the toy industry (but not to be confused with condemnation, they just got swept up in a storm of aggressive advertising). Whats even better though, is that its easily juxtaposed to what Lego as done SO right as well.
That is why she did Lego, it wasn't a random decision, but a calculated one.
Oh God. I remember watching Sailor Moon every day back when it was on Toonami. Those were the days. Powerpuff girls was really kickass as well.geK0 said:My bad, must have made that error when clipping out the other quotes(I hate having quotes within quotes).Ragsnstitches said:
Point taken though, I can't honestly say that I'd see that an anything other than a girl's toy. Still though, A lot of the Lego sets are based off of movies which are popular amongst both genders and I stand by my statement that there really isn't anything exclusively male about Lego city.
The thing is, almost all "girl" toys are like this; try going to a Toys R Us and visit the girls section, almost everything in there is pastel coloured (mostly pink), and has an emphasis on either pets, princesses or house role playing (cooking, baby care etc). Is it any fault of Lego as a brand that almost everything without these qualities is automatically considered a "boy's" toy? I'll say it again, it's "Lego city" not " Lego Brofist robbers construction and action extreme town", just gender-neutral "Lego city".
I think 'femfrequency' would have been better off discussing the toy industry as a whole rather than attacking Lego specifically.
Oh, and just to prove a point, here are some things I enjoyed as a young boy
all things which I enjoyed despite their cutesy, girlish themes.
This isn't a topic on Ageism, but even at that an Elderly person would have the competency and self-awareness to see the bullshit advertisements regurgitate on us daily.Blablahb said:
A small child wouldn't. A little boy or little girl would only understand what they are told and will only emulate what they see. Kids don't forge their own identities until their teens, of which is heavily influenced by their pre-teens.
If you don't see what's wrong with that, then I'm not going to play teacher and pander to your ignorance.
This is why I've stopped talking about it.James Ennever said:
The people who want to debate this kind of thing with you are usually as extremist as the folks who might set themselves off with explosives.
I don't mean to say that feminists are or that people who are concerned with these issues are, but people who want you to chat with them about it on a internet forum are most likely going to take extreme views.
And in the end you'll just have a headache, even if you agree with their base point that all humans should be treated as humans.
Much the problem is she is blaming Lego for this, and in the way people blame McDonalds for obesity. I'll agree with the major point that marketing doesn't try to desegrigate genders much, if it ever did, but blaming a corporation for taking the quickest and easiest path to money is like blaming water for running downhill. The Friends line may not be the best role models for girls, but if they weren't buying the stuff for boys, or the gender neutral stuff, why is she now surprised that it was the model Lego thought girls wanted?
I'm all for giving corporations a hard time for their lack of social concience, but we have to meet them half way. That means making sure there's a market for what is being demanded, and in Lego's case, that will mean more yelling at the parents (unless kids' allownances have gone up reletive to the cost of lego sets compared to when I was a kid when a good lego set was 3 month's allowance). Parent's buy. Childern learn. I'd rather the end question be why you (the parent) bought the Friends set instead of the castle or the shuttle for you daughter, than ask why lego made it in the first place.
I'm all for giving corporations a hard time for their lack of social concience, but we have to meet them half way. That means making sure there's a market for what is being demanded, and in Lego's case, that will mean more yelling at the parents (unless kids' allownances have gone up reletive to the cost of lego sets compared to when I was a kid when a good lego set was 3 month's allowance). Parent's buy. Childern learn. I'd rather the end question be why you (the parent) bought the Friends set instead of the castle or the shuttle for you daughter, than ask why lego made it in the first place.