Hasbro: We've Released "Plenty" of Female Star Wars: Rebels Toys - Update

[murrow]

A few things:
-You do not have an inherent right to have the characters you want be made into more toys (or into toys period), regardless of what their gender, race, religion, etc. is.

So clearly Hasbro is free from all criticism regarding what they make then? So we all just should have shut up and taken 4th edition like the cheep whores Hasbro knows we are?

Consumer protagonism is a great thing. But that is still different than a public good or an inherent right. Let me give you an example of a product that is a right: in my country all bakeries are required by law to sell the stardard bread roll for a very affordable sum (50 cent, IIRC). If they don't have any bread rolls in stock, they are forced to sell any other bread the consumer wants for 50 cent. This is because being able to buy this particular staple without spending much is considered a right. Now then, when it comes to toys and entertainments, there are no such requirements, except in countries which employ ideological regulations on media and market.

Like most things, of course, the difference is moot until it matters: pressuring a company to release a product you want is different (means, objective and consequence-wise) than requiring that a right be upheld. Affirmative action tends to employ a legal jargon rather freely, which makes for efficient rhetoric, but no so efficient consumer advocacy.

-Likewise, the idea that anyone on this board is smarter than the collective brains of thousands of employees who collect and analyze sales data, trends, and conduct research on what kids are looking for, and that they do this for a living, is insane. And no, saying "well I want more female 'Rebels' toys, therefore they are in high demand!" isn't an argument. You (or your daughter, or whomever) are individual cases, you don't represent the entire marketplace.

So anything we say is worthless? Then of what value is the demand side of supply and demand? After all, we are simply individual consumers voicing our ideas, not the powerful grouped minds of conglomerates. So one of the two foundations of the free market is worthless.

One individual is not a market, and it doesn't reflect a demand. To be able to maintain a business or to sell a product one needs to appeal to a collective of individuals. That individuals work in tandem and share preferences with their peers from time to time is not an evidence of "group mentality". If it were, social scientists would have a much easier time understanding society. The same is true for everything: from urban policy to presidential elections. Think of it this way: who do you trust more to access a candidate's chances in a race for government? Your neighbour, who says that everyone he knows is voting for him, or an official pool made with 3000 citizens from every state and municipality? Fallible as the pool might be, chances are it's still magnitudes more reliable than your neighbour.

Whereas the individual most often knows what is best for him/herself, when it comes to charting the preferences of all individuals (or any sizeable sample, for that matter), a single person's opinion is indeed, to use your term, worthless. That's why companies make use of surveys, statistics, focus groups, economic analyses and what else. This is not made to fathom a collective consciousness, but simply to map what is the safest/most profitable markets based on how people are behaving in a specific place at a given time. Without the hard data obtained from such methods (and adequate means of interpreting it, of course), any individual's opinion is, at worst, an educated guess; at best, anecdotal evidence from his close environment.

Which is why I'll refrain from commenting on the issue itself: not being an economist, a market analyst, and not having the data in hand, I'll fully admit to my ignorance of the toy market in North America.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

Best thing to do is to expand their horizons in all possible directions and NOT shove ANYTHING in their heads just because YOU like it.

So I should only expose them to ideas that I personally disagree with? Idiotic. I will expose them to what I view as truth, I will teach them to look for truth, and when they have attained the ability to make up their own minds about things, then I will expect them to do so. If they disagree with me, then I would hope they have found some justification for that. If they agree with me, I would hope the same.

Yes I know it is sometimes hard, but you shouldn't really expect an enlightened era to begin if you don't want to make the effort and let people decide for themselves. New ideas and concepts can only be achieved in a civil conflict of existing ones. Nothing worthwhile will come from raising mindless drones(take the nazi, ISIS, WBC brainwashing) who will someday form a large, homogeneous mass - not even a community, more like a hive in which everyone have their preordained rights, duties and where everyone thinks the same.

And what does this have to do with raising a child to have values? To follow some code of ethics? Surely, being raised to follow some moral guideline does not make you into a mindless drone, and it does not exclude the possibility of discovering some other truth.

Also remember that children have a tendency to take things one step further to prove others that they "belong" in their group - you might be a rational feminist, but your child might go to extremes if he/she thinks it would further "the cause"(That's how radicals are made) - never form ideological camps.

If my child took my ideals to some radical angle, I would expect them to have some justification. If they just had my ideals I would expect that. I would raise them to find that. My child could stray to any extreme, regardless of whether I instill some values in them, but if I raise them with none, then I risk them finding none, which is worse than any extreme.

I grew up with a new age mother, an eastern orthodox father, a feminist catholic grandmother, two atheist uncles, a mentally disturbed uncle, a right-wing(NOT a nazi) godfather, a liberal(who was ashamed of pretty much being alive) godmother and a bunch of other relatives, and none of them tried to indoctrinate me, none demanded anything from me - and yet I understand all of their views(yes, even the mentally disturbed uncle) without subscribing to a particular one. And I am also familiar with countless people who ridicule and sometimes outright hate others, who don't share their ideologies and in most cases their ideologies were forced upon them early in life. That's NOT enlightenment - that's plain ignorance. Let people be people - to err is human.

No. To stand for nothing is to let society falter. It is man's moral duty to make something of themselves. I would rather a thousand radicals than a single passive individual, believing nothing and letting life crash over them. That path is destruction. At the very least, if a child is raised to value and believe, to seek truth and to act, then they are unlikely to make nothing of themselves, which is the one situation I would avoid above all others.

As for your anecdote, I have seen many rich men who grew up poor and now hate the poor. I have seen many once proud progressives who now hate their progressive roots. I have seen many adopt an ideology late in life and grow to hate all others. Your anecdote means nothing to me.

 

[ZiggyE]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

 

[Redvenge]

...

I completely agree with the idea that there might be an issue of character representation, but I think it being some evil gender hate theme is ridiculous. Especially from Disney whos bread and butter is princesses.

I am all for coming out and pointing figures when there's an actual issue of equality, I just hate to see muck raking for the sake of news clickbait cause the movement itself to lose any dignity.

I think we are in agreement.

A lot of complaints are "why isn't there a toy for character x", and some media/agenda-driven people make it "why aren't there equal numbers of male/female toys?".

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis.

Yes, letting boys want to play with toys they want is exactly the same as letting rapists rape and nazis commit genocide.

I never said that. I said we should demand that people behave morally in general, not that immorality is in some way all equal.

A few things:
-You do not have an inherent right to have the characters you want be made into more toys (or into toys period), regardless of what their gender, race, religion, etc. is.

So clearly Hasbro is free from all criticism regarding what they make then? So we all just should have shut up and taken 4th edition like the cheep whores Hasbro knows we are?

Consumer protagonism is a great thing. But that is still different than a public good or an inherent right. Let me give you an example of a product that is a right: in my country all bakeries are required by law to sell the stardard bread roll for a very affordable sum (50 cent, IIRC). If they don't have any bread rolls in stock, they are forced to sell any other bread the consumer wants for 50 cent. This is because being able to buy this particular staple without spending much is considered a right. Now then, when it comes to toys and entertainments, there are no such requirements, except in countries which employ ideological regulations on media and market.

Like most things, of course, the difference is moot until it matters: pressuring a company to release a product you want is different (means, objective and consequence-wise) than requiring that a right be upheld. Affirmative action tends to employ a legal jargon rather freely, which makes for efficient rhetoric, but no so efficient consumer advocacy.

My point was that regardless of whether or not it is our right to get the toys that we want made, we can be right in criticizing the choices of our corporate overlords, and they can be wrong in their decisions.

-Likewise, the idea that anyone on this board is smarter than the collective brains of thousands of employees who collect and analyze sales data, trends, and conduct research on what kids are looking for, and that they do this for a living, is insane. And no, saying "well I want more female 'Rebels' toys, therefore they are in high demand!" isn't an argument. You (or your daughter, or whomever) are individual cases, you don't represent the entire marketplace.

So anything we say is worthless? Then of what value is the demand side of supply and demand? After all, we are simply individual consumers voicing our ideas, not the powerful grouped minds of conglomerates. So one of the two foundations of the free market is worthless.

One individual is not a market, and it doesn't reflect a demand. To be able to maintain a business or to sell a product one needs to appeal to a collective of individuals. That individuals work in tandem and share preferences with their peers from time to time is not an evidence of "group mentality". If it were, social scientists would have a much easier time understanding society. The same is true for everything: from urban policy to presidential elections. Think of it this way: who do you trust more to access a candidate's chances in a race for government? Your neighbour, who says that everyone he knows is voting for him, or an official pool made with 3000 citizens from every state and municipality? Fallible as the pool might be, chances are it's still magnitudes more reliable than your neighbour.

Whereas the individual most often knows what is best for him/herself, when it comes to charting the preferences of all individuals (or any sizeable sample, for that matter), a single person's opinion is indeed, to use your term, worthless. That's why companies make use of surveys, statistics, focus groups, economic analyses and what else. This is not made to fathom a collective consciousness, but simply to map what is the safest/most profitable markets based on how people are behaving in a specific place at a given time. Without the hard data obtained from such methods (and adequate means of interpreting it, of course), any individual's opinion is, at worst, an educated guess; at best, anecdotal evidence from his close environment.

Which is why I'll refrain from commenting on the issue itself: not being an economist, a market analyst, and not having the data in hand, I'll fully admit to my ignorance of the toy market in North America.

If no one person's opinion is valuable regarding the choices of corporations, then how can the sum of them be valuable? If no criticism is worthwhile, then how is the sum worthwhile? I am in no way a friend of free market economics, but I can clearly see why it is still important to listen to the consumer's demands, even on the individual level. These criticisms must have some degree of value for their whole to be valuable, so to dismiss them out of hand is foolhardy. Thee is no capitalism without consumers, each one is valuable to this mechanism to some extent, and therefore so too are their complaints. So, when a company decides to ignore any and all complaints, or to not address some in a reasonable manner out of fear or shallow mindedness, it makes capitalism even worse.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Corporations are dumb. Corporations have always been dumb. Marketing is an inherently idiotic and morally worthless portion of doing business.

SNIP to everything else

I'll give you credit, I certainly don't have a response to that sentence.

Anyhoo, whether you like EA or Ubisoft, they are highly successful companies that sell lots and lots of games. They clearly sell a product lots of people like and are willing to pay money for, otherwise they wouldn't last very long. People don't always like HOW they sell it, but clearly they don't dislike it enough for them to no longer buy their games. Risk/reward, supply and demand.

You can criticize Hasbro all you want, but there's a significant difference between "I wish" and "they should".

-"I wish they would make more toys of female characters, because I would buy them".
vs.
-"They should make more toys of female characters, because they're sitting on a gold mine but are too stupid to realize it" (backed up, of course, with no actual evidence of this) or "They should make more female toys, because we need gender equality of plastic characters" which...yeah once again I got nothing.

As for the supply and demand, no, supply and demand functions like it always does, the difference is that many people on this board seem to have decided that THEIR individual demand is the same as everyone else's. They want female character toys, therefore everyone else does and companies are stupid for not selling them. Except of course that's not how it works. You might want a Princess Leia toy so bad you can taste it (gross) but that doesn't mean enough other people do for the company to justify spending large amounts of capital to make these toys.

"If no one person's opinion is valuable regarding the choices of corporations, then how can the sum of them be valuable? If no criticism is worthwhile, then how is the sum worthwhile?"
This isn't mathematics, where any number times zero is still zero. Your logic is like saying: 'well since one Army Ant isn't life-threatening to a person, therefore 500 million Army Ants aren't life threatening either".
Corporations DO listen to their consumers, it's how they stay in business: by selling things that people (plural) want. When one individual says they want something, that doesn't justify the company spending the capital necessary to produce that item. When 50 million people say they want it, it does. Likewise, when someone says "well my daughter wants Star Wars toys, so they should make them", it's not the same as polling thousands of girls between ages 4 and 8 and finding out that 80% of them say they want Star Wars toys.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

 

[cleric of the order]

Yep, that's right. America is the only state in the world where people care about sexism.
In fact, in the whole of Europe men are still allowed to whip their wives and only men above 30 are allowed to vote...

Are you calling me American man?
Those are... well I'm Canadian not so much fighting words as much as, whinge about you behind your back words.
But that doesn't really matter.
I believe you may be taking me a bit more literal then you should, I think.
I don't quite know and I am sorry to sound rude but I'm not quite sure how one could draw state, like the a physical state to mean I was talking about America or the US which is often shortened to.
I suppose I can sort of see it, but to make myself clear; I meant in terms of era.
But I wished to use state, to I suppose show progression.
we are at this state in history, we have reached this stage,etc,etc.
That being said this is the Only ERA in history TO MY KNOWLEDGE wherein THE PEOPLE care at all about sexism or at-least the majority the majority.
And to my knowledge there is few if creditable any example of the normalized behavior allowing men to physically abuse their spouse without reason.
The rule of thumb doesn't count there as far as I know there is no proof for it, it's an urban myth.
Also people weren't allowed to vote for most of history.
And you just described Athenian democracy, with the men over 30 comment.
Sexism, the idle postmodernist example is like most modern purely academic pursuit, a product of the changing times and the transition from a manufacturing economy to a informational technological economy.

But, hey, they you go again, claiming that capitalism and "freedom" justify sexism.

perhaps we might be on a different wave lengths but just to be sure in the previous discussion with me used sexism as if it was a violent act of repression.
And no we are applying it to the commercial practices of a company that likely does not exclude women, if at worst by rule of law. While bashing the stupid jingoistic American catch phrases.

Companies may be legally entitled to do this, it may even be the most profitable choice (though probably not), but neither of those things mean that it's right.

Business it the job of preying on people's vices, nothing about it has ever been right but in a philosophical sense does it make it wrong ever?

 

[ZiggyE]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

So, what you're saying is, you endorsing the enforcement of specific moral beliefs on children has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is Hasbro's perceived injustice in not supplying female star wars toys at the same rate they supply male ones?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Corporations are dumb. Corporations have always been dumb. Marketing is an inherently idiotic and morally worthless portion of doing business.

SNIP to everything else

I'll give you credit, I certainly don't have a response to that sentence.

Anyhoo, whether you like EA or Ubisoft, they are highly successful companies that sell lots and lots of games. They clearly sell a product lots of people like and are willing to pay money for, otherwise they wouldn't last very long. People don't always like HOW they sell it, but clearly they don't dislike it enough for them to no longer buy their games. Risk/reward, supply and demand.

I don't buy their games... And I honestly don't think that their success precludes them from criticism. They're still shit.

You can criticize Hasbro all you want, but there's a significant difference between "I wish" and "they should".

-"I wish they would make more toys of female characters, because I would buy them".
vs.
-"They should make more toys of female characters, because they're sitting on a gold mine but are too stupid to realize it" (backed up, of course, with no actual evidence of this) or "They should make more female toys, because we need gender equality of plastic characters" which...yeah once again I got nothing.

They should because it is right. Sure, I could appeal to the possibility that there is a large audience that their idiotic marketing division is too foolish to tap into because it is regressive and cowardly, but honestly, the better argument is that making such toys would be the right thing, market forces be damned.

As for the supply and demand, no, supply and demand functions like it always does, the difference is that many people on this board seem to have decided that THEIR individual demand is the same as everyone else's. They want female character toys, therefore everyone else does and companies are stupid for not selling them. Except of course that's not how it works. You might want a Princess Leia toy so bad you can taste it (gross) but that doesn't mean enough other people do for the company to justify spending large amounts of capital to make these toys.

No, they want female toys, so that should actually be paid attention to rather than totally ignored by head up their own ass marketing executives who's most risk taking behavior is crossing the damn street. Maybe they should actually fucking care. Maybe they should actually do something right for once rather than just keep focusing on those short term profit goals so that they make their Christmas bonus. These people ruin economies and livelihoods and perpetuate backwards ideals. To think that this is they are so much wiser than me that I should simply bow to their almighty authority is ridiculous.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

So, what you're saying is, you endorsing the enforcement of specific moral beliefs on children has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is Hasbro's perceived injustice in not supplying female star wars toys at the same rate they supply male ones?

No, I'm saying I don't think you should force children to play with anything, you should teach them that "feminine" and "masculine" toys are both fine and present them with the opportunity to play with both. Perhaps you also should be mindful of hour their toys and media affects them, though I hadn't said that yet in this thread.

 

[ZiggyE]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

So, what you're saying is, you endorsing the enforcement of specific moral beliefs on children has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is Hasbro's perceived injustice in not supplying female star wars toys at the same rate they supply male ones?

No, I'm saying I don't think you should force children to play with anything, you should teach them that "feminine" and "masculine" toys are both fine and present them with the opportunity to play with both. Perhaps you also should be mindful of hour their toys and media affects them, though I hadn't said that yet in this thread.

And when boys almost universally want to play with masculine toys, to the point where feminine toys become scarce for specific intellectual properties, why is this condemned?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

So, what you're saying is, you endorsing the enforcement of specific moral beliefs on children has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is Hasbro's perceived injustice in not supplying female star wars toys at the same rate they supply male ones?

No, I'm saying I don't think you should force children to play with anything, you should teach them that "feminine" and "masculine" toys are both fine and present them with the opportunity to play with both. Perhaps you also should be mindful of hour their toys and media affects them, though I hadn't said that yet in this thread.

And when boys almost universally want to play with masculine toys, to the point where feminine toys become scarce for specific intellectual properties, why is this condemned?

Because I seriously doubt that any of the rest of my comment is being followed. In fact, I know it isn't. And presenting children with the chance to use "masculine" or "feminine" toys would kinda require that the feminine toys be bought and exist in the first place. Hasbro is kinda undermining that.

 

[ZiggyE]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

So, what you're saying is, you endorsing the enforcement of specific moral beliefs on children has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is Hasbro's perceived injustice in not supplying female star wars toys at the same rate they supply male ones?

No, I'm saying I don't think you should force children to play with anything, you should teach them that "feminine" and "masculine" toys are both fine and present them with the opportunity to play with both. Perhaps you also should be mindful of hour their toys and media affects them, though I hadn't said that yet in this thread.

And when boys almost universally want to play with masculine toys, to the point where feminine toys become scarce for specific intellectual properties, why is this condemned?

Because I seriously doubt that any of the rest of my comment is being followed. In fact, I know it isn't. And presenting children with the chance to use "masculine" or "feminine" toys would kinda require that the feminine toys be bought and exist in the first place. Hasbro is kinda undermining that.

What came first, the chicken or the egg? No company is going to supply a product that isn't financially viable. Boys that are interested in feminine toys don't need to be offered ones specifically from Star Wars.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Let boys be boys... they will have to deal with this liberal BS soon enough when they hit puberty. Stop forcing your political agendas down kids throats. Kids that have no fucking clue about it in the first place.

Yes, let boys be boys, let girls be girls, let people be people, let rapists be rapists, let Nazis be Nazis. Demand nothing of your fellow man, because that's just dumb liberal progressivism.

Fuck, the very foundation of raising children is to not just let children be children. That is tantamount to neglectful parenting. You must guide them to be more than what they currently are, even if it seems trivial, because what we see as trivial today may be seen as heartless in a more enlightened era.

Forcing feminism on children is the same as forcing any kind of religion or political view on them(yes that encompasses anything from nazi doctrine to Buddhism).

So a parent ought to never instill moral values in a child? Nihilistic bullshit. You should be ashamed for suggesting such ridiculous nonsense. People ought to stand for something, people ought to believe in things, people ought to teach others likewise and try and affect society.

NO LITTLE TIMMY YOU CANNOT PLAY WITH LUKE, YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY WITH LEIA AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT. IT WILL TEACH YOU MORALS?

What delightful parody you're able to write up. Given that I do not in any way agree with it either, I guess you really have made a good point. No parent should scream at their child about how they have to play with Leia instead of Luke. If only that was even slightly relevant, you would have won all the arguments. All of them.

So, what you're saying is, you endorsing the enforcement of specific moral beliefs on children has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is Hasbro's perceived injustice in not supplying female star wars toys at the same rate they supply male ones?

No, I'm saying I don't think you should force children to play with anything, you should teach them that "feminine" and "masculine" toys are both fine and present them with the opportunity to play with both. Perhaps you also should be mindful of hour their toys and media affects them, though I hadn't said that yet in this thread.

And when boys almost universally want to play with masculine toys, to the point where feminine toys become scarce for specific intellectual properties, why is this condemned?

Because I seriously doubt that any of the rest of my comment is being followed. In fact, I know it isn't. And presenting children with the chance to use "masculine" or "feminine" toys would kinda require that the feminine toys be bought and exist in the first place. Hasbro is kinda undermining that.

What came first, the chicken or the egg? No company is going to supply a product that isn't financially viable. Boys that are interested in feminine toys don't need to be offered ones specifically from Star Wars.

And girls that are interested in Star Wars? Should they not be able to play with toys depicting their favorite female characters from the series? And who gives a fuck about what started it. That kind of nonsense is irrelevant. Regardless of whether Hasbro helped create the problem (which they almost certainly did by the way), they are still cowards for not aiming to fix it.

 

[ZiggyE]

And girls that are interested in Star Wars? Should they not be able to play with toys depicting their favorite female characters from the series? And gives a fuck about what started it. That kind of nonsense is irrelevant. Regardless of whether Hasbro helped create the problem (which they almost certainly did by the way), they are still cowards for not aiming to fix it.

Believe it or not, but there are very few girls out there who are interested in star wars, and the ones that are are even less interested in owning action figures. As for the minority out there who do like star wars and want to own action figures, Hasbro does supply female action figures, a limited supply relative to the limited demand that exists.

 

[Therumancer]

[

You both seem so confident in your conclusions. Surely you have some source to back them up?

Also "no one is making them" isn't a valid excuse, I'm afraid, because they are making female figures, and they have to bundle them with male stormtrooper figures to get them to sell in the first place.

Let me get this straight, your trying to make a rebuttal based on the demand that I prove the collector and speculator market exists?

To be fair, I suppose you do have a point in the sense that people don't talk about it much, which is why you see issues like this being brought up to begin with, and people like me need to explain it. As I pointed out, to really see what I'm talking about you need to go to cons and stuff which most people do not, or spend time looking for specific items online.

The fastest way I can make a point is to display something like this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NIB-Star-Wars-Rebels-Mission-Sabine-Stormtrooper-Figure-Figures-Hasbro-NR-/131432794447?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1e9a01494f

If you watch Ebay you'll see more of these show up, oftentimes by the same sellers putting them up one at a time for auction. Now granted that's one of the "With Stormtrooper" packs since I just did a cursory search, but what your looking at is someone who purchased a packed figure and is selling it via auction to grab more than retail (or try to) to other collectors. As you can see in that auction the guy already has like 12 bids, I haven't checked to see the retail price but I'm guessing it's already higher than the pack would have cost off a shelf. With other searches I did quickly I've found things like Princess Leia figures, some (depending on age) going for as much as $75.00. It's not that these things aren't out there, or were hard to find, it's all about how much you are willing to pay. That's what this kind of market is all about. What's more when you go to Cons and see some dude with a table and all his figures spread out and sitting in boxes, odds are someone doing that bought his stuff retail (he's not a store, obviously) and is trying to sell to a specific market of fanboys with money in their pockets (as people coming to cons usually have money to spend). Each figure he's selling is one that wasn't on a shelf, so if he's say got 30 Princess Leia figures behind his table in a box, that's 30 figures that parents couldn't buy for their kids. There aren't infinite numbers of these out there since they have to be cast (even in plastic) which is part of the point.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

And girls that are interested in Star Wars? Should they not be able to play with toys depicting their favorite female characters from the series? And gives a fuck about what started it. That kind of nonsense is irrelevant. Regardless of whether Hasbro helped create the problem (which they almost certainly did by the way), they are still cowards for not aiming to fix it.

Believe it or not, but there are very few girls out there who are interested in star wars, and the ones that are are even less interested in owning action figures. As for the minority out there who do like star wars and want to own action figures, Hasbro does supply female action figures, a limited supply relative to the limited demand that exists.

Yes, one of the most popular works of science fiction on the planet is not at all popular with half of the fucking species. And all those Princess Leia cosplayers are just fakers after your superior nerd genes. There is undoubtedly a significant demand for such figures among women. Also, there is a significant demand for such figures among men as well. Among boys and girls too. And Hasbro still ought to present people with the opportunity to own figures of any of the characters, even those so unlucky as to be imagined with two X chromosomes.

 

[visiblenoise]

And girls that are interested in Star Wars? Should they not be able to play with toys depicting their favorite female characters from the series? And who gives a fuck about what started it. That kind of nonsense is irrelevant. Regardless of whether Hasbro helped create the problem (which they almost certainly did by the way), they are still cowards for not aiming to fix it.

Not many people share your opinion that people have an obligation to improve the world. I certainly don't believe that anybody who doesn't want to do good should be forced to do good. It would be nice, but I feel like I'd be overstepping some boundaries if I said "they should."

 

[ZiggyE]

[

You both seem so confident in your conclusions. Surely you have some source to back them up?

Also "no one is making them" isn't a valid excuse, I'm afraid, because they are making female figures, and they have to bundle them with male stormtrooper figures to get them to sell in the first place.

Let me get this straight, your trying to make a rebuttal based on the demand that I prove the collector and speculator market exists?

I'm not sure how the fact that collector's markets exist somehow proves that selling female figures at the same rate as male figures is financially viable or that female figures have the same or higher demand that male figures do.

Yes, one of the most popular works of science fiction on the planet is not at all popular with half of the fucking species. And all those Princess Leia cosplayers are just fakers after your superior nerd genes. There is undoubtedly a significant demand for such figures among women. Also, there is a significant demand for such figures among men as well. Among boys and girls too. And Hasbro still ought to present people with the opportunity to own figures of any of the characters, even those so unlucky as to be imagined with two X chromosomes.

If there is such a high demand, prove it. Hasbro's actions suggest that demand isn't high at all and they probably have the actual sales data to go off of. So where's your proof? Something being popular in science fiction is not proof of action figure demand. Female cosplayers is not proof of action figure demand. Yes, Star Wars is a popular franchise, but it is predominantly popular amongst men and boys. Furthermore, action figures are primarily marketed towards children. Simply because adult women cosplay as Princess Leia doesn't mean their daughters will prefer Leia figures over Barbie and Ken.