Yet another petition. But it’s a good one. I couldn’t resist (typical woman, eh).
After 4 years of marketing research, LEGO has come to the conclusion that girls want LadyFigs, a pink Barbielicious product line for girls, so 5 year-olds can imagine themselves at the café, lounging at the pool with drinks, brushing their hair in front of a vanity mirror, singing in a club, or shopping with their girlfriends. As LEGO CEO Jorgan Vig Knudstorp puts it, “We want to reach the other 50% of the world’s population.”
That makes my head want to explode, so I signed.
As representatives of that 50%, we aren’t buying it! Marketers, ad execs, Hollywood and just about everyone else in the media are busy these days insisting that girls are not interested in their products unless they’re pink, cute, or romantic. They’ve come to this conclusion even though they’ve refused to market their products to the girls they are so certain will not like them. Who populates commercials for LEGO? Boys! Where in the toy store can you find original, creative, construction-focused LEGO? The boy aisle! So it’s no wonder LEGO’s market research showed girls want pink, already-assembled toys that don’t do anything. It’s the environment and the message marketers have bombarded girls with for over a decade because, of course, stereotypes make marketing products so much easier. But we remember playing with and loving LEGO when we were little girls.
Damn right. Well I didn’t play with LEGO – it hadn’t been invented in the 1890s – but I did play with cowboy paraphernalia, and Lincoln Logs, and an electric train (my older brother’s, to be sure, but there was no need for two of them and I played with it), and trees (by climbing them), and forts (by building them), and all sorts. I also liked making doll houses. I was eclectic. But I sure as hell did not play with anything pink and stupid.
I did play with Lego. It was a unisex toy when I was growing up in the ’70s. Signed the petition.
Grew up with LEGO; signed.
My daughter’s favorite LEGO sets in the ’90s were the train, the space mining set, the police station and the fire house. She had an entire city set up on a big table. The other half of the population has been playing with them all along!
My daughter just saw the commerical for these and she wants them, sigh, but she also already plays with LEGO – the ones the my husband and I both had from when we were kids. ARGH!
I signed it too.
I have a daughter (now 19) who grew up with LEGOs – we amassed a rather large collection from several different kits, and both of my kids played with them “freestyle” for years.
That girls want “special” pink-and-lavender sets with Barbie-fied figurines was news to her. I won’t reproduce her reaction to the sets I showed her: suffice it to say, it was NSFW.
Nor am I surprised by this. When she was born, I made a very conscious decision to follow her lead, rather than try to force her into any particular mold – unlike some other moms I knew (including my own mother!), I never saw my girl child as my own personal “dress up doll.”
When she was in preschool, for example, she wanted to wear “pretty dresses” and had a fairy princess wand, sparkly red dress shoes and gold tiara. And we gave them to her – no questions asked. Ditto her stuffed animals, dinosaurs, Tonka trucks and Brio trains. I did my level best to not “cue” her to follow any particular direction w/respect to her toys, clothes or mannerisms.
As an adult, her favorite color is black and her daily uniform consists of jeans and tee-shirts. She wears no makeup and – although she has longish hair – has little interest in styling it. She likes – and wears – steampunk and fantasy pendants. Given a free choice and ability to go in whatever direction she wanted, she ran like hell from the stereotypical “girl” lifestyle that the LEGO brass thinks “50% of the world” wants. She is who she is, and has zero interest in remaking herself to please anyone else. I didn’t “try” for this particular outcome (in fact, I’d be happier if she was better at “performing gender,” at least for formal occasions), but – in the end – I ain’t complaining.
Interestingly enough, she’s also an accomplished artist. Must’ve been something about all those “hands on” toys, like LEGOs (real LEGOs) that she found inspiring, methinks.
My sisters and I all played with Lincoln Logs- Legos hadn’t been invented yet. Why, oh why do they need to screw up a great, inventive toy for everybody? Pinheads.
Ophelia – on things like this, could you warn us when they make us give addresses? I don’t put my address out for public, so I chose not to sign the petition.
@pHred: FWIW, my daughter once wanted a Barbie, because some of her friends owned the dolls. That request was a real sphincter-tightener for me (I’m no fan!), but I said nothing and got her the doll for Xmas. It turned out that I had nothing to fear: Barbie ended up on the closet floor in record time, lol, once my kid discovered that she (Barbie) wasn’t particularly entertaining.
Methinks the same thing will happen with the new LEGO kits. I don’t doubt that many little girls will want them. But once they have them, I think they’ll discover that their “play value” is limited.
Signed. I fucking loved LEGO as a kid. I used to make my own Transformers. I adored the idea of humanoid robots that could turn into vehicles, but my mother wouldn’t let me watch the cartoon or have any of the toys because violence was bad. (Which only applied to some shows and toys. He-Man and She-Ra and Thundercats were fine. Transformers and GI Joe were teh ebil.) My sister and I would piece together as many units of our Transformer armies as we could manage with the pieces we had, then make bases from the rest and wage long air and ground battles.
We had no pink legos. If I had a color preference it was for the grey pieces that had come from a spaceship set. I did put some consideration into building using appealing color combinations, though, like red and black, yellow and white, or blue and grey.
My (male) cousin had some of the themed sets that came later, like pirates, but I didn’t care for those as much. They weren’t as construction-focused and came with too many pieces that had to be one thing or another (like a palm tree or a ship’s hull), which I thought was stupid. While I’d had the aforementioned spaceship set, as well as a wind up car and a motorized helicopter set, the custom pieces of those were very easy to give a new purpose to.
Morons. I love Legos! And all my kids love to play with them, the boys and girls. They didn’t need “barbified” sets, they like the pet shop and the star wars and the harry potter and the city sets and the assortments that you can do anything you want with and the… Getting the picture yet?
Interesting point for me is that Lego is based in Europe, in a country that is supposed to be ‘enlightened’ about gender issues and they do something like this that is so STUPID. Makes me think maybe the media in the US isn’t telling me the truth about the way things work in Europe (sarcasm intended).
iknklast: The address field is not mandatory. I put my city but not the street address – I don’t even think the city is required.
Elly: My *son* wanted a Barbie when he was 6 or so. I could not bring myself to buy him one, though he did have lots of other dolls (and I don’t mean action figures).
My mother gave a pink set of legos to my niece for Christmas. I’ve never been more proud; she eschewed the pink ones and demanded my nephew “share the cool ones” with her instead.
jimatkins
Are you sure? No idea how old you are, but my mum is 60 and she clearly remembers The Gift of Lego for christmas.
Cynthia
Well, we’re experiencing the same roll-back over here as you are in the states.
Often, when discussing the pinkification of girls, people point out that the last generation of girls, meaning my generation, grew up to bed mostly kick-ass women. But in fact, we didn’t have to put up with that crap. Lego was considered to be the toy for everybody. Pink was just another colour. Even the boy-toys were different.
Somebody already mentioned He-Man and She-Ra. Now, notwithstanding the problems those sets definetly had, there was at least always 1 kick-ass female character.
If you look at today’s boy-toy sets, there are no women at all. Boys grow up in a play-world that’s male-only. There were more known female pirates in history than there are in playsets.
Elly
My kids are still very small, but I’ve made the decision to never ever buy any of the pink crap unless they explicitely ask for it. And I’ve asked all close family-members to do the same. But still that shit piles up. Because obviously nobody can think of any gift for a girl that’s not fucking pink and does not have glitter.
My mom still buys me a small lego kit each Christmas (this year’s was a dud: some fighting-type figure that involved no assembly at all and, from what I can understand, has the sole purpose of “fighting” with other fighting-type figures….remember when lego sold city-type sets? Like you could build a police station or an airport? Now its all product placement crap), so I signed the petition, even though I’m male.
Even though I never thought of LEGO as a “boy’s” toy, I DO remember being a bit peeved at the gender imbalance with the people: at one point my “Legoland Census” (I was a little obsessed with my personal Legoland) had about 50 men and 5 women, which seemed….off.
On the plus side, the line does include a set that includes a LEGO microscope, robot, Erlenmeyer flask, and blackboard with equations and vectors. I bought that for me, not for a young woman, because that appeals to the science nerd in me. At least that science set and the vet set are a little better than “math is hard” Barbie. I’ll skip all the other sets with cupcakes and drinks and whatever.
@ Theo Bromide – I found that the address field was mandatory, but it accepts “none of your business” as a valid address, and the “city” field accepted “ditto”. I have signed to show solidarity.
Wait, wait.
Is than a 18 in front of those 90’s? If that wasn’t a typo, I’m pretty awestruck.
Today’s post has brought, unbidden, the very first edition of LEGO Club Girls magazine for my 7yo daughter. “Meet the five friends from Heartlake City” it says. The covering letter (from a cartoon character called Nina) says we can call an 0845 number if we prefer to receive the regular LEGO Club magazine instead.
Inside, we meet the five characters: Emma (“Where did you get that outfit? It looks simply beautiful on you!”); Stephanie (“Planning parties and events is my speciality”); Mia (“I love taking care of animals”); Andrea (“I just love to sing and dance…I’m dreaming about becoming a singer”) and then finally Olivia (“I make loads of cool gadgets”).
This is all pretty awful, the gadgety one notwithstanding. I will be complaining directly to LEGO.
The sad thing is that what at least for one young “cousin” (she’s not really a cousin by blood but by relations she is), what she wants is NOT pink blocks. She wants a freeform building set. Something that’s rather hard to get. Basically a bucket of blocks.
Quite frankly that’s a product I think that would appeal to a pretty big unserved portion of the market, both female and male.
My brother’s Legos were one of my favorite toys. We always played together anyway so my mother didn’t see any reason to not allow relatives to just further his set, but those toys were as much for me as for him. My son and daughter have continued this interest in Legos. In fact, I’d say my daughter is just a bit more interested in them now as my son moves more towards pursuing his artwork and she requested a Mindstorms kit for Christmas. (She got it, too, and has started making robots with it.)
Imagine if you put all this effort into something that mattered? Was shopping yesterday, most of these Lego sets were gone, so they’re selling very well. Make all the petitions you want, kids want these, and parents are buying.
I’m enjoying all the “How dare they make PINK toys for GIRLS” comments, though, funny stuff.
You may find the following interesting: http://andrewgelman.com/2012/01/controversy-about-average-personality-differences-between-men-and-women/
So, despite 4 years of marketing research leading a profit-making company to conclude it will make more money if it produces “pink” and “girly” products, we should declare this research to be false because the outcome reinforces gender stereotypes?
I’m sorry, but the logic here baffles me. Lego have invested time and money into determining what products to sell. You don’t like the products. Ergo the research must be false and what Lego REALLY want, as opposed to making a profit, is to propogate gender stereotypes.
Look – gender stereotyping is a real societal problem and requires real solutions. But to blame a toy company for going where (it has good reason to think) the money is is not it. If it is correct that the strong gender demarcations reflected in kids’ toys are hey are a symptom of societal engineering, rather than a reflection of differing majority preferences inherent to gender, then go after the engineering. Criticising Lego for this engineering is like attacking Strepsils for the existence of sore throats.
trolled Plip: Imagine if you put all this effort into something that mattered?
The point is that it *does matter* that girls are being told by LEGO that interest in outfits, parties, singing and dancing are normative (though I do give them some credit for the inclusion of animals and gadgets).
And it’s not “how dare they make pink toys for girls”, but why pink is being used as a marker for what girls are supposed to (and boys are not supposed to) play with. (Whether this is worse for little girls or little boys is a wash, I think – it’s easier (in the sense of more socially acceptable) for girls to cross the gender norms, but one could argue that the boys have less motivation to do so, since they have more of the fun stuff on their side.)
@Giliel, not to be confused with The Borg – We were fortunate in that we didn’t have to deal with a large network of gift-giving family members.
One thing you might try is giving these folks some suggestions that won’t force them out of their comfort zones: art supplies, stuffed animals, play food (both my kids adored the Fisher Price pretend “birthday cake” kit), and certain book titles (“Paper Bag Princess,” “Koala Lu,” “Amazing Grace,” “Sheila Rae the Brave,” etc.). If they’re at all receptive to advice, then it could be win-win.
@Plip – nice try, troll. While you’re not real bright, here’s a few points for your dull mind to consider:
1. “All this effort?” What effort? Clicking on a page link and clicking the “sign” button? Typing a few comments to a blog post? Engaging in conversation with like-minded people?
Seriously – I’m a freelancer working out of a home office. I have a ton of projects sitting in my inbox. If this took a lot of effort, I fucking wouldn’t do it.
2. “How dare they make PINK toys for GIRLS” – STRAWMAN ALERT – WHOOP-WHOOP-WHOOP. Get a clue dumbass: no one here is objecting to the existence of pink toys for girls. See Theo Bromine’s comment at #24. We’re objecting to the bastardization and dumbing down of a UNISEX toy, in the belief that this will make it more appealing to girls.
3. It’s not a zero sum game: the “effort” expended in signing a petition directed at LEGO isn’t “effort” taken away from other, more worthy (in your eyes) causes.
Plip ol’ buddy, since you’re here to teach us silly wimminz about how to be serious, why don’t you tell us exactly what you’ve done lately to improve the lives of women or girls? And trust me, crashing into conversations simply to sneer doesn’t count.
(Sir Shplane @17, no the 18 wasn’t a typo, but it was a joke.)
I don’t know… I’m pretty sure that girls only like cheap sacks of stuffing with plastic heads stuck on top, all as pink as pink can be. You know, the same way that girls only grow up to be nurses and maids and waitresses and mostly housewives. And that’s just nature, and societal pressures and advertising have nothing to do with it. [/snark]
Of course, Legos have become more military oriented, which is probably part of the problem, since those are sold as “boy” toys. Not that I spend a lot of time in toy stores looking for comic book hero bobbleheads or anything…
@Rudi: The reason the “logic” baffles you is because you’re the one who came up with it. Did you even read the text of the petition that Ophelia posted at the top? There is nothing there about “declaring the research false.”
I used to do lab research for a living. I analyze certain pieces of scientific research today. Trust me, not all research is objective. Often it reflects the bias of the people conducting it. And often, researchers over-interpret their results. For example, I seriously doubt that their research demonstrated that “50% of the world” wants this sort of toy, despite what the company is claiming in its PR. Even the most biased evo-psych studies don’t go that far.
LEGO has spent the last 20 years or so marketing their unisex product almost exclusively to boys. Fast forward to the present: now they’re surprised that girls don’t play with LEGOs. So – rather than reconsidering this decision – they conduct “research” that concludes brand new toys are needed, that are depressingly similar to a lot of other girl toys. Worse, even – at least Barbie is allowed to have a career.
Many women are disappointed with LEGO. The petition reflects that disappointment. As I noted above, my daughter adored LEGOs, just as they were. But then again, she grew up relatively insulated from LEGO ads suggesting that only boys should play with them.
It’s nice that you think “gender stereotyping” is a real problem. So how on earth do you square that belief with the idea that we shouldn’t push back against it when we see such a blatant example of it? Raising awareness of a problem is part of fighting it.
This was recently addressed at Sociological Images– see the 1981 LEGO Ad. Apparently LEGO wasn’t always confused about how “to reach the other 50%,” and I doubt they’d have thought of it in those terms then.
@karmakin
I don’t know how old she is, but I know they sell buckets and bags of large-block Legos (or Lego knockoffs) that are free-form and unisex. The blocks are really big and easier to build with for young kids who haven’t developed fine motor skills yet. They’re good for toddlers and preschoolers (maybe even slightly older kids, depending on the kid).
I don’t know about free-form sets of blocks in the regular size though.
@Elly – because I don’t agree with you I’m a troll? Well since you’re just going along agreeing with everyone else that must make you a close-minded sheep.
1. “All this effort?” Yes – the countless articles, arguments, petitions, and boycotts over Legos all over the internet. It gets old.
You’re a freelance writer? Cute. I work for a living.
2. You’re objecting that they “bastardize” Legos? I’m not and that makes me a dumbass? How about this, if you don’t like it, don’t buy it. My comment was to the point that people are buying them in droves, so I’m sure your petition will mean literally nothing to the Lego company.
3. If it’s a zero sum game and you admit this time is wasted then what is the point of the petition in the first place? You can’t start a cause, rally the troops, then admit your cause is worthless. Oh wait, you just did.
Finally, where in the WORLD did you get the notion that I’m a man? Are you in such a defensive stance about your sad little option that anyone who disagrees must be a man? It’s a building block, get over it. As for “what I’ve done” – I’m a RN who works at a Thuthuzela Care Center in South Africa where I treat rape victims home on holiday leave. I’m pretty sure I know how to make good use of my time.
Plip – really? You’re not a man? Despite your email address, which includes a male first name? R U telling the truth?
Signed.
When I was a little girl, I loved pink sparkly princessy things, ribbons, My Little Ponies, embroidery and ineptly sewing clothes for my flower fairy dolls. I also loved Lego, building blocks, toy garages with cars, climbing trees and dressing up and pretending to have adventures involving scaling cliffs over shark-infested oceans.
I don’t remember ever playing at shopping though – usually too busy defeating evil wizards with my wits and magical powers.
@Ophelia Benson – wow your so sneaky, but alas, using my husbands email address. I would feel bad for anyone who has the time to go out to websites and post lies.
Yeah, folks. Plip’s got tons of work to do. Being a complete asshole is very hard work. Show some deference, people!
Using your work to score points on line. I can totally tell you actually care about those rape survivors and aren’t just using them to make yourself feel better.
Jerk.
See, people! Being an asshole takes work! Way more than any of you no bodies could ever muster. You should all worship hir!
Plip – there’s nothing sneaky about it. I didn’t reveal your name, or your email address. I simply pointed out that it’s a male name, which it is. It’s also a free email address; why would you be using your husband’s? Not convincing.
What a sad little corner of the internet.
Deference! Plip has graced us all with hir presence we must be appropriately respectful. That such a person would pend time amongst us sad little people-!!!! Bow your heads!
@Plip: ROFLMAO!!!
No, you’re a troll because you came in sneering and contemptuous, and engaged in classic, “derailing” and provocative statements.
And far from “going along” sheeplike, I posted a rather lengthy description of my experiences with actually raising a girl to be a responsible, self-aware woman who’s comfortable in her own skin. Is it so inconceivable that I should agree because – y’know – what’s being said tracks with my own, lived experience?
Wow… I’ve read a few articles, but have only signed one petition – didn’t know there were more. Could you link me to the others? I’d be happy to sign them too!
To steal one from Atrios, “Y kant Plip read?” I didn’t say I was a freelance writer. I said I was a “freelancer.” For the record, I do write. I also do web and e-publication design. So you “work for a living.” Good for you… so do I. I do articles, sites and booklets for people. They pay me to do it. This is different from work… how?
This is “Y kant Plip read?” part II. Go back and look at the context. You’re a dumbass because you’re making bad arguments, not because you “disagree.”
Whuh? I very explicitly wrote “It’s not a zero sum game.” Nor did I “rally the troops” or “admit [my] cause is worthless.”
Wow. You really aren’t very bright, are you?
Wow again: you really are reading a lot into the “ol’ buddy” comment, aren’t you? I just re-read my response, and don’t see anything else that even remotely suggests that I believe(d) you’re a man. But the “buddy” remark was strictly sarcastic, since you’re among my cadre of male AND female “buds.”
For the record, I don’t give a rusty rat’s ass whether you’re a man or a woman. You came in here not to discuss, but to express contempt and derail the discussion. That makes you a troll.
Whoops, meant to write, “you’re NOT among my cadre…” My bad.
Plip:
It’s too bad that you spent your apparently very valuable time coming here to tell us that *we* are wasting our time worrying about how toy marketing demonstrates and perhaps re-inforces gender stereotyping.
Is it more important to protect a girl from rape than from pink LEGO? Of course it is. But rape is more about power than it is about sex, and a culture that ensures that girls know their place (and stay there) is going to be more conducive to rape than one that promotes equality and teaches girls that there are no careers, hobbies, or fields of interest for which they are inherently unsuited because of their gender.
Now, as I sit at my desk with a recycle bin made of LEGO on the floor, and a pile of LEGO pieces in drawers and boxes waiting for my next opportunity to do a LEGO robotics workshop with a group of girls and boys, I am in no way trying to say that LEGO is deliberately trying to put girls “in their place”. And I would certainly rather that girls play with pink LEGO than with Barbies. Also, according to on of the studies cited in Delusions of Gender, kids are more likely to choose a toy that is labeled as being for their gender, so if the toy store segregation (that seems to be the way of the world these days) is putting all the LEGO in the “boys” section, then it’s sad to concede, but sane marketing for LEGO to have something designated for girls. But why not be a bit subversive, and take the same bucket of blocks and make one version with a boy on the bucket and one with a girl on it?
Rudi
Oh dear, you really lack reading comprehension.
1)Nobody said their research is false. Actually, nobody even commented on it.
2)JUst because something is supported by research, it doesn’t mean it’s a good thing. Same goes for profit.
I’m pretty sure that BP had good research before they killed the Gulf, too.
3)What Elly said. They stopped marketing Lego to girls and then wondered that girls aren’t buying them. Easy solution: make Lego-light and paint it pink.
Theo Bromine
That was really nasty of you, facts and such.
I like it.
It seems that in marketing research is/can be heavily skewed to be used for rhetorical points rather than exploratory and discovery. If one looks at how the ratings system works or how they judge how movies do well with what demographics it seems that precision and accuracy isn’t exactly a big concern.
Take the OkCupid research showing that atheists get more dates than theists. the Data is solid but the conclusion is obviously sketchy.
Also for reference women are considered not to be a demographic for the action genre or ‘sci-fi/fantasy’ genre and tend to poll poorly on interest in it…based on their interest in past works which have been heavily marketed away from them because they’re not the target demographic. thus the decision is made to stay the course because trying to open the genre to them would be pointless because they’re not interested.
Sort of the “More people see blockbuster movies than indies therefore people like blockbusters better!” fallacy…ignoring that most people have no access to indies because they get fewer showings or are only shown at specialist theaters.
Leave Lego alone!
Me and my brother and sister all loved playing with Lego in the 1970’s before they started changing it and as a result taking away a lot of the fun and imagination of making things from scratch. We certainly didn’t need a pink Barbie version and I seriously doubt the current generation of girls need it either.
@Ophelia Benson #27
Ah, fair enough.
And here I was getting all worked up over how cool someone would have to be to be a 120 year old atheist blogger. : P
Well I’m pretty cool as it is!
True, but you’re not quite “SPITTING IN THE REAPER’S ANCIENT, DESSICATED EYE TO CONTINUE BRINGING TRUTH AND JUSTICE TO ALL OF HUMANITY” cool.
Not that “just the second part” isn’t great on its own. Reaper spitting just adds an automatic 20-30 cool points that you don’t have access to.
An alternative to Lego (easier to get in the UK and France, admittedly), but guaranteed to bring out your child’s inner engineer:
http://www.meccanouk.co.uk/
The history in the wiki article is good:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meccano
No separate kits for the genders, either.
[Disclosure: I preferred Meccano to Lego as a child, building (among other things) a scale model of the Eiffel Tower.]
Agreed that Meccano has amazing potential, and an excellent choice for kids with both decent mechanical aptitude and good fine muscle co-ordination, but can be rather daunting otherwise. It’s particularly frustrating for a child with good mechanical aptitude but somewhat lacking in the fine muscle skills – that’s one area where Lego can really shine.
Oh, we loved our Meccano! But it is best when an adult is available to help, at least until a kid’s a bit older. My niece and nephew love their K’nex, which are a bit easier than Meccano and a bit tougher than Lego, fine motor-wise. K’nex seems to take the “gender-neutral = boys” tack, but they don’t go out of their way to exclude girls, which is about as good as it gets these days.
The kids also have loads of gender-neutral Lego (much of it passed down from our early-’80’s stuff), and I don’t think there will be any new pastel Lego sets joining the family.
Thanks for the petition info.
I’m also old enough to be pre-Lego. Shaped blocks and Lincoln Logs were fine, but Tinker Toys were my drug of choice — still are! Back then, circa 1960, they were marketed to boys and girls. My working tool kit, though, was Handy Andy, not Handy Ann. Still, nothing pink or glittery, including my Barbie. She wasn’t even blonde!
Incidentally, it’s possible to find mixed lots of Legos if you look around. There are two 400-piece boxes on my bedside table right now, bought a few years ago at Target (I think) or possibly a dedicated toystore. Bet they’re available on line now. I need more, and the primaries + BW will be fine, thank you. Pink just for girls? Limited ideas? Not in this lifetime!
I don’t know what I’m doing wrong: my 6 year old daughter absolutely loves these legos and wants them for her birthday.
It’s the same with the workbench she made me make for her so she could try to fix her brothers’ broken RC car and her other toys; it had to be pink.
You should see her room: full of pink dresses, a big mirror, a corner filled with dolls. Heck, even her dirt-bike had to have pink handles.
I’ve tried everything, from hiding brochures to trying to force her not to play with barbies. It just doesn’t help
@Jon:
If you had a 6yo son who wanted a pink workbench and pink handlebars on his bike, would you provide them? If so, then I would say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with what you are doing. Your daughter sounds like a well-rounded kid, what with the dolls, dresses, workbench and dirt-bike. Some kids don’t care about colours, and some are fanatic about them. My older son’s favourite colour was pink until the peer pressure got to him (at 9 or so), but he grew up in the 1980s and 1990s when there was less sexual dimorphism imposed on kids than there is now. My own favourite colour(possibly to the extent of being a bit eccentric) is purple (which used to be gender-neutral, but now seems to be becoming feminized).
(As for the age of people who had Lego as kids, I’m guessing it’s geographical and cultural. I grew up in Toronto, Canada in the 1960s, and had Lego, as well as Lincoln Logs and Tinkertoy. (I always wanted Meccano, though.)
I have a 9 year old son who dispises pink, mostly because his sister loves it. He hates dirtbikes though, he can’t stand the thought of getting dirty. He even sends me back to change if I’m wearing a T-shirt with stains on it ( -‘But I wanna mow the lawn!’ -‘Do it in a nice shirt then’)
His idea of a good time is baking muffins with his mother or nosing through my records (He recently discovered Bowie)
I’ve given up on trying not to push my children in or out of gender-roles. They should do what they want to do (within certain (==my) limits)
Jon: Allow me to present you with a Father-of-the-Year award (I’m guessing your gender – apologies if I got it wrong 🙂
why thank you! Standing here, I’d like to take a moment to thank my wife and kids, for without them this wouldn’t have been possible….
Nah, there’s heaps of stuff I’m doing wrong regarding my kids :p Father of the year awards should be given to every dad that just raises his kids the best way he can.
When you are commencing a new company you undoubtedly want to arrive up with a catchy company title that will be exclusive from other people out there. An desirable company title will do much more than just make your organization stand out from other folks.