I'm... really not sure I agree with this. On the one hand, yes, you have some very important points about the valuing of masculinity over femininity and the need to allow children of all genders to be free to be feminine.
On the other hand, do we really want to be arguing that traditional Lego is un-feminine? I certainly never thought about it that way as a child. I loved both Legos and acting out stories, but then I used to act out stories using marbles, which had neither names or personalities to start with. (There's another issue here about giving children the freedom to use their imagination rather than always guiding it down pre-existing paths.)
Why do Legos have to replicate a gender binary of masculine vs. feminine? Why couldn't we just have gender-neutral Legos? (You've implied that in color terms, the choice is neutral or pastel, so there's certainly an argument that traditional Legos *are* neutral Legos anyway.)
ETA: Also, there are already Lego sets that come with stories attached. As a child I had a moonbase Lego and an awesome Robin Hood tree hideout.
no subject
On the other hand, do we really want to be arguing that traditional Lego is un-feminine? I certainly never thought about it that way as a child. I loved both Legos and acting out stories, but then I used to act out stories using marbles, which had neither names or personalities to start with. (There's another issue here about giving children the freedom to use their imagination rather than always guiding it down pre-existing paths.)
Why do Legos have to replicate a gender binary of masculine vs. feminine? Why couldn't we just have gender-neutral Legos? (You've implied that in color terms, the choice is neutral or pastel, so there's certainly an argument that traditional Legos *are* neutral Legos anyway.)
ETA: Also, there are already Lego sets that come with stories attached. As a child I had a moonbase Lego and an awesome Robin Hood tree hideout.