Yeah, it's a quick, dirty way to designate who should like their product, and as route52.livejournal.com mentioned below, it's a way to get Lego products into the "girl's aisle" as well as the "boy's aisle" at stores like Target and Walmart.
And I agree with you about doll shapes--I never had a Skipper because I really didn't have a lot of matel toys. Mostly I had "Disney Barbies", and my preferred dolls of choice were actually the disney princess dolls that were about half the scale as Barbies and had much smaller breasts, etc. I'm all for long-haired dolls though, although I'd love ones with shorter hair too.
And hey--IIRC the new Lego figurines don't actually have breasts, since they're supposed to represent pre-teen girls. Yeah I wish they didn't come with body-molded skirts and that there were options for short hair, but I'm not going to argue with it.
I agree that this doesn't help infant misogyny, but that's... not its goal? Its goal is--given the overly broad gender stereotyping in the world of toys, to create something that girly-girls will pick up and play with too. The kids who are uncomfortable with pink and purple and girly-girl stuff already have the rest of the world of lego toys to play with.
Re: that old ad. I actually feel a lot more kinship with the little girl in it than I do with the girls in the current lego ads. The first several times I saw it my response was "yessssss." But the ad is about embracing the little girl's lack of gender conformity as much as it is about her lopsided legos. And I want to embrace gender nonconformity! It is awesome! Just not at the expense of the people who are conforming to a gender that doesn't get to count itself as a neutral state.
no subject
And I agree with you about doll shapes--I never had a Skipper because I really didn't have a lot of matel toys. Mostly I had "Disney Barbies", and my preferred dolls of choice were actually the disney princess dolls that were about half the scale as Barbies and had much smaller breasts, etc. I'm all for long-haired dolls though, although I'd love ones with shorter hair too.
And hey--IIRC the new Lego figurines don't actually have breasts, since they're supposed to represent pre-teen girls. Yeah I wish they didn't come with body-molded skirts and that there were options for short hair, but I'm not going to argue with it.
I agree that this doesn't help infant misogyny, but that's... not its goal? Its goal is--given the overly broad gender stereotyping in the world of toys, to create something that girly-girls will pick up and play with too. The kids who are uncomfortable with pink and purple and girly-girl stuff already have the rest of the world of lego toys to play with.
Re: that old ad. I actually feel a lot more kinship with the little girl in it than I do with the girls in the current lego ads. The first several times I saw it my response was "yessssss." But the ad is about embracing the little girl's lack of gender conformity as much as it is about her lopsided legos. And I want to embrace gender nonconformity! It is awesome! Just not at the expense of the people who are conforming to a gender that doesn't get to count itself as a neutral state.