February 13, 2012
Buyers Can Choose More Pink for Their Little Girls
Lego marketing director, David Buxbaum, claims the company has done its research, which shows that "80 percent of its sales have been to boys," according to the Daily Telegraph. With a new range of pink and pastel colored bricks, however, he says, "I would argue we are giving girls what they are asking for."
The brand’s new Friends line also features characters sporting slim figures and stylish clothes with each representing a different personality: "the smart girl," "the animal lover," "the beautician," and "the singer." Attractions to be built include a beauty salon, a horse academy, a veterinary clinic and a café.
Legos were initially created to be gender neutral, but the company a few years ago made a decision to focus on kits for boys, sparked by research that showed boys liked completing complex tasks. Further research from anthropologists found that girls wanted more reality-based toys "that let them see themselves as the characters," according to the Chicago Tribune. Girls were also looking to play with the set after building them.
Perhaps not surprisingly, some critics are questioning the stereotypical gender roles they believed are represented by the toys with boys playing active roles and girls passive ones.
Bailey Shoemaker Richards, an activist and blogger, is a co-sponsor of an online movement to force Lego to commit to gender equity in marketing. On a recent segment of NPR’s Tell me More, she described the Friends line as "a very narrow and limiting sort of idea of what girlhood Lego experience should be."
A follow-up Tell me More broadcast featured a group of mothers discussing how their children play and what they play with, including the new Friends range from Lego. Host Michel Martin said some online commenters "applauded the company for bringing girls into the fold, but others felt that the new Legos focused too much on stereotypes of women."
As for his panel of mothers (of sons and daughters), one who previously worked on Barbie for Mattel proclaimed the objections "ridiculous" because it denies their "innately different play patterns … extracting from a child the ability to create an identity." She added, "You have to allow them the opportunity to explore who they are, and I completely agree. But what if who they are is girly?"
- Lego Friends – Lego
- Lego goes pink in bid to appeal to girls – Telegraph
- Whether pink legos are just building stereotypes – NPR
- Do girls really need pink Legos? – hlntv.com
- Lego Friends Petition: Parents, Women And Girls Ask Toy Companies To Stop Gender-Based Marketing – Huffington Post
- New Legos aimed at girls raise questions about gender and play – Chicago Tribune
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Discussion Questions: Is stereotyping a major problem in product development and brand marketing to girls and boys? Do retailers have a role to play in addressing stereotyping when it comes to products developed for children such as toys?
Poll
Having one young child of each gender, I can say the chief difference is girls will play with “boy” toys, but boys will never play with “girl” toys. However, there are some innate differences in play and the availability of girl-themed toys is appropriate. Concerned parents don’t have to buy them, and my daughter both plays tea party and builds “robots” with non-pink legos.
I applaud Richards and Cole for drawing attention to issues of child development. There are times when toy companies should be called out, such as when they glorify violence. But coercing toy companies to manufacture products for their version of girlhood is misplaced.
Toy companies are in business to make money by delighting, educating and developing their end users, not seeking to change the way they grow. There are white spaces created with gender-oriented products. Children ultimately decide what they want to play with. So if something “should” be in the marketplace but isn’t, well, that tells you something.
Point of fact: in 2002 Mattel introduced Ello, a Lego-like construction product for girls. It was the result of an internal initiative called Project Platypus and tens of millions of dollars. It won several Oppenheim Toy Awards. It flopped and ceased production in 2004.
I was at Mattel at the time and had high hopes for the effort. But no matter how much you want to see something succeed, no matter your view of what society should have, parents and kids have to want it. Let kids be kids and toy companies be toy companies. Richards and Cole, like all parents, can make their own choices about what they buy and how they raise their children.
The lifeblood of the toy industry, like many, many others, are new products, and this development at Lego opens up the opportunity for a lot of new Lego products on the market. That Lego appears to be breaking a stereotype with the new items is all to the better for their marketing. Whatever the politics happen to be, Lego Friends would seem to be a smart marketing decision.
Putting marketing limits on practicality and vision of market acceptance reduces the company’s ability to maximize sales. What is more interesting is how LEGOs were successfully enhanced using politically incorrect premises. This flies in the face of establishment mavens that continue to pontificate the method and means versus examining the problem from new or older perspectives.
Personally I’ve never thought of Legos as a sex specific toy, but I do think this is a very smart move by Lego. As mentioned above, it allows them to launch new products with a unique story to help them sell.
One area that I used to think had major stereotyping was with the children’s meals at fast food restaurants. They use to always ask if the meal was for a boy or girl instead of which toy the child wanted. My daughters are older now so I’m not sure if that’s still an issue or not.
Stereotyping and sexism are major problems in society at large and therefore it follows they are — in fact — problems in product development and brand marketing. The notion that colors have more appeal to one gender or another isn’t just bad marketing, it’s bad science. Many jails and psychiatric intake facilities are painted pink because pink calms people down — apparently especially violent men.
Will girls play with Legos and boys play with dolls? Depends on the kid, the peer group and the available play options. What should retailers do? Well, a start would be to remember that colors don’t have genders. That “salmon” shirt you’re wearing is really “pink” and a bet your testosterone didn’t drop, (that much,) when you put it on!
OK, so we all have free choice and we’re all encouraged to take personal responsibility and vote with our wallets. BUT BUT BUT as with much advertising, marketing and merchandising, those looking primarily at their bottom lines do everything they can think of to prevent consumers exercising those choices. Isn’t that the true secret of life and the universe?
“… some critics are questioning the stereotypical gender roles they believed are represented by the toys …”
Get a life people! Isn’t creating nonsensical “controversy” what Yahoo!news is for? Anyway, if there is any objection to Lego’s products, it’s that they’re stifling creativity by offering pre-designed kits: when I was a boy playing with Legos — and Tonka trucks (with only an occasional tea set) — we built our own creations … no helpful suggestions needed, thank you.
Nice to see the majority of topics today being centered around CPG! Retail wouldn’t be around if it weren’t for the CPG products they sell! Ha!
I think Lego is continuing the genius that made them a staple in our own childhoods.
More Discussions
Should Grocers Pay Online Influencers?
What should the relationship between grocers and influencers look like?Will Google’s Pomelli Photoshoot Live up to the Hype for Retail SMBs?
Will Pomelli’s Photoshoot tool be a game-changer for retail SMBs?Mass Retailers, Including Walmart, Tie Grocers on Penetration For the First Time: What’s Next?
Walmart and other mass-channel retailers are reaching dominant penetration levels. What’s next?
Having one young child of each gender, I can say the chief difference is girls will play with “boy” toys, but boys will never play with “girl” toys. However, there are some innate differences in play and the availability of girl-themed toys is appropriate. Concerned parents don’t have to buy them, and my daughter both plays tea party and builds “robots” with non-pink legos.
I applaud Richards and Cole for drawing attention to issues of child development. There are times when toy companies should be called out, such as when they glorify violence. But coercing toy companies to manufacture products for their version of girlhood is misplaced.
Toy companies are in business to make money by delighting, educating and developing their end users, not seeking to change the way they grow. There are white spaces created with gender-oriented products. Children ultimately decide what they want to play with. So if something “should” be in the marketplace but isn’t, well, that tells you something.
Point of fact: in 2002 Mattel introduced Ello, a Lego-like construction product for girls. It was the result of an internal initiative called Project Platypus and tens of millions of dollars. It won several Oppenheim Toy Awards. It flopped and ceased production in 2004.
I was at Mattel at the time and had high hopes for the effort. But no matter how much you want to see something succeed, no matter your view of what society should have, parents and kids have to want it. Let kids be kids and toy companies be toy companies. Richards and Cole, like all parents, can make their own choices about what they buy and how they raise their children.
The lifeblood of the toy industry, like many, many others, are new products, and this development at Lego opens up the opportunity for a lot of new Lego products on the market. That Lego appears to be breaking a stereotype with the new items is all to the better for their marketing. Whatever the politics happen to be, Lego Friends would seem to be a smart marketing decision.
Putting marketing limits on practicality and vision of market acceptance reduces the company’s ability to maximize sales. What is more interesting is how LEGOs were successfully enhanced using politically incorrect premises. This flies in the face of establishment mavens that continue to pontificate the method and means versus examining the problem from new or older perspectives.
Personally I’ve never thought of Legos as a sex specific toy, but I do think this is a very smart move by Lego. As mentioned above, it allows them to launch new products with a unique story to help them sell.
One area that I used to think had major stereotyping was with the children’s meals at fast food restaurants. They use to always ask if the meal was for a boy or girl instead of which toy the child wanted. My daughters are older now so I’m not sure if that’s still an issue or not.
Stereotyping and sexism are major problems in society at large and therefore it follows they are — in fact — problems in product development and brand marketing. The notion that colors have more appeal to one gender or another isn’t just bad marketing, it’s bad science. Many jails and psychiatric intake facilities are painted pink because pink calms people down — apparently especially violent men.
Will girls play with Legos and boys play with dolls? Depends on the kid, the peer group and the available play options. What should retailers do? Well, a start would be to remember that colors don’t have genders. That “salmon” shirt you’re wearing is really “pink” and a bet your testosterone didn’t drop, (that much,) when you put it on!
OK, so we all have free choice and we’re all encouraged to take personal responsibility and vote with our wallets. BUT BUT BUT as with much advertising, marketing and merchandising, those looking primarily at their bottom lines do everything they can think of to prevent consumers exercising those choices. Isn’t that the true secret of life and the universe?
“… some critics are questioning the stereotypical gender roles they believed are represented by the toys …”
Get a life people! Isn’t creating nonsensical “controversy” what Yahoo!news is for? Anyway, if there is any objection to Lego’s products, it’s that they’re stifling creativity by offering pre-designed kits: when I was a boy playing with Legos — and Tonka trucks (with only an occasional tea set) — we built our own creations … no helpful suggestions needed, thank you.
Nice to see the majority of topics today being centered around CPG! Retail wouldn’t be around if it weren’t for the CPG products they sell! Ha!
I think Lego is continuing the genius that made them a staple in our own childhoods.