Subject:
|
Re: legos biggest mistake is...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 21 Jun 2000 18:38:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
750 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Will Hess writes:
>
> Sure, that's gonna happen and there's no way to control it. The point of
> the thread (which seems to have been ignored in favor of bashing us
> "prudes") is whether or not it's appropriate to depict cleavage or
> emphasized bustlines on toys (EMPHASIS ON) aimed at children (EMPHASIS OFF)
> as young as six years old.
Hmmm...how young are kids that play with Barbies again?
> So, to get back on topic, what *IS* appropriate
> about placing Pirate Wench or Islander Babe into the hands of a six year
> old? How many AFOL's have no reservations about doing that?
Nice job turning the question around, but I don't think that's the right
way to ask it. After all, what *is* appropriate about putting a baby doll
that wets itself into the hands of a 6 year old? What *is* appropriate
about giving them a plush replica of a wild animal?
The question should be: is a particular toy harmful (physically, mentally,
developmentally, or emotionally) to the kid you're giving it to?
In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I don't think that the
'cleavage minifigs' are harmful in any way. Any child whose development
would have been harmed by one of these 'figs would have been harmed in the
same way by a myriad of other toys or circumstances (like leaving the
house).
J
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: legos biggest mistake is...
|
| (...) they (...) bunch of (...) European (...) FWIW My attitude is "right" for me and my family. I WISH it was "right" for the rest of the world ('twould make my job as a parent MUCH easier :-) but that's not gonna happen. I'd also like to know what (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
71 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
