| |
Hi John and everyone,
Before I respond to John's letter, I'd like to say this:
As a girl, not so long ago fitting in the Scala and Belville age range, with
three (both older and younger) sisters and three girl cousins, I have to say
that I agree that girls don't like LEGO as much as boys, but I think it's
can't be "blamed" solely on parents OR on TLC. It has to do with both.
Basically, I mean that with just a "leetle" bit parental or other
encouragement (i.e. buying one set, seeing sets at friends' or family's
houses, etc.) and some theme development on TLC's side, girls can get hooked
on lego, and I mean HOOKED.
I have examples for this, such as my cousin and little sister being influenced
by my love to lego. I can explain this in more detail if somebody wants me to -
I'm simply busy right now and it's long.
Now to John's letter...
In lugnet.general, John Neal writes:
>
> Eric Kingsley wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > IMHO think that if Town were unjuniorized it
> > would have a good chance of building a large following with older girls.
>
> <snip>
>
> I know I'll prolly get lit up good for this, but here goes. Generally • speaking, I
> don't see LEGO as being a toy sought out by girls. Now before you ignite the
> torches, let me explain.
>
> First, take an empirical look around lugnet and rtl. What you find is about • (I'm
> guessing, of course) 99.x% males.
Well, maybe it's just me, but I'm not sure this is true - I see lots of
females around here.
> I'm not sure exactly what that means, but it
> means something. LEGO attracts guys. Now I'm NOT saying that it doesn't
> attract
> females as well, just not nearly as much. I would be very interested to hear
> from
> AFOLers such as Tamy, Julie KrenZILLA, and Jody, Suz, etc. as to how they got
> into
> LEGO. My little hypothesis is that they were mentored into LEGO. That is, a
> parent or an adult actively initiated and encouraged the child to play with
> LEGO.
That's very reasonable. But are you implying that only girls are mentored into
LEGO, and boys aren't? I'm not sure I agree.
I for one, got interested in LEGO after I received some (unknown number)
universal set while living in the U.S. (around age of 4, maybe.)
I wasn't really mentored into LEGO - I immediatly liked it a lot, even though
my two older sisters (or parents, for that fact) didn't have much interest in
LEGO.
As I said, my sister gained interest in LEGO much because of my liking it -
she didn't have lots of LEGO when we were both younger, but now that I'm
constantly involved with LEGO, she developed a liking to it too.
> And, of course, being the perfect toy for boy or girl, the child was hooked. • That
> is at least how *my* daughter got into LEGO. I don't think that she would • have
> sought it out on her own.
Maybe not. But do you think a boy could have?
> I hope you all don't think I'm being sexist here because that isn't my intent
> (although I *do* believe that boys and girls are not "equal", ie the same, • but are
> very different by natures).
>
> My point is this: the themes of the LEGO sets are prohibitive to capturing
> the
> interest of girls. Girls don't respond to conflict and aggression, which is
> basically inherent in every theme. Even town, the tamest of the themes,
> experiences robberies and accidents and emergencies with astounding
> regularity.
That's where TLC should start working - change those themes, or add to them.
I can see Castle, Town, even Pirates, appealing to girls if there was a
feminine touch to them. IMHO, in order to do that, TLC must first of all
normalize the ratios between male to female in their sets. (I always wondered
how they got from a 51:49 ratio to 10:90...) Then, they should relieve some of
that aformentioned tension and aggression, at least slightly. More realistic
Towns and Castles would definitely work, such as stores, restaurants, etc. for
town, and some farms surrounding the castle with families living there. (Just
some ideas - I would *love* to see them be part of the LEGO line.)
> That is why I think Belville, Paradisa, and Scala appeal to girls. No • conflict,
> just fun in the sun, going to the beach, riding your horse and just hanging • out.
> As for the colors, well, there is scientific evidence (although I know not • where)
> that pastel colors have a soothing effect upon people. It fits in well with • that
> theme.
Well, maybe. But I think depending on the colors for a sale is a big mistake.
(if TLC do that, I mean.)
>
> Belville and Scala notwithstanding, if TLC wants to get girls interested in • LEGO,
> they are going to have to convince their (the girls', not TLC's;) parents to • buy
> it for them and encourage them to play with it, because, although action and
> conflict themes with naturally attract boys, it won't girls, IMHO.
Yeah, but if TLC would work on stuff that girls -would- like, the parents
wouldn't have to encourage them; on the contrary, the girls would ASK the
parents to buy sets for them, like I assume boys do now.
I think that if TLC would really think about this, they would attract a bigger
crowd - there is no reason why they shouldn't.
Just my two cents worth...
-Shiri
P.S. Notice, John, I couldn't really disagree with anything you said... I
tried hard, but it didn't work... ;-D Just kidding :-?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
| Eric Kingsley wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> I know I'll prolly get lit up good for this, but here goes. Generally speaking, I don't see LEGO as being a toy sought out by girls. Now before you ignite the torches, let me explain. First, take an (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
207 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
