When I chose Gender Development as my topic, this was the first issue that came to mind. In the past few months, popular children's toys "LEGO" has started a new line of play geared specifically for girls called "LEGO Friends." These pink, purple, and and powder blue blocks come with small LEGO dolls that scarily resemble Polly Pockets. The release of this "girls-only" line of the toy sparked serious debate among customers. It poses questions such as "Why can't girls play with the old line of LEGOs? Can't boys enjoy playing with pink and purple blocks? Is it really necessary to split this once gender neutral toy into two separate spheres?" So angry parents have formed the LEGO Friends Petition in order to put an end to their rage. All parents want is for both boys and girls to be treated equally under LEGO.
While I can understand LEGO's motives for creating the LEGO Friends line of toys - to compete in such an competitive market - I must agree with some outraged parents on their view. I remember growing up playing with my LEGO's, and never once thinking that it was a "boys" activity. Since I have two sisters, we were a house that was flooded with girl games. And while there was definitely nothing wrong with playing the "Beauty Salon Monopoly" or "Pretty, Pretty Princess," there was something appealing about having LEGOs and Lincoln Logs always available in the house. When my boy neighbors or boy cousins came for play-dates, we could share the fun of these games since they were geared for either gender. By creating LEGO Friends, I feel like the LEGO company is telling girls that the old LEGOs aren't for them, that they have to make shopping malls and beauty parlors instead of buildings and bridges now. The separation isn't healthy, as it is putting certain labels on certain activities, making girls and boys more distinctly different at a young age, and labeling girls and boys.
No comments:
Post a Comment