A Legos line is not politically correct? Amended to say PC was dumb to use-imaginations are where it's at

[Sarah]

Well, first of all, I hate the term "politically correct." The issue here isn't political correctness, and the pejorative way the term is used these days implies that someone is being sensitive to something they shouldn't be. This line of toys doesn't offend me because of political correctness or lack thereof, it offends me because it is developmentally suspect.
I'm not a teacher or an expert on child development, so I don't have the proper terminology, but...

The point of Legos - and block type toys in general - is to get kids using their imagination. Blocks can be turned into buildings or spaceships or mountains or monsters. They are designed for open ended play. Even if you buy one of the sets that is supposed to have the right pieces to make a pirate ship or whatever, they can still be used to make other things. And if these become the de facto girls' legos, the implication will be that all the other fun sets are boys' legos. A girl who wants to play with an awesome regular Lego set may be told that those are boys' toys.

Look at the toys in that picture.

Those blocks can obviously only be used to make one thing. No imagination necessary. Just follow instructions.

Then add to that the choices that girls have - again, as it says in the article: outdoor bakery, salon, house, vet's office. Such limited scope.

Sure, your kids will have more to deal with as they get older, but that doesn't mean they have to be limited now.

Compare that to this awesome ad:

[Cynthia]

I went round and round with my girls about Barbie dolls. I despised them and refused to buy them. I got them a Happy To Be Me doll--she can't wear Barbie clothes because she has smaller boobs and does not stand on tiptoe. They said meh.

Daughter #1 was not into Barbie, Daughter #2 was. And by the time her girl cousins had unloaded their old Barbies and sent them to her, we had something like 75 of them in the house. The girls can repeat my anti-Barbie rants ad nauseum.

Some of my ranting may have paid off, as both girls (so far) seem well-adjusted and not in need of a ton of male validation. Whew.

[Laurin]

I don't think playing with Barbies has anything to do with male validation. I had probably over 50, but only one Ken doll, and I rarely played with him. I just liked to dress them up, drive them around, etc. I also played with Thomas the Tank engine. At one point, I could list every engine by their name, color and type.

[Lobstergirl, el principe]

The above Legos for girls (or children lacking all imagination) are awful. I don't like them now, and I wouldn't have liked them as a kid. We had the normal, regular Legos as kids and we loved them. When my nephew was growing up, Legos had gotten super fancy and you would buy kits that made fighter jets and such. Which I also didn't approve of too much because again, you're limiting the kid's imagination to a specific thing. The less you limit imagination, the better.

[Linda]

I have nothing against them but they look to easy, I had an "off" brand of girl legos when I was growing up and they were pastel but they were also every bit as challenging as my brother's sets (and by the way, my brother was the king of legos but he got an airplane when I was 10 and I was the only one who could build it, I still laugh about that)

[evie]

I guess my daughter chose her own toys.
I tried to provide her with a variety that she could play with and use depending on her mood.
As long as she wasn't hurting anyone or herself I was O.K with it.

Most of her games were creative and imaginative with or without toys and we encouraged her individuality.

[janine]

Growing up I had girly Lego, regular Lego, Barbies and other dolls I shared with my sisters and brother. Girly Lego had more horses and other animals, regular Lego provided cars and guns (we developed an elaborate Lego world, which was rather violent), I cut some of my Barbie's hair because we didn't have Ken dolls and the baby dolls had to live with us as rebels in the jungle.

[Cynthia]

Cool, J! I like the idea of you and your jungle rebel babies.

[~Geektastic~]

It seems that they've just created a magnified version of Polly Pocket, only you (kinda) have to put it together yourself. I loved legos as a kid, and I think there are plenty of girls that still do. Dumbing them down and painting them pink is just stupid, but the only thing that really surprises me is that they've waited this long to make this marketing move.

[Phil]

Bun's post above about playing with the box reminded me of this book: Beryl's Box. My son liked it because it was all about imagination.

He has a lot of LEGO kits that build specific things, but they almost always end up getting jumbled together so he can make his own creations. We keep the instructions and occasionally he'll hunt down the correct pieces and construct them again.

[Kevin]

i guess this all doesn't tweak me at all. i have had a daughter who is girly and i have nieces who are girly and some who are not. we bought them toys and books they wanted that fit them instead of buying things to try to mold or shape them one way or another. if they wanted girly dolls or pastel blocks that was cool and if they wanted army men than that was cool also. i have a niece who loves pink stuff and most all of her toys are super pink and girl driven. my boys played with dolls at some point. kids will sort stuff out if we just let them be kids usually. i had a friend who wouldn't let her boys play with toy guns so at our house we put the toy guns up when they came over. at snack time one day one of her boys chewed a graham cracker into the shape of a gun and off they went shooting each other with crackers. they work things out

[Laurin]

I'm glad that there is a range of things, from fashion designer to engineer.

[Sarah]

Those new pictures make me withdraw some of my complaints. Thanks, Barb.