I was in Target this morning and I saw something that disturbed me. Lego Friends, basically Lego for girls. Since when was Lego not unisex? In the past when Lego did licenced properties the characters looked like little Lego people but in different costumes, these little people look like sweet little  Barbies, with modern names like Olivia, Emma, and Mia

I'm sure someone in a research department said that Lego could make money on this, but is it necessary? Can't boys and girls play with the same toys. I know Nugget likes playing with cars, and swords as much as she likes her mermaid dolls and tea set (well not as much as tea ... she is like Margaret Thatcher tea time is serious). While Belushi sticks with cars (even Nugget's pink ones) and plush animals. So there is lots of overlap, for instance they both like blocks, the foam axes and musical instruments.

Nugget just picked up the swords and axes.

By the way I was looking at pink t-ball gloves today, when Belushi is getting near that age will I consider a colorful glove ... or will I insist on a regular colored glove.

I should hate this song ... but I can't stop playing it on my iPod. I am so ashamed. I just love that weird laser beam sound


foodiechickie said...

It is catchy I admit. Berry Gordon you genius always with the times.

Belushi likes tea time also. But usually to throw the dishes on the ground. Nugget Thatcher does not appreciate this.

Mike said...

I had a post on FB about these Legos, it got somewhat heated on both sides. There's actually been quite a bit of internet heat about whether this is a good move to bring girls back into the Lego fold (all the licensed products are really boy oriented, that's a fact) or whether this is reinforcing the cultural ideas about girls and toys that Lego supposedly stands against.