Oh boy! New LEGO.

Posted on March 4, 2012 by Stephen Abbott

Well, there certainly is a lot of fuss over LEGO for girls.

I’ll start with a full disclosure. I am a LEGO fan. I still build with it, and get excited when I get it for a gift. I take my LEGO hobby seriously, so when I heard that there were new sets apparently designed for girls—and the blogs are all a flutter over how nasty this new angle is—I had to look.

The sets are from a new series titled ‘Friends’. If you read deep into the supporting marketing it does claim to be designed for girls, but that isn’t the first message. However, with the brick colours and story elements, it’s easy to see how the product aims towards cliche girls. As a storyline, though, it all works nicely with the other ‘City’ sets in the mini-fig scale. (Please read the updates for more. My opinion has evolved since this was first posted.)

I am happy to debate the merits and failures of ‘pink marketing’, but we can’t deny that LEGO toys are not selling to girls in great numbers. Just as any company does, LEGO also wants to increase sales. It’s made an effort to grow the toy experience, and did some valid research to support market expansion. They created a theme, developed storylines, built a product with both construction and play experience built in, and developed pieces (colours and shapes) that support the theme. It’s what they have done for every other series.

A quote from LEGO: “In its research… LEGO discovered that girls value things like harmony, order, friendly colors, and details. LEGO also found that role playing is the style of play that little girls tend to favor, and that, while they do like to construct things, their methods are different from those of boys.

While boys will be happy to build LEGOs from kits, girls prefer their creations to be an enhancement to storytelling and they like having the option to redesign them.”

I have never considered LEGO to be just for boys, but I’ve also never met a girl/woman who was the least bit interested in my collection. There are some newer sets that do appeal to young girls I know (Harry Potter, some City and Farm sets, and the Castles), but those storylines aren’t proving to be enough to get the girls interested, at least not enough to show a significant increase toy sales.

LEGO Friends isn’t ‘pink marketing’, but here is where I think LEGO has seriously dropped the ball.

I am annoyed by the different design of the minifigs—those classic people figures of the LEGO worlds. I believe it’s this one factor that will keep the kits away from boys and men, and truly distinguish the sets as “LEGO for Girls”, instead of just being LEGO. Different figure shapes will break the consistency that we love about the different themes. Each character, from aliens to the police station to Harry Potter is based on this classic little figure. Introducing a new shape breaks the story illusion.

And the girl figures are thinner. Ugh.

I predict sales of the new sets will be limited only to girls (and a few men like me who want the buildings and colours) and that—along with the backlash for even trying—won’t likely be enough to keep the theme growing. Evolve the minifigs to fit with the rest, and the new sets add a fun new storyline to an amazing toy series. For boys and girls. And men.

UPDATE (March 15, 2012):
So far, every girl or women I’ve talked with likes the new figure shapes. They admit that the “stubby” minifigs are an important factor in why they didn’t relate to the LEGO play experience in the first place, and they like the new character shapes. But they also didn’t say they were going to buy any more LEGO as a result.

UPDATE (April 13th, 2012):
Toys ‘R Us and Lego have the worst LEGO Friends promotion. Upon entry to the story, large posters inform people that LEGO Friends is available in the “girl’s aisle”. That’s not bad, but the series is not also available in the 600+ sqft of the dedicated LEGO section. None. That is more than unfortunate; it’s insulting. When I first explored the series marketing there was no direct reference to this being a product targeted only to girls, but this is getting uncomfortably close to ‘pink marketing’ and all the insults such tactics bring.

Standing in the store, I saw a father and his daughter in the LEGO section, holding a Friends series house set, but trying to decide whether to buy the Apple Tree House set from the Creator series instead, or also. Both had accessories the young girl wanted. I asked her opinion; she loves the new series, but clearly wants the more traditional product, too. Why LEGO and/or Toys ‘R Us thinks the products should be separated is beyond me.

Posted in Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Hugs.

Posted on December 12, 2011 by Stephen Abbott

Mere weeks after public outcry over a gay teen’s suicide and months of ‘It Get’s Better’ campaigns, the last thing I expected to read was Christie Blatchford’s article in Canada’s National Post newspaper, where she writes that Toronto is full of sissies because men hug. The hugs are but the tip of the iceberg in a list of activities from men who are too close to their feminine side for Ms Blatchford.

Rebuttals are loud and clear—from the comments on her article to the Huffington Post and countless bloggers—though her defenders balance the commentary too much for me to think she is alone in her delusions.

I get it. It makes her uncomfortable, and she’s doesn’t think it’s a manly thing to do. She’s not attracted to men who are comfortable expressing their emotions or showing genuine affection for a male friend. Whatever. And so what.

What’s scary to me, though, is where she takes her preference for aggressive men and shifts it back on society as a solution to a very real problem. Her comments are inexcusably irresponsible.

“I remain convinced that the best way to stop a bully is… to take the bully out for a short pounding after school. I don’t mean the victims should do this, but rather others. The onus for stopping bullies lies not with the people being bullied, but with those who see it happen. This has been true for centuries, and it is still true, and it works equally well in the locker room, the office, a bar, and on the factory floor or street.” 

Her ignorance of bullying, social norms, history and gay culture come together in one horrifically misguided article. While many people read her column with disgust, a few will see it as validation for their taunts and teasing. And so the cycle of bullying continues.

Since my son was little, I have treasured every moment that he let’s me hug him in public. I fear that there will be a day that someone like Ms. Blatchford uses the word “sissy” about boys and hugs, and it may be enough to make him uncomfortable with any future hug from me, his mom or a friend. Worse, an innocent hug may be enough for a bully to act.

I won’t know when the last real, unguarded hug will happen, but with articles like her’s, I fear it’s closer than ever.

Posted in Current News, That's Not Right | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Swear Words: The Next Generation

Posted on December 12, 2011 by Stephen Abbott

I knew my share of swear words when I was young. The big ones; the ones that might get your mouth washed out with soap. I’m sure I learned them from friends with older brothers, and I knew not to use them around my parents.

I still use them occasionally. You wouldn’t confuse me for an angry trucker, but I can let colourful language fly with conviction when needed. (Needed in my opinion)

But I try not to swear in front of my kid. I know he knows the classic swear words (hearing your child innocently drop an f-bomb at 5 is a memorable experience), but as a family we try to instill a sense of manners in the words we use.

However, an odd sense of political correctness at school has turned words that have valid meaning into swear words for this new generation of linguistic adventurers. ‘Stupid’ is now a swear word. ‘Dumb’ is now a swear word. ‘Ugly’ is now considered a swear word. People are still undecided about ‘hell’, but that adds a whole other dimension to offending someone.

The reason is obvious. Young kids can use these words in hurtful ways; calling someone stupid is not nice and it’s unproductive.

The challenge is that if these are now considered real swear words, and these words appear in everyday life outside of school—on TV and radio and movies and t-shirts and many other situations—then there is no distinction for the power and impact of the words that are truly swear words in society. There is effectively no difference between “that’s a dumb thing to do” and “you’re a fucking idiot”; both use swear words. And if it’s okay to use the new swear words, then it’s okay to use any of them. Anywhere.

I understand that it’s hard for a toddler to grasp the concept of describing the action and not the person. (“That’s a dumb thing to do” rather than “You’re dumb”.) But to call useful words swear words because they are sometimes used improperly is lazy parenting.

So we end up with rules that are impractical—even irresponsible—and kids that will ultimately be confused. If the swear word rule is broken so frequently and easily and casually, other rules—rules that matter far more than merely offending someone—become equally arbitrary.

Lazy people make silly rules when it’s too tough to work through the problem. Lazy people also forget to control their own language around children; they forget that sometimes life needs to be G rated. But worst of all, lazy people make poor parents.

Posted in Culture, Education, That's Not Right, Thinking Differently, Values | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

We’re talking Mo’vember

Posted on November 21, 2011 by Stephen Abbott

I decided this year to participate in Mo’vember, that growing movement that is building awareness around prostate cancer. Symbolically only, though; I haven’t been collecting pledges. Between sports fundraising and school fundraising, my friends and family are a little tapped out. I’m giving them a break on this one.

Not everyone is supportive, though. Some people think it’s another “cause-washing” event, allowing some companies to feel good about raising money for a charity while still selling products that are considered to be at the root of the problem. Other people are concerned that the awareness is creating hyper-sensitive patients who are encourage to get a treatment that may not reduce cancer, or possibly cause more harm. I understand both of these arguments, but I think they’re missing one very important point.

For me, it’s the conversations started. Only a few of my friends are sporting a cool, furry look (or at least working towards one), and there are still plenty of people who are unaware of Mo’vember. I’ve started no less than 9 decent conversations about prostate cancer and the need to get checked. These conversations—conversation with men, women and children— are powerful.

First, we draw attention to prostate cancer. Awareness—especially among grown men—is critical to prevention.

Secondly, these conversations offer a little support and compassion, reducing the stigma or embarrassment that prevents many men from talking with their doctor. No one is alone in this.

Finally, (and this is the kicker) proudly growing facial hair is a male thing. Prostate cancer is also a male thing. Drawing the link is powerfully symbolic, and it’s something that a colourful ribbon or symbolic flower can’t match.

Like most men, I realize that a little creative shaving for 30 days isn’t going to prevent cancer. But if my quirky appearance encourages one guy to go to the doctor —whether he does it on his own or at the urging of his partner or family or friends—and he gets checked out so he can make informed decisions about his health, then this will be worth a million times more than the effort I’m putting in.

You may be the coolest dad in the world, but we need you to be around so you can be the coolest grandfather in the world, too. That’s why I am talking Mo’vember.

Update November 2, 2012: Movember gets its share of criticism. The most recent being from Amberly McAteer in the Globe and Mail. She’s concerned that men are not trying hard enough, or taking our effort seriously. She misses the point completely.

“Call me a fundraising snob, but I train for a handful of races each year for cancer research and victims. While I’m climbing the evil, vicious hill in the last leg of the Harry’s Spring Run Off, which benefits prostate cancer, and want to quit, I think of those close to me who have beaten the disease or are battling it. The hill is absolutely nothing compared to the struggles the men I love are facing.”

Since last year’s event, two people close to me took the time to see a doctor, and have since been diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer. So, sure, the fundraising snobs can tell me over-and-over about their concerns. Get over your righteousness. I have two healthy friends, simply because not shaving reminded them to go get checked.

Posted in Adventures, Cool dad in action, Inspirations, Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment