Friends "Controversy"

[Muddy]

Dear Lego,

Perhaps the best solution to the problem is to release a bunch of promotional sets.

Maybe include some SMALLER sets with malefigs.

I personally love the line.

Not sure why there is a big controversy.

OMG Barbie is marketed toward girls.

I will keep buying Friends Sets because I feel they are very good.

I like the idea of being able to have diverse array of colors.

I love the Lego Minifigure and I also like the new friends figure.

For once unlike Maxifigs, and MaxStoneifigs lego has found the right mix of pieces that make the sets compatible and fun.

I wouldn't recommend changing the sets at all.

Just release promotional sets and let them speak for themselves.

(You already got them geared up) just make them available.

Not a big fan of change for changes sake but this time I think you hit the nail on the head.

Alot of AFOL like the concept, wait to see what the numbers say.

I would say make an impact

Valentines day is coming up

Take this set

30105 Stephanie and mailbox

And send it out as a promotional mailer to all your Lego Club Members - not only will it be great publicity but would be perfect timing for concept and holiday.

That is my 2 cents

[brickie]

And as you will probably say it again, please let me correct your French, in the Friendliest way:

Vive la difference.

Viva is Spanish :)

Thanks for that.

I failed 'French' at high school and 50 years later, I have failed with my French again.

I will give up on passing myself off as a linguist.

And send it out as a promotional mailer to all your Lego Club Members - not only will it be great publicity but would be perfect timing for concept and holiday.

That is a brilliant idea for Lego to adopt.

It would put "friends" into each Lego Club home.

[LegoMyMamma]

And send it out as a promotional mailer to all your Lego Club Members - not only will it be great publicity but would be perfect timing for concept and holiday.

That is my 2 cents

That's a great idea! It reminds me of this video of a Friends launch event in France:

So many of the less than favorable comments have come from people who have never held the mini-dolls between 2 fingers or realize the amount of bricks & pieces in the sets. They blend with all the rest of LEGO well.

Club members would have to request a set like you suggest though, since some people became irritated with getting the new girl Club magazine without being given the option to receive it. Maybe polybag sets will come along soon.

[Mr Meleca]

The controversy is ridiculous...

I never saw someone complaining about Barbies, Ponys and Pollys Who are the worst ever toys created.

My daughter has some of them and NEVER spend more than 30 minutes with them

Today she played during ALL DAY with her Lego friends and she mixed with ALL my collection. That is the first time that she doess that, and I have buying legos foer her since the pregnancy, including paradisa and belville... wonderfull day...

The ORTODOX AFOLS, as my wife call the AFOLS who does not like Friends Should see the effects of the Friends collection to the girls. It is an amazing expansion in the Lego line, an amazing expansion in the business and profit(my god, they are a company, they need it!), and best of all: THE BEST TOY FOR GIRLS TOO, from now.

[Smrgol]

Like many people have said already, there is nothing wrong at all with the Friends range. I won't buy any for myself, but if my neice wanted some Lego that would be the stuff I would look at for her, unless she asked for a specific set from the other ranges.

People always whinge when new ranges that leave the "norm" are released - Star Wars was loved, LotRs will be loved, Ninjago is fine, police, fire, city, construction, etc etc etc are all ok as they are in exactly the same format as Lego have been doing for decades, but now they have broken the format people see it as a great reason to jump on them.

TLG have clearly done a LOT of research in to this, like everything they do, and we all know that its gonna sell well and at the end of the day negative news often sells as much, if not more than positive news does.

Well done TLG for making the leap and bring out new ranges not just a new theme.

[Lance]

To be honest, I think this whole controversy is a Mega Blocking waste of time. Why do people think Lego as a stereotypical toy company when all they're doing is trying to sell products targeted at a female audiance? These are just people who troll about Lego and are just trying to make TLG look bad. Seriously, it's pathetic of them.

Edited January 15, 2012 by Lance

[Legogal]

It really is fun adding System minifigs to the Friends sets! Glad that the sets can be mixed together. We are expanding a couple of Friends sets and have used a lot of our existing parts to do the build. It is wonderful that the parts blend so well.

Once folks begin building with these sets, I think that the Friends controversy will go away for the most part. Friends sets are full of new, vibrant colors and decorating pieces that lighten up any build. They should attract serious builders of both sexes. Cheerio!!!

[5150 Lego]

To be honest, I think this whole controversy is a Mega Blocking waste of time. Why do people think Lego as a stereotypical toy company when all they're doing is trying to sell products targeted at a female audience? These are just people who troll about Lego and are just trying to make TLG look bad. Seriously, it's pathetic of them.

This pretty much sums it up right here. Off all things people are having a fit over theme targeted at girls? Stupid. There is no controversy. Just some douche of a writer that thought it would be fun to stir the pot with the AFOL crowd.

One thing that i have to say about the AFOL group... At times i think they are far less mature that the actual age group this theme is targeted at. While it seems that most are in favor of this line, the fact that there are some that oppose it is not only ridiculous, but down right insulting. How selfish are you that you feel that your going to pass on this line for your daughter simply because you feel that it stereotypical of what girls like. You know what? Girls do like Pink. Girls do like the "Polly pocket" type figures. Get over it. Like it or not girls were never a huge market fot TLC and this is a push get grab that hare of the market that they have been absent from. If someone else has a better way of doing so then by all means, lets here some suggestions. Until then get off your high horse.

[def]

Club members would have to request a set like you suggest though, since some people became irritated with getting the new girl Club magazine without being given the option to receive it. Maybe polybag sets will come along soon.

Really, was that the irritation? Receiving the magazine without the option to receive it? Yeah, what I wrote before about the need of Friends-supporters to quash criticism goes for this comment too. It's easy to sound rational by framing the other side with an argument nobody made

This pretty much sums it up right here. Off all things people are having a fit over theme targeted at girls? Stupid. There is no controversy. Just some douche of a writer that thought it would be fun to stir the pot with the AFOL crowd.

One thing that i have to say about the AFOL group... At times i think they are far less mature that the actual age group this theme is targeted at. While it seems that most are in favor of this line, the fact that there are some that oppose it is not only ridiculous, but down right insulting. How selfish are you that you feel that your going to pass on this line for your daughter simply because you feel that it stereotypical of what girls like. You know what?

Wow, please, allow me to actually sum it up: the people complaining about it on Facebook, and signing an online petition, by and large, are not AFOLs. The people on this site are. I've only read half of this thread, but in those posts, I haven't seen any calls to destroy the theme or boycott the company.

So, the people here, hemming and hawing about the AFOLs attitude about the Friends line, well, it's a knee-jerk, unfounded opinion, to put it lightly. I have a feeling that you have actually read very little of the discussion on the topic, here or elsewhere

[Muddy]

To put two more cents in Friends adds features that aren't available in "Boy Sets"

How many "Bird Houses" have ever been released in a lego set?

Vets?

Pianos?

Sandcastles?

Shower curtains?

Couches?

Beds?

none of which are exclusively Male items

Let's not forget BLENDER?!? - From Oliva's house - yeah genius idea...

Gumball Machine

I can't wait for the Advent set myself!

I hope we get at least 2 friends in it unlike the belleville one which included 1 fairy...

But a boatload of rareish pieces

[5150 Lego]

Wow, please, allow me to actually sum it up: the people complaining about it on Facebook, and signing an online petition, by and large, are not AFOLs. The people on this site are. I've only read half of this thread, but in those posts, I haven't seen any calls to destroy the theme or boycott the company.

So, the people here, hemming and hawing about the AFOLs attitude about the Friends line, well, it's a knee-jerk, unfounded opinion, to put it lightly. I have a feeling that you have actually read very little of the discussion on the topic, here or elsewhere

I never said people were out to boycott or anything of that nature (though that does appear to be the case with this petition) . ANd it doesn't need to be an over whelming majority. But the fact that anyone would opposes this line and petition it over it being girly is ridiculous. At this point you would have to petion Barbie, Polly Pocket, etc. Iv'e read all i need. As far as no one posting in this thread fitting this category, there have been a few and you are in fact one of the guilty..

But, as a parent in the 21st century, I find it pretty lame, and will avoid the series when shopping for li'l def. I still consider LEGO one of the few toys that is gender neutral.

Are all of your daughters toys gender neutral? Your telling me you've never dressed your daughter in pink, bought her a doll, or anything else that would be considered "girly"?

[def]

I never said people were out to boycott or anything of that nature (though that does appear to be the case with this petition) . ANd it doesn't need to be an over whelming majority. But the fact that anyone would opposes this line and petition it over it being girly is ridiculous. At this point you would have to petion Barbie, Polly Pocket, etc. Iv'e read all i need. As far as no one posting in this thread fitting this category, there have been a few and you are in fact one of the guilty..

Are all of your daughters toys gender neutral? Your telling me you've never dressed your daughter in pink, bought her a doll, or anything else that would be considered "girly"?

I realize from the last time I interacted with you that you're more concerned with being right than discussion, so I won't dwell on this too much.

I have more problems with the marketing than the sets. If you read through the thread rather than cherry-picked a single comment, you would have known that. And that I've ordered two sets for myself. If that makes me guilty of a boycott and a petition in your mind, oh well.

As for petitioning Polly Pocket and Barbie, you're not the first to say that in this thread, and you would know why it's a poor comparison if you'd read through, but I'll give it to you in a nutshell. People have far different expectations of the LEGO brand than they do of Mattel or whoever. That's one reason the AFOL community is so strong, the company's reputation is so great, and why LEGO is consistently a recommended toy. You can't say the same about Barbie, which looks more archaic every year, despite whatever fans they have.

For the most part, the toys I buy my daughter are gender neutral. We're planning on buying a doll-house soon for her, but I don't consider that "GIRLS," at least not the ones we're looking at (they aren't "pink-heart mansion"). It's a matter of opinion where to draw the line between boys and girls toys. I don't think pink is an evil color, nor will I forbid it from my daughter's life. But I will not bathe her in pink toys and clothes. She's more of a 'person' than simply a 'girl'. Likewise, if I have a son, I will not force the color blue on them. It's really a matter of personal opinion, and the job of a good parent to consider these sorts of things. She has a colorful necklace and bracelet, but she never wears it. She really likes LEGO, especially Cars sets, puzzzles, and anything electronic. For the record, she likes red and green most at the moment. She has a pink down jacket at the moment. I don't know why you were asking me about how I dress my daughter, but, I've shared with you. Pink is allowed, but it's not a mandate.

Just for the sake of things though, let's just say you're the winner in this discussion. I concede, I am "guilty" of being "ridiculous"

[Lance]

Wow, please, allow me to actually sum it up: the people complaining about it on Facebook, and signing an online petition, by and large, are not AFOLs. The people on this site are. I've only read half of this thread, but in those posts, I haven't seen any calls to destroy the theme or boycott the company.

WHAT This is all happening on Facebook? Well, it all comes with no surprise to me. If you can start a protest on

Facebook, you can certainly boycott an innocent company

People just can't deal with the fact LEGO is superior to pretty much every other toy on the market. It out-sells games consoles, even, and companies make billions off those alone, let alone the games. There is no excuse for this "Controvesy", but people wanting to hate on LEGO for the fun of it. To tell the truth they're just being immature, and they just need to grow up about it. If they don't like the new sets, as someone said a few pages back, they don't have to buy them. And if they can't bear the idea of TLG making toys for girls, it's tough luck for them because there's nothing wrong with it. "Oooh, that LEGO company is selling girls sets they're so stereotypical. I know! Lets start a controversy and raise hell about it shall we?". Unfortunetly, thats what some people in the world are like

Edited January 16, 2012 by Lance

[def]

People just can't deal with the fact LEGO is superior to pretty much every other toy on the market.... There is no excuse for this "Controvesy", but people wanting to hate on LEGO for the fun of it. To tell the truth they're just being immature, and they just need to grow up about it....

Wow, I suppose the adults out there discussing TLG and Friends are just being immature, because they can't deal with the fact LEGO is superior. So, for the fun of it, they hate on LEGO. It's a possibility.

Your insight into the issue is noted

[Aanchir]

I think that while the controversy of the theme is a little bit overblown in some places like certain Facebook groups, it doesn't seem right to dismiss the controversy as stuff and nonsense from beginning to end. Remember that before the sets were seen in detail, AFOLs were often among the strongest critics of the theme, asking why a girl-oriented theme was even necessary instead of making the regular themes more gender-neutral. Once pics of the figs emerged AFOLs criticized the "segregation" of boys' and girls' themes even more, pointing out that girls introduced to LEGO through Friends would not be able to build their collection with sets from other themes, and that girls who were already LEGO fans could not include the Friends figs in their minifigure collections or in their play without difficulty.

Now that the sets have been released and high-quality images of them have emerged, some of the criticisms like those aboutjuniorization have fallen by the wayside, and even some of the criticisms of the sets being "stereotypically girly" have become weaker with the realization that pink is not central to all the sets' color schemes and that there are very non-traditional sets like Olivia's Invention Workshop. Also, AFOLs with daughters have often reported that the sets have appealed to them successfully and have inspired just as much creative play.

But even though some of the "cons" have become weaker and the "pros" stronger, there are still things to criticize about the theme, at least from a non-AFOL's point of view. We shouldn't trivialize the fact that many of the stereotypical aspects of girls' toys are still present in the theme to some degree. Even if this isn't something we all agree is a problem, it is a fact that for many people is reason for concern, given how inundated girls are with these same types of influences and how desperate some parents are to find toys for their girls that avoid these gender stereotypes. Even if boycotting LEGO is too extreme a response to this theme's weaknesses, it's not as though LEGO has totally skirted all of the pitfalls that girl-oriented toys and media tend to have, and we shouldn't ignore these areas in which the theme still has room for improvement.

[sharky]

Bring in new members by automatically switching existing girls to a girly magazine. Thank you for your eloquent reasoning

By putting the magazine into more households it increases the exposure to a very specialty magazine that most people would have no knowledge of outside of going to a Lego store or seeing it at a friends house. There are a lot of people that don't have regular access to a Lego store as they live too far away. So, if Lego wanted to expose as many people to the Friends line as possible they would be wise to put out the girl Club magazine to as many female subscribers as possible in order to get the message out. So, if one girl Club member already into Lego were to show this new girl magazine to her friends who weren't interested before then this could draw in new people to Lego and generate more members to the Club in the end.

Also, the fact that girls have subscribed to the one and only Club magazine in the past doesn't negate the probability that if given a choice a majority of the girls might actually prefer the girl Club magazine. Also, given the fact that the girl Club magazine features the new Friends sets it is in TLG best interest to promote the Friends theme to as many girls as possible by switching the girl subscribers to the girl Club magazine. Since it is a free magazine that is really nothing more than one big advertisement for Lego I can't fault them for utilizing this advertising tool to their advantage. And make no mistake about it, the Club magazine is nothing more than an advertisement campaign by Lego.

And for the record, my daughter didn't receive the new girl Club magazine. She still got the regular one.

Edited January 16, 2012 by sharky

[RoxYourBlox]

My 4-year-old daughter loves boyish colors and Lego, especially the Modular and Creator themes. She is also fascinated by Friends and motivated to plow through these instructions further than other Lego sets. Much of what Lego claimed about girls' style of play has been true from what I've observed, and I consider myself someone who promotes gender neutral play as much as any parent. My daughter loves small pieces, variety of color, and detail, and the Friends line caters specifically to those interests. Thanks Lego!!

[5150 Lego]

I realize from the last time I interacted with you that you're more concerned with being right than discussion, so I won't dwell on this too much.

Concerned with being right? Hardly. For whatever reason you had a hard time comprehending the point i was making. Oh well.

I have more problems with the marketing than the sets. If you read through the thread rather than cherry-picked a single comment, you would have known that. And that I've ordered two sets for myself. If that makes me guilty of a boycott and a petition in your mind, oh well..

Ya i know... You don't like the marketing, yet you understand and acknowledge the business aspect. You realize TLC isn't a charity organization, but still look down upon the marketing decisions they make for profit.. Yup, makes perfect sense.

And the fact that you bought sets for yourself is irrelevant. These sets aren't marketed for you. And more importantly, your denying someone the chance to enjoy these sets purely on the fact that your upset TLC marketing strategy. You by these sets for whatever reason you have. whether it be the looks, parts, etc. Why wouldn't your daughter, or any young girl for that matter enjoy them for the same reason?

As for petitioning Polly Pocket and Barbie, you're not the first to say that in this thread, and you would know why it's a poor comparison if you'd read through, but I'll give it to you in a nutshell. People have far different expectations of the LEGO brand than they do of Mattel or whoever. That's one reason the AFOL community is so strong, the company's reputation is so great, and why LEGO is consistently a recommended toy. You can't say the same about Barbie, which looks more archaic every year, despite whatever fans they have...

Says the guy that is a fan of LEGO and not Barbie. I've got news for you.. Any large fan base can make the exact same argument. And you know what? Both sides would be right. It is in fact a completely fair comparison. Your right, i do expect alot from TLC. I also expect alot from Hasbro when it comes to Transformers and G.I. Joe. While each might be different, the intent is always the same. To give the consumer what they want. I'm not a fan of Barbie, but I'm beating a Barbie fan could easily make similar arguments about TLC as your trying to make about Barbie.

For the record, she likes red and green most at the moment. She has a pink down jacket at the moment. I don't know why you were asking me about how I dress my daughter, but, I've shared with you. Pink is allowed, but it's not a mandate....

Why? Because you initially suggested you were upset that TLC was marketing sets that were stereotypical "girly", and due to that you'd be passing on getting them for your daughter. That being the case i was curious if you followed suite through every aspect with your daughter. If you have problems with TLC being stereotypical, than you must with other companies as well. It turns it seems you have more of a problem with TLC doing it because you've always seem them as the one toy brand as being gender neutral. You put them on a higher pedestal than other toy brands. That was the reason for my question, and you have answered it. Thank you.

And just so where clear, I understand you can be "girly" in plenty of other ways, colors etc. In many ways other colors can be just as feminie or 'girly" as pink.

People just can't deal with the fact LEGO is superior to pretty much every other toy on the market. It out-sells games consoles, even, and companies make billions off those alone, let alone the games.

Here's a fun game for ya..

Post this on any gaming site or toy chat forum and see if you can get out with your life.

Edited January 17, 2012 by 5150 Lego

[Laura Beinbrech]

To: Hikaro Takyama, Yes, I served in the military too and I do agree TLG realizes their tactics. Have you seen this? http://aboutus.lego.com/en-US/PressRoom/CorporateNews/article/393912.aspx

It will be lovely when this is no longer a controversy -- I wonder what the next one will be

Yeah, that article is pure win! I can't really add anything else to what they said except Q.E.D.

[def]

By putting the magazine into more households it increases the exposure to a very specialty magazine that most people would have no knowledge of outside of going to a Lego store or seeing it at a friends house. There are a lot of people that don't have regular access to a Lego store as they live too far away. So, if Lego wanted to expose as many people to the Friends line as possible they would be wise to put out the girl Club magazine to as many female subscribers as possible in order to get the message out. So, if one girl Club member already into Lego were to show this new girl magazine to her friends who weren't interested before then this could draw in new people to Lego and generate more members to the Club in the end.

You know what? I genuinely hadn't considered the marketing strategy of sending them to girls in hopes of those girls showing it to their friends, and, considering it now, it makes perfect sense, it's a great meta-marketing plan: send them to the target markets' Friends <wink wink> Substituting the regular mag without consulting people, rather than adding it to the regular mag or simply sending it as an additional magazine, was, in retrospect, the obvious course of action. The cutting girls out of the regular mag too. It was brilliant marketing. After all, that's why we love LEGO, right? Their savvy marketing. I know that's why I'm an AFOL. The ads. They have the best marketing in the world.

I had worried that a lot of people in this thread were just obsessive LEGO fanboys (or girls) incapable of taking any criticism of the beleaguered LEGO corporation, unable to acquiesce any point whatsoever or attempt to find a middle ground, much less attempt to reach some sort of understanding with those who don't think the Friends line is 100% awesome (like myself. I only think thought it's 50% awesome). I realize this was my own misunderstanding of the grander vision of the posters here, and I will rethink my position until it comes more in line with others here, until I can confidently unequivocally state that those who have criticisms of the line are stupid and ridiculous, and need to get a life, or whatever has been said here, since I now have the explanations to back up those statements.

Thanks for opening my eyes to the truth. Cheers

[Darth Nihilus]

I don't especially think that Friends is too 'girly' at all, the sets actually don't have that much pink in them. A lot of these arguments are based on the minidolls, yes, but I prefer to look at the actual set rather than just buy for the figures. The sets' colorschemes actually focus more on azure and red rather than pink, and both of those colors are generally considered gender-neutral. The builds themselves might focus a bit more on what girls want (Animal shelters, talent shows, etc.), but I really don't think that anything in the theme is too overly girly. But, since most of these arguments are based, as I said, on the minidolls, I have to look at those too. Generally speaking, I don't think that they really are any more girly than a normal doll or action figure, but they are less poseable, just like LEGO minifigs. The one thing that really bugs me, though, is the same thing as what makes me not like Barbie: The lack of male characters of any importance. The only male character comes in the largest set, and that, I think, is what is making so many people think that this theme is far too girly. If they would introduce one male character that looks the age of the main characters and put him in some smaller sets, I think a lot of this "controversy" would disappear.

[sharky]

You know what? I genuinely hadn't considered the marketing strategy of sending them to girls in hopes of those girls showing it to their friends, and, considering it now, it makes perfect sense, it's a great meta-marketing plan: send them to the target markets' Friends <wink wink> Substituting the regular mag without consulting people, rather than adding it to the regular mag or simply sending it as an additional magazine, was, in retrospect, the obvious course of action. The cutting girls out of the regular mag too. It was brilliant marketing. After all, that's why we love LEGO, right? Their savvy marketing. I know that's why I'm an AFOL. The ads. They have the best marketing in the world.

I had worried that a lot of people in this thread were just obsessive LEGO fanboys (or girls) incapable of taking any criticism of the beleaguered LEGO corporation, unable to acquiesce any point whatsoever or attempt to find a middle ground, much less attempt to reach some sort of understanding with those who don't think the Friends line is 100% awesome (like myself. I only think thought it's 50% awesome). I realize this was my own misunderstanding of the grander vision of the posters here, and I will rethink my position until it comes more in line with others here, until I can confidently unequivocally state that those who have criticisms of the line are stupid and ridiculous, and need to get a life, or whatever has been said here, since I now have the explanations to back up those statements.

Thanks for opening my eyes to the truth. Cheers

I'm just calling it like I see it. As I already pointed out, the 'magazine' is nothing more than an advertising tool for Lego. The sooner that people understand that, the sooner they will realize that there is no need to consult with anybody on something that they do not pay for. It's called marketing. The idea is to try to sell your product not go around asking "would you like for us to market this to you?" You just send it, you don't ask.

I could care less who criticizes Lego. In fact, I'm really not all that pleased with the Club magazine myself. I'm a relatively new AFOL, and I just started getting the Club magazine for my daughter last year. I don't think I'll be subscribing to it for much longer.

The question came about why Lego would switch girl subscribers to a girl themed Club magazine and I offered up a reason why they would do it. Why are people suddenly concerned about Lego's marketing strategy when it comes to this one topic? Why wasn't the concern there before? The marketing strategy hasn't really changed. The 'boy' themes are just as stereotypical, probably more so, than the Friends theme.

This whole notion that Lego is pushing some agenda about forcing girls into stereotypical rolls is ridiculous. No one is forcing anything. Parents of young kids have every duty to do what they think is best for their child. It's not up to Lego or anyone else to worry about. Lego is going to do what it does in order to sell more toys.

You know what? If you don't like Lego's marketing then here's a novel idea, don't support the company by buying their products. You certainly are a fan of their savvy marketing if you allow Lego to directly market to you via their Club magazine by giving them your name, address, age, and gender. Here's another super genius tip. Don't subscribe to an advertising magazine if you are really concerned about toy companies marketing their products to your kids.

The only point I am trying to make is for people to try not to be so naive into believing that Lego is some kind of special exception to the way toys are marketed to kids. The toys themselves are great IMO, but any kind of advertisement and individual set needs to come under parental scrutiny if one is concerned about what message it is conveying to their children. So, in the end the only 'controversy' is the one of the lack of parental involvement or not.

Edited January 17, 2012 by sharky

[fallentomato]

Not to jump in in the middle of the conversation here, but I spent the past couple weeks researching and writing an article that charts the 40 year history of the LEGO groups attempts to market based on gender. I think the Friends line is problematic but not the terrible affort some people have made it out to be. I hope this will be a resource for people on both sides of the debate to sharpen their arguments.

Comment and critiques very welmoce

[Peppermint_M]

You know what, the whole idea can fall or fly depending on where the retailer puts the sets. Clever retailing would place it near enough to the other Lego toys that some cross purchasing will occur. Retailers don't care who they sell their toys to, they just want to see them.

I am yet to make it out to the nearest Toys R Us but they used to have all the Lego across the back wall, with some on the opposite endcaps. The aisles then went down from all the construction toys, whether they were Fur-Real toys or Hotwheels cars. Anyone going down these aisles would see the Lego at the end. The Entertainer places new toys they want to push right near the door, so I am not sure where they will put it afterwards.

Now, ASDA is different. They have a aisle of dolls and pink things, they have an aisle of action figures and toy cars. That aisle has LEGO at the one end. They placed Friends between a shelf of mid-range sets (the £20 price point, bigger boxes) and the new Ninjago. The block of shelving next to it has City and Star Wars, with some other brick brands mixed in (HM Armed Forces, Doctor Who, Halo and Transformer sets). So in ASDA, one of the biggest supermarkets has put them in a place where girls may be able to get other sets.

[Theo]

Not to jump in in the middle of the conversation here, but I spent the past couple weeks researching and writing an article that charts the 40 year history of the LEGO groups attempts to market based on gender. I think the Friends line is problematic but not the terrible affort some people have made it out to be. I hope this will be a resource for people on both sides of the debate to sharpen their arguments.

Comment and critiques very welmoce

Very nice article, thanks for all the effort. I agree with most of the things you wrote. An additional problem that I see is that now girls will have two (not compatible) types of minifigures to play with.