Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[williejm]

44 minutes ago, Poodabricks said:

I don't think Lego should get rid of Harry Potter just because of who is behind it. That's just idiotic. I say love the franchise. Dislike the person behind it. 

Great if you can make that distinction. Lots of people can’t. And as has been already said she is *increasingly* dangerous and vociferous on this.

[MAB]

3 hours ago, timemail said:

Lego however are positioning themselves as committed to LGBTQIA+ and no matter what they go forward and do, the fact that they keep Harry Potter makes it all seem like lip-service.

It seems more like what they are doing is trying to get some quick commercial gains through positioning as an ally while not actually taking any real stand.

To some people, maybe. But to others, the recent inclusivity sets they have produced look like LEGO are doing something positive towards the LGBT community. Their actions towards LGBT staff are also much more inclusive than some other companies.

If someone wants to boycott buying HP sets, or boycott LEGO completely because they profit from sets based on movies based on books written by someone that has opposing views to you, or boycott any Warner Brothers productions, or boycott any stores or supermarkets that sell HP media or toys, then go for it. It is personal choice.

If you believe the Everyone is Awesome set is just a quick commercial gain under the pretense that they support LGBT issues when really they don't, then don't buy the set and boycott the company's products.

 

[Aanchir]

On 3/16/2022 at 9:30 AM, MAB said:

My opinion (I don't know whether it is unpopular or not, and I couldn't really care): there is no need to keep bringing it up and it does not need to be mentioned every time  new HP set comes out.

I'm sorry, but do you realize that many folks like me have pretty much made a habit of keeping silent about our concerns and discomfort with the Harry Potter theme specifically because of the inevitable backlash to mentioning that discomfort, even in the context of reacting to news about the sets and theme?

Please understand that as frustrating as it is for you to be reminded again and again of the author's commitment to promoting this particular brand of prejudice, it's all the more frustrating for those of us at the receiving end of that prejudice. And we have to deal with those reminders far more often than the rare occasions that somebody mentions them in relation to a new wave of LEGO sets.

17 hours ago, Poodabricks said:

I don't think Lego should get rid of Harry Potter just because of who is behind it. That's just idiotic. I say love the franchise. Dislike the person behind it. 

I wish I could still feel the same, to be honest. I used to love Harry Potter, and still have a lot of nostalgia for those things I loved about it as a child. But Rowling's betrayal cut a little too deep for me — especially I had only just come out as transgender shortly before Rowling began to openly align herself with other, even more flagrantly transphobic figures in British media and politics. Since then, I'm no longer able to enjoy the series or brand the way I once did.

I can't bring myself to weigh in about what LEGO (or their fans) should or shouldn't do regarding the HP brand at this juncture. But having to engage with these sorts of discussions is tiring in and of itself. In a best case scenario, I would have preferred if the creator of this series had just been more supportive and accepting in the first place so I didn't have to associate such hurtful perspectives with such a beloved childhood interest in the first place.

But since we're well past that point, and she has shown no signs of changing her views about transgender people… well, I have to admit, I'd be happier as a LEGO fan if LEGO didn't keep that theme around for too much longer.

I don't have the stomach to speak any further on this topic right now.

[Peppermint_M]

Unpopular opinion: The surcharge of "branding" is annoying when it comes to creator sets. The Fiat 500, the Vespa? They are great colours and a great parts selection which I would love to bulk up my MOC parts collection with, but they cost more than I want to pay for a set I am using as a parts pack.

[williejm]

8 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I'm sorry, but do you realize that many folks like me have pretty much made a habit of keeping silent about our concerns and discomfort with the Harry Potter theme specifically because of the inevitable backlash to mentioning that discomfort, even in the context of reacting to news about the sets and theme?

Please understand that as frustrating as it is for you to be reminded again and again of the author's commitment to promoting this particular brand of prejudice, it's all the more frustrating for those of us at the receiving end of that prejudice. And we have to deal with those reminders far more often than the rare occasions that somebody mentions them in relation to a new wave of LEGO sets.

…

But since we're well past that point, and she has shown no signs of changing her views about transgender people… well, I have to admit, I'd be happier as a LEGO fan if LEGO didn't keep that theme around for too much longer.

I don't have the stomach to speak any further on this topic right now.

Thanks @Aanchir - really value your experience on this, and appreciate it’s not easy to engage with. Really hope that those who dismiss this with the sort of ‘just ignore and don’t buy them then’ arguments read and hear the experience of those on the sharp end of this. It’s not an ‘equal’ argument when your rights, safety & very existence are at stake. And to those for who this isn’t a big deal, please listen to the folk for whom it really is when they tell you why.

[Alexandrina]

11 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Please understand that as frustrating as it is for you to be reminded again and again of the author's commitment to promoting this particular brand of prejudice, it's all the more frustrating for those of us at the receiving end of that prejudice. And we have to deal with those reminders far more often than the rare occasions that somebody mentions them in relation to a new wave of LEGO sets.

Even if you limit the context to Lego alone, this holds true. The amount of times I saw people weighing in to say that they disagreed with Everyone Is Awesome (or, in some cases, that they disagreed with the existence of LGBT+ people full stop) far outweighs the amount of times I've seen people advocating for Lego to drop the Harry Potter line because of Herself's prejudice. When trans people are saying that they feel uncomfortable with Lego's continued association with the author and her brand, those people should be listened to - and certainly not dismissed out of hand.

2 hours ago, williejm said:

And to those for who this isn’t a big deal, please listen to the folk for whom it really is when they tell you why.

This is soooo important. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion on the matter, but if you have no personal stake in an issue you simply cannot know what it's like to have that personal stake. When Herself first started being outspoken, I was in the phase of questioning my gender but not out as trans - it was easy then for me to mentally divorce her words from the reality of the world. I wasn't even an impartial party then, being as I was actively engaged in introspection around my gender, but I can definitely remember how much easier it was to ignore things then compared to now, when it's my day-to-day reality that Herself is seeking to quash.

Things like Everyone Is Awesome are a step in the right direction, but Lego might easily find themselves holding the bag if Herself's comments take a turn for the even-more-sinister-than-they-already-are. I don't know the intricacies of the licence, but perhaps it would be best for them to think of winding the theme down even if they're still tied into the licence for a few years yet

[danth]

On 3/17/2022 at 2:19 AM, Poodabricks said:

I don't think Lego should get rid of Harry Potter just because of who is behind it. That's just idiotic. I say love the franchise. Dislike the person behind it. 

Good god, really? Who can honestly do this? Like, just go watch the Cosby show and enjoy it, knowing what we know now? I don't think anyone can honestly separate a person from their work. The people suggesting we do so would probably be the first to boycott an entire body of work if the creator did something they disagreed with.

4 hours ago, williejm said:

And to those for who this isn’t a big deal, please listen to the folk for whom it really is when they tell you why.

But it doesn't matter to me, so if you don't shut up about it, that makes me the victim.

 

(I'm being very sarcastic, obviously).

[Lyichir]

On 3/16/2022 at 9:30 AM, MAB said:

My opinion (I don't know whether it is unpopular or not, and I couldn't really care): there is no need to keep bringing it up and it does not need to be mentioned every time  new HP set comes out.

In addition to my sister's reply above, I'd just like to mention that the newly released Harry Potter sets had nothing to do with me bringing this up—I was bringing it up because of a recent round of vile tweets by Rowling on International Women's Day. I am obviously a little disappointed with each round of new Harry Potter sets, but apart from looking up what new parts they include and hoping that the good ones find their way into other non-Potter sets eventually, I mostly tend to ignore the new sets and reviews/discussion of them.

[Peppermint_M]

As such, completely tangential to LEGO and not necessary to post here? 

LEGO has a license with Warner, not with the writer. Warner are creating properties within the "Wizarding World" So a lot of Fanfiction and not the books themselves that were written by the writer in question.. People disagree with her, people are free to boycott the products, but everyone is entitled to an opinion on whether they want to or do not want to purchase the products. 

I somehow doubt the massive theme parks will detach from the Harry Potter Brand either

Sure, if LEGO announces a The Cuckoo's Calling based sets, it will be more problematic as it would be a new deal and not one that has been ongoing for quite a long time now.

No one boycotts Hugo Boss, or Ravensburger or any of the other companies that are pretty filthy if you look into their history.

[The Island Chronicles]

1 hour ago, danth said:

The people suggesting we do so would probably be the first to boycott an entire body of work if the creator did something they disagreed with.

I think I better leave said topic along. Or else I may find myself involved in a convo that less about Lego fan stuff (which is what people come to this forum for) and more about who we should cancel. 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Poodabricks

[williejm]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

As such, completely tangential to LEGO and not necessary to post here? 

Literally nothing is necessary to post here. But it’s an issue with a live Lego licensed theme. It’s not getting better. And, like it or not, Lego’s continued support of the theme gives social licence to the problematic author/owner of the ‘brand’.

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

People disagree with her, people are free to boycott the products, but everyone is entitled to an opinion on whether they want to or do not want to purchase the products. 

Again, this doesn’t help the people who can’t just disagree and ignore, many of whom have explained at length, and with a lot more dignity than I could, what I means to them here, and in other forums. When the issue is in national newspapers and flooding social media, it’s not ignorable. When it’s creating a toxic environment leaving LGBTQ+ people feeling vulnerable, just saying ‘boycott and move on’ doesn’t cut it. We need to hear the people affected by this. 

 

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

No one boycotts Hugo Boss, or Ravensburger or any of the other companies that are pretty filthy if you look into their history.

I’m pretty sure people do, just that they wouldn’t post about it here, as it’s not Lego relevant. I mean, for my own part I avoid lots of brands, some specific products and products from some countries for a variety of reasons - but they don’t have Lego themes so I don’t mention them here. 

[MAB]

2 hours ago, danth said:

Good god, really? Who can honestly do this? Like, just go watch the Cosby show and enjoy it, knowing what we know now?

There is a significant difference in that Cosby is the major star in the Cosby show. JK Rowling is not in the Harry Potter movies and so is not likely to be in a LEGO set. There are also many positive role models for boys and girls in the series. Plus if LEGO dropped it, it would be picked up in an instant by another brand so would not go away.

How can people just go and watch Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, or Working Girl, or Shakespeare in Love, knowing what we know now. How can anyone join the Boy Scouts? It is quite easy to separate the person from the work.

[Lyichir]

23 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

As such, completely tangential to LEGO and not necessary to post here? 

LEGO has a license with Warner, not with the writer. Warner are creating properties within the "Wizarding World" So a lot of Fanfiction and not the books themselves that were written by the writer in question.. People disagree with her, people are free to boycott the products, but everyone is entitled to an opinion on whether they want to or do not want to purchase the products. 

I somehow doubt the massive theme parks will detach from the Harry Potter Brand either

Sure, if LEGO announces a The Cuckoo's Calling based sets, it will be more problematic as it would be a new deal and not one that has been ongoing for quite a long time now.

No one boycotts Hugo Boss, or Ravensburger or any of the other companies that are pretty filthy if you look into their history.

The specifics of who the license is with doesn't override the mental associations people make. From a PR perspective, the fact that Lego's license is with Warner Bros. and not the author directly (even though WB of course pays the author in turn for the use of her IP and her continued collaboration) is pretty irrelevant.

The other comparisons you make to historical scandals also miss a huge part of the reason the issue with Rowling is such an ongoing concern. Unlike Hugo Boss, Rowling is still alive and actively engaged in campaigning to roll back trans people's rights. She regularly makes fearmongering tweets and articles insinuating that trans women are a danger to cis women, is cited by politicians in the U.K. and abroad in efforts to roll back trans rights, and in all likelihood actively funds causes that seek to deny those rights with her abundant wealth. And the Harry Potter/"Wizarding World" brand in turn raises her profile not just by paying her dividends from WB's ongoing licensing of the franchise and each successive installment to it, but also merely by maintaining her celebrity status and raising her profile (and by extension, the reach of her platform) each time the Harry Potter brand makes the news.

If Rowling were a long-dead author like Tolkien, and the impact of whatever views she held was confined to the past, this would be a very different conversation. Heck, if Rowling merely logged off of Twitter and stopped regularly encouraging harassment against trans people, that alone would probably make whatever reprehensible views she holds less of a pressing issue. But the fact of the matter is that the author of one of the most popular and successful book series of my lifetime has spun her success into a crusade against people like my sister, and as much as i love Lego their continued promotion of that series makes them complicit in that in their own small way. Even if Lego ending the Harry Potter theme wouldn't be enough to sink that media juggernaut, it would at least reassure me that Lego's commitment to LGBT rights was more than just platitudes.

Edited March 19, 2022 by Lyichir

[Peppermint_M]

I think MAB put it best.

22 hours ago, MAB said:

There is a significant difference in that Cosby is the major star in the Cosby show. JK Rowling is not in the Harry Potter movies and so is not likely to be in a LEGO set. There are also many positive role models for boys and girls in the series. Plus if LEGO dropped it, it would be picked up in an instant by another brand so would not go away.

How can people just go and watch Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, or Working Girl, or Shakespeare in Love, knowing what we know now. How can anyone join the Boy Scouts? It is quite easy to separate the person from the work.

And add the works of Joss Whedon. Not seeing much pushback over The Avengers and such.

My personal views and experience is complicated in relation to the current trend in LGBT(QAZ#+etc, I can't keep up with what you need to use, the flag even changed since I was growing up and figuring things out), and not for discussing here, a site to talk about plastic toy bricks. But TLG are just like any other business: They want money. Including the "pink £/$/€" and the HP fandom cash. Limited morality, just whatever gains the profit.

Take the dispute to a platform that gets notice, it will help a lot more. I feel that EB doesn't have any clout to help any cause (these days for sure.) Not saying gtfo, just thinking people can swell a bigger crowd for action elsewhere. I know that Stop Funding Hate managed to get TLG to suspend promotion with The Daily Mail by putting on pressure in the right places.  

[williejm]

59 minutes ago, Peppermint_M said:

My personal views and experience is complicated in relation to the current trend in LGBT(QAZ#+etc, I can't keep up with what you need to use, the flag even changed since I was growing up and figuring things out)

This is offensive, and unnecessary. The ‘alphabet letters’ jibe is just another way of delegitimising the concerns of anyone identifying as LGBTQ+ 

‘The flag’ and indeed many laws, have also changed in my lifetime, but that’s not a reason to mock the changes, or the people they represent. 

[Peppermint_M]

Sure, now I am being offensive, not speaking from my personal experience or anything at all.

While some people like to jump around and broadcast about themselves in every possible way, I like to keep things private, so please do not presume any intention that is not there. Flippant maybe, but not derogatory A mis-step? Perhaps, as tone is difficult to convey on this platform instead of face to face. I can easily say; you don't know me. You don't know what I have to deal with in life (thus maintaining a level of privacy about myself) and what efforts I make to try and keep the forum a bearable experience for all. I and other staff have swept off some pretty nasty things before anyone can be hurt by it.

Here, on this site? I identify as an AFOL and that is all that is of any concern for EB apart from those I consider my close friends. 

I am sure you will disagree with me, but there we go.

[Vindicare]

I love it. People want something gone because they don’t like it. Should LEGO stop making Chinese New Year sets because it conjures up thoughts of what China does to it’s people? Or close the factory in China...woo boy, just think of all the money they gubernatorial to China for that place. 

[Wolfpackfan99]

25 minutes ago, Vindicare said:

I love it. People want something gone because they don’t like it. Should LEGO stop making Chinese New Year sets because it conjures up thoughts of what China does to it’s people? Or close the factory in China...woo boy, just think of all the money they gubernatorial to China for that place. 

 I don’t think it’s because people “don’t like it”, it is because the creator has belligerently voiced radicalized hate speech on social media platform despite numerous backlash and criticism. This therefore associates the medium franchise with the creator despite discretion from competent entities that the medium franchise is separated from the creator’s bigotry comments. In the spirit of upholding social justice, the public voices their outcry over the social violations, therefore the public simply doesn’t want the sets because their association with the social violations of the creator and the medium franchise is not separable, as mentioned before, therefore the only action is for TLG to end its license and further distance itself from the the dilemma.

[Toastie]

1 hour ago, Vindicare said:

People want something gone because they don’t like it.

Phew. I suggest rethinking the "don't like it" bit. Do you really believe this is it? Not liking it? And then these folks call for - oh my - "cancellation"?

I believe there is more behind this. More complex issues. "Chinese" - as far as I am concerned - doesn't match here.

But: Just my opinion - triggered by the "I love it" bit.

Best,
Thorsten

 

[Vindicare]

4 hours ago, Wolfpackfan99 said:

 I don’t think it’s because people “don’t like it”, it is because the creator has belligerently voiced radicalized hate speech on social media platform despite numerous backlash and criticism. This therefore associates the medium franchise with the creator despite discretion from competent entities that the medium franchise is separated from the creator’s bigotry comments. In the spirit of upholding social justice, the public voices their outcry over the social violations, therefore the public simply doesn’t want the sets because their association with the social violations of the creator and the medium franchise is not separable, as mentioned before, therefore the only action is for TLG to end its license and further distance itself from the the dilemma.

 

2 hours ago, Toastie said:

Phew. I suggest rethinking the "don't like it" bit. Do you really believe this is it? Not liking it? And then these folks call for - oh my - "cancellation"?

I believe there is more behind this. More complex issues. "Chinese" - as far as I am concerned - doesn't match here.

But: Just my opinion - triggered by the "I love it" bit.

Best,
Thorsten

 

Yes, don’t like it. If people can’t separate the art from the artist, that’s on them. The people who can shouldn’t be punished by losing a theme we enjoy. The franchise didn’t say those things & they aren’t apart of any character within it. 

[Aanchir]

39 minutes ago, Vindicare said:

Yes, don’t like it. If people can’t separate the art from the artist, that’s on them. The people who can shouldn’t be punished by losing a theme we enjoy.

I never claimed any differently. But this is a topic about "unpopular opinions", after all — and I think it's plenty LEGO-related for me (and others with similar perspectives) to speak up in a topic like this about certain LEGO themes that make us uncomfortable, even if our reasons for that discomfort and the sort of changes that would help make us more comfortable are far from universal.

So regardless of whether others here agree or disagree, I don't understand the point of trying to shut this particular conversation down for being "non-LEGO-related", when from what I can tell, most people sharing perspectives like mine are just describing how this issue is frustrating to us as LEGO fans, like so many other people in this thread have done about other issues.

11 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

And add the works of Joss Whedon. Not seeing much pushback over The Avengers and such.

For what it's worth, if LEGO were producing a theme based on an IP created by Joss Whedon, I'd be bothered by that as well. It probably wouldn't be on quite such a personal level since I did not grow up as an avid admirer of his work, so didn't feel nearly such a deep sense of betrayal upon learning about his various abusive actions and patterns of behavior. But it'd still be a source of discomfort.

And I don't think there's any sort of "slippery slope" in acknowledging the awfulness of awful people and acknowledging when it makes us feel gross, overwhelmed, or anxious.

Frankly, I wish more of us could feel free to talk about that stuff instead of always treading on eggshells and expecting criticisms of a particular work (such as "hey, the fact that Indiana Jones canonically had a sexual relationship with a teenager while he was ten years older than her is super creepy, actually!") to be dismissed as some kind of witch hunt or "cancel culture" instead of just venting about things that make those works more difficult for us as individuals to enjoy.

As I mentioned, I try not to wade into discussions of the Harry Potter theme at ALL anymore. And often when I do work up the nerve to say anything about it, it's because I am struggling, in my own way, to process and voice some of these conflicting feelings I get from seeing the new Harry Potter sets that are coming out. After all, they're often genuinely amazing in their own right — far superior to their counterparts from the early 2000s or 2010s — and I realize that I'd have been overjoyed with them if they'd come out ten or even twenty years ago, long before the author decided to broadcast her prejudices to the world!

But I'm not the same person I was ten or twenty years ago, and I can't somehow "un-learn" the things about the series and its author (or about myself) that have brought about so many changes in my perspective since then.

I wish I could live in a different world where the author never turned against people like me — even among her own devoted fans — in such a hurtful way. But then, I also wish I could go back in time and come to terms with my own identity much sooner, instead of subconsciously burying those parts of me until my 20 and forcing myself to try and be somebody I wasn't. But since I can't change the reality I've found myself in, the best I can do is try to make the most of it. And sometimes that means accepting that a LEGO theme and series that used to bring me immense joy now does the opposite, despite the products themselves being better than ever.

I apologize if hearing about that sort of thing makes other people uncomfortable sometimes. But if LEGO sites like Eurobricks aren't about sharing our personal opinions and perspectives on this hobby/interest/passion we all share, then what are they even for?

[Alexandrina]

19 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Take the dispute to a platform that gets notice, it will help a lot more. I feel that EB doesn't have any clout to help any cause (these days for sure.)

Perhaps I misinterpreted the recent comment thread, but I never got the impression that anyone was attempting to use EB to further their cause. It seems to me that people are using the thread devoted to unpopular opinions to express their own opinions.

13 hours ago, Vindicare said:

People want something gone because they don’t like it.

Not only is that an oversimplification of things, but I'm not actually sure it's accurate. Every voice I've seen in this thread that would like to see the Harry Potter line ended holds ambivalence towards the theme itself. Many comments express their favour of the books, or the films, or indeed the sets.

People have an issue because the author - the person to whom, eventually, money goes to from merchandise based on the franchise - is actively espousing hate and is close to reaching the point of saturation where she is seen unfavourably by the general population. Nobody's saying "I don't like Harry Potter, therefore Harry Potter sets should be banned". People are saying "Lego are at risk of having their brand name sullied by association with JK Rowling, therefore it might be prudent for them to wind down their association with a franchise whose latest entries are seeing diminishing returns and whose sets are not of the same quality as their peak".

Incidentally, I can't imagine you'd make a comment like that if someone posted here that they'd like Harry Potter to end because it's eating up the market for genuine Castle sets - an opinion which could legitimately be boiled down to "I want it gone because I don't like it", and which I vaguely recall actually seeing said once, though I can't remember when or what thread and frankly don't care enough to trawl through the EB archvies for it. It really does feel as though the reason people have an issue with the HP theme is the cause for concern here.

[karmajay]

Yeah, even though Lego works with WB, Rowling still makes money off of new HP stuff and that is why it is tough for people to buy Lego HP along with other stuff.

[zoth33]

I think it's important to remember that everyone is not going to have the same experiences in life.  Also that not everyone is going to agree on everything.We are all human and different in our own ways.  I am never going to agree with everything someone else is that's just not human nature.  People will always have different opinions and that's ok.  Whether it's political, religious, gender, etc.  We will all never have the exact same views and feelings on things.  There will always be people that are not ok with the way people live their lives due to their own personal, religious etc beliefs.  Personally even if I disagree with someone on some subject that doesn't mean I need to cancel them or censor them we just disagree and move on.  

[Johnny1360]

LEGO is a great business opportunity, not only the buying and selling of actual LEGO branded stuff but you can also make a ton of money making videos and instructions for MOCs.