I too am a little frustrated that the Friends line is segregated from the Lego lines – but then I think many of the toy shops really have gone for gender specific focus (so the boys will head down one aisle, the girls another… leaving the parents to work out where their children have gone :) )

My largest concern though is the minifigures themselves. As children learn through play, in many cases they “become” a character in their play. Sadly many children do have issues with how they look (and how they think they should look) and whilst Olivia, Mia et al are dolls, my worry is that the young girl will think she has to look thin and skinny. At least the original minifigure had a “standard” size that no-one would want to look like!)

I think that Friends is intended to bring girls that don’t play with LEGO hooked but it’s just one theme at the moment and since my girl likes to play with princesses and pirates and other themes the minifigs suit her better.

What I’m saying is that LEGO could make Barbie LEGO for all I care, but I wish they could also cater to regular LEGO builders, that just happen to be girls.

When was the last time you saw a boy in a Barbie commercial?
Are the dolls not all sold in pink boxes?

Are Disney sexist for seeking out properties to appeal to boys to compliment their home grown Princesses line?
Or is it that they should abolishing the Princess line for the stereotypes it represents?
What if Lego had obtained a license to make Disney Princess sets, would they have inherited Disney’s sexism shield?

There might be an age guideline on set boxes but there isn’t a gender one. If a child isn’t interested in a set and states “because it’s for *gender*s”… at what point did this become Lego’s doing? Surely it’s down to values instilled in the child?

I thought that summed it up quite well for me. LEGO is a company that whether we like it or not, is out there to make money. If they have to change up the shape of the minifig to get more girls into LEGO then I am all for it. I will buy Friends sets for my sons and also if I have a daughter, because once they build the set I know that they are going to take it apart and build infinite other things with the pieces anyways…It is all about sparking that creativity!

One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed in my experiences as a foster parent and an owner-operator of a home daycare is the style in which many kids approach their play. Take playing the drums, for example. Most boys would approach this in an “I’m playing the drums” way, while many girls would say “I’m a drummer.” It’s a very subtle, yet important, distinction, and much of the actual activity is ultimately the same. Now we could debate all day about nature versus nurture, but as I said, I can only comment on what I’ve seen.

On a related note, the sets that my daughter seems to enjoy the most are the ones that are more like a play set, with furniture and/or lots of utensils. For instance she chose “Mia’s Bedroom” (3939) over “Olivia’s Speedboat” (3937), because one had more open-ended play potential. (Not her exact words, but a sufficient paraphrase.)

I suppose the point that I’m eventually getting to is that while some people may complain about LEGO Friends line, there are people who will criticize anything and everything, so you just have to take it with a grain of salt. For my family, the Friends line has been and excellent, versatile, and welcome addition, both for my daughter, and for the numerous AFOLS within it.