This post was submitted by Jean

People who believe in equality are often ridiculed by more closed minded peers for trying to swing the pendulum too far in the direction of the minority at hand so that the original majority group suffers. Examples of this include the belief that affirmative action takes jobs away from white men, making it unfair. Or focusing money on the specific issues of poverty or homelessness or welfare, cheats people who don’t deal with those issues out of deserved money from their community or government. The key point to understand in these arguments is that focusing on a minority, or trying to elevate a minority, doesn’t flip the paradigm. Fighting for the rights of women isn’t unfair to men because of the institutional belief that “male” is normal and “female” is other. “White” is norm and “Black” or “Asian” equals other. It’s a simple case of privilege in this world and in this country more specifically.

I try to be cognizant of the privilege I carry because I am Caucasian, because I come from the middle class, because I have been afforded a good education, because I can read, because I have clean drinking water, because my very survival is not the first question posed to me when my eyes open each morning. I have to. Seeing that privilege is the only way that I can live my life because I am aware that circumstances like those were handed to me — I did not earn them.

Unfortunately, my awareness of these issues carries from the depths of issue-driven political stances and seriousness to the lighthearted and stress free moments of play in my life. It’s not the play itself; it’s the constant realization the retailers separate “normal” and “other” in perpetuity.

Just because a retailer acknowledges that their products should and can focus on a wider range of people and cultures (by doing more than advertising cleaning products to women, play houses with laundry to little girls, cars and cheeseburgers to men) doesn’t mean their attempt doesn’t remain sexist, racist or at least catered to the privileged group.

This week, my play involved spending an inordinate amount of money on Lego building blocks in Chicago’s Watertower Place store, and to spend a series of evenings enjoying cocktails and building. Creating. Relaxing. The glorious moment that was exploring Legoland was dampened slightly by the realization that the world of Legos, more than 20 years after I began my relationship with them, had almost become MORE boy oriented. Not only were the “toys for girls” only a fraction of a fraction of the stores capacity, but they were also pink. Pink – that’s what made the toys “for girls.” In most sets, the pre-assembled minipeople were gender biased – a policeman, a fireman and a “girl on a bike.” The “For Girls” section of the website advertises the Pink Brick Box:

“LEGO® bricks in beautiful colors!

Build a house, a pony, or anything else you can imagine with this special box filled with LEGO bricks in colors you love and elements like fences, windows, doors and flowers!”

At these meant to be things only girls like? A house and a pony? Some of the mix and match Lego bodies at the Lego store had cleavage, too. I suppose because that’s how we identify a “girl” in Legoland. Other building sets “for girls” include Animal care, zoo, green grocer– again, are these things only girls like?

The Lego folks have also not made a move to make Lego minipeople more culturally diverse. All the Legos are that yellow-signifying-Caucasian color unless you buy the “World People” set which, for $40, can help diversify your Lego community. Get the majority with every purchase, go out of your way to get the “other.”

Let me be clear, I am not saying there should be 50 percent of the Legos in that store geared towards girls and minorities; I’m just saying that 100% of the bricks should not be geared toward Caucasian boys. Legos are just building blocks –why are they marketed to boys? Why can’t they be genderless? It is not impossible to sell items to “children” addressing their needs and interests, without explicitly demonstrating that boys are the primary audience, but girls can “play too.”

The Legos in my house defy all the boundaries they can despite coming from origins of prejudice, but it would be great if Lego, and other toy-makers, could take a look at rebranding their products for all children, not just those that fall into majority groups.

---

First time here? See what we're all about... Get involved... Send us a tip!...

---