It’s a typical sunny afternoon in August in Brighton’s
bustling Churchill Square, and I stand next to the iconic 4 ft tall red Lego
brick that customers pass as they enter the Lego store on the ground floor. I’m
wearing my work uniform, black and yellow with the LEGO logo emblazoned on my
front and back. I’m greeting customers, smiling, a few waves and even some high
fives. I quite like my job.
Well, actually, I love my job. It’s hard not to. Not only
are the hours reasonable, the managers and staff are all warm, genuine people
and Lego as a product is easy to sell: it’s a trusted brand that kids and
adults love alike. This isn’t a piece slagging off Lego, or any toy company for
that matter. But before we move on, I have to make you aware of a set that Lego
began selling this summer.
The Research Institute is a 165 piece set which depicts
three female scientists going about their daily jobs. It was produced by the
company after it was submitted to Lego Ideas by geochemist Ellen Kooijman and
successfully reached the ten thousand votes it needed to be considered by Lego.
The set itself retails at £14.99 and sold out globally in just a few days. The
ones that ended up on eBay began selling for triple the price, if not more.
Although not perfect, the popularity of the set does send
a huge message to Lego and other toy manufacturers alike: Girls want to be able
to identify with figures in serious, professional roles through play. Safe to
say, sets that smash stereotypes like this one are in high demand.
However, this brings me to tell you about a customer I
had that August afternoon. A woman came in with her daughter, no older than
about ten, to ask if the Research Institute was in stock. I had to inform her
that no, sadly it had sold out a few weeks back and that no, we weren’t sure if
it we were going to get any more in stock. I told her (in my best Retail Voice)
that because of the media buzz around the set it had not only sold to
youngsters but also adult collectors and opportunists who would probably sell
it for an inflated price online. To this, she turned and said to her daughter, “Well,
that’s not what we want it for, is it?” implying that they probably would have
spent a pleasant afternoon building and playing with the set together. Her
daughter did not respond to this, instead continued to shyly swing around the
giant red brick, eyes idly wandering around the shop. Seeing the mother’s intentions,
I began to tell her about the many other sets we sold that have female figures,
as well as the non-gendered builds we stock. This didn’t seem to appeal in the
slightest, and she left with her daughter without another word on the subject.
No doubt I can see where she was coming from. Lego have
come under lots of criticism about their Friends
range, which was launched in an attempt to get more girls interested in
Lego. On first glance, it is a heavily stereotyped aesthetic, with figures in
frilly skirts and pink tank tops sporting make up and long, stylised girly
hair. But on closer inspection of the sets, it shows the characters taking on
roles like being a helicopter pilot, and a couple of them are even vets. I can’t
be the only one who knows how hard it is to become a vet: but do years of
university study and hard work not matter because she is wearing a dress?
Why don’t we also take
another look at Lego’s other products. The Lego City range, although mainly
boy-centric, do have female figures of policewomen and even female robbers. The
Lego Agents spy-themed sets come with female villains alongside female heroines.
Even the other Lego Ideas set, the Exo-Suit, comes with one male and one female
minifigure, both in space suits: Yve and Pete.
So why are these examples being ignored? Sure, the female
figures are in the minority, and by no means am I saying this isn’t a problem.
Lego are not the only toy manufacturers who need to step up their game when it
comes to equal representation. But the hype around this one particular set says
a lot about modern feminism. In that, like this set, feminism is treated as ‘separate’
or ‘the other’ compared to the mainstream. Instead of creating an entirely separate
set of Lego, or a set of ideas, that women can benefit from, why not make
gender equality a running theme throughout all of our toys, and all of our
society? Is there really an issue where we have people who are against equal
rights and representation? Do we really need to create separate products that
embody these ideas, instead of integrating it smoothly into what we already
have?
That being said, I don’t think that exclusively buying
children certain toys will draw out the best future for them. Media
representation is hugely important in our upbringing, but buying a set of toy
scientists for your daughter will not turn her into one. There are many other
social and economic factors that will shape her into the woman she will become,
but from watching hundreds of families come in and out of the Lego store, it’s
not the sets the children buy which determine if they are happy or sad, motivated
or lethargic, creative or uninspired. It’s the parents who talk and listen to
their children when they speak, and the ones who join in and include themselves
in their child’s play when they sit and build on the play table. It’s the
parents who are positive about any choice their child makes, because they have
encouraged them to think and decide for themselves. All parent/child relationships
are different, and any influences on their lives can make a difference, but
none more so than the lessons they learn from their parents.
The
Research Institute is now back in stock (or was on Monday) and will probably be
just as popular as it was before. The discussion on gender representation will
continue to bubble all through the media, in films, television, video gaming,
and so much else. But as I write this, I think of Malala Yousafzai, who has
just won the Nobel Peace Prize, and I think to myself; we could be doing a
whole lot worse.
