Advertisement

“I Just Don’t Really, Like, Connect to It”: How Girls Negotiate LEGO’s Gender-Marketed Toys

  • Rebecca C. HainsEmail author
  • Jennifer W. Shewmaker
Chapter

Abstract

LEGO has become a contested site of children’s culture. Once regarded as a toy for all children, LEGO’s rebranding as a “boys’ toy” and, later, the development of a separate line of LEGO toys for girls raised concerns about gender equity and inclusion. Given the brand’s reputation for benefitting children through STEM play, LEGO’s gender segregation and gender-stereotypical marketing practices are laden with cultural significance and meaning. In this chapter, authors Hains and Shewmaker present findings from interviews and play sessions with twenty girls, ages six to eleven. The authors found that girls understand and may adopt the gendered marketing associations of LEGO toys, but when they offered their participants a chance to play with LEGO sets away from the contexts of their often gender-stereotypical packaging, they found that many girls contradicted gender stereotypes by engaging in active, creative play.

References

  1. Auster, C. J., & Mansbach, C. S. (2012). The gender marketing of toys: An analysis of color and type of toy on the Disney Store website. Sex Roles, 67, 375–388.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0177-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakir, A., Blodgett, J. G., & Rose, G. M. (2008). Children’s responses to gender-role stereotypes in advertisements. Journal of Advertising Research, 48(2), 255–266.  https://doi.org/10.2501/S002184990808029X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakir, A., & Palan, K. M. (2010). How are children’s attitudes toward ads and brands affected by gender-related content in advertising? Journal of Advertising, 39(1), 35–48.  https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367390103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.  https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coyle, E. F., & Liben, L. S. (2016). Affecting girls’ activity and job interests through play: The moderating roles of personal gender salience and game characteristics. Child Development, 87(2), 414–428.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coyne, S. M., Linder, J. R., Rasmussen, E. E., Nelson, D. A., & Birkbeck, V. (2016). Pretty as a princess: Longitudinal effects of engagement with Disney Princesses on gender stereotypes, body esteem, and prosocial behavior in children. Child Development, 87(6), 1909–1925.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Feloni, R. (2014, February 20). These are the disastrous Lego kits that almost ruined the company. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/legos-worst-failures-2014-2. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  9. Fine, C., & Rush, E. (2018). “Why does all the girls have to buy pink stuff?” The ethics and science of the gendered toy marketing debate. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), 769–784.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3080-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hains, R. C. (2014, December 23). LEGO Friends comic goes viral: An interview with illustrator Maritsa Patrinos. https://rebeccahains.com/2014/12/23/lego-friends-comic-goes-viral-an-interview-with-illustrator-maritsa-patrinos/. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  11. Hains, R. C. (2015, July 9). The problem with separate toys for girls and boys. The Boston Globe Magazine. https://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2015/02/27/the-problem-with-separate-toys-for-girls-and-boys/2uI7Qp0d3oYrTNj3cGkiEM/story.html. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  12. Hains, R. C., & Ostrow, C. (2017, August 9). Toy marketing and gender stereotypes: A critical content analysis of 40 children’s retail web sites. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Mass Communication and Journalism, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  13. Hartmann, M. (2011, December 15). Lego targets girls with pink blocks, cute figures, and no creativity. Jezebel. https://jezebel.com/lego-targets-girls-with-pink-blocks-cute-figures-no-5868334. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  14. Hilliard, L. J., & Liben, L. S. (2010). Differing levels of gender salience in preschool classrooms: Effects on children’s gender attitudes and intergroup bias. Child Development, 6, 1787–1798.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01510.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kahlenberg, S., & Hein, M. (2010). Progression on Nickelodeon? Gender-role stereotypes in toy commercials. Sex Roles, 62(11–12), 830–847.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9653-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. LEGO Scala—Interesting and Sweet. (2010, November 27). The Brick Blogger. http://thebrickblogger.com/2010/11/lego-scala/. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  17. Liben, L. S., Bigler, R. S., & Krogh, H. R. (2001). Pink and blue collar jobs: Children’s judgments of job status and job aspirations in relation to sex of worker. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79(4), 346–363.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2000.2611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martens, A., Johns, M., Greenberg, J., & Schimel, J. (2006). Combating stereotype threat: The effect of self-affirmation on women’s intellectual performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 236–243.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matyszczyk, C. (2011, December 19). Lego for girls: Wait, what? CNet. https://www.cnet.com/news/lego-for-girls-wait-what/. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  20. Mortensen, T. F. (2017, October 17). The LEGO Group history. About the LEGO Group. https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/lego-group/the_lego_history/. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  21. Nipper, M. (2012, January 20). LEGO Group commentary on attracting more girls to construction play. About the LEGO Group. https://www.lego.com/en-us/aboutus/news-room/2012/january/lego-group-commentary-on-attracting-more-girls-to-construction-play. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  22. Reich, S. M., Black, R. W., & Foliaki, T. (2018). Constructing difference: Lego® set narratives promote stereotypic gender roles and play. Sex Roles, 79(5–6), 285–298.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0868-2.
  23. Shewmaker, J. W. (2015). Sexualized media messages and our children: Teaching kids to be smart critics and consumers. Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
  24. Shewmaker, J., & Hains, R. C. (2016, August 7). Gendered marketing and promotion of stereotypes in girls aged 8–11 years. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
  25. SPARK. (2012, January 20). Our letter to Lego. SPARK Movement. http://www.sparkmovement.org/2012/01/20/our-letter-to-lego/. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  26. Spencer, S., Steele, Claude M., & Quinn, D. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Steele, Claude M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wieners, B. (2011, December 15). LEGO is for girls: Inside the world’s most admired toy’s effort to finally click with girls. Bloomberg Businessweek. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-12-14/lego-is-for-girls. Accessed on July 25, 2019.
  29. Wooden Toys. (n.d.). http://www.miniland.nl/Historie/houten%20lego%20eng.htm. Accessed on July 25, 2019.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Media and CommunicationSalem State UniversitySalemUSA
  2. 2.Abilene Christian UniversityAbileneUSA

Personalised recommendations