The Connection Between LEGO Sets and Gender Stereotypes

Introduction and History

LEGO – a product twice named “Toy of the Century,” has been a fond memory of many adults who grew up with it, and continues to be a childhood favourite (Lego.com). The LEGO Group, founded in 1932 by Ole Kirk Kristiansen, is based in Billund, Denmark, and is still owned by the Kirk Kristiansen family, who came up with the name ‘LEGO’ – an abbreviation of the two Danish words, “leg godt,” meaning “play well” (Marsh & Bishop, 2013). The LEGO Group provides several products and services, including its website, multiple theme parks, discovery centers, retail stores, business consultancy, video games, board games, films and television, books and magazines, children’s clothing, and of course LEGO sets (Lego.com). LEGO products have also been known to partake in cross-media promotion, such as when they created LEGO products based on the Harry Potter franchise (Marsh & Bishop, 2013). In this paper, the focus will be on the LEGO toy sets, specifically the LEGO City sets, marketed for boys, and the LEGO Friends sets, marketed for girls.

LEGO quickly gained popularity and expanded its range to include products for girls (Marsh & Bishop, 2013). With the introduction of gendered product lines, sales of LEGO sets tripled from 2011 to 2014 (Reich, Black, & Foliaki, 2018). In 2015, LEGO products had reached sales in more than 140 countries and the LEGO Group and the LEGO Foundation entered a three-year partnership with UNICEF to protect children’s rights and change the way in which children learn (Lego.com). While the LEGO Group has historically marketed its products as educational toys that promote engineering principles for all young children, it now targets male and female consumers differently (Reich, et al., 2018). The release of the LEGO Friends line resulted in the LEGO sets being firmly gender-segregated (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018).

Play includes components of effective learning such as providing opportunity for independence, and learning in terms of social context, and consists of physical, educational, social and moral values (Tas, 2018). Children’s play, toy preferences and group mate preferences differ in accordance with gender roles (Tas, 2018). Research has demonstrated that toy features, from colour palette to structure, influence if and how boys and girls play (Reich, et al., 2018). As well, research has found that by age 12.5 months, infants already exhibit gender-stereotyped toy play patterns (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). While researching the effects of LEGO in terms of gender, commonalities suggested that children are susceptible to the influence of the gender stereotypes associated with LEGO sets, based on colour coding, gendered narratives, and the encouragement of adults. As well, children’s interests and gender normative play choices, while likely affected by adult bias, perpetuate the loop of gender stereotyped toys within marketing and play.

Colour Codes and Gender Based Labels

In 2015, the Target Corporation announced that they were removing gender labels from their stores’ signage in children’s toy displays (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Many parents, educators, and feminists agreed with this decision as a way of reducing gender stereotyping of toys, however, there were also many individuals who disagreed with Target’s decision, remarking that gender differences in children’s toy interests are natural and that removing labels would confuse customers who use them to guide toy purchases (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Studies have explored the ways in which both product design and the marketing associated with toys can guide play by making social roles, especially gender roles, silent to the children playing (Reich et al., 2018). Research has shown that, when given a choice, children as young as 20-40 months old show significant colour preferences, specifically, girls choose to play with pink toys, whereas boys actively avoid pink toys (Reich et al., 2018). A study in China found that children recognized pink as a symbol of girl and blue as a symbol of boy despite the fact that this gender-typed code derives from Western societies (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Another study, focused on engineering and construction skill based toys, such as LEGO, found that boys demonstrated worse engineering and construction skill when playing with pastel coloured toys, rather than the primary coloured toys (Reich et al., 2018). As well, when gender-neutral objects are coloured pink or blue and labeled for girls or boys, it alters the likelihood of such toys being selected for play by boys and girls (Reich et al., 2018).

Fulcher and Hayes studied the effects of the colour of the LEGO bricks and the femininity/ masculinity of the objects built on boys’ and girls’ play with LEGO sets (2018). Their study found that; children took longer to build a feminine object with blue bricks than with pink bricks; when girls played with blue bricks during the free play task, the objects that they built were rated to be as masculine as the objects built by boys; free play with LEGO bricks may be gendered if children draw on gender norms and gender codes, such as colour, and build the gendered objects that are familiar; and regardless of the colour of bricks offered to them, boys created masculine objects, often with wheels (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018). Wheels may serve as another cultural marker to indicate that a toy is for boys, in the same way that pink indicates that a toy is for girls (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018). Playing with toys like the pink bricks may activate gendered play scripts, meaning, girls whose parents provide pink bricks to encourage spatial play may also be providing girls with yet another opportunity for scripted feminine play of relationship maintenance and appearance play (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018).

Gender Stereotypical Narratives

The types of toys that are typically labeled and marketed for boys often involve transportation, construction, adventure, danger, aggression, agency, competence, and support the development of spatial and larger Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) skills (Reich et al., 2018). However, toys marketed towards girls are often focused on caregiving, domesticity, and attractiveness (Reich et al., 2018). Reich et al., studied gendered norms within LEGO play through the LEGO City set, intended for boys, and the LEGO Friends set, intended for girls (2018). They found distinct gendered messages in their research that were written in a way that positioned them as active participants and encouraged them to enact various skilled professions, heroism, and expertise; while it positioned female consumers as more passive, novice, social caregivers and encouraged them to focus on having hobbies, being domestic, caring for others, socializing, being amateurs, and appreciating and striving for beauty (Reich et al., 2018). LEGO City provides many opportunities for players, typically boys, to play important occupational roles, often heroic in nature, with 89% of the LEGO city sets involving some sort of job or profession, including, police officer, fire fighter, doctor, astronaut, pilot, paramedic, race car driver and train conductor; and 41% of the sets describing rescue narratives and positioning the child as an active helper (Reich et al., 2018). LEGO Friends, however, had significantly fewer opportunities for playing in professional roles, with only 47% of the sets involving employment or professions, which consisted of mostly retail jobs, but also included farmer, veterinarian, model, teacher, horse-riding instructor, fashion designer, and ballet dancer (Reich et al., 2018). Driving a vehicle as a profession was common in LEGO city sets, and vehicles were included in all City sets, however, driving in LEGO Friends sets narratives was almost exclusively for recreation, such as driving to the mall, and vehicles were included in less than half of the Friends sets (Reich et al., 2018). The LEGO Friends sets often had narratives portraying the Friends’ characters engaged in domestic labour, such as cooking and cleaning, but none of the LEGO City sets involved domestic work (Reich et al., 2018). Both LEGO sets had narratives involving relaxing and unwinding, but were framed much differently. In LEGO Friends’ sets, narratives described winding down, relaxing, and napping; compared to the LEGO City sets, where all references to relaxing and sleeping were described as following a hard day of physical labour or temporarily taking a break before doing more work (Reich et al., 2018). The study also found that references to beauty were common in LEGO Friends set narratives, but not in LEGO City narratives (Reich et al., 2018). LEGO Friends set frequently referenced appearance and beauty, even when it was not a focal point of the sets’ narrative (Reich et al., 2018). Across activities, male-oriented products, characters, and anticipated consumers were positioned as capable and knowledgeable, whereas females were consistently positioned as learners in need of practice and help (Reich et al., 2018).

Adult and Peer Influences

Research has found that caregivers and educators often provide different types of toys to male and female children and encourage or discourage different types of play according to children’s gender (Reich et al., 2018). Surveys of children from kindergarten to eighth grade demonstrate that they are aware of gendered expectations for play and have play preferences that adhere to these expectations (Reich et al., 2018). Gender labels regarding toys are primarily given and reinforced by adults, such as parents, teachers, toy developers, and marketing specialists, and have been shown to disrupt children’s toy play patterns (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). One factor driving adults’ decision-making about purchasing toys for children is how gender-typed their own toy play was during their childhood (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Adults perpetuate gender-typed toy play by creating toys with gender-stereotyped narrative content (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Children learn societal rules about play through their observations of other children who model play behaviours (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). One British study found that children who viewed other children role modeling counter-stereotypical play behaviours had greater gender flexibility about toy play and playmate choice (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018).

Future Research

It is plausible that nostalgia plays a part in parents’ toy purchasing decisions, but given parents’ roles in purchasing and providing children access to toys, we need investigation into how to effectively communicate these findings to parents and to convey to parents that broadening children’s toy options could expand their child’s cognitive and social skills (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018).With this, future research should explore how much of parents’ toy purchasing decisions are driven by their child’s interests compared to the role played by parents’ own opinions about toys (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). As well, future research should look into the toys made available and the messages children receive within their daycares and schools, as schools could be prime contexts for interventions designed to broaden children’s play and reduce their exposure to gender stereotypes (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Research could also benefit from exploring, as an alternative to creating more pink and relational-themed boys’ toys, additional ways to engage and encourage girls in spatial play (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018).

Conclusion

Children build important cognitive skills when playing with construction toys like LEGO sets (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018). In particular, experience with building toys is associated with improved spatial skills including better mental rotation and geometric thinking, which may increase interest in STEM activities as well as occupational aspirations in STEM fields (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018). But, stereotypes surrounding STEM suggest that men are more capable of such skills than are women (Fulcher & Hayes, 2018). Girls are at a disadvantage here, and when girls’ play narratives are focused on trying but not excelling; on caring, giving, and cleaning as hobbies but not as professions, and on dedicating time to fashion and beauty rather than to hard work and skill, LEGO is encouraging girls to play in highly gender stereotypic ways (Reich et al., 2018). Boys, instead, are provided with messages of agency, heroism, and professionalism (Reich et al., 2018). These are messages about which consumers should be aware when purchasing sets for children (Reich et al., 2018). The concern about gender-stereotypical content in toys is elevated when paired with findings that indicate children recognize the gender stereotypes present in their play environments (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). It is possible that these themes reflect the preferences of boys and girls and that toy companies are giving their customers what they want, however, it is also possible that toy companies are prescribing stereotypes and leading children to accept or reject these themes by using labels, gender-typed colour codes, and/or male and female models on their packaging (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). The research supports the idea that interventions designed to reduce children’s gender-typed play may need to target the adults who are perpetuating the gender stereotypical toys (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018). Attempts to broaden play should be researched further so that children can gain a more well-rounded skillset while still enjoying play (Dinella & Weisgram, 2018).

References

• Dinella, L. M., Weisgram, E. S. (2018). Gender-Typing of Children’s Toys: Causes, Consequences, and Correlates. Sex Roles. Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0943-3
• Fulcer, M., Roberson-Hayes, A. (2018). Building a Pink Dinosaur: The Effects of Gendered Construction Toys on Girls’ and Boys’ Play. Sex Roles. Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.10.1007/s11199-017-0806-3
• Marsh, J., Bishop, J. C. (2013). The material cultures of childhood. Changing Play: Play, media and commercial culture from the 1950s to the present day. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
• Official LEGO Shop US. (n.d.). https://www.lego.com/en-us.
• Reich, S. M., Black, R. W., Foliaki, T. (2018). Constructing Difference: Lego Set Narratives Promote Stereotypic Gender Roles and Play. Sex Roles. Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/s/11199-017-0868-02
• Tas, I. (2018). An analysis on play and playmate preferences of 48 to 66 months old children in the context of gender. Vol. 13. Academic Journals: Educational Research and Reviews. https://doi.10.5897/ERR2017/3355