How Girls and Boys Play

[Li Shenron]

The skate maneuvers had taken hours and hours to perfect, defying the consensus that modern kids don’t have the attention span to stick with painstaking challenges, especially during playtime. To compete with the plug-and-play quality of computer games, Lego had been dumbing down its building sets, aiming for faster “builds” and instant gratification. From the German skateboarder onward, Lego saw it had drawn the wrong lessons from computer games. Instead of focusing on their immediacy, the company now noticed how kids responded to the scoring, ranking, and levels of play—opportunities to demonstrate mastery.

This part is actually the most interesting and relevant to us.

 

[Alzrius]

No, but I expected that someone would feel that way. If people can be indoctrinated to believe that there are no differences in median physical strength between men and women, they can certainly be indoctrinated to believe that girls don't inherently prefer pretty things.

But reality - empirical evidence - says otherwise.

Um, what?

You're equating biological sexual dimorphism to cultural attitudes regarding gender? Really?

I think you need to reexamine who's been indoctrinated.

 

[S'mon]

Um, what?

You're equating biological sexual dimorphism to cultural attitudes regarding gender? Really?

I think you need to reexamine who's been indoctrinated.

No, I'm saying that some people are indoctrinated to even deny biological sexual dimorphism. Denying inherent psychological differences is very sensible by comparison. So don't worry about it.

 

[Mallus]

...the Japs are idiots...

Hey, the Japanese haven't been "the Japs" since WWII ended .

Can we dial this back a little, or at least make it funnier?

(for the record, I *love* LEGOs, have a smidge of Japanese ancestry, and my idiot status has never been conclusively proven)

Do any other men here feel vaguely uncomfortable hearing that the most important quality for girls was beauty?

I think you're reading "beauty" too narrowly. I believe "beauty" is being used here to mean general aesthetics, design, and details relating to them. It's not being used in the simple "pretty girl!" sense.

Think "beauty is truth, and truth beauty".

 

[Alzrius]

Denying inherent psychological differences is very sensible by comparison.

I'm neither a psychologist nor a sociologist, but I really think you're stepping into a minefield with this statement, particularly in regards to using it to posit that girls inherently prefer pretty things.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

It's really stupid to say somebody prefering beauty. Since that is one thing that is very much opinion, cultural thing and such. Girls refer much more than boys into different things as cute/pretty/beautiful. It's not the same thing than there would be general shared idea what is percieved as "pretty". There is not. Another person's beauty can easily be another's horror. Many girls despise pink and other referred as girly colors. And many men like them. Saying color is somehow gender related is not true, but it might be so because of cultural trappings.

There is some cultural preasure and traditions pressing the issue. And parents often do much to teach them to their children. Despite this kiddies pick flavors, colors and music they like. You can force girls to play with "girl's toys" and boys with "boys toys", but you can't teach them to like something they don't like. Not in normal family anyhow.

You can naturally because of culturally heavily pressed roles force people to "choose" according to desired themes. But here price of not follow the suit, has serious consiquences. Like violence or public humilation. OR simply the lack of different role models. It's always hard to be the first different one. That's why we have "yes-men" and story about only one kid that dared to say "king wears no clothes":.

 

[MarkChevallier]

I'm neither a psychologist nor a sociologist, but I really think you're stepping into a minefield with this statement, particularly in regards to using it to posit that girls inherently prefer pretty things.

I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he's saying that

a) Some people reject biological differences between the sexes (with the implicit understanding that they do this because to them, accepting it would connote sexism)

so

b) If some people reject psychological differences between the sexes, that's really not a big surprise. You may infer that he believes this is for the same reason (ie, rejecting sexism, political correctness etc), but note that this isn't a necessary corollary and he may not mean to imply that.

 

[S'mon]

b) If some people reject psychological differences between the sexes, that's really not a big surprise. You may infer that he believes this is for the same reason (ie, rejecting sexism, political correctness etc), but note that this isn't a necessary corollary and he may not mean to imply that.

I do believe it's for the same reason, but yes it's not vital to my point. People are taught to disbelieve the evidence of their Lying Eyes all the time, and are remarkably effective at doing so. These two sex-disparity cases are both linked to (post)modern Political Correctness, but you get just the same with, say, evolution - I grew up in Northern Ireland where Creationism was/is generally accepted and evolution was not taught in schools. Or Young Earth theory - claims that the planet is ca 6,000 years old. I see the same sorts of arguments employed to reject what should be obvious. Oh, on the flipside you also see arguments that eg men and women, girls and boys, are completely different, with no overlap - just as silly and as contrary to the evidence as claiming that they're the same.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

Good points S'mon but can't exp you now.

 

[Dire Bare]

Do any other men here feel vaguely uncomfortable hearing that the most important quality for girls was beauty?

No. Because it is true. At least, in Western culture it is true. Doesn't mean that ALL girls focus on beauty and harmony, or that it is their only concern, or that boys can't appreciate it, nor that it is "inherent" genetically (which it actually might be, according to some scientific work).

In our society, women do tend to focus on beauty, harmony, and the like moreso than men. Is that as it should be? Is it more nurture (culture) than nature (biology)? Should we work to change this in some fashion? Perhaps.

But as someone else pointed out above, LEGO is working to understand children's play preferences as they stand now, rather than they perhaps should be.