What IS "Gender Neutral"?

[Asita]

So earlier today I was checking out the latest posts in the Sarkeesian[footnote]No, I do NOT want this thread to turn into a she said/didn't say thread. This is providing context nothing more.[/footnote] thread on the Gaming Board, when I came across an interesting post. The post read thusly:

You are missing the point that the theme sets are by far the most popular lego. I mean, how many little boys will want to play with just building blocks when they can have ninjas and pirates in them if they get the right set? I know I always went for the theme sets when I was a kid, and every other boy of that age that I have ever known always went for the theme sets. (EDIT: Basically, the public perception of what it means to be a "lego set" has shifted to focus much more on the theme sets than the tubs of generic bricks, and Lego has shifted its production and marketing to focus on those theme sets over the generic bricks). And it isn't so much that there are sets that pander to the "girl toy" stereotypes, it is that said sets are much more simple than the "boy toy" ones.

Now this post stood out to me for one simple reason: It seemed to strongly imply that "Ninjas and Pirates" were themes tailored to men, and thus - as opposed to the generic Lego blocks - neither theme was truly gender neutral. This isn't the first time I've heard statements like this, and it almost certainly won't be the last. This did, however, make me think of all those times I've heard similar statements. In the past I've heard various people say that Star Wars was a 'guy theme', Cops and Robbers was a 'guy theme', Cowboys and Indians, Firefighters, Robots, Monsters, Aliens, Bugs, Cars, Trains and MANY other themes all favored men over women. At times it honestly seems like any conceivable theme has been declared to be the property of one gender or the other. It really makes you question if anything Lego produced (other than square blocks) could conceivably be considered gender neutral.

Ultimately, I find myself wondering this: What would be a good example of a gender neutral theme? Are there themes you've heard described as gendered that you disagree with? And what's more, how could we make a given theme seem more inclusive? (Of course, added insight as to why your choices qualify as gender neutral are always welcome)

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I'm guessing it's less the themes themselves, and more the way they're marketed. Because like you, I fail to see anything particularly masculine about pirates and ninjas. Well, okay, male pirates were masculine as all getout, but it's not like the female pirates (which really did exist, it's not just some pornographic fantasy) didn't kick all kinds of butt too. A lot of it has to do with sexism in the way we raise little boys and little girls. To wit, whether there's anything inherently masculine about pirates or not, we still encourage little boys to play with pirates, and little girls to play with baby dolls -- in a way, socializing boys to go out of the house and do something for themselves, and women to stay at home and raise children.

As for something truly gender neutral: I don't know how it actually plays out in the movie, but I always got the impression from the trailer and the reviews I've read that the crystal spires and togas culture from Zardoz was like that, until Sean Connery showed up wearing a cod piece and not much else.


Sean Connery: so manly, he introduces gender roles into a civilization without them simply by being there.

 

[BreakfastMan]

So, since I was quoted, I feel like I need to post here. XD Anyway, to explain myself a bit more... Pirates and Ninjas are not inherently gendered. BUT, our society perceives them as such. So, I would say that I disagree with ALL "gendered themes", as it were.

As for what is gender neutral? Probably the City sets from what I have seen. Those generally seem to be fairly gender neutral.

As to how to make a theme more inclusive? Include girls in the commercials, playing on equal footing with the boys, there gender not made an issue. Include female minifigs who also get to do awesome stuff and have awesome sets. Don't convey that girls should only play with certain sets and boys should only play with certain sets in advertising. Don't pander to the "No Girls Allowed!" mindset and be more inclusive, basically, and more girls will come.

 

[Abomination]

I was thinking about this while driving home yesterday and then I saw it: trampolines.

Very gender neutral item. Slip & slides as well.

Toys though do seem to be very focused. Certain board games, I guess, are gender neutral like Monopoly & Hungry, Hungry Hippos. But when we think of toys we think "dolls, cars and building blocks". Building blocks are gender neutral as a whole but tend to specialize in certain areas that are less gender neutral.

 

[Thaluikhain]

In of itself nothing much is gender based, it's how society perceives it. In context, advertising plays a big part, but that's not just it, not when society has been sending messages about something for years.

 

[Asita]

In of itself nothing much is gender based, it's how society perceives it. In context, advertising plays a big part, but that's not just it, not when society has been sending messages about something for years.

Well that is certainly true, but you have to admit, that's sidestepping the issue. I mean in truth there's nothing truly vulgar about nudity, but we as a culture do tend to perceive running around in your birthday suit as such. It's not the grand picture that's under scrutiny here but the nature of our perceptions.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Here's the thing. You can either have something which really appeals only to one group. If you have something which tries to be neutral, it'll be suprassed by the non-neutral alternative of the relevant group. Even if you're a girl into ninja and pirates, you'll still prefer ninja and pirates over the generic blocks just as much as the boys would.


To make something into less so that it may be liked by a wide group of people is NOT the best way to make the best version of anything. All these imagined neutral things are not innate ones, they're neutered versions of other things or a basic primitive thing, such as in the case of the legos. Generic plain legos were too LOW TECH to be able to be gendered, they weren't aimed at being this utopic toy that brings boys and girls together...and dunno about you but most girls prefered their barbies just as much as I prefered my transformers over those generic lego things.

 

[Spinozaad]

Gender neutrality is ultimately a social construction. Gender neutrality is not girls playing with ninja/pirate-themed toys, or boys playing with Barbies. To add labels such as "neutrality" or "multiculturalism" to things, objects or concepts is still implicitly referring to the opposite. For example, an "unisex bathroom" in a public building is not neutral, because it refers to the concept of gendered bathrooms. The bathroom in my appartment would be "neutral", because it doesn't need any other label to make sense.

Not the best example, I know.

"Playing outside" would be a gender neutral concept, since it is self-evident that it applies to both boys and girls. At least in our Western society.

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

The themes of Lego now are aimed primarily towards a male audience. This does not mean exclusively. For instance the new LotR Lego is not aimed at little girls, but little boys. That is kind of the demographic of the LotR, but that does not mean that girls cannot buy it. The reason why they don't is because both boys and girls are exposed to and expected to comply to particular imagery presented by their society.

If you look at the simple building packages that you can get for Lego, you can't see any signs of pandering to gender constructs. Instead they are just blocks and well no one can really put any gender limitations are blocks, without saying "blocks are for boys".

 

[Asita]

The themes of Lego now are aimed primarily towards a male audience. This does not mean exclusively. For instance the new LotR Lego is not aimed at little girls, but little boys. That is kind of the demographic of the LotR, but that does not mean that girls cannot buy it. The reason why they don't is because both boys and girls are exposed to and expected to comply to particular imagery presented by their society.

If you look at the simple building packages that you can get for Lego, you can't see any signs of pandering to gender constructs. Instead they are just blocks and well no one can really put any gender limitations are blocks, without saying "blocks are for boys".

Ok, what would you see as an example of a viable theme (Other than simple blocks) aimed at both sexes then? I'm not asking rhetorically, I'm honestly curious.

 

[josemlopes]

Here's the thing. You can either have something which really appeals only to one group. If you have something which tries to be neutral, it'll be suprassed by the non-neutral alternative of the relevant group. Even if you're a girl into ninja and pirates, you'll still prefer ninja and pirates over the generic blocks just as much as the boys would.


To make something into less so that it may be liked by a wide group of people is NOT the best way to make the best version of anything. All these imagined neutral things are not innate ones, they're neutered versions of other things or a basic primitive thing, such as in the case of the legos. Generic plain legos were too LOW TECH to be able to be gendered, they weren't aimed at being this utopic toy that brings boys and girls together...and dunno about you but most girls prefered their barbies just as much as I prefered my transformers over those generic lego things.

Gender neutrality is ultimately a social construction. Gender neutrality is not girls playing with ninja/pirate-themed toys, or boys playing with Barbies. To add labels such as "neutrality" or "multiculturalism" to things, objects or concepts is still implicitly referring to the opposite. For example, an "unisex bathroom" in a public building is not neutral, because it refers to the concept of gendered bathrooms. The bathroom in my appartment would be "neutral", because it doesn't need any other label to make sense.

Not the best example, I know.

"Playing outside" would be a gender neutral concept, since it is self-evident that it applies to both boys and girls. At least in our Western society.

DING DING DING!!!
Jackpot!

The first for saying why the marketing (something that doesnt apply only to Legos) is the way it is and the second for saying that things are the way they are because thats how they become to be, you know, evolution of a civilization.

EDIT: Now to add my opinion in here, Legos started out very "gender neutral", and somehow they started to go after the male audience instead of keeping it totally neutral or going instead after the female audience. Why is that?

Maybe because even the "gender neutral" Legos had more success with boys then girls making the company try to focus more in the bigger portion of its consumers? Because that is what companies do. Even then they still kept their "gender neutral" stuff and just added the boy stuff to the mix

 

[Asita]

EDIT: Now to add my opinion in here, Legos started out very "gender neutral", and somehow they started to go after the male audience instead of keeping it totally neutral or going instead after the female audience. Why is that?

Maybe because even the "gender neutral" Legos had more success with boys then girls making the company try to focus more in the bigger portion of its consumers? Because that is what companies do. Even then they still kept their "gender neutral" stuff and just added the boy stuff to the mix

I hope you aren't implying that I was attacking them for their theme choices, or for appealing to one demographic more than another, because that wasn't my intent. Truth be told, I find a lot of the 'this is a boy theme' claims puzzling and am trying to determine what - aside from stereotypically 'girly' subjects - wouldn't actually qualify as such according to the general public.

 

[Dr. Cakey]

Question 1: Does it have pink on it? (If 'NO', go to Section A. If 'YES', go to Section B.)

Section A.
It is for boys.

Section B.
It is for girls.

This is where you say, "Oh god it really is that simple what the fuck is wrong with our culture."

 

[anthony87]

EDIT: Now to add my opinion in here, Legos started out very "gender neutral", and somehow they started to go after the male audience instead of keeping it totally neutral or going instead after the female audience. Why is that?

Maybe because even the "gender neutral" Legos had more success with boys then girls making the company try to focus more in the bigger portion of its consumers? Because that is what companies do. Even then they still kept their "gender neutral" stuff and just added the boy stuff to the mix

And don't you see how that's WRONG!?!? For....reasons?

But yeah, it seems that some of the things I see referred to as "sexism" I was taught years ago in Business Studies as "marketing". Then again I don't pay much attention to the sexism threads around here so maybe I'm grossly under thinking the whole thing.

 

[lifeat24fps]

So earlier today I was checking out the latest posts in the Sarkeesian[footnote]No, I do NOT want this thread to turn into a she said/didn't say thread. This is providing context nothing more.[/footnote] thread on the Gaming Board, when I came across an interesting post. The post read thusly:

You are missing the point that the theme sets are by far the most popular lego. I mean, how many little boys will want to play with just building blocks when they can have ninjas and pirates in them if they get the right set? I know I always went for the theme sets when I was a kid, and every other boy of that age that I have ever known always went for the theme sets. (EDIT: Basically, the public perception of what it means to be a "lego set" has shifted to focus much more on the theme sets than the tubs of generic bricks, and Lego has shifted its production and marketing to focus on those theme sets over the generic bricks). And it isn't so much that there are sets that pander to the "girl toy" stereotypes, it is that said sets are much more simple than the "boy toy" ones.

Now this post stood out to me for one simple reason: It seemed to strongly imply that "Ninjas and Pirates" were themes tailored to men, and thus - as opposed to the generic Lego blocks - neither theme was truly gender neutral. This isn't the first time I've heard statements like this, and it almost certainly won't be the last. This did, however, make me think of all those times I've heard similar statements. In the past I've heard various people say that Star Wars was a 'guy theme', Cops and Robbers was a 'guy theme', Cowboys and Indians, Firefighters, Robots, Monsters, Aliens, Bugs, Cars, Trains and MANY other themes all favored men over women. At times it honestly seems like any conceivable theme has been declared to be the property of one gender or the other. It really makes you question if anything Lego produced (other than square blocks) could conceivably be considered gender neutral.

Ultimately, I find myself wondering this: What would be a good example of a gender neutral theme? Are there themes you've heard described as gendered that you disagree with? And what's more, how could we make a given theme seem more inclusive? (Of course, added insight as to why your choices qualify as gender neutral are always welcome)

If it makes a difference, my mom was the one who taught me to like fantasy, sci-fi and superheroes. My dad has never had time for all that nonsense.

 

[josemlopes]

EDIT: Now to add my opinion in here, Legos started out very "gender neutral", and somehow they started to go after the male audience instead of keeping it totally neutral or going instead after the female audience. Why is that?

Maybe because even the "gender neutral" Legos had more success with boys then girls making the company try to focus more in the bigger portion of its consumers? Because that is what companies do. Even then they still kept their "gender neutral" stuff and just added the boy stuff to the mix

And don't you see how that's WRONG!?!? For....reasons?

Honestly, they sort have some girly sets for the female audience but overall I think that what they should do more is just keep a 50/50 of male/female heads on those very "gender neutral" sets like the ones of the firemans or the airport, etc...
The typical "boy fantasy" set could always at least bring one female head, even if not attached to any body, just to keep a nice way of getting their heads to replace the male ones if a girl wants to.

Other then that I cant really blame their decisions, what they want is profit, maybe there isnt as much demand for more female stuff (it certainly isnt because of ideals, a lot of people take these things very personally while its just business). And it isnt just that, from what I remember from when I was a kid wasnt the girl market for small toys with a lot of customization already taken by the Polly Pockets or whatever that was? The small toys with the clothes and stuff?

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

The themes of Lego now are aimed primarily towards a male audience. This does not mean exclusively. For instance the new LotR Lego is not aimed at little girls, but little boys. That is kind of the demographic of the LotR, but that does not mean that girls cannot buy it. The reason why they don't is because both boys and girls are exposed to and expected to comply to particular imagery presented by their society.

If you look at the simple building packages that you can get for Lego, you can't see any signs of pandering to gender constructs. Instead they are just blocks and well no one can really put any gender limitations are blocks, without saying "blocks are for boys".

Ok, what would you see as an example of a viable theme (Other than simple blocks) aimed at both sexes then? I'm not asking rhetorically, I'm honestly curious.

That is purely dependent on what is deemed socially acceptable for each sex and well for both. Maintaining the Lego example I will point you towards my childhood. The was a particular brand of Lego called Lego Town. This included everything you would expect from a town from emergency services to family life, from banks to bakers, you get the idea. It was a set i never really got into getting in my youth but was always interested in. But in these sets male and female models where often mixed. To me this is thematically the best example of a gender neutral theme for lego, it presents nothing you would not expect from life and presents both sexes equally.

The problem here kinda lies with views on gender. When buying Lego for a young boy would my relatives go with the baker set or the fire engine, or skip that theme completely and go for a spaceship or something. Long story short the Town has been rebranded completely into Lego City and has eliminated all but he emergency services sets. Lego as a company did have a few themes like this but over time have been eliminated, possibly due to poor sales.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

A truly neutral toy has to be thematically bland. In theory this might make it appeal to everyone, but in reality it makes it appeal to noone.

The examples you mentioned that are quite neutral, like board games, are trying to sell based on how enjoyable the gameplay inherently is, whereas dolls and building kits better lend themselves to imaginative roleplay because they have no inherent entertainment value. They rely on the imagination of the user to make them interesting, and thus those that push a theme that fires the imagination are going to be more popular.


EDIT: That said, the issue of which themes are seen as inherently masculine or feminine is basically explained by social constructs, wherein the problem lies.

 

[Erana]

Gender neutral...
Hrm...

I'd say that gender neutrality is more about the plot- is one gender dominating all the screen time or has most of the power? Is one gender fetishized or depicted with far fewer facets than the other gender? Is anyone a blatant "token" character?


The only thing off the top of my head that I can think of that is pretty darn gender neutral is the Powerpuff Girls. Anything that was blatantly skewed towards one demographic (like the protagonists being little girls) was balanced out by something very appealing to the other demographic. (It was the most violent cartoon cartoon until they brought a show staring Death himself)

Otherwise, it had a very balanced cast of heroes and villains, and they represented one of the few great single fathers in kids shows from that decade that I remember. Even when it did get preachy and address the issues of gender equality, it both spent time to tell people to not consider women inferior and demonstrated that feminism doesn't mean being a female supremacist jerk.
And for that matter, Him, a transvestite character, was taken just as serious as any other villain.


I can't think of any major childrens' franchises that is more gender neutral at the moment.

 

[Madman Muntz]

I'm guessing it's less the themes themselves, and more the way they're marketed. Because like you, I fail to see anything particularly masculine about pirates and ninjas. Well, okay, male pirates were masculine as all getout, but it's not like the female pirates (which really did exist, it's not just some pornographic fantasy) didn't kick all kinds of butt too. A lot of it has to do with sexism in the way we raise little boys and little girls. To wit, whether there's anything inherently masculine about pirates or not, we still encourage little boys to play with pirates, and little girls to play with baby dolls -- in a way, socializing boys to go out of the house and do something for themselves, and women to stay at home and raise children.

As for something truly gender neutral: I don't know how it actually plays out in the movie, but I always got the impression from the trailer and the reviews I've read that the crystal spires and togas culture from Zardoz was like that, until Sean Connery showed up wearing a cod piece and not much else.


Sean Connery: so manly, he introduces gender roles into a civilization without them simply by being there.

I don't feel Zardoz has anything to do with gender neutrality at all. All of the clothing worn there looked like a kitsch take on earlier decades of sci fi and fantasy themed art. Look up some of the pulp comics from the 30s to the 50s and you'll see what I mean. IE neo-greek classical and sci fi barbarism. While I have to admit I found Zardoz's costume ridiculous as fuck, I think they were shooting for a sci fi version of Conanesque loincloths and not Borat in a mankini.


As to gender neutrality in general, I feel its an attempt to remove gender based prejudice from society in the most absurd way possible. Rather than trying to forge compassion understanding and tolerance of our various gender and sexuality differences, they instead are attempting to strip everyone of their core gender identity. Which in my not very humble opinion is a massive step towards fascism. Whats next? Making everyone wear a bag over their heads so we can try to stamp out the prejudicial concepts of ugly and beautiful? Or painting everyone a uniform hue to stamp out racism? Bollocks.