Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

kickstarter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 113 posts

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#91

Post by Frostbeard »

cullenking wrote: post #41

All the naysayers out there are neglecting an important viewpoint best explained by a personal anecdote. I have a 4 year old niece that is so into princesses, pink, high heals, the whole 9 yards, that any present that isn't themed pink and girly will just get ignored, yet she's very smart and likes playing with puzzles. Something like this might actually work for her, where gender neutral legos or erector sets would…

My first reaction when I saw this campaign was to roll my eyes a bit, to be honest. My own daughter loves the gender neutral and even "boyish" construction toys, and even though she loves ponies and princesses and pink frilly things, she'd probably cast something like this aside.

On reflection though, I think anything that helps get girls interested in the concepts is fantastic. This simply wouldn't be of value to my own daughter (or my nieces for that matter), but I can see how it would be really helpful in getting girls like your niece interested, and that can only be a good thing.

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#92

Post by vacri »

greendestiny wrote: post #25
timr wrote: post #5

I get the desire for narrative and different colors...but this looks awfully simple-minded. Why can a boy age 5-9 play with erector sets and legos, but a "girl's" engineering toy must comprise such a primitive set of components?

There is girls themed lego and duplo these days.

There was in the early '80s, too. I remember seeing the product line in the catalogue but not the store shelves. The sets were for making jewellery out of and the like.

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#94

Post by mjwalshe »

mkramlich wrote: post #54

Now if we could solve the other great crime against humanity: why aren't there more dressup dolls and baby toys aimed at boys? That gender-biased oppression has got to end.

Have you not seen all the diferent Action Man (GI Joe in teh USA ) and all the uniforms.

And not forgetting all Matt Mason toys which Sam Carter plaied with - as did I.

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#95

Post by mamoswined »

tthomas48 wrote: post #16
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should girls have to be interested in bio-alien-robots? Gender differences are real, so instead of trying to overcome them, we should do what this toy is trying to do: recognize them and work within them.

Gender differences are real. But interest in bio-alien-robots is taught.

Anecdotally, I'm probably a good example of this. Being sickly, I was homeschooled for a lot of my childhood, so I didn't have a peer group to tell me what was cool for many years. I did interact with other kids through church and various activities like choir, but it wasn't very similar to social groups that form in schools.

My mother also limited my TV time. My dad didn't but only when we watched Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, and all kinds of other sci=fi stuff together. He also told me stories about robots. I did also love playing with my Littlest Pet Shop toys and dressing up as a princess, but I also loved building robots, spaceships, pirate ships, etc. with legos. I don't really understand why that stuff isn't more popular with girls. I mean, almost all franchises based on them have multiple good female characters and storylines that seem like they would appeal to women.

Based on later experiences as a teacher of 4-5 year olds, I get the impression that socially there is usually a queen bee girl who tells all the other girls who like different things that they are lame and they can't be in the club if they play with robots. I don't necessarily think that's a natural thing as the way schools divide children up based on age would be unusual from a historical perspective. I think having all 5 year olds together with no younger or older girls encourages bullying behavior as they establish a social dominance, rather than age-based, hierarchy.

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#96

Post by Tipzntrix »

ttttannebaum wrote: post #64

Why not call it "GoldieBlox: The Cute Engineering Toy"? Why enforce gender roles? Isn't the title kind of saying "Girls like cute stuff, boys don't ever like cute stuff, and the only way to get girls interested in engineering is to make it cute"? Couldn't we get females into engineering more easily if we stopped culturally delegating "cool" to little boys and "cute" to little girls? [Or the real solution, just stop h…

I think the answer to this has been no, females won't go into engineering more no matter how you culturally delegate personality attributes. Consider the sales of the toys and the admissions rates into engineering programs DESPITE the fact that more women are being admitted to university than men [1], and yet still engineering programs are 80-20 male-female[2], despite the gender neutrality motions taking place and the fact that it's no longer the 50s with openly sexist TV commercials and advertisements.

[1]: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11542-... [2]: http://theblueandwhite.ca/article/2011/03/09/19/47/52/someth...

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#97

Post by Tipzntrix »

DeepDuh wrote: post #37
languagehacker wrote: post #33

Interesting! The spools and ribbons are almost skeuomorphic in that toy's context, but still attractive under the existing girls' toy aesthetic. Smart idea.

Now we're applying the word 'skeuomorphic' back to real world objects? The sky is the limit for this new expression. Will it reach inception-esque levels?

Yeah, what does skeuomorphic mean here, its interface is made to imitate a real world drive belt? I hope it would be, if it's supposed to be an engineering toy.

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#98

Post by trhtrsh »

mamoswined wrote: post #95
tthomas48 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender differences are real. But interest in bio-alien-robots is taught.

Anecdotally, I'm probably a good example of this. Being sickly, I was homeschooled for a lot of my childhood, so I didn't have a peer group to tell me what was cool for many years. I did interact with other kids through church and various activities like choir, but it wasn't very similar to social groups that form in schools. My mother also limited my TV time. My dad didn't but only when we watched Star Wars, Star Tr…

The alternative is age-based bullying, so, mu.

Re: GoldieBlox: The Engineering Toy for Girls

#99

Post by trhtrsh »

jlgreco wrote: post #12
timr wrote: post #5

I get the desire for narrative and different colors...but this looks awfully simple-minded. Why can a boy age 5-9 play with erector sets and legos, but a "girl's" engineering toy must comprise such a primitive set of components?

I can see the concerns some people have with legos clearly focusing on marketing to boys, but erector set stuff does seem rather un-gendered to me. I don't know if it has changed, but the erector set stuff I had as a child was just a bunch of stamped out metal parts with nuts/bolts. Not much "themeing" at all. I suppose you can just buy "vanilla" lego blocks too of course. Anyway, parents know what their kids want mo…

Construction toys are gendered. You just don't notice because it is the standard.
Post reply on HN