Classic-Castle.com


The source for all your LEGO Castle needs!

LEGOLAND needs women!

Open message to The LEGO Company. We make no guarantee that anyone from LEGO will actually read them, let alone respond!

Postby Emperor James » Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:32 am

LORD DOOM wrote:
Emperor James wrote:
the only problem i sea with women figs is that they would be one more fig that could be a soldier instead. anyway i prefer my women real, without flat torsos.

(no bad joke)


Double, you, tea, F!? MATE!?

That's some pretty sexist smack you're talkin'. What's to prevent a woman from being a soldier?


cuz women cant get the jacked muscle fibras you need to cut someones head off. unless theyre like those woman bodybuilders who take loads of steroids and end up looking like men anyway. but they didnt have those in the middle ages.

and idk where your coming from sayin women were forced into combat and stuff, for the most part the church kept anything of the sort from happening.

(no sexist)
pwnage
Emperor James
Steward
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 3:55 am

Postby Emp.Justinian » Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:56 am

The Shadow Knight wrote:I think that Lego should make a feminine themed Lego line, so that other sets, (such as Castle) don't get ruined by a bunch of female minifigures.


*cough* Beliville *cough* Fabuland *cough* clickets *cough*

I know I have to be the smart aleck. :P

God's speed

Emp.Justinian
Support the true king, Support SavaTheAggie!

A proud member of the Legion of Aggie

I Pledge Allegiance to SavaTheAggie
and to the empire for which it rules
one Empire under One Admin
invincible, with tyranny and injustice for all.
User avatar
Emp.Justinian
Archer
 
Posts: 369
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:42 am
Location: Home sweet Home

Postby Chrislad77 » Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:20 pm

Women weren't soldiers in the middle ages. It's just that simple. Medieval combat was definately not suited to female abilities, where as today anyone can fire a gun with some training, most medieval combat was based strength. Raw strength is where men excel so it's not really surprising the way things were.
User avatar
Chrislad77
Foot Soldier
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:34 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Postby The_Vanquished » Sun Jul 08, 2007 5:05 pm

Personally, I think it'd be a lot funner with more girls around. I know life usually always is!


Well, here is something I agree with.

Im not entirly sure if there should be more LEGO women, I don't have very much LEGO money, my male figs can't afford to all have wives. Bricklink orders would go through the roof!
wrap me in a bolt of lightning,
send me on my way still smiling,
maybe that's the way i should go:
straight into the mouth of the unknown....
User avatar
The_Vanquished
Artisan
 
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:10 pm

Postby Tower of Iron Will » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:56 pm

In the early years of Castle, if I wanted to add a "queen" then I simply borrowed one of my town ladies for the role. As time went on women filed the role of leader types or wandering adventure types. I didn't place them in the regular armies as it was my experience that historical midieval armies were all male. I like the Princess Storm armor but have over the years used "male" armor torsos with a female head or incase of the smilies, female hair. I try not to worry too much. As long as there's a Princess/Queen figure then I'm cool. If I need to make a female adventurer say for the new "castle knights" line then I'll pop the head of one of the knights and substitute a female head in. Bricklink thankfully has a few to spare. It may not have the curves of Storm's armor, but this is a hobby that requires a little imagination anyways.

I would support a medieval town village that has more women but then I haven't gotten to that level with my MOCs :)
-Tower
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

Despise learning and make everyone pay for your ignorance.

The water that floats a ship is the same that sinks it.

My LEGO figures keep me from being evil, drat!!
User avatar
Tower of Iron Will
Master
 
Posts: 1705
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:47 am
Location: Fortress of the Lion Emperor

Postby Peppermint Pig » Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:34 am

Chrislad77 wrote:Women weren't soldiers in the middle ages. It's just that simple. Medieval combat was definately not suited to female abilities, where as today anyone can fire a gun with some training, most medieval combat was based strength. Raw strength is where men excel so it's not really surprising the way things were.


Joan of Arc. But your point is well taken. Military is male dominated for a reason.



More Lego Women? Yes please!

Paradisa was cool. I've suggested this before: Lego, create more sets with mass appeal to all ages (and you can create them with non violence too!!): More molded animals (zoo, farms, etc), musicians (big band lego set? rock stars?), more city sets than just police state, fire, construction, rescue, transport, and racing!!! Find opportunities to include more Lego women!

Lego, you're on the right track with the cafe! Keep creating interesting buildings (they don't all have to be expensive sets). Hotdog vendors and carnival games. Museums. Baseball field?! Post office (love that post office horn logo)! You get the drill, overflowing with ideas, hoping Lego will follow up with at least one... SOMETHING!!! Lego Prison. Bank (need cool vault door designs!), pet store....
User avatar
Peppermint Pig
candied swine
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:42 pm

Postby Daria » Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:42 am

I'm all for more females... but right now I'm having fun piecing together my own medieval ladies (and children) but that's fine, I don't need an army of fighting women. They wouldn't be as special if ever other soldier was a girl. I'm content with using a Storm torso and my hidden female in the purple jelly armour. :P

I'm just annoyed that there isn't more decent hair selections. I'm using the short hair as a sort of squire/pageboy look for noblemen so it looks unnatural on my females. And the princess hair, leia buns, mid length, and long braid only come in variations of brown... so all my woman are brunettes. You'd think they'd have made some long haired blondes by now.
User avatar
Daria
Villein
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:01 pm

Postby arc » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:34 am

I admit, I tend to think of the minifigs as male, but that's because they're always doing "male" things: fighting, exploring deep space, running dangerous machines, etc.

Think about it for a second. Who's more valuable to society? It ain't the boys. How many men do you actually need? Two males and six females, you're good to go from a purely reproductive standpoint. Take the opposite of that situation, and you've got a problem. Of course in the real world people aren't so crass and uncaring... I hope... but even then, once a male has passed his genetic material on and created offspring, his contribution to the gene pool has been made and he's even more expendable than he was before from a biological standpoint.

It's just nature. Look at the number of species in which the male is just a puny little thing whose only further purpose in life is to be eaten by his mate the very second he passes on his genetic code. Men are the way they are (bigger etc.) because cavewomen needed expendable protectors, workers, etc. and chose the males with the traits that made them better suited for such.

That's why men are always sent to do dangerous things like fight wars and drive huge trucks; women are too valuable to waste. Even in 2007 we can't truly recreate what women have been doing since the beginning of recorded history. Only when technology gets to the point that viviparous births are pointless and unnecessary will this ever change.

That's why even in the modern era where technology has made many gender traits largely irrelevant, we still have mostly male armies, etc. So in a setting like Space or Castle where you have a lot of fighting or just plain dangerous stuff being done, most of your mini figs will tend to be male.

It's not about inherent competency or ability, since realistically that's probably a wash in many areas of interest. It's about biology, and one gender is more expendable than the other.

It would be quite nice however to see historically accurate female figures. Noblewomen (not just one generic princess), seneschals, spinsters, farm wives, nuns, etc. would all be welcome additions. But their gender should be discernible by their context not some overly painted mini fig element.
arc
Peasant
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:53 am

Postby Paradosis » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:53 am

Lego sets have a deplorable lack of female mini-figures.


Here, here! There can never be enough women, in the real world or the Lego world. :)

Having said that...

arc

I admit, I tend to think of the minifigs as male, but that's because they're always doing "male" things: fighting, exploring deep space, running dangerous machines, etc... That's why even in the modern era where technology has made many gender traits largely irrelevant, we still have mostly male armies, etc. So in a setting like Space or Castle where you have a lot of fighting or just plain dangerous stuff being done, most of your mini figs will tend to be male.


That's a fair point when it comes to many themes... if you have a pirate ship or a militaristic medieval Castle set, it'd be unrealistic to have a lot of females. Obviously there were females around at the time, but since Lego isn't putting out markets and homes and other such things, we don't see 'em.

Think about it for a second. Who's more valuable to society? It ain't the boys.


I agree. Though for different reasons. ;)

How many men do you actually need? Two males and six females, you're good to go from a purely reproductive standpoint.


Well, I'm not a biology major, but I think you need a larger gene pool than that at this point. As evolution occurs naturally, it's not like a new species just pops into place in a generation, with that new species unable to reproduce with members of other species. The evolutionary change from one species to another takes place very slowly, over many, many generations. When specific creatures can be defined as a seperate species, the naturally selected mutations that makes the new species what it is are in a suitably large population base. That's why scientists often speak of the changes within populations, rather than focusing solely on mutations within individuals.

Take the opposite of that situation, and you've got a problem. Of course in the real world people aren't so crass and uncaring... I hope... but even then, once a male has passed his genetic material on and created offspring, his contribution to the gene pool has been made and he's even more expendable than he was before from a biological standpoint.


He's certainly not expendable from an evolutionary point of view. First, most species require a male to create more than one child for the species to survive, especially if early death is a common problem (death before birth, sickness in childhood, etc.). Second, you yourself called "fighting" a "'male' thing". Certainly females can defend themselves (and as you point out, for some species the female is actually dominant). However, men usually fill the protection role. For almost all species (including ours), reproduction is about more than just doing the horizontal polka. It's also about protecting the offspring, and providing the best context in which they can reproduce when their time comes. The more men that are killed off, the more women will have to learn to fill the role of protector/defender.

It's just nature. Look at the number of species in which the male is just a puny little thing whose only further purpose in life is to be eaten by his mate the very second he passes on his genetic code.


Though there are probably more, I'm only aware of one (a spider). But regardless of how much of this goes on in nature, this doesn't really make a difference when it comes to humans.

Men are the way they are (bigger etc.) because cavewomen needed expendable protectors, workers, etc. and chose the males with the traits that made them better suited for such.


I would agree with that, to some extent. Certainly females will generally choose male mates who are able to protect and help them. This is especially true if people are in constant danger because of things like predators. It is also true that people that were able to protect themselves and be more productive were the more likely to survive and pass on their genes.

That's why men are always sent to do dangerous things like fight wars and drive huge trucks; women are too valuable to waste. Even in 2007 we can't truly recreate what women have been doing since the beginning of recorded history. Only when technology gets to the point that viviparous births are pointless and unnecessary will this ever change. It's not about inherent competency or ability, since realistically that's probably a wash in many areas of interest. It's about biology, and one gender is more expendable than the other.


Aww, we guys aren't too valuable to waste? Darn! You have such a lovely view of people. :wink: Out of curiosity, if we ever get to the point where women do not need to give birth, will women become expendable as well?
User avatar
Paradosis
Laborer
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:58 am
Location: PA

Postby arc » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:06 pm

Well it certainly is more complicated than that and I'm not that blase about it to think one gender is just meant to be thrown away, I'm just saying people behave as they do for a practical reason. It's not politically correct to admit it, but gender does make a difference in determining where the great bulk of males or females wind up in any society.

The main thing I balk at is the idea that since say the military is a mostly male institution or that this that or the other is male dominated, it's because of discrimination against women or some other such nonsense. Sometimes that does figure into it, but most of the time these things develop for reasons deeply ingrained in our psyche.

Societal expectations figure into it as well of course. For example there's no reason a man can't be a competent nurse, but most nurses are women. However there's been a lot written on how the genders being biologically different means their behaviors and inclinations tend to exhibit certain trends.

Anyway from a pure genetics standpoint, more females than males is much easier to deal with than the reverse. Take my 2 to 6 examples. For the sake of my example I'm throwing out the ethics of the situation and the reality that most people don't behave this way and reducing us to the level of monkeys. I'm also ignoring the fact that in the real world, the least attractive people would probably be left out. Remember, the more cross mating, the stronger the gene pool.

It's much easier on six women to have two kids each by two different men than it is for two women to have six children each by six different men. Childbirth is hard and quite dangerous even if it is routine, and even today in western countries where medicine is amazingly advanced, people still die from it. This is not even mentioning that six women having two kids each will make twelve kids who will mature sexually at roughly the same time, whereas with two women having six kids that won't happen.

There's also a school of thought that the most desirable men are the ones historically chosen to reproduce, and the less desirable men were then expendable. Basically, if you weren't good enough to fertilize the uterus, then you were good enough to defend it.

You can observe these trends in our behavior on the large scale (men do most of the physically dangerous work) and on the small scale (put a family of mom dad and 2 kids in a house, when something goes bump in the night, who do we normally expect to go investigate the possible danger?). It's not about competence or talent or one gender being "better" than the other, it's about practicality.
arc
Peasant
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:53 am

IDEA!

Postby mouthofsauron » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:38 pm

:idea: ! For later 08 lego should make a village with peasants attacked by the evil orc/troll dudes and ONE knight to defend it. At least a small farm...... :cry:
Yes, I use to many smilies. Who Cares!
my brickshelf http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=yelraf
User avatar
mouthofsauron
Villein
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:00 am

Re:

Postby Daria » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:23 pm

Daria wrote:I'm all for more females... but right now I'm having fun piecing together my own medieval ladies (and children) but that's fine, I don't need an army of fighting women. They wouldn't be as special if ever other soldier was a girl. I'm content with using a Storm torso and my hidden female in the purple jelly armour. :P

I'm just annoyed that there isn't more decent hair selections. I'm using the short hair as a sort of squire/pageboy look for noblemen so it looks unnatural on my females. And the princess hair, leia buns, mid length, and long braid only come in variations of brown... so all my woman are brunettes. You'd think they'd have made some long haired blondes by now.


Future self is now quoting past self. Three years later I still stand by what I said, however given the "fantasy vein" of the current and past Lego Castle sets it would have been nice to see some females thrown in as a sorceress (offset by the male wizards), or even a dancer (counterpart to the jester).

Another thought would be to include a priestess or cleric in one of the larger sets. Just think, a battle medic would still cater to the “action” marketability of the sets without appearing demeaning towards girls or seem artificially tacked on for the sack of being politically correct. And hell, what child wouldn’t love to play out an epic Lego battle with injuries in dire need of immediate medical attention? Isn’t horrendous car crashes the only fun use of the ambulance in a hot wheels set?
User avatar
Daria
Villein
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:01 pm

Re: LEGOLAND needs women!

Postby Karalora » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:29 am

I've been known to say that I wish there were more female minifigs in Castle sets, especially in "active" roles instead of always being the captured princess. Issues of "period accuracy" are a lot less relevant in a fantasy scenario than a realistic historical one, so I don't see why we can't have one or two female knights. I made some of my own for the Crownies a while back, but it would be nice to see some official endorsement of the idea. And if they couldn't bring themselves to do that, a female spellcaster would surely work. Since the Kingdoms line seems to be positioning the Green Dragons as the bad guys, a Red Lion sorceress to balance the wizard would be awesome. I don't think LEGO has ever produced a good female spellcaster who wasn't a Harry Potter character.

I'm also hoping that the Collectible Minifig series starts a trend of variety in female faces. I was getting so bored of the generic smiley/scared face.
Karalora
Journeyman
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:22 pm
Location: San Fernando Valley, CA

Re: LEGOLAND needs women!

Postby Bruce N H » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:36 pm

Karalora wrote:I don't see why we can't have one or two female knights. I made some of my own for the Crownies a while back, but it would be nice to see some official endorsement of the idea.


There were Princess Storm and the green and white Ninja Princesses, so there is some precedent, but your point is well taken. Female figs don't have to be relegated to the damsel-in-distress or non-action roles.

Bruce
User avatar
Bruce N H
Precentor of the Scriptorium
Precentor of the Scriptorium
 
Posts: 6690
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 9:11 pm
Location: Middle Zealand

Re: LEGOLAND needs women!

Postby Karalora » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:42 am

Warrior princesses are neat. Plain old everyday warrior women fighting alongside the warrior men like it was no big deal, without the story making a point of how exceptional this is? Even better.
Karalora
Journeyman
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:22 pm
Location: San Fernando Valley, CA

PreviousNext

Return to Dear LEGO

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest