I thought this was one of the more sensible comments:
I think the point is; how much of why they want things is because girls are naturally attracted to such things, and how much is a result of conditioned response?
Are girls "girly" because they are naturally so, or are they girly because that's how we, as society, train them to be?
Yes, I thought it was an interesting question. Does having a specific girl version of Lego limit their creativity and thus possibly result in women not pursuing careers in science and engineering? We could really do with more women in science and engineering as they have better people and time management skills which can often help to avoid male egos getting in the way of getting the job done. They seem to play less office politics too.
Seriously? Either you don't work with women or you are trying to impress some girl on here.
The place I work is about 98% male geeks. The few women we have seen to operate better than the men and I've observed a number of them manage difficult male egos so the project is delivered. You don't have to agree with me and I'm sure you've had different experiences. I've also experienced male and female relationships at work have serious negative impacts on an organisation but this thread isn't about this. It's about whether we should have male and female oriented toys and do they influence the way current develop skills and creativity.
Surely lego is genderless. The whole point of it is that it's featureless bricks. The end result comes from the imagination and resourcefulness of the Lego-user.
P.s. I enjoyed using Lego into my late teens ... it transcends age as well as sex.
It was but they've now created pink girly Lego complete with curvy women figures.
p.s. I still have Lego and get more every Chrismas. I've now got the mindstorms programmable stuff.