Goldie Blox...women in science, etc.

I wish my 4 girls were little again so I could give them some primary colored legos and say, "good luck with these, they're boy colors, they might be hard for you to snap together".   

Alas, of the 4,  one would have tried to eat them, one would have beat her brother with them, one would have fed them to the dog, and the other would try to collect them all from the other three figuring that was the object.

Not an engineer in the bunch. 

Got a 7 year old daughter here.  Trust me they get them to play with the "girlie" lego kits, then the just want more and more and no longer care about the friends line of legos.  My daughter actually used the Chrome builder for lego app this weekend to build a house, then Sat. we had to go to the lego store so she could buy the parts to build her design.  

So proud.

i used to be offended by goldie blox, but then i read more about debbie sterling (honorary phi rho) and the story behind how goldie blox came to be.  they DON'T have crowns and princesses and pink and purple - the company logo is YELLOW.  the company's focus is "disturbing the pink aisle."  we had normal legos growing up too - but walk through a toy department the way they are segregated and find legos.  they are firmly in the "boy" aisle.

as for the VW engineers - i work in automotive too - just because not many women is the status quo, it does not mean that it is OK or good.  it was a simple opportunity for VW to give a woman wings - to show that women are engineers too.  (the only woman in the ad is a girl in an elevator that gets goosed when the engineer with her gets his wings).  

the problem overall is that there aren't many messages that girls should be engineers (or doctors or scientists or whatevers) so any opportunity to remind girls that it's an option is a good one.  there are tons of studies about when exactly girls begin to become disinterested in math/science, even though generally they are BETTER at it than boys - don't you think the world is missing out on a ton of potential there?

There are TONS of women cops, firemen, doctors, angels and teachers on Halloween...  You mean those are not their work clothes?

Possibly....so what's stopping them?  (Not meant to be sarcastic at all)

I guess the VW commercial could offend some...then again, someone could find something offensive about everything. I still think the commercial is funny!

I guess Goldie Blox may encourage girls to want these toys?!? But I'm reading that it's just good parenting or a good, encouraging teacher that allow us to understand we can do what we are good at. Whether it's encouraging you to enter into a field of science or, as Left Brain illustrated, knowing that your children don't need Legos. :-)

To each his OR her own!

I work in Life Sciences, and there is pretty much an equal ratio of women to men in both industry and academia. Chemistry is a little male-biased. I do know quite a few women chemists, but they are in academia.

I see a problem in Engineering. My son is a senior and spent 4 years in a magnet program for Engineering at his HS. 22 kids in his class, all male. There are a maximum of 3 girls in each of the freshman-junior classes.

Besides the message it's sending about women, it's made social interactions like dating and prom difficult.

isn't the point of all commercials to encourage a consumer to want what you are selling?

Um yeah, missing the whole point of Goldie Blox here, which is exactly that they are in fact NOT pink legos, but rather a complex toy that teaches your daughter to build in a fun way that appeals to girls. The product was developed as a reaction to the appearance of pink legos - the developer thought that was dumb. They are not legos - they're really cool, and one of the best things I've bought for my daughter. 

I've got a chemical engineering degree and yes, engineering is very male-dominated. That's okay, but I think it's okay to encourage girls in math and science. I have a daughter and a son and I will say that despite all of my preconceptions prior to having children, they ARE different. They learn differently, they are attracted to different types of toys and activities. Why is it wrong to develop a product that appeals to a girl's different learning style?

My daughter is a girly-girl and loves pink. As much as I hate to admit it, she really would rather play with something pink than something red and blue. I know that seems really dumb to a bunch of logical adults, but it is what it is. Why should that mean she can't like math and science and building things too? As she started to get older, I started to get frustrated by how all the boy toys DO COOL THINGS, and all the girls toys do nothing. And she doesn't like that either, but she's a girly-girl so she doesn't want to play with a freaking truck (or a Star Wars lego set, because yeah, they're not really "primary colored blocks" nowadays) - she just doesn't. So what's wrong with someone designing an awesome toy, for girls, that does cool stuff? 

There's this underlying attitude in this thread that a girl ought to be a tomboy to end up a scientist or engineer, and I'm sorry, but that's BS. Yes, a lot of my friends in engineering school were tomboys who played with trucks when they were kids, but a lot of us were girly girls too. I like makeup and yoga and dressing up (and I wear pink when I mountain bike!), and I was really good at engineering when it was my job (I'm an artist now, but I worked as an engineer for 7 years). You don't have to be one or the other, and I applaud the creator of this toy for acknowledging that.

Like what kind of cool stuff?  Most of the "cool stuff" that boy toys do revolve around shooting, exploding, etc.........or as in your example, something along the same lines, like a rocket, or spaceship....and what's male dominant about star wars?  It was a movie, and rocket ships aren't pink.  I'm not trying to give you a hard time and, like I've said, I have 4 daughters (two grown and very succesful), and one son.  If someone can come up with a girl toy that turns into a horse and runs around the room I've got one who will think that's cool, but what else?

Look, awesome toys are for boys.....deal with it.

With all due respect, I beg to differ - I DO think you're trying to give me a hard time.

My daughter is two years ahead of grade in math, and currently thinks science is awesome - it's really important to me that she grows up thinking she can be what she wants to be, and so I think about ways to encourage her in these areas every day. It's a big deal to me. I think about it a lot.

Most of the "cool stuff" that boy toys do revolves around mechanical motion of some sort - action and reaction. Yes, shooting and exploding, but a whole lot of other actions as well. Building, moving, cause and effect - these are the foundation of engineering. A Barbie just looks pretty. American Girl dolls just look pretty. Most girl toys are made for imaginary play, they don't have a mechanical component. They don't teach problem solving.

When you say "And what's male dominant about Star Wars?" that's EXACTLY what I take issue with. There are a lot of adults out there that want to say there's nothing inherently masculine about primary colors or Star Wars or Legos, and why can't girls just play with those things? And that makes sense to an adult, I get it. But it doesn't always work with a kid. When you get a girl like my daughter who happens to be awesome at math and science but has an affinity for pink, you start to wish there were some more mechanically-oriented toys out there that would appeal to her. The product that this thread is about does exactly that, and it's awesome.

Look, I personally think Star Wars rocks. I've seen all the movies, and I dig it. My 7 year old daughter does not. I don't know why, and I'm not going to spend a lot of time worrying about it. I think it's probably a lot easier to design and sell a cool engineering toy that appeals to girls (GoldieBlox) than it will be to completely overhaul society such that our daughters don't come home from Kindergarten thinking pink and Barbies are cool.

We don't get offended when Mattel designs toys that explode and shoot things to appeal to boys. Why should we be offended when an intelligent woman designs a toy that appeals to girls?

I love these conversations :)

My kids (girls 8 And 7 and boy who is 3) got a Glodie Bloxs set last year from their Aunt who had read about the idea and thought it sounded cool (same Aunt has bought them an embarrassing amount of AG dolls and stuff).  Goldi Blox are "ok".  I actually like the premise quite a bit, and it does help kids experiment with some fundamentals of mechanics--if I remember correctly, gears, pullys, friction.  Unfortunately, it is still plastic crap that has a dedicated use, and once you've figured out the few permutations of the gear design it loses its appeal and takes its place in the back of the closet.

In our house, the most popular "toys" are those that don't have a dedicated purpose and have a lot of flexability.  If you have imaginative kids and let them play, they figure out a lot of stuff on their own.  A cardboard box is always popular and there's a reason it has a spot in the Toy Hall of Fame.  Scraps of wood, a hammer and nails go a looooong way in teaching engineering and building; trial and error building a treehouse is an authentic lesson with real-life consequences.   Cooking utensils and a cooking bench that's their height (one of the best things we did in our kitchen) has served as a great place to get cooking skills which some might think is "girly" but I would say that preparing and eating good food is a gender nuetral skill and cooking teaches a lot of math and science.  A sewing kit and eventually a machine--traditionally very "girly" things--can teach a helluva lot of math and science too.  Those American Girl dolls have lots of different outfits that the girls have actually sewn for them--measurement, spatial ability, tensile strength, and promlem solving.  It's all there :)

My 13 year old twin girls rock at math....both score in the 99% percentile on anything math related.  One wants to be a Veterinarian, the other wants to be a Nutritionist like her big sister.  I have to say that I don't believe the toys they played with as kids had ONE BIT to do with their affinity for math or their career desires.  Their other sister is a pharmaceutical rep.....she hated toys unless there was a ball involved.  Three of them are girly girls, the horse kid is mean as a snake and even boys are afraid of her. 

Kids will be what they will be.....and one day you'll give all the toys to Good Will and wonder why they don't play with them anymore.  You had it right in your first post......boys and girls learn differently, and I'll tell you something else, they grow differently, think differently, and want different things as well.  There is NOTHING that stops a girl from being whatever she wants to be....there are less girls in the math/science fields because there are fewer girls, proportionally to boys, who are interested in those fields....it's nature, not toys.

That's really awesome of you to think as a man, but I call BS. You can stick your head in the sand and act like women have always had the same opportunities as men in these fields, but until you go work in a chemical plant or on a drilling rig, I don't think you really know what it's like out there.

If she doesn't know it's an option, how does she know if she's interested? When I went to engineering school my graduating class was 21% female - it was record-breaking at the time. The same school now boasts 29% females in the student body, 14 years later. 40 years ago, 0% female. This is because as more women enter technical fields, more girls see engineering as an option where they might not have been aware of it before. My daughter knows engineering is a valid career choice (as is teacher, or veterinarian, or artist) because she KNOWS women who are engineers. 40 years ago, unheard of. 20 years ago, a possibility, but still mostly unheard of. You make it sound like women are genetically predisposed to not be interested in engineering - if that were the case, you wouldn't see the numbers of female engineers continually increasing. Opportunity is there that hasn't always been. 

Why does it get everyone's panties in a bunch that there's a freaking TOY on the market to encourage young girls in engineering? Does this even affect your life at all Left Brain? Seriously? That's what this thread is about - whether or not we should be offended by the existence of this toy. My answer is NO. Whatever we can do to encourage young girls, let's allow it. Especially when it's not hurting anyone else, or asking anything of you at all. I realize that this is not going to be the end-all be-all of what my kid chooses to be as an adult, but come on - I'd like to at least give her something constructive to do on Christmas morning, rather than brushing her Barbie's hair.

I don't recall saying it was guys? Did I make that point and miss it? Does it even matter? Let's recap. Woman starts thread being offended about toy. Men chime in about how kids can play with whatever toys they want. I defend said toy and it's purpose. Man on this particular thread wants to argue about it. I defend my point to HIM, not to the random women on the internet who also have issue with said toy.

I don't care whether it's women or men who have their panties in a bunch. My point is that there's a place for it and we need not be offended.

Uh....I have yet to be offended.....I don't even know what the toy looks like, and didn't see the commercial.  It's a toy.....in the end it will mean nothing to anyone's development.  

 I'm not arguing either.....but I can.

I'm guessing someone blew your barbie house up with a rocket when you were young......and you had to rebuild with legos.

Can you explain the bolded part?  You really feel like you are in a battle to get your daughter the same educational/athletic opportunities as your son?  I'm asking because we have never felt that way in dealing with our 5 children.