introduction:

in 1932, master carpenter and joiner ole kirk kristiansen began crafting wooden toys [1]. throughout the 1930s and into the 1950s, ole kirk took several initiatives to establish lego's reputation and identity. this included the company's first order of a plastic injection moulding machine from great britain, its early use of plastic bricks, an innovative design that allowed for seamless interlocking between sets, and a deep commitment to supporting children's growth and development [1]. eventually, ole kirk's son, godtfred kirk, took over the company's management, continuing the family's ownership and upholding the values that had been passed down through generations [1].

production:

starting as tiny plastic granules, lego bricks are created through a process called injection moulding, where these plastic granules are heated up to about 450 degrees fahrenheit, and then fed into metal molds shaped like lego bricks [2]. the shaping of lego pieces is unique, in that, pieces can range from size, shape, and functionality, but they are designed to be compatible with all other lego pieces. this is due to the "studs" on top of the bricks, which are circular plastic pieces that connect to the bottoms of other legos. this makes these pieces universal by nature, so they can be attached to any other piece in any way imaginable, because all lego bricks share the same core binding structure. this universality with lego's design is what makes lego special; it's design opens the door to creativity, rather than limiting it.

lego also has grown its production outside of just toy manufacturing in recent years. overtime, the lego company has grown into a worldwide corporate conglomerate, and to extend its reach, the lego company also moved not just to a toy manufacturer, but a media entertainment company. along with the lego sets and pieces, lego also produces lego tv shows, movies, and theme parks. in 2011, lego ninjago burst into the scene both as a lego set and the television series. lego introduced ninjago as a "big bang" product line, which is a product that has a shelf life of no more than 3 years. while that timeline was revisited and extended due to popular demand, during this time, lego was producing video games, lifestyle products, and tv episodes at an exponential rate [3]. lego ninjago is just one of the many examples of how lego transformed from a toy manufacturer to conglomerate of many different forms of entertainment. soon lego would produce major successes like the lego movie, the lego batman movie, and lego star wars the video game: the complete saga.

representation:

lego, in its early years, was a gender-neutral toy. from the start, lego sets never explicitly used advertising codes for girls and boys separately. however, their market was hugely boys. as seen in this report by the los angeles times, "...in 2011, lego's market research boys found that 90% of lego users were boys." [4] this is a clear gender gap that existed in lego's customer base even before they started gendered marketing. while finding answers is important, in this step right now, asking the right questions is also very crucial. this raises an important question, that is, did lego create gendered sets to respond to the existing disparity in their customers, or was it a contribution to reinforce those disparities? could it be that they launched girls-only sets to increase the overall involvement of girls ratios in their customers?

a huge part of this gender gap to exist in the first place could also be that lego's are inherently building blocks, which seems to be a traditionally "masculine" thing, echoed by the world around us. that could've also possibly led to the gender gap in the first place. parents would've thought the same way they have been all these years and assume that their daughters wouldn't like legos because "building" is a "masculine" thing to them. this reflects on what the author of dcs describes as "cultural codes". shared assumptions like these are built into how a product is accepted and understood even before any of the deliberate marketing placed around it by the company that produces them.

once lego decided to tell stories that were gender-specific, the toys became more than just creative, open building toys. with a shift in packaging, character representation, advertisements, segregation in aisles, one by one, almost everything started to change to fit two gendered lines. girls's sets were heavily coded in pastel-colored spaces, with a heavy focus on hanging out, baking, going to the mall, getting your hair styled, etc. boys' sets were heavily coded in stark, contrasting colors, set in spaces like the jungle or a warzone, where they fought battles, attacked enemies, defended bases, secured places, etc. these representations, however, weren't new. they echoed the same old gender stereotypes in the world. in this sense, lego didn't create the divide, but they definitely amplified it, filling all their toy sets with gendered stereotypes. this aligns with the argument in dcs that representation isn't just what is shown, but how the meaning of the product itself is constructed through other signs like colour, language, stories, and how these stories help shape how we think about who these products are for. lego's gendered sets, literally reshaped their entire identity and also hugely impacted the identity of their entire customer base, which includes both kids and parents.

consumption:

it's inspiring to think that some people took kirk's original vision for lego and expanded on it in ways the company never intended or marketed. fans of legos have created stop motion films using minifigures to showcase skills that transcend the typical roleplay and brick building aspect of the toy. to achieve this effect, lego pieces must be arranged incrementally, frame by frame, with a photo taken after each adjustment to create the illusion of motion in a film. an example of this is the youtuber "michaelhickoxfilms," who has been creating lego stop-motion films for over 15 years. hickox writes on his channel description that he tries to make his videos "universal" and "with a wide range of cultures and ages in mind" [5]. these films allow people like hickox to create their own stories, and depending on the creator, these stories can appeal for all ages.

another example of fans consuming lego products in a different way is 3d video animations. preston mutanga re-created the trailer for "spider-man: across the spider-verse" in the style of legos back in 2023 [6]. mutanga was 14 years olds at the time when he developed his lego fan animation using a 3d software called "blender." his animation brought the attention of the producers for the upcoming film, in which the young teen was offered a job to contribute to creating a scene in the actual movie [6]. it is important to emphasize that mutanga did not use physical legos to create his animations. this is similar to stop motion films, but mutanga used a software that used 3d assets that had the appearance of a lego minifigure. by creating media using lego, he did not just consume them, but effectively re-presented how legos can be used in numerous ways that the company never intended.

identity:

children who watch these gendered advertisements, and play with toys that are gendered, will definitely have their identities messed up. when a kid repeatedly gets told that pastel colors and domestic activities are for girls, and contrasty colors and action sets are for boys, they start to internalize these values. these gendered representations of legos toys shape more than just preference among kids, they shape self-understanding. 71% of boys surveyed feared they would be made fun of if they played with what they described as "girls' toys". [7] this literally showcases how representation hugely shapes identity. lego sets which are supposedly for creative freedom, and open building end up creating these values in kids' heads from a very young age.

this is what dcs describes as "identity as constructed through consumption". [8] kids decode these messages from lego's messaging and form these ideas and boundaries that only a specific set of toys are for them, and the other ones should never be touched by them. it doesn't just affect the kids though. madeline di nonno, the chief executive of the geena davis institute on gender in media, said in this article in the guardian, "parents are more worried that their songs will be teased than their daughters for playing with toys associated with the other gender". [7] as parents, by accepting the messaging of these companies, they were indirectly reinforcing the idea that kids should in fact be worried about playing with toys for the other gender.

while lego alone wasn't responsible for the gender divide in toys, it definitely played a major role. they didn't just conform to the market trend which was immoral, but actively re-presented it, and reinforced the ideologies without even pushing back. they made the decision to divide their sets, regardless of it being because of external pressure from the market, or an internal decision.

regulation:

there are several instances that showcase when people have regulated what is deemed "right or wrong" within the lego community. it became apparent to the lego community that there was some kind of gender division going on with the introduction of the "lego friends" product. people pushed back by creating a petition against this new set, asking the company to market the product equally for boys and girls. the petition amassed 62,000 signatures. it was obvious that this could not be ignored, so the lego company responded in a progress report done at the end of 2012 to address the problems that people vocalized [9]. one of the problems the lego company addressed was the idea that the lego friends set did not contain the same number of bricks and building complexity as any other kind of mainline lego set [9]. the company made sure to clear up this misunderstanding, citing that they are actively engaging in conversations both with activists and parents to grasp a better understanding on how to develop their products and market in a way that will bring greater creative construction play to girls in the future [9].

the problem of gender division in lego sets brought the attention of charlotte, a 7 year old girl who wrote a letter to lego. [10] charlotte expressed her frustration upon noticing the stark contrast between the adventurous, creative nature of the lego sets marketed to boys and those targeted at girls. she pointed out that the girl-oriented sets often focused on domestic activities like "sitting at home," "going to bed," and "shopping," which stood in sharp contrast to the more action-driven themes of the boy sets. this form of regulation spoke out on an injustice a young consumer faced, which prompted them to write a letter in order to see a change from the lego company to better fit people like them.

while it is obvious that the lego company heavily markets their toys towards kids, they have also recognized a different demographic of enjoyers that still share the same compassion for legos that they never outgrew. thousands of adults are still interested in legos, especially bigger and complex builds [11]. since then, the company started making "adult-oriented sets" that depict "architectural landmarks, vehicles, and television shows." the community even began calling adults "afol", which stands for "adult fans of lego" [12]. this form of regulation focuses more on a community that was overlooked, but now has steadily grown enough to put themselves out there for the world to see.

after receiving widespread criticism on various aspects of their products, lego shifted course. their recent campaigns aim to reshape the brand around gender-neutral and inclusive storytelling. today, lego sets feature a wider range of representation, including versions for both adults and children, updates to existing sets for greater gender neutrality, and entirely new sets designed with inclusivity in mind. this evolution reflects a cultural pushback that demonstrates how regulation and public pressure can influence and reshape even the most iconic brands.

conclusion:

barbie and lego, both were playing their own parts in the gendered representation of toys, but they did so under different cultural contexts. barbie never claimed to be a toy for everyone. from the start, they were always positioned as a toy for girls. of course there's criticism around it, but they were at least honest about their goals. lego, on the other hand, built its entire reputation on being a universal toy, a toy that your kid wouldn't get bored of, a toy that had unlimited potential. so when lego shifted into gendered storytelling of their toys, it wasn't just a marketing technique, it was a pivot from their core identity, kind of a betrayal to their past selves. this betrayal is why lego faced immense public backlash, petitions and criticism. it reveals how all 5 parts of the circuit of culture (production, representation, consumption, identity, and regulation) are inter-connected. lego produced toys that were shaped by existing cultural values, represented them through gendered stereotypes, saw how consumers interacted with their products alongside those representations, and had their identity sort of reshaped by public and self regulation. it shows that culture isn't static, and that it's performative.

credits: this was a paper written by vishruth siddi, chris ramirez, evan buschman for msch-c249 instructed by professor richard jermain.

lego: beyond bricks