Yes, I Saw the GoldieBlox Video
This may be one of the most unpopular posts I write, but I’m going to say it anyway because… well… this is how I feel on the topic.
A lot of people sent me this Beastie Boys-inspired, GoldieBlox YouTube video yesterday, and it’s super cute. Three girls, bored by the pink-drenched toys they’ve been sold by the toy industry, set up an epic Rube Goldberg machine through their house that shoots them outside and toward a toy they really want: GoldieBlox.
I have every reason to be interested in GoldieBlox. It’s a toy created by a smart woman whose sole aim (beyond selling toys) is to introduce girls to STEM early in life based on realizing her own limitations in adulthood due to the toys she was given as a child. Rather than using those formative years playing out narratives while they wait for their prince to come, she wants girls understanding concepts in engineering because it will build life skills that will carry them well into adulthood. Sounds good.
I’m not getting my daughter GoldieBlox.
I’m not saying that if someone else gets my daughter GoldieBlox that we’ll return them or throw a fit, but I’m not going to spend my money on more toys that are gender-labeled. If the ChickieNob wants an engineering toy, she can play with the Quadrilla marble run we already own. She can engineer a marble monstrosity that will shoot marbles around the room that we won’t find for years to come. Or play with our Lego Mechanics set. It’s a non-motorized, non-programmable version of Lego WeDo. One box, dozens of projects with gears and pulleys and levers.
What I can’t do — and perhaps this is more a reality when you have boy-girl twins with similar interests, a small toy budget, and limited space — is buy gender-specific toys simply because a marketing team told my kids that something is for their sex. I feel that way about all toy companies, not GoldieBlox specifically. But I don’t want the ChickieNob (or myself) to get sucked into clever marketing. I don’t want her to have a knee-jerk, girl power reaction. I don’t want her to buy something just because the company is telling her that girls can do anything! They can, by the way. But the point is that it’s too easy to get sucked into the message and miss whether or not it’s actually a good toy. I have no clue if it’s a good toy, and I suspect that a lot of people who were drawn into the video also have no clue if it’s a good toy insofar as quality and value. But until I know that, I really don’t want to buy my kid something just because they have made a catchy, viral YouTube video.
Of course I want to punch the air and say, “hells yeah!” to those cool kids in the video, but I don’t believe for a second they actually set up that course on their own. I think it illustrates the point: that this is still a bunch of adults telling kids what they should like. Sure, it’s educational and reinforces ideas I’d like my daughter to hear (that it’s not only a good idea for her to strongly consider the STEM fields, but that STEM can be fun). But it’s still a product. They’re still being sold something. They’re still telling my kid what to think. What she should like. What she shouldn’t like. How she should spend her time.
They spend two straight minutes crapping on girls who like princesses and pink in order to make their point. There are girls out there who like princesses and pink. And that’s okay. It’s also okay if a girl completely rejects that toy narrative and writes her own story. And it’s also okay if she wants to be a princess scientist. If she wants to mix all of her interests into one non-gender-specific salad.
I want the ChickieNob to choose her own interests, and I want the rest of the world to respect her interests, whatever they may be. She will always be swayed by marketing — we all are. But just as my first instinct was “ooooh, me want” (I can’t even use correct grammar when I covet) when I saw the GoldieBlox video, I’m glad I have a second instinct that kicks in and says, “hey, we have toys that not only accomplish the same thing, but both my kids are welcome to play them.”
Because sometimes my daughter plays with other girls. And sometimes my daughter plays with boys. And I just want her to feel as if all the toys can be dumped in front of all people with the message “let’s play!”
I’m glad Debbie Sterling made her toy and got it out there on the market. I wish her a lot of luck in getting this toy into the right hands. Based on the reaction on Facebook, it seems very popular. I would encourage those excited parents to really look at the quality of the toy: how many hours of play will your child get from this set? Is there another toy on the market that accomplishes the same thing that costs less or contains more value per dollar? As I said, I know nothing about this product except what I saw in the YouTube video and her original TED talk. (Remember, I’m on a tight toy budget. Our motto is repurpose, repurpose, repurpose. Or, “everything old is new again!” Or, “you’re not getting another toy. Play with what you own.”)
Sterling’s heart is in the right place. I’m just a cranky woman who is tired of people marketing to my daughter. The ChickieNob is asked by toy manufacturers to navigate a gender minefield, to make enormous statements with her toy choice, and to align herself with either the Princess-embracers or the Princess-rejectors. And she’s a little too complicated for that. She contains interest multitudes.
Plus that is too much pressure to put on a damn kid.
Please don’t miss my point: I want girls to use engineering toys. If GoldieBlox is what makes that happen, then I’ll be stepping up and cheering on GoldieBlox. But until I know more about this product, I can only comment on the presentation. And that YouTube video was a piece of really slick marketing. I almost forgot I was being sold something as I watched the obstacle course unfold.
36 comments
I love that you posted this. Because, you know what—I have had a bad taste in my mouth with the anti-pink/princess of the ad myself. Which is interesting, because of two reasons:
1. My daughter is WAY into pink/princess stuff and I HATE it…because I was a tomboy and I would so prefer her to be more like a tomboy. But. She is not. And I have learned that I need to embrace her for what she is. And when I can, to steer her towards choices that show self-worth and empowerment–while still being utterly glittery and pink and frilly.
2. I bought her a Goldie-blox. Mainly because I knew it would appeal to her and I hoped that perhaps she would also learn a bit of engineering. So far, while I am impressed with the toy and the thought process of it–she has not been. I have been thinking that I will take it out again and try again with her–but the last time I did, she was a bit frustrated with it.
I do not agree with gender marketing at all, believe me, my daughter has dinosaurs and cars a plenty (as my son got an easy bake oven because he asked for it one year). BUT, sometimes you have to let the child be whoever she or he wants to be–even if that is pink. 😉
I thought about buying the kit, but it’s not really something my girl isn’t already getting from her Lego Friends. She makes up their stories. She makes Lego hotels for her Squinkies from the Legos my husband played with when he was a kid. And then she puts all her stuffed animals in a row because it’s time for class. While another building toy with a book might be fun, and the video is awesome, it doesn’t seem like it would be a long term interest. Instead, I went out and got a stupid rubber band loom (because I’m a sucker) and a chemistry set that is gender unspecified
I agree. I can’t count the number of times someone has expressed doubt that T will have anything to do at P’s playdate “because we only have boy toys”. Or someone has said they never got into train tracks “because they have a girl”. As someone who remembers how bitterly disappointing it is to get barbies when all you wanted was a truck, WTF.
But actually that wasn’t so much your point. Your point was that girls are being sold “engineering for girls” which may or may not be “engineering” – which is what it should be.
As someone who once staged a semester-long protest against “science glass for girls” in HIGH SCHOOL because it turned out NOT TO BE THE SAME AS “SCIENCE CLASS” I can totally get behind that message.
They never ran gendered science streams at our school again, by the way.
I don’t know if you’re catching any of my childhood school issues in these last few posts, by the way 😉
Yes. I think you pretty much nailed why I’ve felt like I wanted to love this idea and product but was feeling uncomfortable about it. I’m all for the idea of educational toys, puzzle toys, getting girls (and boys!) interested in science. But we generally do not buy gender-specific anything for our two girls. (It’s hard when you have only one gender kids, btw – people really tend to just buy “girl” stuff or “boy” stuff, though our families know our stance!) I can appreciate the effort of the toy maker, but gendered toys make me so frustrated…
Yes! YES YES YES. I completely agree with you, and I felt exactly the same way about Goldieblox. No one seems to get it. When I was trying to shield my daughter from society forcing its ideals on her, just to try to let her be herself, everyone thought my goal was just to keep her from liking pink and princesses. And now that she likes pink and princesses, everyone is like “Ha! You didn’t want her to be a girly-girl, and now she is, so nice try, hahaha.” But that wasn’t what I wanted at all. I just wanted her to decide for herself what color she likes. If it’s pink, that’s fine, it just should be HER choice, not someone else’s. Why is that so hard? I explain it over and over, and people seem to get it, but then they don’t. I’m tired of fighting this battle (and she’s only 3). And now she and her twin brother are coming home from preschool telling each other (and me) what boys and girls can or can’t do based on their sex. Sometimes I feel incredibly overwhelmed and sad.
On the other hand, my 5yo son just put this on his Christmas list.
Amen sister!!! I have boy/boy twins, but I also have a younger sister tag along that wants to do it ALL. She wants to be a batman scientist princess that rides pink ponies into the sunset. She wants to inherit every toy the boys get tired of. And on the flip side, I have two boys that want to bake and cook and watch princess movies and enjoy snuggling and going to crazy tea parties. It is all one big toy gender salad over here, and it is ALL good 🙂
YES! I get offended by these things every day. I have a son, who plays rock star and legos and loves to craft and whatever new thing he thinks up every day. Why do Goldieblox have to be just for girls? Whatever. I can’t even bring myself to watch the video.
Love this. I personally am not a fan of the princess stuff and we don’t get it for my daughter. But she is 2 and interested in drawing and baking and Elmo. If she wakes up tomorrow and loves princesses – because she understands what they are or has a book about them or whatever – I’m going to suck it up and let her play with that stuff. Because ultimately, I am her role model. And I take care of myself. Yes, I’m married to her dad, but I went to college and have a master’s degree and owned a home on my own and had a great job all on my own. So I think we need to worry less about gender-specific toys and more about the real-life role models in our daughters’ (and sons’) lives.
The video made me cheer, too. It does an awesome job of pointing out the problem: “You like to buy us pink toys; everything else is for boys.” (The problem is not that some girls like “pink and pretty,” but that their options are often limited to this one.)
Like you, though, I’m not convinced that more gender-specific toy marketing—however well-intentioned—is the answer. Here’s how my Toy Utopia would look:
http://www.lettoysbetoys.org.uk/why-it-matters/
I have two girls. When my oldest started to learn about the princesses I internally groaned a bit. Then, one day, when she was around 3 I saw princess legs sticking out from under the little people school bus with little people all standing around outside the bus. When I asked what was going on my smart little toddler said: Cinderella is fixing the bus, these guys are waiting. From there on out I realized that she’s going to make those princesses do what she sees fit, not what a book or movies tell her they SHOULD do.
To this day both of my girls love princesses and barbies. These toys also get kick ass jobs as snake wranglers and parachuters.
As another commenter said above, as parents we are the biggest role models in their lives. I don’t wrangle snakes or parachute but I have never said that I couldn’t.
I’m always surprised when I go hang out with friends who have kids how much gender-specific stuff there is when it comes to toys today. I’m probably showing my age here, but I had unpainted wooden blocks, Duplos in primary colors, and really, a lot of stuff that wasn’t particularly gender-specific. I was looking for a present for a kid recently, though, and was shocked at how hard it was to actually find a toy that wasn’t billed for a particular gender (I suppose that’s why I almost always wind up buying books for gifts!).
Personally, I always wanted to be a princess, wear amazing dresses – and then go play on the jungle gym (I insisted on wearing dresses daily, but also had to wear shorts under them so that I could go turn cartwheels). So I think you’re right that it’s much more complex than just saying girls should/shouldn’t be into princesses.
I think the biggest issue I have with the whole industrial-princess-complex is that at times it pushes a certain message of passivity/damsel-in-distress towards women. I also don’t like the message it can give that women have to be physically beautiful/dressed to the nines to be loved. That being said, I completely agree with the comments that talked about role models being the most important and that kids often make up their own narratives for these princesses.
As a father of a seven year old girl who like pink, princesses, science, reading, business and technology…. I just had to say that you nailed how my wife and I felt after learning about these toys and watching the video.
I actually really like it, with one exception… it still seems to be pastel? I get that it’s clever marketing, designed to make the moms cheer “hell yeah!” (which worked). My kid is too young for me to really know her preferences other than she prefers climbing to dolls, but I like the idea because it gives girls more options. The fact of the matter is that gendered marketing is everywhere and the stuff that really could and should be gender-neutral just isn’t presented that way. This gives girls an option if they’re sensitive to that – here’s a toy for them that they’ll find in the girl aisle. If they don’t care, then they have more options. To me, it’s kind of like having a women’s group in the workplace. We want to promote women and make sure they’re treated fairly and equally by having a separate group for them? Seems counter-intuitive, yet the women’s topics and speakers relate to me and make me cheer “hell yeah!” so I just embrace the conundrum 🙂
I agree w/ you 100%. Why can’t toys just be toys? It’s the same frustration I experience buying clothes for my son. No, I don’t want camouflage or sports-themed clothing. Why can’t I find an article of clothing w/ a cat on it for my boy? Why do girls get kitties and boys get dogs or monkeys?
I played w/ Barbies AND regular Legos as a child. I received a Voltron action figure and a baby doll for the same Christmas. It seems so much more difficult just to buy regular toys for children now. I try to let Daniel’s interests guide us rather than looking for boy toys vs girl toys.
I pretty much agree with but one argument in favor of it:
I can’t control what presents my kids get from their grandparents…. And so if grandma and grandpa will only look at something if it is the correct gender ( pink= girl and blue =boys) then I am happy to have some toys that are labelled as “baking for boys” or “stem for girls”. For a lot of people that is a huge step and has to sold in a really over the top fashion. And frankly there just isn’t enough science propaganda out there for career paths other than biology- I speak as a chem prof who almost always has primarily male students, bio is flooded with women.
All marketing is propaganda… But the audience may not be you.
Just watched the video. Don’t think I agree with the criticisms– they’re not saying you can’t be a princess or like pink, just that they shouldn’t be stereotyped as only princesses and pink. They say they don’t want all the same toys, with everything else for boys.
No, probably won’t get the product. It is unlikely the in-laws will purchase it for DC2 and she’s got plenty of (boy) DC1’s super cool hand-me-down toys to play with. Agree with Tara in that respect– it’s the grandparents doing the bulk of the toy-buying at our place too. And boy, there’s such a sameness to gifts at girl’s birthday parties compared to boys. DC1 has gotten some pretty cool gifts, but at his female classmates’ parties it’s almost 100% dolls (humans and ponies only, that don’t do anything but get dressed and undressed) and princess clothing. Our non-barbie/pony gift that we let DC1 pick out always looks a bit out of place.
This video really rubs me the wrong way. And I am a female engineer by the way, but not because someone told me I should be interested in engineering, but because I sought it out (and my parents provided lots of options for me). Part of my problem with the video is that they never actually show the toy. I don’t know what it is other than a glimpse at the end (and by the way it looks to be pink and aqua – so much for their pink stance). The other problem is that I have a daughter who loves pink. Anything pink and princess, she has since she was old enough to crawl toward a toy and pick it up. I provided lots of trucks, and trains, and balls. She only ever played with dolls and dress-up, and art supplies. Does that mean that she is somehow inferior becuase she likes traditional “girl” things? She is bright and loves Math and I hope will be interested in Science too, but in learning to love the person that my daughter has become, I have learned that I cannot force any of my preconceived notions on her. I have to let her be who she is, and support that. I have also learned to embrace my pink side in the process. Pink isn’t that bad. =) On a side note, my younger daughter is 2 and now showing a bunch of interest in those forgotten trucks and trains, so yay!
My students brought it up in class today. They didn’t think it was anti pink so much as pro variety, so I’m not alone. Several had a problem with using the sexist beastie boys song as a base. The one that says girls should do the dishes.
One of M”s fellow GeekDad writers here. After participating in an interesting back-and-forth email last night with the group, I had to check out M’s writeup… and I’m glad I did.
First, I should state I have no real solid opinion on the product one way or the other. I have two boys, so this toy’s marketing is definitely not pointed in my direction.
I think my biggest gripe with the video is exactly what M states — nothing is really said about the actual product. Entertaining video, nice twist on the original (offensive) lyrics, and an amazing contraption. But what does this thing do???
Pink, blue, purple or black… if the product doesn’t deliver something substantial to back up what the video promises they’ve got some trouble.
New wave feminists (and a lot of women in general) clamour for more entertainment, toys, games, movies, books, etc. with strong female characters who aren’t the same old cliche, sexist garbage. = Huge amount of support (and some criticisms from insecure basement dwellers.)
Female entrepreneur creates a toy that is aimed at girls, and more specifically, giving them options that aren’t horrifically deformed Bratz dolls. Doesn’t demand major toy manufacturers produce a toy-line for her, she goes out and does it herself. = Unanimous disgust and disapproval of the woman responsible, the toy, the advertising, and any sort of message behind the toy.
Great job, girls, keep up the awesome work.
I haven’t seen the video, although I’m on the Goldieblox mailing list and they emailed me the link. I actually pre-ordered the original toy while it was in production, and was one of the first people to get one. I just bought the second one for Miss M for Christmas.
I, too, loathe the gender-based toy aisles. But I didn’t buy it because of girl power or the slick marketing behind the product. I bought it because I had a 3 year old who liked to tinker beyond the toys marketed to her age group, and I thought she’d like it. And she does, a lot. She’ll build with it for quite a long time, although there aren’t enough pieces in a single kit to do anything really complex. I’m going to get the expansion kit this Christmas, too. But I would have bought the toy regardless of colors or marketing. I love that the kits come with books that tell stories and teach to build machines at the same time. It’s a brilliant idea for any child. And, there’s plenty of fun to be had apart from the script.
That said, I also like supporting a woman-run business aimed at involving more women in STEM. That’s a worthy goal.
I grew up bein a major tomboy climbing trees, playing in dirt, skateboarding with the boys, etc. but I also really liked dressing up and having tea parties. I don’t understand all the anti pink and princess stuff out there. I want my daughter to enjoy being girly just as much as I really really hope she loves playing in the dirt and playing sports. I saw this viedeo earlier and I wasn’t super impressed or compelled to buy the product. I promote the idea and do think girls should be involved in math and science etc. I guess I just don’t see it as a problem since I’ve coached softball the past 20 years and I’ve had just as many girls go on to study math and engineering as I’ve had to into nursing and teaching. All of which are commendable careers.
I can no other answer make, but, thanks, and thanks. ~William Shakespeare and me! Depressing that so many people are mindlessly following this ad into the store. As a physics undergrad, I’m certainly not opposed to STEM. But oh, the humanity that follows so blindly. I’m happy to have found this oasis of free thinking to remind me that all is not (necessarily) lost.
I was rubbed the wrong way by this ad, too. Because it’s still pink and plastic. And we have all kinds of things (magnets, legos, tinkertoys, k’nex) that encourage engineering. Why did I need one JUST for my girl? Even the packaging annoyed me.
It also just so happens that my daughter loves princesses and dresses. She loves the way clothes move when she dances, because SHE is always in motion. She does have a very early (worrisome) need to be “pretty” which, to her, means wearing specific things. But I am brainwashing her to know that being pretty is about your “words, your hugs, and your nice things that you do for other people.” It’s a little abstract for a two year old to understand, I guess. But she loves the Paper Bag Princess, and some day she’ll get it. She’s strong like that, and she has a style all her own.
Hehee, I love the twist of the Beastie Boys song! And the video is fun (regardless of what it is marketing) and my little boy even watched the video (he doesn’t sit still long enough to watch anything).
As far as toys being marketed to one gender, ugh! I’ve never been a pink girl (mostly) nor a doll type of girl. When I babysat a girl who loved barbies, I’d get her to dress them up and send them to prom so we could go play something else. LOL.
For my 14mo old boy, I’ve gone in with the mindset that he will let me know what he likes. So far it is big trucks, tractors, diggers, cars, balls, blocks and recently a few stuffed animals. I hope for the day he wants something “girly” (although I do hope it isn’t pink, because I don’t care for pink, hahaha, but anyway). I know marketing is there to get us to buy stuff and when it is done well, it really works. But I do hope to let my kid lead me in what he likes.
I loved and still love legos, before all the specialty pieces.
I’ve heard it said that kids don’t need toys; toy companies need kids. I agree with you on all fronts.
I totally agree, and I’m glad to find someone else swimming against the current a bit with regard to this video/product. I think what bothers me the most is that the whole thing just seems insincere. The song says one thing, the product says quite another. I don’t think the idea of the product itself is so bad, but parents should not be forcing interests on their children, or using their children to make a statement. I have an architecture degree, and yes it was tough being one of only a few women throughout my education and career, but I don’t see that as a problem.
Well, this gift is coming to our house. Yup, the kickstarter pitch and the ad was less pink, but the ribbon that connects everything still is. Funny that a fairly misogynistic Beastie song is, um, bastardized for the campaign. Regardless, here’s my question: What can be done AFTER the initial book project is done? Are there other goals or build outs?
Ok, I don’t have a girl, but with a boy I try hard to buy gender neutral everything (impossible ) or at least not totally screaming in your face “boy”! So, when it comes to GoldieBlox, I would just get Legos. The primary colored ones. Geez I’m so behind on reading!
People are upset that the product is pink but then say that their child likes pink. What is wrong with making engineering toys pink! I like it. I don’t like the backlash against pink and princess though. I think it tells our daughters that traditional masculine is good and traditional feminine is bad. Why are there so many moms out there that hate princess and pink? Because society has told us it is inferior. What is the normal reaction when a girl acts like a tomboy? What is the reaction when a boy acts like a princess boy? One is considered good, the other bad. Why? The feminine side is considered inferior. There is nothing wrong with being girly!!!
I’m the founder of DIYGirls.org, and organization in LA that runs programs for girls. We provide an environment where girls build, use tools and learn to create with technology. I love the Goldieblox video because it aligns with our mission of instilling an inventive spirit in girls. I haven’t played with the product but you don’t need toys to get girls started. Our girls make their own toys and games and they really love it!
I am excited about this line of toys. Why? Because I am female and have a girl. I am a mechanical designer. The ratio of men to women in my field is staggering. There are SO many STEM toys out there that are NOT pink or purple. That’s why this will appeal to little girls. My daughter wants real lights in her dollhouse. Her cousin is on the robotics team at school and has tons of Lego Mindstorm gadgets. It doesn’t really appeal to her and they are expensive. I really don’t understand why people are so against a “pink” STEM toy!! My daughter is both girlie and a tomboy. She has lots of dolls and stuffed animals but also competes in archery and loves sports. This is great for her because there is a dollhouse, with dolls, that SHE can circuit to have REAL lights! All kids need an early intro to STEM. Playing with Legos doesn’t do that. Building a house with them is not STEM at all. It’s more architectural than anything and there are plenty of female architects.
I love the idea behind GoldieBlox! I think it is a huge step toward showing girls that you don’t have to lose your femininity in order to go into a STEM field. The Association for Women in Science says that one of the top reasons women drop out of STEM fields is because of “stereotypes against women as scientists”. My niece was very big on having “toys for girls” as soon as she was old enough for marketing to have an impact. Having a toy “for girls” like this one, would have been great! Including a storybook about a spunky girl inventor, even better. Showing a kid how to build a belt drive, telling them what it is, and showing what that does…well, my LEGOs don’t do that.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I only recently discovered the First Lego League and love it!! The FIRST program is a great idea to further student’s interest in STEM education. I work for a summer technology program that also uses LEGO robotics to engage and teach through hands on learning. The valuable skills you’re imparting through the FIRST program is paving the way towards success! Keep up the great work!