Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Now LEGO BLOCKS Can Discriminate Over Their Parts?!
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2025 16:34:17 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <voale8$ndbh$1@dont-email.me>
References: <voa923$l0k3$6@dont-email.me> <Pd4qP.458$uxQc.60@fx12.ams1>
Injection-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2025 17:34:17 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fdab4f4f9b94e0c37815e393fbb60a1f";
	logging-data="767345"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Ipzg4EpciHVeLcJMQykam8B6esglJ6kc="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:IGZzEc/J68hhMwLKtj5TaDQxY7o=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Bytes: 3035

Ubi's crosspost to newsgroups he doesn't read cut

the dog from that film you saw <dsb@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com> wrote:
>On 09/02/2025 09:30, Ubiquitous wrote:

>>Dana Loesch reacts to the London Science Museum saying Lego bricks are anti-
>>LGBT because they have 'male and female parts that mate together'.

>>https://youtu.be/Bm9KPyHUN8E?si=b92qR8aGBEq3WLqa

>fun story but totally untrue.
>what the guide actually points out is that people refer to bricks as 
>male and female, an example of how language reinforces the normality of 
>hetereosexuality (which i agree is the norm)
>it doesnt criticise lego in any way but why spoil a fun story with facts?

She's literally reacting to a headline from The Telegraph.

Here's the article, although it's been updated since Loesch commented on
it.

Science Museum in 'bonkers' LGBT Lego warning
Institution's Seeing Things Queerly tour claims people think the toy
bricks are 'gendered' and reinforces idea 'heterosexuality is the norm' 
by Craig Simpson
Arts Editor
The Telegraph
06 February 2025 12:20pm GMT
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/06/lego-can-be-anti-lgbt-says-science-museum/

The first line of the article

	Lego can be anti-LGBT, the Science Museum has said.

Yeah, that's LITERALLY criticizing Lego.

Here's paragraph 2.

	A self-guided museum tour on "stories of queer communities,
	experiences and identities" includes a display of Lego bricks
	alongside a guide stating the plastic blocks may reinforce the
	idea that heterosexuality "is the norm".

That's literally a criticism of how the pieces are designed to fit
together, therefore normalizing heterosexuality.

In a later paragraph,

	No source is provided for the alleged view that people consider
	Lego to be gendered, or that sticking bricks together is called
	"mating".

None of this is about the use of gendered words in language. It's
literally about the design of the toy and the action of fitting them
together, and that the curator made shit up.

You got this very wrong. Your criticism is off base, and you ruined my
day by making me defend Ubi.