Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Now LEGO BLOCKS Can Discriminate Over Their Parts?!
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2025 13:37:20 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <voasl0$ousc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <voa923$l0k3$6@dont-email.me> <Pd4qP.458$uxQc.60@fx12.ams1>
 <voale8$ndbh$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2025 19:37:21 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8d8f7debf6ed1f78eaf78558fd8eb84a";
	logging-data="818060"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/VroF/m6YN/nKDtmmsGejldL9YooIpXaw="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:G2u9W7uZePyyhxnZOT8bvZwQs5c=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <voale8$ndbh$1@dont-email.me>

On 2/9/2025 11:34 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> 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.

What the Science Museum actually said:

    “Like other connectors and fasteners, Lego bricks are often 
described in a gendered way. The top of the brick with sticking out pins 
is male, the bottom of the brick with holes to receive the pins is 
female, and the process of the two sides being put together is called 
mating.
    This is an example of applying heteronormative language to topics 
unrelated to gender, sex and reproduction. It illustrates how 
heteronormativity (the idea that heterosexuality and the male/female 
gender binary are the norm and everything that falls outside is unusual) 
shapes the way we speak about science, technology, and the world in 
general.”