Paul Dini: Superhero Cartoon Producers don't want girl viewers

[JD]

I just found this article over on IO9. It's kind of sad really. I think what's sad is if they just marketed the toys to girls they would buy them just the same as the boys. Sure, most girls probably don't buy the same toys as boys, so I don't see why they don't just make toys for girls.
Or even better they could just try marketing the existing toys to both sexes. I work in the Toys department in Wal-Mart, and I've overheard girls talking about things like Avengers just as excitedly as the boys do. I've seen girls getting excited about Iron Man toys, and even a couple who was buying their young daughter Matchbox cars. So obviously there girls who are interested in this stuff, and if they just spread the marketing out from just boys, I'm pretty sure they could get even more girls interested.
The only reason there are "girls toys" and "boys toys" is because adults think there should be. I honestly think if they just let the kids decide for themselves what they want to buy, then we'd probably see plenty of crossover between the different types of toys.

 

[JarodRussell]

But girls can still decide if they want a Barbie or Iron Man. Don't underestimate kids, as they do decide what they want.

I don't know how a comercial for an Iron Man toy for girls would be different though.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I have friends who have a three-year old girl. If she were to choose between Batman and My Little Pony, she'd go straight for Batman. Hell, I don't know if this is true or not, but they claim that her first word, before "Mommy" or "Daddy", was "Batman".

 

[Hound of UIster]

^No surprise since MLP is aimed at adult men.

 

[Christopher]

I gather that lots of girls like to play with "boy" toys -- or rather, with action toys, building toys, and the like. The problem is that the industry's definition of "girls' toys" is too narrow.

Although that might be starting to change. I see that Nerf has begun making a line of bow-and-arrow and crossbow action toys for girls called Rebelle -- no doubt inspired by The Hunger Games. And there's a company called GoldieBlox making construction toys aimed at girls (they had a neat viral video online for a while, using a version of a Beastie Boys song with new lyrics protesting the lack of variety in toys aimed at girls, but apparently it's been pulled because that band has forbidden their songs to be used in advertising.)

And of course, if the executives had any sense, they'd realize that of course girls aren't going to buy toys based on their shows if the shows are specifically designed to alienate girls. It's a self-fulfilling prejudice. And the CN execs' narrow views of what they want their target audience to be explains why their programming has become so limited, why they've stopped making most of their best, smartest shows.

 

[JarodRussell]

Which is so unfair. I would like to have a NERF bow and arrow, if it wasn't PINK! But I have the NERF minigun, so I got that going for me, which is nice.

 

[JD]

I gather that lots of girls like to play with "boy" toys -- or rather, with action toys, building toys, and the like. The problem is that the industry's definition of "girls' toys" is too narrow.

Although that might be starting to change. I see that Nerf has begun making a line of bow-and-arrow and crossbow action toys for girls called Rebelle -- no doubt inspired by The Hunger Games. And there's a company called GoldieBlox making construction toys aimed at girls (they had a neat viral video online for a while, using a version of a Beastie Boys song with new lyrics protesting the lack of variety in toys aimed at girls, but apparently it's been pulled because that band has forbidden their songs to be used in advertising.)

And of course, if the executives had any sense, they'd realize that of course girls aren't going to buy toys based on their shows if the shows are specifically designed to alienate girls. It's a self-fulfilling prejudice. And the CN execs' narrow views of what they want their target audience to be explains why their programming has become so limited, why they've stopped making most of their best, smartest shows.

The Rebelle stuff is apparently doing pretty well. I've had a ton of people looking for it over the last couple of weeks.
I definitely agree with you about CN, and I'm starting to get the feeling that they're becoming more concerned with selling the merchandise for their shows, than whether the shows anybody actually likes or watches the shows. I don't see why they would want to alienate girls anyways, I would think they would just want as many people as possible to watch their shows/buy their toys regardless of their gender.

 

[Hound of UIster]

^The funding formula for CN action shows relies on toy merchandise. It's what killed YJ, Green Lantern and I believe the new Batman. The problem is compounded by the fact that DC/WB signed with Mattel, one of the worst toy companies, to create their toyline. Their Batman toyline in the 90s was just constant mold recycling.

It doesn't help that the CEO of CN wants to populate the chhannel with cheap comedy shows and cheap live action programming.

 

[Unicron]

But girls can still decide if they want a Barbie or Iron Man. Don't underestimate kids, as they do decide what they want.

I don't know how a comercial for an Iron Man toy for girls would be different though.

Besides, sooner or later Barbie will have her own copy of the Iron Man armor. She gets all the cool stuff.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

But girls can still decide if they want a Barbie or Iron Man. Don't underestimate kids, as they do decide what they want.

I don't know how a comercial for an Iron Man toy for girls would be different though.

Besides, sooner or later Barbie will have her own copy of the Iron Man armor. She gets all the cool stuff.

Then why did (and can't) Mattel not make a Barbie doll version of Pepper Potts as Rescue, complete with armor that can be taken off? This is just going to piss off the feminist blogsphere more than it already has this year (especially over the words said by one prominent comic book artist/creator/writer at a major science fiction convention recently.)

 

[Greylock Crescent]

My 7-year-old daughter loves MLP and Transformers Prime (especially Beast Hunters). It has provided me with much amusement watching her put a Rainbow Dash figurine on Bumblebee for an adventure.

So yeah, at least some girls will buy the toys. If their parents allow them (and thinking about it, parental prejudice is probably more of the issue than whether or not girls are interested in the show and the toys).

 

[Unicron]

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing more "female" Transformers personally, even though gender is always a weird thing when referring to alien robots. Just because boys might seem like the primary market doesn't mean girls shouldn't be able to enjoy them.

 

[Hound of UIster]

There is like possibly five lined up for the generations line (Wingblade, her female remold, Minerva, Arcee and Chromia) and the club has transmutate.

 

[Christopher]

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing more "female" Transformers personally, even though gender is always a weird thing when referring to alien robots.

Well, if you think about it, making robots female is no weirder than making them male.

 

[DEWLine]

I've seen Pepper-as-Rescue toys at Shoppers Drug Mart, bundled with other Iron Man stuff. And there was that Lego package, "Malibu Mansion Attack" where Pepper was depicted as suited-up on the box...?

But that doesn't fully address the main point of this thread, does it?

 

[Gaith]

Well, if you think about it, making robots female is no weirder than making them male.

​

I mean, if we're talking robots that can build mini-robots within their own bodies, then yes, I guess female-ish robots make sense. But if we're just talking your run-of-the-mill rock'em-sock'em machines, than making them male-ish seems to me the less weird choice.

 

[Christopher]

^The point is, it's not like male is some kind of "default" and female is the automatic "other." That's a deeply sexist assumption in itself. Making something male is a gendered choice every bit as much as making it female would be. A "neutral" form would be more androgynous.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

To be fair, it's not like "male" robots have penises or anything.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Data does. So does Dorian.

 

[JarodRussell]

^The point is, it's not like male is some kind of "default" and female is the automatic "other." That's a deeply sexist assumption in itself. Making something male is a gendered choice every bit as much as making it female would be. A "neutral" form would be more androgynous.

But the male form IS more neutral. For some reason. Remove boobies and reduce the curves on a female body, and you get a male body. You have to ADD to a male body to get a female one.


And Optimus Prime is only male because of its voice. Replace it and tada, there you have Optimus Primabella.