Review: 40516 Everyone is Awesome

I am gonna buy the hell out of this. Too cool to pass up on.

(Just one!)

Definitely getting this one. It's a great statement, and a lovely set.
If there's anything to wish for it would be a tan /nougat minifig included. I feel that that would really include everyone... But that's a limitation of the flag.

I love it - both for its message as well as its execution as a bright and still stylish piece of Lego to put in the living room (too be honest, mostly for the second reason ;))

here come the scalpers

I love it for the message LEGO is sending out. Do we know if some of the profits will go to a good cause?

This is what should be a real VIP reward, I will want one the colors are amazing

@Huw the price on Lego.com is showing as £30.99

Either way its in my wish list.

This is live on Lego.com but priced at £30.99, not £29.99? Will certainly be looking to buy Day 1 though. It’s awesome!

Wow, this is awesome in every possible way. I really hope they made decent quantities of this because I'll be gutted if I can't get one.

@Huw Maybe comments should be locked so there isn't a predictable flame-war over differing opinions

At the risk of starting something, I do feel like there should be more to the set than just a sociopolitical message, and there is.

I'm a little disappointed that the review doesn't include a more detailed look at the figs themselves, but I see more than a couple of useful recolors in the hairpieces, as well as a completely new one for the blue fig.

Never really understood the monochrome fad, but definitely a nice range of colors, providing a well of accent colors for custom figures (and another way to get the ultrarare yellow legs).

I'm not gonna lie, the set itself isn't for me, but I do love the figures included, and it can certainly garner a broader appeal than intended.

Kinda want multiples just for the hair :( Wonder how much the hair alone will be selling for on BrickLink
The red spiky hair is perfect for an early 2000s Matt Bellamy fig

@mcbbvb said:
"I love it for the message LEGO is sending out. Do we know if some of the profits will go to a good cause?"

Based on the number of figs and new elements, doubt there is any profit on it. May be even sold at a loss. Love this set, both as a statement and a piece of art. Lego has really grown a lot in last couple of years, especially in terms of engagement with community.

Out of curiosity, why do people like monofigs? Especially enough to pay $30 for a rare color. What are they used for?

@Wellspring said:
"Out of curiosity, why do people like monofigs? Especially enough to pay $30 for a rare color. What are they used for?"

Decorative purposes. I just think they look groovy - currently have 28 in my display so this set won't add anything new but will allow me to return some elements to the general minifig population.

@CapnRex101 said:
" @Snaz said:
" @Huw Maybe comments should be locked so there isn't a predictable flame-war over differing opinions"

We are watching the comments carefully and hopefully closing them will be unnecessary."

Correct me if I’m wrong, but are you going to allow anyone to say something negative?
Or will those comments be erased because they have a different opinion?
If it’s that way then the so called “monitoring” is actually just a selective opinion.

Absolutely love it! Already in my wish list. Thank you LEGO and thanks for the great review. I might even get two!

Speaking as a queer person, I've got mixed feelings about this. It's a lovely set (and an obvious boon to monofig collectors) but does it signal a wider acknowledgement of queer identities in Lego sets? Lego City sets have already introduced disabled people, which is great; will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?

I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.

If everyone really is awesome, as Lego claims, then this needs to be the start of a larger look at how Lego represents queer people in their products... and also if their other products undermine this message.

I've literally never said this before, but:

DAY ONE PURCHASE.

(for so many reasons)

If anything, there aren't enough colors.

This is a great set! Really hope I'll be able to get it before it sells out. PLEASE LEGO, I hope you've made plenty of these.

Great message behind the set and all the monofigs are beautiful. The design is underwhelming though. I get that they’re going for simplicity so that the colors and message can be the focal point, but it seems like they could’ve designed something a little more interesting to look at. I guess they might’ve wanted to keep this at as low a price point as possible to be accessible to as many people as possible?

Tell you what, the grime has crawled out of the shadows to comment on this one in some of the Facebook groups, it's really unpleasant.

I love this! I have to admit that the first time I saw this I didn't get any sort of message at all, just a pretty display of monochromatic figs which was super pretty. Really looking forward to this!

This might look even cooler with the colour bands swapped from left to right so they don't match the figures.

Glad these comments haven't gone the way of the Trafalgar Square review

I feel like this will create a bunch of new monocolor minifig fans.

@jouhyo said:
"What a wrong message. If everyone become LGBT, this world will go extinct in a 100 years"

Imagine not understanding the point of the set. Couldn't be me!

@Mister_Johnny - on the HP topic, I think there's a lot to be said from separating the art from the artist here. If the actual content of the books/films themselves was problematic, that is reasonably straightforward to deal with. If it's the views of the creator... I think that's something different. We ALL (and I would feel confident with this absolute) at some point enjoy the creative works of people who have either done bad things or have held views that some find inappropriate or unpalatable - and yet 'A Merry Christmas to you from Phil Spector' is still the best Christmas album. The JKR/HP issues have understandably been high profile, but unfortunately if you go delving deep enough you'll find ways to put you off a lot of stuff you really enjoy.

(Sorry if this is considered a little inflammatory in the comments here - please delete if necessary)

For some reason I see this and all I can think is.... 'Red is sus....'

/end Among Us reference.

I've been dabbling in monofigs, so this looks great to get me completely sorted. Should be relatively easy to tweak to add additional colours, too.

@Mister_Jonny said:
"
I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.
"

Again with the Harry Potter nonsense?
You don't like JK, fine. An artist's work has nothing to do with the artist itself. I don't agree with Clint Eastwood's personal and political views, but I do like his work as an actor and director and I still see his movies. Same goes for a lot of other actors/directors or singers, painters, scientists, you name it. Whatever JK's opinion is, she is entitled to it, wether you like it or not, and so are you entitled to yours.

I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.

I’m betting that my chances of being able to get this set, are about zero :(

@Mister_Jonny said:
"Speaking as a queer person, I've got mixed feelings about this. It's a lovely set (and an obvious boon to monofig collectors) but does it signal a wider acknowledgement of queer identities in Lego sets? Lego City sets have already introduced disabled people, which is great; will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?

I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.

If everyone really is awesome, as Lego claims, then this needs to be the start of a larger look at how Lego represents queer people in their products... and also if their other products undermine this message."

Maybe it’s just me, but canceling Harry Potter sets because JK Rowling has a different opinion trans rights, doesn’t sound very “inclusive”.

“Inclusive” doesn’t mean you only allow things that agree with your set of beliefs. The word for that is “exclusive”.

Meh. I don't really care for this set. Apart from looking somewhat nice on display I'd much rather spend money on something else as none of this is particularly useful? As for its message; as a child I've never thought of LEGO figures as hetero or white. They were just people. The idea how some people seem to think differently is shocking to me, but a LEGO set targeted at grown ups isn't going to change much about it I guess. It's only once you start incorporating the entire community in LEGO stories that you'll be able to make a difference in the world of a child.

very very cool. The completed set's a bit tacky for my taste, but there's really nothing to complain about beyond personal preference. "Diversity done right," as they say. Now if there are actually enough sets in stock to last for the whole month of June is another issue entirely

@mister_johnny

I seem to recall one of the city sets having two female figs or two male figs together or something? I could be wrong but maybe someone else remembers better.

When it comes to something like transgender I don't see how you'd really represent it in Lego. A MtF Lego minifigure would just look like a female minifigure, no?

Is this the most new parts in a single new sets ever?

This is definitely awesome. Not only the message but also the pieces.
Even though I have all those colours as monofigs already I am certainly getting at least one of this set.

But even more awesome would have been monofigs in dark turquoise, light flesh, coral and pearl-dark-grey :-)

@MainBricker said:
"Obviously this is a gay pride set, but apart from an interview with the designer on the website does Lego make reference to LGBT on the box or manual?

I feel Lego are trying to be a bit ambiguous about what this set is, and the fact that you can't buy this set in Russia or Saudi Arabia says a lot about how far Lego truly believe in this issue."

For sure it would not be possible to buy it in such countries if LGBTXXXX were on the box.
At least this could be some way of entering into those territories.

Blimey, actually looked at the price: this is one of the best value sets (under my unique formula) Lego are making. And that's without taking into account any of the rarity aspects. fab.

I also like the marketing spiel on the website: free of the usual marketing hyperbole, "politically neutral", nicely balanced. They truly want this to be a set for everybody. Nice!

One bonus of the 18+ marker: it signals that it's not just one for the kids. I can see this being one for my weekend building activity with my daughter; we're both going to love it.

I must admit I'm still quite ignorant in the main subject matter, but as a LEGO fan and collector I love the colours and mono figs, and will be happy to add it to my collection.

I hope Lego have made enough of these. For some reason I think they will be flying off the shelves. Day 1 for me!

So. Many. Monofigs! So. Many. Colours!
This set is awesome!

And yeah, somewhere lego is probably hypocritical in they way they release this set or in doing one of the myriad other things it's doing. The sad reality is that it's a gigantic company, so there's always some decisions that are driven by profit (if not nearly all its decisions). That said, I think it's nice lego is going to release a set like this.

I just hope this won't become ridiculously mishandled in its actual release and becomes rare due to lego's horrible IT management... again.

As for the topic of gender diversity in sets... Strictly speaking minifig gender is decided by the one who 'plays' with them. If you want you can take a random minifig and decide their gender in spite of what they look like. That's the beauty of lego: you can play with it however you want! And if we're talking sexual preferences... I understand lego itself is not going to overtly deal with that, it being a toy manufacturer and all. ;)

@Mister_Jonny said:
"Speaking as a queer person, I've got mixed feelings about this. It's a lovely set (and an obvious boon to monofig collectors) but does it signal a wider acknowledgement of queer identities in Lego sets? Lego City sets have already introduced disabled people, which is great; will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?

I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.

If everyone really is awesome, as Lego claims, then this needs to be the start of a larger look at how Lego represents queer people in their products... and also if their other products undermine this message."

Hi everyone,

Firstly, thank you Mister_Johnny for adding your voice to the conversation :)

Secondly, from my own perspective as a middle-aged, white, hetero, male, I'm very conscious that my own opinions on a Pride set should rightly take somewhat of a back seat to our LGBTQ+ fellow Lego-heads.

Thirdly, I'd ask everyone to be very aware that issues you may not personally face on a daily basis can be deeply important to others, so please keep an open mind and try to avoid stifling the conversation or in any way shouting down things you may not be best-placed to understand.

Peas-out!

Beside a good display model, also an amazing parts pack.

Very unusual hairpiece colors, plenty of bricks and 2x2 tiles, some larger white plates are always nice too, and monofigs.

@inversion said:
" @mcbbvb said:
"I love it for the message LEGO is sending out. Do we know if some of the profits will go to a good cause?"

Based on the number of figs and new elements, doubt there is any profit on it. May be even sold at a loss. Love this set, both as a statement and a piece of art. Lego has really grown a lot in last couple of years, especially in terms of engagement with community."

TLG has a profit of around 25 percent of their revenue.
Production costs really can't be that high that they won't make a profit on this. Plus the costs for printing and, as I learned, associated storage, are absent.

@pawelg said:
" @Eggyslav said:
"Ugh, I can already see the Ultra-catholic, homophobic, transphobic, and racist troglodytes of the polish Alt-Right boycotting this set... If I had money, I would buy it just to spite those alt-right scum. Ad because it's a cool set."

What's the matter, you Ultra-progressive, homophilic, transphilic, and all race-loving non-polish person? Don't you have 35�� to spend on such a lovely set? This whole rainbow topic is not my thing, but I'm going to buy one or two of them anyways."

He actually is polish. Not surprising at all. No one hates the polish like the polish themselves.

I'm just so sad this wasn't made entirely from classic space-people figs. I've been waiting for a purple and brown.

@Corban2011 said:
"Wow. That’s absolutely sick. I can’t believe LEGO would make something like this. :( I thought the LEGO group was a family based company, but I guess they decided to change that. :,( that’s just sad. "

You do realise LGBTQ people are part of families and also have families themselves right?

@jnscoelho Except this argument doesn't work, because—setting aside the fact Harry Potter isn't particularly progressive—JKR benefits both financially and reputationally from sales of Harry Potter merchandise. That in turn signals to merchandisers that a person can carry out tangibly harmful actions (which isn't just 'expressing an opinion') and that isn't a dealbreaker to us as consumers. That ripples out and does harm to the very people Lego is ostensibly supporting.

We can't separate the art from the artist when the former (and the merchandise it inspires) both reflects and legitimises the latter. We can't shrug off IPs like Harry Potter when transphobia is a serious problem in the UK, and inspiring transphobic actions overseas.

I'm not interested in going all the way down this rabbit hole, but suffice it to say that 'separate the art from the artist' is exactly the kind of mental hoop I was talking about, and why I regard sets like this with a healthy degree of scepticism.

@inversion said:
" @mcbbvb said:
"I love it for the message LEGO is sending out. Do we know if some of the profits will go to a good cause?"

Based on the number of figs and new elements, doubt there is any profit on it. May be even sold at a loss. Love this set, both as a statement and a piece of art. Lego has really grown a lot in last couple of years, especially in terms of engagement with community."

I doubt it, I can see this set flying off shelves and having a long production life

@Mister_Jonny said:
"Speaking as a queer person, I've got mixed feelings about this. It's a lovely set (and an obvious boon to monofig collectors) but does it signal a wider acknowledgement of queer identities in Lego sets? Lego City sets have already introduced disabled people, which is great; will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?

I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.

If everyone really is awesome, as Lego claims, then this needs to be the start of a larger look at how Lego represents queer people in their products... and also if their other products undermine this message."

Thanks for being the only person to say what I hoped to find in the comments.
If you’re wondering what LEGO has to say on the subject: They keep falling back on “we have contracts with WB and where our licensing fees are then divided is not something we can control” but they “have a deep commitment to diversity.” When I asked if they could at least make any sort of statement that while they’ve made the choice to continue to produce Harry Potter sets, they disagree with JKR. They were like, “nah.”
I stopped buying LEGO HP sets. Does this really impact JKR? No. But I won’t be giving a penny to a woman who uses her fame and power to try to destroy the lives of me and my community. When someone’s “opinion” is “there’s some people I don’t like, let’s hurt them.” Maybe we don’t give that person a megaphone.

The set is pretty swell. I hope they donate proceeds but I doubt it. But I’ve already got LEGO Pride decorations I made myself so here’s some great parts to add!

I'm so, so happy to see Lego do this. I'll be buying one for sure the day of release!!!

@nick3c said:
"" @jouhyo said:
"What a wrong message. If everyone become LGBT, this world will go extinct in a 100 years"

That’s for sure.
I really wish people would open there eyes, instead of going with the crowd.
It’s really disheartening.""

If this world goes extinct, it will be because of climate change, not some sexual minorities.

Does anyone know how many of the hairpieces are new colours? about 9?

By the way, now I can't get Everything is Awesome out of my head.

I like how LEGO is really doing a huge variety of subjects for 18+ sets and that we keep getting like 10 18+ sets per month.

The more people who get involved in LEGO, the better!

So many people in the LGBTQ community could pick up this cheap set as their first LEGO set as an adult. Since the community shares a strong bond and sense of community, they can share or even gift this set amongst each other and further get involved in the LEGO hobby.

The more the merrier, people. More people who likes LEGO = better world. Include as many people as you can.

@Mister_Jonny said:
" @jnscoelho Except this argument doesn't work, because—setting aside the fact Harry Potter isn't particularly progressive—JKR benefits both financially and reputationally from sales of Harry Potter merchandise. That in turn signals to merchandisers that a person can carry out tangibly harmful actions (which isn't just 'expressing an opinion') and that isn't a dealbreaker to us as consumers. That ripples out and does harm to the very people Lego is ostensibly supporting.

We can't separate the art from the artist when the former (and the merchandise it inspires) both reflects and legitimises the latter. We can't shrug off IPs like Harry Potter when transphobia is a serious problem in the UK, and inspiring transphobic actions overseas.

I'm not interested in going all the way down this rabbit hole, but suffice it to say that 'separate the art from the artist' is exactly the kind of mental hoop I was talking about, and why I regard sets like this with a healthy degree of scepticism."

You were the one opening this rabbit hole...
But yeah, I remember that scene where Harry and his friends turned everyone in Hogwarts into white, heterosexual males. Totally transphobic. I get it.

@nick3c said:
"" @jouhyo said:
"What a wrong message. If everyone become LGBT, this world will go extinct in a 100 years"

That’s for sure.
I really wish people would open there eyes, instead of going with the crowd.
It’s really disheartening.""

Ridiculous and disingenuous. Nobody claims that everyone should become LGBT, or in fact anyone at all. It's about being able to be who you are and love who you want, freely. And I mean, even if you've actually ever heard anyone say that in earnest (which I doubt), surely there are crazy people everywhere, including LGBT, that doesn't mean you need to single those out to make such preposterous claims as yours.

@Laminated said:
"Is the blue hairpiece new? Or a recolour of the Balthazar figure from set 70837 ? I can't tell on my little screen!"

It seems to be a new piece; I'm pretty sure Balthazar's hair is a dual-moulded piece. It's also quite lovely.

@jnscoelho said:
" @Mister_Jonny said:
" @jnscoelho Except this argument doesn't work, because—setting aside the fact Harry Potter isn't particularly progressive—JKR benefits both financially and reputationally from sales of Harry Potter merchandise. That in turn signals to merchandisers that a person can carry out tangibly harmful actions (which isn't just 'expressing an opinion') and that isn't a dealbreaker to us as consumers. That ripples out and does harm to the very people Lego is ostensibly supporting.

We can't separate the art from the artist when the former (and the merchandise it inspires) both reflects and legitimises the latter. We can't shrug off IPs like Harry Potter when transphobia is a serious problem in the UK, and inspiring transphobic actions overseas.

I'm not interested in going all the way down this rabbit hole, but suffice it to say that 'separate the art from the artist' is exactly the kind of mental hoop I was talking about, and why I regard sets like this with a healthy degree of scepticism."

You were the one opening this rabbit hole...
But yeah, I remember that scene where Harry and his friends turned everyone in Hogwarts into white, heterosexual males. Totally transphobic. I get it."

I heard appreciating the paintings of a certain austrian watercolor painter makes you an anti-semite.

Speaking also as an LGBTQ+ AFOL I figured I'd give my 2 cents on the matter.

First off, it's a very nice gesture. It's neither in your face, condescending, nor does it feel exploitative as many Pride Month products do. I feel it gets the message across in a nice way. There's something genuine about this.

I have a few concerns, however - namely with availability. The past few months have eroded my confidence and my general concern is that monofig collectors, investors and speculators will devour this with gusto, leaving the target audience to scrounge up scraps on ebay for a premium, a situation I genuinely dread. I feel the message of "everyone is awesome" can fall flat if everyone can't actually acquire the set of they want it. I forsee a PR nightmare in the future and hope Lego has learned their lesson to avoid it. This isn't to say people who aren't LGBTQ+ can't or shouldn't be allowed to buy this, quite the opposite - it's called "everyone is awesome", after all. I also quite like that it's both reasonably priced and at a price point that's not prohibitive/exclusionary- like $50-100.

My final comment is this: I've always felt that Lego has generally been inclusive from the dawn of the minifigure. The generic smiley in bright yellow felt less like an attempt at homogeneity and more like a blank slate upon which one could imprint their imagination. I don't need to be told a character is gay, so long as I'm not explicitly told they're not, if that makes any sense. That's always been the joy of Lego to me, that element of tabula rasa which everyone can enjoy and make awesome in their own way.

Curiously unavailable here in Malaysia too...

On another note, I wonder how many countries' flags you could make by rearranging the stripes

What a great idea and awesome set! Day one purchase and hopefully in multiples. Everyone seeing anyting else than a colorful set with monofigs need to burn all their crayons.

@biffuz said:
"If anything, there aren't enough colors."

I think there are enough colors for a good start. And for making a point.

Kudos to the Lego Group for the awareness.

It's a joyous set and your pictures are so fun to look at, Huw. I hope to get two, one to keep and one for a gift. Thanks very much for the review!

Thanks to all the monochromatic mini-figure collectors for your comments on the parts. It's so interesting to learn more about people's collections. Huw, do you think Brickset would be able to run an article on monochromatic mini-figures? Or maybe one has already been done and I couldn't find it?

As an aside to my previous statement, as I wanted to keep this separate, I would also like to say this:

Please, do not shut down this comment section.

People will inevitably cause a stink, they always do. But if you lock this down you send the wrong message to the community - that we can and will allow ourselves to be bullied into submission. This only encourages individuals who may have ill intentions to double down on their behavior.

Thank you.

@krysto2002 said:
"Speaking also as an LGBTQ+ AFOL I figured I'd give my 2 cents on the matter.

First off, it's a very nice gesture. It's neither in your face, condescending, nor does it feel exploitative as many Pride Month products do. I feel it gets the message across in a nice way. There's something genuine about this.

I have a few concerns, however - namely with availability. The past few months have eroded my confidence and my general concern is that monofig collectors, investors and speculators will devour this with gusto, leaving the target audience to scrounge up scraps on ebay for a premium, a situation I genuinely dread. I feel the message of "everyone is awesome" can fall flat if everyone can't actually acquire the set of they want it. I forsee a PR nightmare in the future and hope Lego has learned their lesson to avoid it. This isn't to say people who aren't LGBTQ+ can't or shouldn't be allowed to buy this, quite the opposite - it's called "everyone is awesome", after all. I also quite like that it's both reasonably priced and at a price point that's not prohibitive/exclusionary- like $50-100.

My final comment is this: I've always felt that Lego has generally been inclusive from the dawn of the minifigure. The generic smiley in bright yellow felt less like an attempt at homogeneity and more like a blank slate upon which one could imprint their imagination. I don't need to be told a character is gay, so long as I'm not explicitly told they're not, if that makes any sense. That's always been the joy of Lego to me, that element of tabula rasa which everyone can enjoy and make awesome in their own way."

I've been saying this for a long time. The simplicity of the older sets left much more to the imagination of the one who created their own stories with minifigures.
Nowadays there is a lot of detail on both minifigs and the sets and while sure it looks cool, it takes away that freedom of interpretation and imagination.

I'm definitely not a member of the LGBT community, but I have friends there. And so I love this set because it sends a clear and simple message. Apart from that, it's just a fantastic set

@bricksintheattic said:
"Convinced myself I need one of these as a parts pack, love the variety of colours. Useful torsos to have available for custom stuff, nice mix of legs and hairpieces. With the Daily Bugle going straight in at number one on my wishlist this is turning into an expensive year..."
So far, I have resisted the urge to collect monofigs. They look great and I know that if I started, I wouldn’t be able to stop getting them. This set would allow me to confine my monochromes to one set, so I’m very tempted by it. The problem is that there are loads of great sets coming out in June and, like @bricksintheattic, I’m cost constrained. So with regret, I may have to pass.

I suspect that lots of AFOLs will want this set and not just for its Pride symbolism. I’m not LGBT (though have always been an advocate for LGBT rights even before their wider acceptance, and sympathetic to the plight of LGBT people). I just think this is a great set for its minifigures that will have broader appeal.

@Wellspring said:
"Out of curiosity, why do people like monofigs? Especially enough to pay $30 for a rare color. What are they used for?"
I was never really interested in monofigs until I got the first one in a set by chance. Out of curiosity I looked through my parts bin and found that I had several more, plus parts to begin several of the rarer colours. Somehow I got drawn into collecting them and by now I am hooked. Otoh I would never spend such ridiculous amounts of money for rare parts. There's always opportunities to get them for a reasonable price. I even managed to complete a light flesh one, and didn't have to pay through the nose for it.

FYI: light flesh was considered to be the holy grail of monofigs until recently, because all pieces except for the hips had been available for years, but until the release of Porky Pig, light flesh hips had only found their way onto Bricklink by way of some prototype castings that had somehow escaped the factory.

I think is lame it has no full flesh colored fig.

Also just a reminder- None company is your friend. This is just another product.

Man these comments are a minefield

@Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

The only type of censorship I wholeheartedly support

@krysto2002 said:
"That's always been the joy of Lego to me, that element of tabula rasa which everyone can enjoy and make awesome in their own way."

Tabula rasa! Love that :)

I learn a good few gems from my time on Brickset.

In the spirit of total inclusivity, I’d assume this will be available to purchase at all LEGO retailers and not just LEGO stores and LEGO.com. Does anyone know?

I am the only one missing Unikitty jumpin' over the rainbow?

@lordofdragonss said:
"I think is lame it has no full flesh colored fig."

LOL

I think you may have just exposed your own prejudice. Which is great! I really hope you can see the positive in this, and know that I'm not attacking you.

Tip: Some flesh is brown.

@greg said:
"I'm just so sad this wasn't made entirely from classic space-people figs. I've been waiting for a purple and brown."

Well, it might still help with getting more classic spacers in the future. I seem to recall that which single-colour torso assemblies were being produced at the time limited the choices of what colour the astronauts in 21109 could be.
With this set, all these colours are now "in the system" for the foreseeable future, and turning any one of them into a CS astronaut would be a little bit easier.

@MainBricker said:
"Obviously this is a gay pride set, but apart from an interview with the designer on the website does Lego make reference to LGBT on the box or manual?

I feel Lego are trying to be a bit ambiguous about what this set is, and the fact that you can't buy this set in Russia or Saudi Arabia says a lot about how far Lego truly believe in this issue."
Well, for starters, new sets appear in the official Russian LEGO stores with a delay of about 1-2 weeks. But that's beside the point since, naturally, this set isn't likely to ever appear in the store.

Yet, honestly – what good would that do? The only thing that'll happen if they put it on the shelves is that the bigots in our government will quickly get a lawsuit running and ban LEGO sales in the country entirely – and although as a cishet dude I can't be entirely confident in my judgement, but I don't think THAT would make any queer AFOLs around these parts happier.

As a collector of monochrome minifigs this is an absolute delight. I guess it's not likely to happen but it would be amazing if they release more sets like this in the future. Yes, LEGO, we are right here, there's a market for this, we would love to see more hair pieces, torsos, legs and why not accessories in all sorts of new colors!

@Mister_Jonny said:
[[Speaking as a queer person, I've got mixed feelings about this. It's a lovely set (and an obvious boon to monofig collectors) but does it signal a wider acknowledgement of queer identities in Lego sets? Lego City sets have already introduced disabled people, which is great; will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?]]

There has been some discussion of this in Lego forums in the past, and someone has even compiled a Google Doc of LGBT characters that have become minifigs. However at this point it's only 3rd Party IP characters and the establishment of their LGBT status is mostly tenuous (e.g. Dumbledore) or established after Lego produced the minifig of the character so effectively retrospective.

Lego is mostly progressive in it's outlook but also wary of generating too much controversy around it's products. It seems like this release could be a testing of the waters.

Yes progress will truly be made when Lego releases it's first in-house theme sets with LGBT minifig characters, whether their identity is established through visual cues or backstory, or a combination of both.]]

Hello, I gotta ask is that normal I don't see the set listed on Lego.com page when choosing my country or is the release limited and it won't reach Poland?

Or is that because we are considered one of the most homophobic countries in Europe?

@MainBricker said:
"Obviously this is a gay pride set, but apart from an interview with the designer on the website does Lego make reference to LGBT on the box or manual?

I feel Lego are trying to be a bit ambiguous about what this set is, and the fact that you can't buy this set in Russia or Saudi Arabia says a lot about how far Lego truly believe in this issue."

It's not available in a lot of countries from what I've checked. Kinda dissapointed it's not available here, would've liked some monofigs, and it's a nice display piece.

@michaels_afol To be honest I'd be happy with them, say, showing a same-sex couple pushing a pram in some of a set's promotional shots—something that signals they acknowledge that queer people exist. Other identities might be trickier to convey, but I'm sure there's a way...

@lordofdragonss said:
"I think is lame it has no full flesh colored fig."
The point you're clearly missing is that 'flesh' isn't one single colour.

In terms of the figures themselves, all the body parts apart from the Light Royal Blue/Bright Light Blue torso are already available unprinted. The main problem was scrabbling around trying to find places that sold, for example, Bright Green hands.

The great thing about this set for aspiring monofig collectors is that you can get 11 figures cheaply and easily, which is sure to spark a lot more interest in that sub-section of the hobby.

@Dandalfa00 said:
"... a woman who uses her fame and power to try to destroy the lives of me and my community. When someone’s “opinion” is “there’s some people I don’t like, let’s hurt them..."

You might find it hard to bring people across to your perspective when you continue to invent your own facts.

@Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants".

@LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "
If a comment is being outwardly homophobic then it isn’t really being respectful, is it?

@Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "
If a comment is being outwardly homophobic then it isn’t really being respectful, is it?
"

I don't think simply deleting any comments just because they don't agree with this matter is very respectful either. You can be a "homophobic" yet still express your opinion respectfully.

Re: the comment on yellow heads. I sent LEGO a letter back in the 80s asking why there weren’t any black LEGO people and they responded to me that yellow was meant to be universal.

I love this.

I know TLG don't always get it right, but I think this is a really positive thing. I just hope it isn't too hard to get hold of.

If anyone doesn't like it, they can just choose not to buy it, just like any other Pride product that a company might sell.

@LegoDavid said:
" @Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "
If a comment is being outwardly homophobic then it isn’t really being respectful, is it?
"

I don't think simply deleting any comments just because they don't agree with this matter is very respectful either. You can be a "homophobic" yet still express your opinion respectfully.
"

Okay let’s put it this way; I really don’t care about the cars Lego makes. So when Brickset did it’s McLaren review the other day what did I do? Didn’t even read it, never mind go into the comments and deliberately spout about how much I don’t care. That’s being respectful, just letting the people who do like the thing enjoy their thing. So if you’re coming into the comments of something like this just to state how you think the people who like it are wrong then that’s on you buddy and that kind of behaviour is going to get your comment deleted

I like it as a Lego set regardless of the what it represents.

@jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated.

@Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I think the traditional terminology for that is a "shadow ban"

@krysto2002 said:
"Speaking also as an LGBTQ+ AFOL I figured I'd give my 2 cents on the matter.

My final comment is this: I've always felt that Lego has generally been inclusive from the dawn of the minifigure. The generic smiley in bright yellow felt less like an attempt at homogeneity and more like a blank slate upon which one could imprint their imagination. I don't need to be told a character is gay, so long as I'm not explicitly told they're not, if that makes any sense. That's always been the joy of Lego to me, that element of tabula rasa which everyone can enjoy and make awesome in their own way."

I like the set and I'll probably buy one. I don't really have anything to add regarding the review but @krysto2002 said something really important and I think more of us cis-gendered should read, understand, and empathize.

"I don't need to be told a character is gay, so long as I'm not explicitly told they're not..."

This can apply to society at-large...cis people telling others what they aren't and what they can't...and that's not acceptable. That's all I have to say and thank Krysto for their perspective.

Flashing back to opening a box of crayons!

@LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "

That is a perfectly fine message to send, since intolerance is disrespect and as such should not be tolerated. This is not paradoxical - intolerance is the *only* thing that should not be tolerated.

@LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "

It is a duty to be intolerant towards intolerance, racism and ignorance.

I think what the mods are saying is that one can freely express a civil opinion and avoid being rude at the same time.

@LegoDavid said:
" @Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "
If a comment is being outwardly homophobic then it isn’t really being respectful, is it?
"

I don't think simply deleting any comments just because they don't agree with this matter is very respectful either. You can be a "homophobic" yet still express your opinion respectfully.
"

N... no. No you cannot, no more than you can be a racist respectfully. Homophobia is by its very nature disrespectful (to put it mildly...)

Love the set, hate the title.

Awesome is such an overused word nowadays. Especially in YouTube videos, where everything seems to be described as awesome, from a 2x4 red brick upwards.

But I suppose, 'Most people are average, a few are awsome', didn't have quite such a ring to it!

@Mister_Jonny said:
"... will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?
"

Robin Loot from Barracuda Bay appear to be trans, as she is presented as “former Gunner of the Cross Bone Clipper” who were obviously male, but wearing similar clothes.

The Lego Movie 2 contained a few characters who were rather queer: Queen Watevra Wa’Nabi and Balthazar (the spa vampire).

I hope we’ll see more and more openly queer characters than these in future. But at least LEGO has already moved far from the extremely binary world of boys and girls of my 80’ies childhood. Or just 10 years ago.

@sjr60 said:
"Love the set, hate the title.

Awesome is such an overused word nowadays. Especially in YouTube videos, where everything seems to be described as awesome, from a 2x4 red brick upwards.

But I suppose, 'Most people are average, a few are awsome', didn't have quite such a ring to it! "

Yes, the word is badly overused, but in this case, it's just a play on "everything is awesome".

I’m a Christian, and so i believe that if I am living according to the mandates of the Bible, there is no room for me to hate anyone. Sure, you can be a Christian, and also have hatred, but it is outside of the teachings of Jesus. I can disagree with the way someone chooses to live their life, but still love them, and see them as someone made in the image of God.

Hatred is wrong (unless against overt evil) but just because I disagree with you, that doesn’t mean I hate you.

P.S. if this comment starts a political or religious debate, I will remove it myself.

Wow this set has made a stir and I somewhat understand why.

I just want to raise my point that Cancel Culture is bad - removing people or deleting history because of bad things doesn't make them not happen. We need to educate and have a better understanding, we need to promote and use the good and learn from the bad.

We are all humans, and there is not one human that is faultless.

Let the kids be kids so they can play with what they want how they want.
Lego HR doesn't make kids into J.K.R. and it isn't gated or forced into certain play. If a kid wants to be Harry or Hermione or a magical hat its up to them.

Lego is still a children's toy first, yes they've stepped up to the 18+ franchise.
But it's still a freaking toy.
It is plastic, but plastic made by 'adults' for 'children'.

As an adult, I have lost the deep power of imagination and yes I personally find that it helps to have a gendered mini-fig, but for my 'use'.

But as a child in the past, I didn't care if my minifig was male/female, I wanted a fig that was for 'my' needs, for 'my' build, of 'my' imagination.
I got sets that I chose, sets that I asked for as 'I communicated' with my parents, and if I got something I didn't like, I broke it up and used it for parts.

@nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?

@rab1234 said:
"Re: the comment on yellow heads. I sent LEGO a letter back in the 80s asking why there weren’t any black LEGO people and they responded to me that yellow was meant to be universal.
"

I really liked that about the early minifigs: neutrally colored and neutrally shaped. Any minifig could be a boy or a girl if you wanted it. It's pretty obvious LEGO now does their inclusivity differently: by representing as many groups as possible by a minifig. I understand this is partially because not everyone is imaginative enough to make do with 'bland' minifigs.

And, I'm told by people who know this stuff, it's important to see yourself reflected in the things you watch and buy, to recognise yourself.

This set is a pretty abstract way of expressing inclusivity and I'm frankly shocked people have taken offense (or... maybe they are pretending to be offended to make some sort of point?)

@Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "
If a comment is being outwardly homophobic then it isn’t really being respectful, is it?
"

I don't think simply deleting any comments just because they don't agree with this matter is very respectful either. You can be a "homophobic" yet still express your opinion respectfully.
"

Okay let’s put it this way; I really don’t care about the cars Lego makes. So when Brickset did it’s McLaren review the other day what did I do? Didn’t even read it, never mind go into the comments and deliberately spout about how much I don’t care. That’s being respectful, just letting the people who do like the thing enjoy their thing. So if you’re coming into the comments of something like this just to state how you think the people who like it are wrong then that’s on you buddy and that kind of behaviour is going to get your comment deleted"

I don't think YOU understand. Commenting isn't just for compliments. The word comment does not mean to compliment. As much as people complain about Lego, if they only commented when they where positive about it, no one would ever comment. Ps. You're welcome :).

Like Huw's verdict and cannot agree more.

Live and let live.
Anyway, everything else aside .... what a beautiful looking set !!

@jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

It's called the paradox of intolerance, as described by philosopher Karl Popper.

In case you don't want to read all 432 pages of his book to understand it in detail, there's a nice cartoon that summarizes it: https://i.redd.it/vl00mm78jpq61.jpg

I actually really dislike how pink is a stereotypical female and both blues are stereotypical men, feels kinda counter to what this set is about... Well, not that it actually matters. Pretty cool regardless.

@Wellspring said:
" @Mister_Jonny said:
"Speaking as a queer person, I've got mixed feelings about this. It's a lovely set (and an obvious boon to monofig collectors) but does it signal a wider acknowledgement of queer identities in Lego sets? Lego City sets have already introduced disabled people, which is great; will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?

I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.

If everyone really is awesome, as Lego claims, then this needs to be the start of a larger look at how Lego represents queer people in their products... and also if their other products undermine this message."

Maybe it’s just me, but canceling Harry Potter sets because JK Rowling has a different opinion trans rights, doesn’t sound very “inclusive”.

“Inclusive” doesn’t mean you only allow things that agree with your set of beliefs. The word for that is “exclusive”.
"

The term "inclusive" means giving seats at the table to people who don't have them. JK absolutely has had a seat at the table, and she wants to keep other people from joining. hereForHPbutNotJK

This set looks dope. Not 100% for the actual design of it, but the colors are sick and I love the Minifigures. Fortunately, whether you like the design or not this set looks to be a fantastic springboard for any other Pride moc you'd prefer. <3

@XenonX It's a nice idea, but I'm not sure these characters offer solid evidence of queer identities. Robin Loot could certainly be read as trans (as all the characters could) but I fear the description could just be the writer's unfamiliarity with the original model.

The Lego Movie 2's characters aren't much better in this regard. Queen Wat'evra Wa'Nabi is certainly fabulous, but ultimately she marries a (Bat)man. Sure, she could be queer, but if memory serves there's nothing to suggest she'd be happy with Lucy or Wonder Woman instead. Balthazar is a similar situation; he's certainly not conventionally masculine, but he's also pretty clearly inspired by the likes of Twilight's Edward Cullen... whose relationship with a girl is one of his most memorable aspects.

We can't really determine a character's sexuality from things like effeminacy or colourful personalities, because (as I'm sure you know) people come in all shapes and sizes. You can absolutely read the characters you mentioned as queer or transgender (a queer Queen Wat'Evra Wa'Nabi is a great idea) but you're not going to find any real support for that idea in the text surrounding them.

I like monochromatic figures.
I have absolutely nothing against different sexual orientations and I couldn't care less what consenting ADULTS do behind doors. None of my business.

However, "Pride Month" and this sort of thing isn't about "tolerance" or inclusion or anything like that. It has become pure attempt to push a political agenda. And to push pure hate from both sides. And that I can't support.
I don't support that agenda and I don't support LEGO making political sets.

So I'll just speak with my wallet and I won't buy the set.

I would suggest others to do the same. There's no point going around insulting each other.
Let us speak with our wallets and be done with it.

@Fjeczur and @MainBricker: It's now on both the Polish and Hungarian versions of Lego.com.

@MainBricker said:
"Obviously this is a gay pride set, but apart from an interview with the designer on the website does Lego make reference to LGBT on the box or manual?

I feel Lego are trying to be a bit ambiguous about what this set is, and the fact that you can't buy this set in Russia or Saudi Arabia says a lot about how far Lego truly believe in this issue."

Selling this set in Russia will quite likely be deemed as a violation of the "propaganda" law, regardless of what LEGO thinks of it. I guess same for Saudi. This is the nature of law, you need to follow it regardless of whether you agree with it or not. It is very unfortunate that we have such laws in 21st century, but it is not LEGO's fault or liability.

@djtucci18_gmail_com said:
" @Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Brickalili said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @Huw said:
"I do not plan to prevent commenting but we are deleting any homophobic or other intolerant comments, and will also give the worst offenders 'hell-bans', after which they can write whatever offensive diatribe they want but nobody but themselves will see it."

I personally think people should be allowed to freely express their opinion as long as they do it respectfully. Simply deleting any negative comments might offend a lot of people, seemingly sending a message of "intolerance for the intolerants". "
If a comment is being outwardly homophobic then it isn’t really being respectful, is it?
"

I don't think simply deleting any comments just because they don't agree with this matter is very respectful either. You can be a "homophobic" yet still express your opinion respectfully.
"

Okay let’s put it this way; I really don’t care about the cars Lego makes. So when Brickset did it’s McLaren review the other day what did I do? Didn’t even read it, never mind go into the comments and deliberately spout about how much I don’t care. That’s being respectful, just letting the people who do like the thing enjoy their thing. So if you’re coming into the comments of something like this just to state how you think the people who like it are wrong then that’s on you buddy and that kind of behaviour is going to get your comment deleted"

I don't think YOU understand. Commenting isn't just for compliments. The word comment does not mean to compliment. As much as people complain about Lego, if they only commented when they where positive about it, no one would ever comment. Ps. You're welcome :). "

Yeah, but there’s a difference between saying “I don’t like a car” and “I don’t like a large percentage of the human population”

@1265 said:
"That's the nice thing about this set. You can say the pink represents females and the blue represents males. Each person sees things in their own way, not to be forced into messaging."

And the fact that those hairpieces and pants etc can be swapped freely with regular minifigs (or even minidolls if one wants to) allows great customization options, and that includes using pink long hair for a male(face print) minifig.

I love it.

One could even make a few 3-color transgender flag figure, using pink/blue/white color combination of hair/torso/legs.

Or other things like minifigs colored around country flag colors.

@MainBricker said:
"I feel Lego are trying to be a bit ambiguous about what this set is, and the fact that you can't buy this set in Russia or Saudi Arabia says a lot about how far Lego truly believe in this issue."

I disagree. If you read the designer's notes it clearly states what the reason for this set existing is. And let's be honest, even is that wasn't the case: it's a rainbow of people in a set call 'Everyone is Awesome'.

As for the Russia/Saudi Arabia availability: Lego is a company, not a civil rights activist group. I don't know about SA, but Russia has laws that makes it a crime to promote equal rights. Lego would be a bad employer if they expose their employees to get this point acros from the safety of an office in Billund.

@djcbs The thing is, though, that on one level or another almost ALL Lego's toys push a political agenda. They avoided making green bricks in their early days because they didn't want children to make military vehicles. They dithered on Star Wars because of its depiction of warfare. And nowadays they're making sets with men and women in different roles (like firefighters and doctors).

All of these decisions are Lego making statements—overtly or otherwise—about what they think the world should look like, and the values they want to encourage. Or, to take a more cynical view, what will make them the most money.

When people bemoan the presence of politics in art (or toys, in this instance) what they're really bemoaning is a challenge to their preconceptions. And that's fine, but don't treat politics as something that only sporadically pops up in what we consume. It's always there, whether you notice it or not.

As a trans person I cannot wait to get this set! Thank you Lego, and thank you Brickset!

@Cooliocdawg said:
"I’m a Christian, and so i believe that if I am living according to the mandates of the Bible, there is no room for me to hate anyone. Sure, you can be a Christian, and also have hatred, but it is outside of the teachings of Jesus. I can disagree with the way someone chooses to live their life, but still love them, and see them as someone made in the image of God.

Hatred is wrong (unless against overt evil) but just because I disagree with you, that doesn’t mean I hate you.

P.S. if this comment starts a political or religious debate, I will remove it myself."

As a Christian myself, I fully agree.

@jnscoelho said:
" @Mister_Jonny said:
"
I also feel that this set clashes with the elephant in the room—namely, Lego's continued production of Harry Potter sets. I realise this site wants to try and decouple that range from the views of the person that inspired them, but the bitter truth is you can't—no matter the mental hoops we might try to jump through. Regardless of Lego's prior statements on the subject, Harry Potter merchandising undermines this message of inclusivity, given trans rights are a serious concern at the moment.
"

Again with the Harry Potter nonsense?
You don't like JK, fine. An artist's work has nothing to do with the artist itself. I don't agree with Clint Eastwood's personal and political views, but I do like his work as an actor and director and I still see his movies. Same goes for a lot of other actors/directors or singers, painters, scientists, you name it. Whatever JK's opinion is, she is entitled to it, wether you like it or not, and so are you entitled to yours.

I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Tolerance for intolerance just breeds more intolerance. You can see this time and time again throughout history. If you pretend hateful views are just as valid as any other, people continue to be oppressed.

As for the JKR issue, the big problem is that she still gets a cut of the profits. In an ideal world, complete separation of art from artist would be possible, but when buying the sets fuels Joanne's hatemongering, and her consistent attempts to spread misinformation about gender issues, art and artist are going to be inherently linked. Buy the sets if you can live with the knowledge that you're complicit in this, as I might well do, but don't pretend that supporting JKR through these purchases is a morally neutral act

@jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all.

@nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all."

Those are some interesting mental gymnastics you had to go through

@CapnRex101 said:
" @Snaz said:
" @Huw Maybe comments should be locked so there isn't a predictable flame-war over differing opinions"

We are watching the comments carefully and hopefully closing them will be unnecessary."

Commendable attitude :)
Although in this light the immediate closure of the comments to the news "2021 Brickpicker sweepstakes: win LEGO prizes!" is quite puzzling.

@TehKutsuu said:
"I actually really dislike how pink is a stereotypical female and both blues are stereotypical men, feels kinda counter to what this set is about... Well, not that it actually matters. Pretty cool regardless."

That's not why the pink and blue are in this set. Those colours were part of the Monica Helms' Transgender Pride Flag, and were in 2018 incorporated in Daniel Quasar's new Progress Pride Flag.

The 11 colours of that flag are what we now get in this set. Nothing about stereotypes; quite the opposite.

@MattJek82 said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all."

Those are some interesting mental gymnastics you had to go through
"

Not at all. This is a real thing that is pretty common knowledge. The phrase was coined by a philosopher named Karl Popper. I'm just trying to summarize a very big book. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance for more info.

Disclaimer: This is NOT meant as an attack on the trans community.

Honestly, I don't think something based around sexuality/sexual identity belongs in a toy.

Edit: Whoops. I've gone and started a controversy. Yippee.

@MattJek82 said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all."

Those are some interesting mental gymnastics you had to go through
"

Not at all. People living through WW2 realized this already a long time ago. Philosopher Karl Popper published his paradox of intolerance theory (The Open Society and its Enemies) in 1945.

A nice summary: https://i.redd.it/vl00mm78jpq61.jpg

THE CHEMICALS ARE TURNING THE LEGOS G... I’m not finishing that meme.

Anyway, I’m pretty much always bothered by companies slapping a rainbow on a product and selling it. I don’t care what the intention is. It kinda comes across to me as cashing in on something relatively serious while doing little to actually help. It comes across as exploitative to me.

These companies couldn’t have cared less about LGBTQ+ rights until it became safe to do so. It disgusts me in the same way a rainbow Mickey Mouse or rainbow Stormtrooper funko pop does. I don’t like this practice.

@Snaz said:
"Disclaimer: This is NOT meant as an attack on the trans community.

Honestly, I don't think a something based around sexuality belongs in a toy."

How is this any different to the marriage sets they release?

Love this set! I know some people are trying to make this a political issue, but that says more about their own insidious beliefs than Lego simply celebrating everyone.

Well, this looks perfect for army building for all those complaining about the lack of battle packs

@Snaz said:
"Disclaimer: This is NOT meant as an attack on the trans community.

Honestly, I don't think a something based around sexuality belongs in a toy."

But LEGO sets, especially those 18+ are so much more then just a toy, there are so many display models and such (things like a Mosaic, Typewriter, Flowers and such in recent times) , the meaning of Toy, vs Artwork/means of Displaying, are blurring.

@Cooliocdawg said:
"I’m a Christian, and so i believe that if I am living according to the mandates of the Bible, there is no room for me to hate anyone. Sure, you can be a Christian, and also have hatred, but it is outside of the teachings of Jesus. I can disagree with the way someone chooses to live their life, but still love them, and see them as someone made in the image of God.

Hatred is wrong (unless against overt evil) but just because I disagree with you, that doesn’t mean I hate you.

P.S. if this comment starts a political or religious debate, I will remove it myself."

Well said. God hates sin, not sinners. The first and second greatest commandments are to love God and love people. You can still love someone without condoning their sin, after all, God does it to all of us every day :D

@Wellspring said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
"I’m a Christian, and so i believe that if I am living according to the mandates of the Bible, there is no room for me to hate anyone. Sure, you can be a Christian, and also have hatred, but it is outside of the teachings of Jesus. I can disagree with the way someone chooses to live their life, but still love them, and see them as someone made in the image of God.

Hatred is wrong (unless against overt evil) but just because I disagree with you, that doesn’t mean I hate you.

P.S. if this comment starts a political or religious debate, I will remove it myself."

Well said. God hates sin, not sinners. The first and second greatest commandments are to love God and love people. You can still love someone without condoning their sin, after all, God does it to all of us every day :D"

Amen!

" @TeriXeri said:
@Snaz said:
"Disclaimer: This is NOT meant as an attack on the trans community.

Honestly, I don't think a something based around sexuality/sexual identity belongs in a toy."

But LEGO sets, especially those 18+ are so much more then just a toy, there are so many display models and such (things like a Mosaic, Typewriter, Flowers and such in recent times) , the meaning of Toy, vs Artwork/means of Displaying, are blurring."

Lego is a toy brand.

@Snaz said:
"Lego is a toy brand.""

Yes, and still LEGO calls this set "building set for adults", and an 18+ logo on the box.

" @djtucci18_gmail_com said:

I don't think YOU understand. Commenting isn't just for compliments. The word comment does not mean to compliment. As much as people complain about Lego, if they only commented when they where positive about it, no one would ever comment. Ps. You're welcome :). "

I think you need to go back and read the comments you quoted again. The issue is about respect, not dissent. Do you disagree that spouting homophobia is disrespectful?

@lordofdragonss said:
"I think is lame it has no full flesh colored fig.

Also just a reminder- None company is your friend. This is just another product."

You're probably not aware of this, but "flesh colored" is not a very inclusive term.

@XenonX said:
" @Mister_Jonny said:
"... will we also see queer-coded people in sets going forward? In Lego's movies? Their cartoons? Or is this a one-off that capitalises on Pride Month's visibility, that preaches to the choir instead of challenging preconceptions amongst its younger consumers?
"

Robin Loot from Barracuda Bay appear to be trans, as she is presented as “former Gunner of the Cross Bone Clipper” who were obviously male, but wearing similar clothes.

The Lego Movie 2 contained a few characters who were rather queer: Queen Watevra Wa’Nabi and Balthazar (the spa vampire).

I hope we’ll see more and more openly queer characters than these in future. But at least LEGO has already moved far from the extremely binary world of boys and girls of my 80’ies childhood. Or just 10 years ago. "

Okay so I wasn’t going to get into this thread as I usually don’t comment on threads regarding products in which I have no interest; however, I’m stepping into the minefield - not to take the wind out of anyone’s sails, but to ask quasi-rhetorical questions:

Couldn’t Robin Loot be a female pirate? Keira Knightly ended up becoming a pirate captain in the Pirates of the Caribbean series, didn’t she? She becomes as capable at pirate-ing as any of them and dresses the part, if I’m not mistaken; as I recall, she wasn’t the only powerful female pirate captain.

Isn’t Queen Watevra Wa’Nabi is a girl who fell in love with Batman and got married? Sure there was a lot of glitter and glam, but isn’t that because we were seeing it from the perspective of the younger sister playing with them the way she wanted?

Finally, maybe I’m mistaken but isn’t Balthazar the LEGO version of the whole ‘Sparkly vampire’ thing from those Twilight movies that tween girls enjoy? That made sense being that the younger sister seemed to be close to that age range.

@TeriXeri said:
" @Snaz said:
"Lego is a toy brand.""

Yes, and still LEGO calls this set "building set for adults", and an 18+ logo on the box.
"

"This is not a toy!"

"Well, it kind of is..."

"No, actually, it's a highly sophisticated interlocking brick system."

"But we got it at the toy store..."

@Snaz said:
"Disclaimer: This is NOT meant as an attack on the trans community.

Honestly, I don't think something based around sexuality/sexual identity belongs in a toy."

So look at it as a box of coloured minifigures then. What’s the issue? If I hand this set to my young children they will play with the minifigures and talk about colours. They won’t start trying to set up a blind date for the bisexual one with the gay one or put the trans one in a LEGO car with the queer one.

Don’t worry, my children won’t be freaked out by me saying there are gay, lesbian, trans, queer, bisexual or whatever else people identify as in the world...they think that ‘everyone is awesome’ means exactly that.

(I’m a gay mummy, my children are not brought up thinking toys are gay)

@Snaz said:
"Disclaimer: This is NOT meant as an attack on the trans community.

Honestly, I don't think something based around sexuality/sexual identity belongs in a toy."

I have wondered many times why people say this with a straight face while being ok with weapons in toy sets. Not assuming you are, just speaking in general here. Arguably, hurting people with weapons is a lot worse than loving someone. Even if that love doesn't conform to your personal view of it.

By the way, children have a lot less trouble dealing with the concept of "people who are not like me" than adults do. Which probably means we shouldn't be too worried about sets like this.

Thoughts I have after reading (too many) comments:

1) I'm supper hyped about the positive reaction of many people on this forum.

2) I love this set and I'll get one if I can only get one, but if I can get several, I'll gift it to many of my LGBTQ2S+ friends who are not into LEGO.

3) I'm going to build mine with my kids and proudly display it in the house. I want them to learn that whoever they are, they can be proud of themselves. And I don't want them to turn into bigots.

4) I'm always amazed at people who say that if we all became LGBTQ2S+, humans would go instinct. Firstly, no one is asking you or anybody else for that matter to "become" LGBTQ2S+. Secondly, you realize LGBTQ2S+ people also have kids too? Most of those I know do, in fact, whether because they had them before coming out, or because they chose to have some.

5) Those who say you should separate an artist from its art, well, you can't. Yet, no artists are perfect: everybody has faults. The choice of giving your hard eared money to an artist should be based on moral and ethnical considerations. When buying stuff or encouraging an artist or a company, I always question their values. I've never encountered anyone who I was 100% in agreement with. So I make decisions based on my better (and less than perfect) moral and ethical judgement. As a Black Metal fan, this is the kind of reflections I constantly have. I do encourage and listen to some bands but refuse to listen to others (even when I like their music).

6) Those who are afraid that this set (or other inclusive initiatives) will influence their kids into becoming LGBTQ2S+, I have some news for you: your kids are fine and way more tolerant than you are.

7) To those who say Brickset should not erase negative comments or comments who go against the LGBTQ2S+ community because it impedes their free speech, I have this to say: you'd be the first to kick out of your house LGBTQ2S+ people because of what they say and represent. Brickset has no obligation to put up with you or your nonsense. It is a private website afterall.

That is all for now.

@Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction.

@Snaz said:
" @TeriXeri said:
" @Snaz said:
"Lego is a toy brand.""

Yes, and still LEGO calls this set "building set for adults", and an 18+ logo on the box.
"

"This is not a toy!"

"Well, it kind of is..."

"No, actually, it's a highly sophisticated interlocking brick system."

"But we got it at the toy store...""

I can still get upset at how the LEGO movie was robbed at the Oscars... What a great movie

@Wellspring said:
"Out of curiosity, why do people like monofigs? Especially enough to pay $30 for a rare color. What are they used for?"

I suggest NOT looking at the 'Collecting every color of a single piece' thread in the forums if you don't want to get sucked in too. Stick them in a nice little display and getting all the colors of some piece together starts to get really tempting. Even for just common pieces like 1x2 plates its pretty neat, let alone something more complex like a collection of monofigs! :)

@SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

The comments sure don't represent that, from both perspectives including my own. I apologize.

I was happy to see LEGO finally take an explicit stand for inclusion, and also terrified to see the reactions, given what I've seen even on this very site. It's a nice statement from a company with influence, and has some great parts appeal, but I can understand it's a bit of a clash with the HP sets (and my take on separation of art and artist is that it's impossible when the art reflects the artist's opinions, and there are several moments where HP is rather ignorant). I wouldn't seriously expect a company to end a license like that out of the blue, especially when it hasn't been flopping, and I doubt general public opinion of HP will ever tank. But if the author was willing to listen and stop spitting her ignorant rhetoric, people wouldn't be as upset with the franchise she created that gave her the public power to make people believe her. So I agree that there's a clash, but I still like this set is a display, collector's, and parts piece and think it's a good move as long as the sentiment isn't a one-off.

@nushae said:
" @MattJek82 said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all."

Those are some interesting mental gymnastics you had to go through
"

Not at all. This is a real thing that is pretty common knowledge. The phrase was coined by a philosopher named Karl Popper. I'm just trying to summarize a very big book. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance for more info."

Just because someone calling himself a philosopher said something doesn't mean it's right.

It's perfectly ok to tolerate the intolerant as long as the intolerant aren't restricting anyone's liberty. Views can be argued and changed, actions must be judged. If all the intolerant do is voice their views, you can discuss with them and try to change their mind, but as soon as you start censoring them, you're legitimizing their extremism, effectively polarizing the society and becoming intolerant yourself.

@Snaz said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

The comments sure don't represent that, from both perspectives including my own. I apologize."

I push back against intolerance (and I believe we should) but I always aim to do so respectfully. After all, how can we improve our views if we do not discuss them with others? If anything I posted seemed disrespectful I assure you that was not the intent. I read most other people's posts with the same assumptions, and I think so far it's quite an agreeable discussion.

So I am a bit surprised at your comment.

I love the set & the message it represents, designer video is great. Great job mr Ashton!

@Arnoldos said:
" @nushae said:
" @MattJek82 said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all."

Those are some interesting mental gymnastics you had to go through
"

Not at all. This is a real thing that is pretty common knowledge. The phrase was coined by a philosopher named Karl Popper. I'm just trying to summarize a very big book. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance for more info."

Just because someone calling himself a philosopher said something doesn't mean it's right.

It's perfectly ok to tolerate the intolerant as long as the intolerant aren't restricting anyone's liberty. Views can be argued and changed, actions must be judged. If all the intolerant do is voice their views, you can discuss with them and try to change their mind, but as soon as you start censoring them, you're legitimizing their extremism, effectively polarizing the society and becoming intolerant yourself."

I would argue the opposite view, once you start discussing intolerant views you legitimise them. They become mainstream instead of fringe beliefs and gain a veil of acceptability they didn’t have previously.

The light blue one looks like Force Ghost Obi-Wan

I’m completely ignoring the comments on this one! As a lgbtq+ person it’s so cool and encouraging to see LEGO offer its support in this way. And, a really interesting and unique set, too!

@IgelCampus said:
" @Indy24LA said:
"Love this set! I know some people are trying to make this a political issue, but that says more about their own insidious beliefs than Lego simply celebrating everyone."

Lego is not celebrating everyone. Everyone would include right-wingers and worse and they are definitely not included here. (For a good reason one could add)

Lego simply found another niche where a lot of people will buy it even when they were never interested in Lego in the past just because they think this set has a message.
"

You do understand that is your prejudice, right? I know a few right-wingers who support human rights and equality for everyone and would take no issue with this set. It's a choice to single out this set and say, "this excludes me" instead of looking at all the Lego sets already released or coming out.

@Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Let kids play with LEGO minifigures that carry guns and sets that shot missiles, but please, don't teach them about love and tolerance!!!!

Kids need to learn tolerance at a very young age if they are to become decent human beings.

I'm very happy with the additional clarification of the colours because I had no idea there was a flag redesign. I was wondering why people were getting their panties in a bunch when it doesn't even look like the flag. But now I "understand" better.

Honestly, it's a neat little set even without the underlying message.

Now this is a great LEGO set. Not only is it great value, but it shows inclusivity in many ways, towards a group that doesn’t get a whole lot of support shown towards them in the big picture. Bravo LEGO!

@JammyD said:
"I’m completely ignoring the comments on this one! As a lgbtq+ person it’s so cool and encouraging to see LEGO offer its support in this way. And, a really interesting and unique set, too! "

The majority of commenters are being very positive, and even some of those with differing views are being respectful or at least careful. So on the whole I think it's a good sharing experience.

Oh, but you're ignoring the comments, so I'm typing to myself... D'oh!

Thank you for the excellent review and showcasing both the pride flag this set represents and the fun new colors of hairpieces as well. As a queer AFOL, this set is a very classy celebration of LGBTQ2IA people! Who doesn't enjoy the simplicity and beauty monofigs?

@SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

Yet for whatever reason, LEGO has always completely avoided representing anything remotely associated with religion in their products, yet they are totally fine with a set like this.

This set is clearly representing the LGBT community specifically, not literally "everyone, regardless of religion".

The only thing this set does is divide its current customer base... I can't see it gaining them any customers, because Lego already was an inclusive product. In fact, Lego has always been the shining example of how to do business right in today's highly charged political climate.

It is sad, because it's such a great set in regards to the monochrome figures. I guess only time will tell whether this was a good decision for the company.

@Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

I also agree. Parents should be the ones teaching their kids about moral values, not toy companies whose primary goal isn't making the world a better place, but rather first and foremost profit.

I'm trying not to be sucked into responding to people here, but I just want to say I deeply appreciate @Huw and the Brickset team for moderating the comments. :) You'd think its some peoples first day on the internet to be shocked that moderation happens in communities...

I'm Bi and Non-binary and been a Lego fan forever, representation matters and I'm glad to see this set from Lego! I hope this signals more inclusion in their play sets.

@Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have.

@Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Your inference is that this set is IN-decent and UN-clean then?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that does appear to be what you're saying, so here's your opportunity to correct any misunderstanding.

@Arnoldos said:
" @nushae said:
" @MattJek82 said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
" @nushae said:
" @jnscoelho said:
"
I don't understand this "intolerance for intolerants". You either say what I want to hear, or you should be silenced. Sounds kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? And it's exactly this kind of attitude that is fueling extremism.
"

Intolerance for intolerants is not the same as intolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don't understand that, OF COURSE you're not going to understand why intolerance should never be tolerated."

intolerant - not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one's own.
It's Oxford Languages definition, not mine.

But if you don't tolerate something, you're intolerant. In other words, if you don't tolerate intolerants, you're an intolerant yourself. Thus, according to you, you should never be tolerated. Is that it?"

This is called the paradox of intolerance - if you think being tolerant means also accepting the intolerance of others, you're falling into a trap. "Intolerance of intolerance" is a special case - being tolerant, and promoting tolerance, DEMANDS the intolerance of intolerance. This is not hypocritical at all."

Those are some interesting mental gymnastics you had to go through
"

Not at all. This is a real thing that is pretty common knowledge. The phrase was coined by a philosopher named Karl Popper. I'm just trying to summarize a very big book. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance for more info."

Just because someone calling himself a philosopher said something doesn't mean it's right.

It's perfectly ok to tolerate the intolerant as long as the intolerant aren't restricting anyone's liberty. Views can be argued and changed, actions must be judged. If all the intolerant do is voice their views, you can discuss with them and try to change their mind, but as soon as you start censoring them, you're legitimizing their extremism, effectively polarizing the society and becoming intolerant yourself."

Do you really think this is something whistled up by a hack claiming to be a philosopher? Or are you just saying that so you can swipe it aside without looking into it? The topic is way too deep to discuss in a toy forum but I really think you should give this some attention. The wikipedia page is just a starting point. This is not just something pulled out of a hat by a single person claiming to be more than he is - this is taken seriously by many educated people, and has been for over 70 years now. Also it has been repeatedly proven correct by history itself.

I also disagree that censoring intolerance is legitimizing it. Quite the opposite. Here on this forum we see opposing views being debated reasonably. That is fine. But what we are talking about here is *intolerance*. Intolerance is not the same as "having a different view". Intolerance is a form of extremism. Intolerants are, as a rule, not at all open to debate, so you should wonder why they want to join it in the first place.

Intolerant groups have historically used open debate disingenuously, trying to subvert it from within with sofistry and strawmen. The only way to defend against that is to refuse to let them join the debate.

But do you really not see that it is preposterous to claim that to be open to everything one must also be open to the opposite of openness? Doesn't this feel even a bit funny to you? If so you are missing the obvious thing: tolerance and intolerance are mutually exclusive. You can't have both exist at the same time in the same place. So, in order to have tolerance, we must not have intolerance.

I for one am finding these comments quite entertaining.

@eiffel006 said:
" @Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have."

Yet for the longest time, LEGO claimed to have no political or religious agendas, and their only goal was supposedly inspiring kids to be creative and imaginative.

I think people not being happy with LEGO starting to push a LGBTQ agenda right now after being silent on any sort of political matter for so many years should be perfectly understandable.

Everyone knows that sex sells.

So I'll put it this way... I am happy for every person that feels that this set has in any way supported them in their struggles in this harsh world.

At the same time, I am very curious if LEGO would produce a set to support/be inclusive towards the victims of world hunger, various kinds of abuse, slavery, etc.

Also, now there is no reason for us to not expect to see other "controversial" themes like LEGO temples based on actual world religions and so on, to be truly inclusive.

There are many worthy causes and people suffering/being shunned for a lot of various reasons in this world.
If the only one they choose to represent is the one based on sex (therefore profitable), then I'm sorry, but this has not been about inclusivity at all, just a cheap marketing move

I had no idea there was a different flag than the traditional Pride flag. But this was a good idea including all those colors for the updated flag.

From a monochrome collector perspective, it looks neat. I have only built up a few, so this would be a welcome collection.

From a human being perspective, it is always a good idea to include as many people as we can. I do agree with another commenter and hope this actually leads to something and not LEGO just cashing in on Pride.

@LegoDavid said:
" @eiffel006 said:
" @Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have."

Yet for the longest time, LEGO claimed to have no political or religious agendas, and their only goal was supposedly inspiring kids to be creative and imaginative.

I think people not being happy with LEGO starting to push a LGBTQ agenda right now after being silent on any sort of political matter for so many years should be perfectly understandable. "

I suppose that depends on whether you view human rights as political or not.

Love the set, thanks for the review. I'm not a member of the LGBTQIA+ community but I apreciate the message of inclusiveness and also it's a great display piece. Awesome indeed!

@marjangles said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @eiffel006 said:
" @Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have."

Yet for the longest time, LEGO claimed to have no political or religious agendas, and their only goal was supposedly inspiring kids to be creative and imaginative.

I think people not being happy with LEGO starting to push a LGBTQ agenda right now after being silent on any sort of political matter for so many years should be perfectly understandable. "

I suppose that depends on whether you view human rights as political or not. "

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with.

@marjangles said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @eiffel006 said:
" @Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have."

Yet for the longest time, LEGO claimed to have no political or religious agendas, and their only goal was supposedly inspiring kids to be creative and imaginative.

I think people not being happy with LEGO starting to push a LGBTQ agenda right now after being silent on any sort of political matter for so many years should be perfectly understandable. "

I suppose that depends on whether you view human rights as political or not. "

I was about to write that as well. But I'll repeat it anyway : this is about human rights, not about politics.

@ThatBrickGuy said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

I'm looking forward to all the love and tolerance that White Christians have to look forward to then."

This is the difference between tolerance and intolerance. For intolerant people only the total removal and suppression of what is not directly catered to them is acceptable. For the tolerant it's just one more flavor of icecream - others can have it if they want but no one has to, so no skin off their backs.

So how is the existence of stuff that represents others than you, a problem for you? If you say "well I want to see ME represented too" let me congratulate you: now you know how the underrepresented feel every hour of every day, about everything they encounter.

The white, cis, christian viewpoint is ubiquitous. Like, every politician closes his speech with "god save america". 99% of the faces you see on tv are cis/white. Even now, with much mor erepresentation popping up, the large majority of relationships portrayed in media are boy/girl. Those few that aren't jump out to you because they are different from you, so imagine how a gay couple feels watching most tv shows in existence.

Cis white christians don't need extra representation because it's already the default thing everywhere. This is why, for example, we don't have a "men in science" LEGO set, while we do have a "women in science" one. It doesn't mean men are somehow less, it simply means they don't need the extra boost.

To complain that everything else gets representation except you is to be blind to everyday media.

@LegoDavid said:
" @marjangles said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @eiffel006 said:
" @Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have."

Yet for the longest time, LEGO claimed to have no political or religious agendas, and their only goal was supposedly inspiring kids to be creative and imaginative.

I think people not being happy with LEGO starting to push a LGBTQ agenda right now after being silent on any sort of political matter for so many years should be perfectly understandable. "

I suppose that depends on whether you view human rights as political or not. "

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

You could say the same thing about anything politicians legislate on. Even things as mundane as crosswalks and public parking would be considered political by that standard, but I don't see people complaining about Lego sending a political message every time a street or parking garage set is released.

@MainBricker said:
" @IgelCampus said:
" @Indy24LA said:
"Love this set! I know some people are trying to make this a political issue, but that says more about their own insidious beliefs than Lego simply celebrating everyone."

Lego is not celebrating everyone. Everyone would include right-wingers and worse and they are definitely not included here. (For a good reason one could add)

Lego simply found another niche where a lot of people will buy it even when they were never interested in Lego in the past just because they think this set has a message.
"

You can be right-wing and gay..."

Of course. Who said you couldn't?

I just wanted to point out, that the title of the set is wrong, because Adolf Hitler was definitely not awesome and probably 50% of Americans would not even include Trump.
So it's just a marketing claim to get people to buy this (which is of course fine) and some even want to "multi-buy" so marketing-wise it seems to work.

If you want to get political (I know this is definitely the wrong place to discuss this) just read Twitter threads where both the left and right can no longer listen to each other to learn about other views which maybe would change their own opinion when reading about some other interesting perspective. Today everything is Them against Us and this set is taken one side here clearly. Personally I don't care what people have between their legs and who they want to spend their life with as long as they don't force others to their idea of life. I am interested in talking to people which are nice and friendly to each other and to have a good time together, whether they share views or have different opinions on topics.

To come back to Lego, I will not buy this set, because it's a boring build and I am not interested in monofigs and I do not show my political opinion with a Lego set in my living room. But I will happily build the new castle with the family to have a good quality time together.

People relax.
This set has nice colours and nice minifigs! Or haven't you noticed?

@nushae said:
" @ThatBrickGuy said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

I'm looking forward to all the love and tolerance that White Christians have to look forward to then."

Cis white christians don't need extra representation because it's already the default thing everywhere. This is why, for example, we don't have a "men in science" LEGO set, while we do have a "women in science" one. It doesn't mean men are somehow less, it simply means they don't need the extra boost.

To complain that everything else gets representation except you is to be blind to everyday media."

Ok but... when was the last time Christians got properly represented in LEGO? Or heck, in media as a whole?

The "default thing everywhere" is mostly the secular/agnostic view. In a world that is increasingly moving towards secularism, claiming Christians are represented on a regular basis is a bit of a stretch.

@LegoDavid said:
" @nushae said:
" @ThatBrickGuy said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

I'm looking forward to all the love and tolerance that White Christians have to look forward to then."

Cis white christians don't need extra representation because it's already the default thing everywhere. This is why, for example, we don't have a "men in science" LEGO set, while we do have a "women in science" one. It doesn't mean men are somehow less, it simply means they don't need the extra boost.

To complain that everything else gets representation except you is to be blind to everyday media."

Ok but... when was the last time Christians got properly represented in LEGO? Or heck, in media as a whole?

The "default thing everywhere" is mostly the secular/agnostic view. In a world that is increasingly moving towards secularism, claiming Christians are represented on a regular basis is a bit of a stretch.
"

Do the Advent calenders count?

@Darth_TNT said:
" @LegoDavid said:
" @nushae said:
" @ThatBrickGuy said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

I'm looking forward to all the love and tolerance that White Christians have to look forward to then."

Cis white christians don't need extra representation because it's already the default thing everywhere. This is why, for example, we don't have a "men in science" LEGO set, while we do have a "women in science" one. It doesn't mean men are somehow less, it simply means they don't need the extra boost.

To complain that everything else gets representation except you is to be blind to everyday media."

Ok but... when was the last time Christians got properly represented in LEGO? Or heck, in media as a whole?

The "default thing everywhere" is mostly the secular/agnostic view. In a world that is increasingly moving towards secularism, claiming Christians are represented on a regular basis is a bit of a stretch.
"

Do the Advent calenders count?"

Not really, to be honest. As much as Christmas started out as a Christian holiday, it gradually shifted to becoming another secular holiday, with a lot of its religious roots being removed and replaced with fabrications such as Santa Claus. The fact that in some places its name was even changed from "Christmas" to "Xmas" is the ultimate proof of that.

@Arnoldos said:
" @nick3c said:
"" @jouhyo said:
"What a wrong message. If everyone become LGBT, this world will go extinct in a 100 years"

That’s for sure.
I really wish people would open there eyes, instead of going with the crowd.
It’s really disheartening.""

If this world goes extinct, it will be because of climate change, not some sexual minorities."

Oh my god, I’m gay, I’m a mummy....how the hell did that happen!!

@LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are.

@LegoDavid said:
" @nushae said:
" @ThatBrickGuy said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

I'm looking forward to all the love and tolerance that White Christians have to look forward to then."

Cis white christians don't need extra representation because it's already the default thing everywhere. This is why, for example, we don't have a "men in science" LEGO set, while we do have a "women in science" one. It doesn't mean men are somehow less, it simply means they don't need the extra boost.

To complain that everything else gets representation except you is to be blind to everyday media."

Ok but... when was the last time Christians got properly represented in LEGO? Or heck, in media as a whole?

The "default thing everywhere" is mostly the secular/agnostic view. In a world that is increasingly moving towards secularism, claiming Christians are represented on a regular basis is a bit of a stretch.
"

LEGO specifically does not do religion, so also not Christianity. It does have mysticism in fantasy settings like ninjago and chima, so it is not completely devoid of it; LEGO just chooses to avoid explicit real life religious references. That seems fair and balanced to me, doesn't it to you? I also think there is no need to put overtly religious things into LEGO, just as I don't think there should be overt republican or democrat political stuff in it.

If you want you can make a church out of LEGO and put people in it, and you can even cobble together a white jesus if you want to, even though the real one was not white. It's your party. Politics and religion are mine fields, even something abstract and not overtly political like this set is taken as an offense by some, so I'm not at all surprised LEGO just leaves ALL of them out of the toys.

As for the rest of media - christianity is certainly represented all the time. People regularly pray for one another in many tv shows. Many shows have scenes set at churches or during church services. I know of at least three shows that actually have priests as their main character (even if it's stuff like Father Downing). A tremendous amount of horror movies has an overtly catholic theme to it (and not just the exorcist knock-offs either - most demon mythology is based on the catholic viewpoint).

But it's much more pervasive than that. Crosses hanging on the wall in the background, a nun sitting with a rosary in a waiting room, just the 'random' assortment of extras in shows. In your "secular default" we still encounter phrases like "go to hell" or "for god's sake" and so on. It is assumed that everyone knows who or what the devil is, since, after all, this is the west and here christianity is default. It's this kind of stuff that I really mean. It's SO ubiquitous you don't even see it anymore.

What's worse, it's the only religion that is represented like that, like it's wallpaper and no big deal. Do you realise what representation like that would mean for other groups? It is STILL quite common to have (for example) "being a muslim" or "being gay" be the only defining trait of a character, rather than just another aspect of them mentioned in passing. That's not even proper representation, but a caricature that serves no one. So yes, christianity is represented plenty in media.

I will want two, one to set up and another for history, to remember the time when it was still necessary to fight for rights

@LegoDavid said:
" @nushae said:
" @ThatBrickGuy said:
" @SirZed said:
" @Matt_Saderson said:
"The set is interesting. What it represents ..."

is love and tolerance towards everyone, regardless of colour, religion or sexual orientation. Which is a wonderful thing, gaining much-appreciated traction."

I'm looking forward to all the love and tolerance that White Christians have to look forward to then."

Cis white christians don't need extra representation because it's already the default thing everywhere. This is why, for example, we don't have a "men in science" LEGO set, while we do have a "women in science" one. It doesn't mean men are somehow less, it simply means they don't need the extra boost.

To complain that everything else gets representation except you is to be blind to everyday media."

Ok but... when was the last time Christians got properly represented in LEGO? Or heck, in media as a whole?
"

Abraham Lincoln, William Shakespeare, Paul McCartney, Hans Christian Andersen, the comic book character Daredevil, Bob Cratchit, Tiny Tim... I think (well, hope) you get the point.

@eiffel006 said:
" @Master_Wu said:
" @Yeetforlego said:
"Lego has crossed the line for me. I am a big monofig collector and still don’t know if I want this set. Lego is a kids toy, not a political statement. Kids should not be introduced to these things until way later. Is there any decent brand any more that will let kids be kids??There are not many brands that keep there toys clean for kids, can we please just have lego? "

Exactly! I couldn't agree more with this. It's just a toy and I'm sick of companies like Lego pushing their political agendas through products and advertising. Our society should not be normalizing this!!"

Every company has an agenda and every single one of them promote one type of lifestyles or another. That's how they can sell their products. Thats marketing 101. It's true of booze companies, gun companies, churches, but also furniture companies and toy companies. LEGO is what you Americans call a Liberal company and promotes Liberal values. If that's not of your liking, fine. Do business with someone else. But stop saying companies should not have agendas. They all have."

Their only agenda is to make money. Things like this set is pure pandering and virtue signaling to make themselves look good in the media.

@Cooliocdawg said:
" @LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are."

It's a real shame though that we need humans to tell us what those transcendental beings want from us... Because they're not speaking to us directly. But that does mean that either way, the word on "what is a human right" comes from a human mouth. I personally prefer those mouths to belong to elected people rather than self appointed ones.

@nushae said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
" @LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are."

It's a real shame though that we need humans to tell us what those transcendental beings want from us... Because they're not speaking to us directly. But that does mean that either way, the word on "what is a human right" comes from a human mouth. I personally prefer those mouths to belong to elected people rather than self appointed ones."

Well, there was a time when they spoke to humans directly, and luckily for us, it was written down.

@nushae said:
"
Do you really think this is something whistled up by a hack claiming to be a philosopher? Or are you just saying that so you can swipe it aside without looking into it? The topic is way too deep to discuss in a toy forum but I really think you should give this some attention. The wikipedia page is just a starting point. This is not just something pulled out of a hat by a single person claiming to be more than he is - this is taken seriously by many educated people, and has been for over 70 years now. Also it has been repeatedly proven correct by history itself.

I also disagree that censoring intolerance is legitimizing it. Quite the opposite. Here on this forum we see opposing views being debated reasonably. That is fine. But what we are talking about here is *intolerance*. Intolerance is not the same as "having a different view". Intolerance is a form of extremism. Intolerants are, as a rule, not at all open to debate, so you should wonder why they want to join it in the first place.

Intolerant groups have historically used open debate disingenuously, trying to subvert it from within with sofistry and strawmen. The only way to defend against that is to refuse to let them join the debate.

But do you really not see that it is preposterous to claim that to be open to everything one must also be open to the opposite of openness? Doesn't this feel even a bit funny to you? If so you are missing the obvious thing: tolerance and intolerance are mutually exclusive. You can't have both exist at the same time in the same place. So, in order to have tolerance, we must not have intolerance.
"

What I mean is: philosophy is not a science and philosophers are not scientists. They don't provide answers, they provide insight. Whether you agree with this insight or not is entirely up to you.

I respect that you agree with that "Paradox of Tolerance". I, however, don't.

There were philosophers who said that nothing is real, that existence is futile and life is suffering. Should we accept this as universal truth? I don't think so.

This set is simply amazing. So happy to see something so unexpected from Lego. Put a smile on my face right away :)

@lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's about love, something we all need to learn more of imo. It also is NOT about anything sexual.

@lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's not marketed for kids, the box says 18+ , and the Description names it "This LEGO® Everyone is Awesome 40516 building set for adults"

LEGO even has a link to the Adults Welcome page : https://www.lego.com/en-us/categories/adults-welcome

@Cooliocdawg said:
" @nushae said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
" @LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are."

It's a real shame though that we need humans to tell us what those transcendental beings want from us... Because they're not speaking to us directly. But that does mean that either way, the word on "what is a human right" comes from a human mouth. I personally prefer those mouths to belong to elected people rather than self appointed ones."

Well, there was a time when they spoke to humans directly, and luckily for us, it was written down."

Why do I get the feeling you aren't talking about the Quran?

@Cooliocdawg said:
" @nushae said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
" @LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are."

It's a real shame though that we need humans to tell us what those transcendental beings want from us... Because they're not speaking to us directly. But that does mean that either way, the word on "what is a human right" comes from a human mouth. I personally prefer those mouths to belong to elected people rather than self appointed ones."

Well, there was a time when they spoke to humans directly, and luckily for us, it was written down."

Let's play the devil's advocate here. The guys who wrote it down *claim* that's what happened. And we really don;t have any proof. Plus can you imagine there might be good reasons for someone to lie about this? Yeah I know.

Regardless of what you believe, it should be obvious that the problem here is getting the people who don't believe such beings exist on board too. Because I can see how they would be hesitant to submit to the authority of such an unseen, unproven entity. And let's not forget that this has been tried before and look what happened then. Too many atrocities have been committed in name of that authority already.

It's pretty naive and idealistic to think no one will ever abuse such absolute power. No, I'd rather have people in power that can be held accountable.

I will probably arrange the minifigs in a V-Formation rather than diagonally.
Now LEGO needs to release monofigs in all other colors for the same low price and I will be happy to put them in a Ribba frame.

Well, this set and article has caused so many comments!

I think it's a great set, the layout and colours are a work of art. If I'm honest, I think is also suggests inclusiveness of skin colours as well as gender and when I first saw it, Pride was not my immediate first thought! Whatever views anyone has, it's a great set and let's not get bogged down in personal opinions on gender or any other part of our identities. It's LEGO afterall and isn't that why we are AFOLs?

If I buy this (and I'm very tempted) it will not be an indication of my character other than I love LEGO.

@Syren_Neostar said:
" @lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's about love, something we all need to learn more of imo. It also is NOT about anything sexual."

Romantic love (which is what the lgbt are about) is inherently sexual, do you not understand basic biology? There is love like you love a pet, then there is love like you love your wife. Completely different. Lbgt isn’t pushing for buddy buddy, friendship love, they are only pushing, by existence, for sexual love.

@Cooliocdawg said:
" @nushae said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
" @LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are."

It's a real shame though that we need humans to tell us what those transcendental beings want from us... Because they're not speaking to us directly. But that does mean that either way, the word on "what is a human right" comes from a human mouth. I personally prefer those mouths to belong to elected people rather than self appointed ones."

Well, there was a time when they spoke to humans directly, and luckily for us, it was written down."

Are you referring to the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

@ksprice45 said:
" @Syren_Neostar said:
" @lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's about love, something we all need to learn more of imo. It also is NOT about anything sexual."

Romantic love (which is what the lgbt are about) is inherently sexual, do you not understand basic biology? There is love like you love a pet, then there is love like you love your wife. Completely different. Lbgt isn’t pushing for buddy buddy, friendship love, they are only pushing, by existence, for sexual love. "

Boy have I got bad news for you about the "traditional" reason for heterosexual marriage... And to think that Lego exposes children to this with cake toppers and Brickheadz and so on.

Alright, it looks like it's group hug time! Who's with me? :)

@ksprice45 said:
" @Syren_Neostar said:
" @lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's about love, something we all need to learn more of imo. It also is NOT about anything sexual."

Romantic love (which is what the lgbt are about) is inherently sexual, do you not understand basic biology? There is love like you love a pet, then there is love like you love your wife. Completely different. Lbgt isn’t pushing for buddy buddy, friendship love, they are only pushing, by existence, for sexual love. "

Then when is Lego going to stop putting moms and dads in sets? Because that's no less "inherently sexual" than a same sex relationship.

The reality is that romantic love and sex can either coexist or be independent of one another. In fact the "A" in "LGBTQIA+" is in recognition of asexuals—people who don't experience sexual attraction, but some of whom (not all!) do experience romantic attraction. The reality of "basic biology" is that brains are immensely weird and complex and don't all work the same, and that people shouldn't be considered lesser for it.

I agree with Greg, they should have included smiley faces and matching space helmets so you could switch to 11 different colored space astronauts!

Outstanding and excellent set!
Seemingly simple, but perfectly designed.

BTW, tthis is exactly the right thing to separate normal people from bygots, and show who is who in attitude to LGBTQ+ rights.

Not to forget to mention, this set has generous selection of monochrome figs.

@ksprice45 said:
" @Syren_Neostar said:
" @lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's about love, something we all need to learn more of imo. It also is NOT about anything sexual."

Romantic love (which is what the lgbt are about) is inherently sexual, do you not understand basic biology? There is love like you love a pet, then there is love like you love your wife. Completely different. Lbgt isn’t pushing for buddy buddy, friendship love, they are only pushing, by existence, for sexual love. "

It's only about sex if you make it about sex. The same way a wedding set is also not explicitly about sex even though the sexuality of the couple is undeniable.

The reason the LGBTQ+ flag is a rainbow is because it is an abstraction - and the evolution of the flag to include ever more colors drives this home. The point is to celebrate diversity in all its forms. Some of this diversity comes from sexuality other than your own, some of it comes from skin color other than your own. I really don't see how celebrating the rainbow of variety that is humanity can be so controversial for some.

It's like going to a restaurant and demanding all the salads are taken off the menu because you only like steak. So just don't order a salad and let others enjoy them! (And yes, a restaurant would be smart to show people with such demands the door.)

What does it matter to you that Amanda and Eve (or Adam and Steve) want to live together? How exactly does that, happening in some house down the street, impact your life in any way? Just let them be!

@captainpie said:
"I like it , great to add some diversity awareness in this form.

Only criticism I have that takes away a bit is that the pink and purple (stereotyped female colours) figures are more feminine, "

The pink, white and blue figures on the right represent transgender individuals who identify as female, neither/in transition, and male respectively.

@nushae said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
" @nushae said:
" @Cooliocdawg said:
" @LegoDavid said:
"

Human rights is 100% linked to politics, because it is up to politicians to decide what even constitutes those "human rights" to begin with. "

That is one of the scariest things I’ve ever heard. The idea that a human, or even a group of humans has the power to determine human rights is legitimately frightening. Human rights have to be determined by a transcendental being, or else every government abuse of people is ok, because the government gets to determine what their rights are."

It's a real shame though that we need humans to tell us what those transcendental beings want from us... Because they're not speaking to us directly. But that does mean that either way, the word on "what is a human right" comes from a human mouth. I personally prefer those mouths to belong to elected people rather than self appointed ones."

Well, there was a time when they spoke to humans directly, and luckily for us, it was written down."

Let's play the devil's advocate here. The guys who wrote it down *claim* that's what happened. And we really don;t have any proof. Plus can you imagine there might be good reasons for someone to lie about this? Yeah I know.

Regardless of what you believe, it should be obvious that the problem here is getting the people who don't believe such beings exist on board too. Because I can see how they would be hesitant to submit to the authority of such an unseen, unproven entity. And let's not forget that this has been tried before and look what happened then. Too many atrocities have been committed in name of that authority already.

It's pretty naive and idealistic to think no one will ever abuse such absolute power. No, I'd rather have people in power that can be held accountable."

Well, first off, the people who believed the prophets, did so because it was proved to them, and they did see proof that He was real. Second, the Bible was written over several thousand years, by 40+ authors. It would be a little difficult to keep your story straight for a lie over that time. As far as atrocities committed in The name of God, those people were flat out ignoring what he told them to do. The crusades, for instance, were selfish leaders using religion to rile up the people to go take more land. As far as submitting to a higher authority, would you rather submit to a flawed human being, or an all perfect, just God? A human that will try to gain all power for himself, or a God that already has all power, but gives you the choice to choose or reject Him?

I am honestly saddened that people have done things in the name of Christ that cause people to be turned off by a belief that went against the racist, misogynistic cultured it’s day, and said that all people are loved, and have meaning. Weather you are Gay, Trans, Bi, Black, White, or anything else, God loves you, and wants you to choose him. But He won’t force you to choose him, that’s the beauty of the Gospel. That someone loves you enough to die for you. In John 3:16, it says “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him, should not perish, but have everlasting life” that is Christianity. That someone loved You, and because of that, you can love others, no matter what they have done, or what they believe. Christianity is a religion of inclusivity. I could talk about the evidence of it all day, but it would only further alienate people who disagree with me. So I have done my best to explain what I believe, and why.

@ksprice45 said:
" @Syren_Neostar said:
" @lego_lover2008 said:
"lego has gone from bad to worse. this set isn't okay for kids if it's about pride. i wish lego never made this."

It's about love, something we all need to learn more of imo. It also is NOT about anything sexual."

Romantic love (which is what the lgbt are about) is inherently sexual, do you not understand basic biology? There is love like you love a pet, then there is love like you love your wife. Completely different. Lbgt isn’t pushing for buddy buddy, friendship love, they are only pushing, by existence, for sexual love. "

It has been fun seeing this and other such silly, overblown hand-wringing be so thoroughly eviscerated.

I may be naive but when I saw the images of the set I didn't even think of any political agenda or anything else. I was like, cool, a bunch of monofigs in various colors. I will definitely by buying this.

Never in my life did I think LEGO would produce an official monofig set, nor an official pride set, but now we're killing two birds with one stone and I love it!

Only real gripe I could think of is the color choices. LEGO's got a pretty diverse color pallet, so limiting it to 11 makes sense for the modern pride flag, but leaves a lot of the secondary flags and LEGO's other colors in the dust. I'm sure monochrome fig collectors would rather get a few shades of grey and pride flag builders would appreciate things like burnt and pastel orange for the lesbian flag. For my own personal gripes that shade of pink is a little to dark for the trans flag but a little to bright for the bi flag, and as much as it wouldn't fit I'd love a monochrome Keet-orange figure.

@Lucina said:
" @inversion said:
" @mcbbvb said:
"I love it for the message LEGO is sending out. Do we know if some of the profits will go to a good cause?"

Based on the number of figs and new elements, doubt there is any profit on it. May be even sold at a loss. Love this set, both as a statement and a piece of art. Lego has really grown a lot in last couple of years, especially in terms of engagement with community."

I would be very surprised if this sold at a loss. I'm pretty sure lego learned their lessons about losing money on sets from the Manas."

Lego definitely doesn't sell anything at a loss like that anymore. That's not to say that this set or any is "overpriced" (when factoring in not just production costs but also things like distribution, Lego's profit margins on a per set basis are pretty slim), but a handful of recolors (some of which may even have been factored into the budget for other upcoming sets and themes) aren't gonna be pushing this one over the edge into unprofitable territory.

@MrKoshka 8539 a Bionicle set with a chunky remote control units that were extremely expensive to make, and the set, even as expensive as it was, couldn't cover the costs in sales.

@LegoDavid said:
"
Not really, to be honest. As much as Christmas started out as a Christian holiday, it gradually shifted to becoming another secular holiday, with a lot of its religious roots being removed and replaced with fabrications such as Santa Claus. The fact that in some places its name was even changed from "Christmas" to "Xmas" is the ultimate proof of that."

Bit off topic and I have no idea if you’re even going to see this reply, but I’m just going to point out that the X in Xmas isn’t actually an X. It’s a chi, a Greek letter pronounced as a hard ch sound and would be the first letter in Christ when written in the original Greek. As such it’s been commonly used as a sign of Christianity since the days of the Roman Empire (usually paired with a rho for the R). Xmas isn’t taking the Christ out of Christmas, just abbreviating it

@ALEGOMan said:
"Propaganda. lgbt is a marketing strategy for lego to keep the fans and collect new ones to sell goods to. They don't actually care, not just lego either."

If you watched the designer video, where the openly gay designer behind this set talks about their reasons for wanting to make this, you'd know that's not true.

It's true that sometimes corporations do make empty gestures toward causes like this. But if you look at the people behind it and not just the corporate monolith, you can sometimes get a glimpse at the difference between an empty gesture like that and a genuine expression of support. I'm happy that we've gotten to a time when a designer like Matthew Ashton can make an expression of support as open and honest as this into a reality without that corporate structure standing in the way of that.

@Cooliocdawg said:
"Well, first off, the people who believed the prophets, did so because it was proved to them, and they did see proof that He was real."

Fascinating. This is completely circular, you do see that, right? The only record you have is what those prophets themselves wrote down. Every claim, especially those about others believing things because it was 'proven' to them, comes from that same source. It's only proof if you believe the claim that it is proof.

And by the way, you seem to assume we were both talking about the bible and God. Everything you wrote (and everything I said just now), can be similarly said about greek mythology, roman mythology, islam, judaism, hinduism, and so on, and so forth. Who is to say which of all these 'authorities' that 'proved' things and whose words were recorded over many years, is the real one? Because, newsflash, they don't all agree on everything. Not by a long shot.

Those bad things done by bad people, and I was not just talking about christianity, who you therefore deemed to not be real believers? You can only say this because you have the clarity of hindsight. For example by medieval standards, what they did back then was perfectly fine. It no longer is, but we are 7 centuries down the line.

The truth is that Christianity, as well as other religions, have evolved over time, as people reinterpreted 'the' texts to suit the times. There is no such thing as *the* unfiltered truth from the mouth of the being of your choice.

How can you ever know if a figure of authority is of pure and true intent? The bible, as well as those other books and stories, contradict themselves many times. People can (and do) draw completely opposite conclusions from the same text and argue bitterly till the sun goes down. Which goes to show that it is just very unrealistic to ascribe the sense of good versus evil to some higher being, when we ourselves are judging and measuring against some inner sense of good and bad all the time. We have to, because no one can be trusted to be truly objective. You must so to speak, do this to separate the true believers from the bad faith ones, and it's not always clear cut. The only way to arrive at a common idea of good is to discuss it and form a consensus that is practical and liveable. Those nonscientific philosophers are quite useful for that, because they are not burdened by dogma.

I've got so much love for everybody in the chat who is keeping it cool and respectful.

When world-views collide it can be ugly, or it can be enlightening.

Props to everyone keeping it classy xxx

I've got mixed feelings. On one hand, as a bi guy, I love that Lego's taking a public stand of support, and that they not just included the traditional rainbow but the black and brown stripes, and the trans flag too. On the other hand, it feels a bit empty when it's just a matter of profiting off us. I would have greatly preferred that some of the profits from the set go to LGBTQ charities

As a trans person I love the idea of this set, I will get it as soon as it comes out. It really sickens me to find out that there are so many many bigoted lego fans out there. Please just let us lgbtq+ people be who we are. We aren’t hurting anyone. Oh and about the Harry Potter sets I see no problem in buying sets from that theme, just try and separate the artist from the art.

@fredbob392 said:
"I've got mixed feelings. On one hand, as a bi guy, I love that Lego's taking a public stand of support, and that they not just included the traditional rainbow but the black and brown stripes, and the trans flag too. On the other hand, it feels a bit empty when it's just a matter of profiting off us. I would have greatly preferred that some of the profits from the set go to LGBTQ charities "

I agree, I vastly prefer the inclusion stuff that says "all proceeds go to ..." (like the special MtG lair drop for black history month) but I'll take the extra visibility as a consolation prize. I guess to open the door to broader acceptance we must first start with commercial acceptance? If there is an audience that pays, it will be catered to, after all. I see it as a first step in the right direction.

@nushae said:
".
How can you ever know if a figure of authority is of pure and true intent? The bible, as well as those other books and stories, contradict themselves many times."

Would you please share an example of when the Bible contradicts itself? Also, I’m sorry for being vague about which God I was discussing I should have been more clear.

@Cooliocdawg said:
" @nushae said:
".
How can you ever know if a figure of authority is of pure and true intent? The bible, as well as those other books and stories, contradict themselves many times."

Would you please share an example of when the Bible contradicts itself? Also, I’m sorry for being vague about which God I was discussing I should have been more clear."

No, nor for any of the texts I mentioned (and I find it interesting that that is the one thing you want to talk about from all of that, that reeks of cherry picking). Also, I never said you weren't discussing God, I said you didn't realise *I* wasn't.

Yo, can you moderators turn off comments already. This comment section has turned into a toxic waste dump.

@Bastibrick (replying from other article)

I did not intend to offend you in any way, and I apologize for that.

You twisted my words though, I never labeled you as "all immoral," nor was I reducing you to one action in any way. I was merely stating what I believe, which is that one's actions may be immoral, but that does not mean that you, as a human being, are immoral.

Everyone *is* awesome, everything *is* awesome, this set *is* awesome ... this comment section, however, is downright scary. Please shut it down already :(

Good and quick moderation, as in this case, is better than shutting down the comments.

@L_Gomez426 said:
"As a trans person I love the idea of this set, I will get it as soon as it comes out. It really sickens me to find out that there are so many many bigoted lego fans out there. Please just let us lgbtq+ people be who we are. We aren’t hurting anyone. Oh and about the Harry Potter sets I see no problem in buying sets from that theme, just try and separate the artist from the art. "

I couldn't agree more! Glad to know there are other trans people here other than myself!

@cabbie (replying from other article)

I am sorry you consider me to be a bigot. As I explained to @Bastibrick I was not intending to offend.

You judged what I said as bigotry, so you saying I cannot judge your actions, is hypocritical.

I am not judging you as a human being, rather I am judging the choices that you make, just as you judged the choices of speech that I made.