Was Disney gonna develop a merchandise line for boys in the 2000's

[PolymerSkywalker]

The “Majority” of Barbie fans were female?

Majority = a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total. (Webster)

Barbie fans skew female and Star Wars skewed male (OT & PT). Both true statements, but it’s “wrong think” with this group of posters.

I think I said the bulk once, which wasn’t clear…..but should have read the majority. But when you consider merchandising sales “the bulk” is completely accurate for Barbie.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

I'm not even sure what the point is, but part of that is I don't read most of what PF writes, because it is, well, pointless. If memory serves, this is not the first time this poster has taken the position that "girls in Star Wars are icky and gross."

Never once said that, you are making things up.

 

[BrianL]

The “Majority” of Barbie fans were female?

Majority = a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total. (Webster)

Barbie fans skew female and Star Wars skewed male (OT & PT). Both true statements, but it’s “wrong think” with this group of posters.

I think I said the bulk once, which wasn’t clear…..but should have read the majority. But when you consider merchandising sales “the bulk” is completely accurate for Barbie.

Yes, in a literal sense you are correct, but I think you are trying to make a bigger point than 60-65% warrants. Absolutely it skews female, but not as heavily as one might expect and it doesn't really prove anything about who might be a fan. It certainly doesn't prove anything about who might be a Star Wars fan either!

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

I'm not even sure what the point is, but part of that is I don't read most of what PF writes, because it is, well, pointless. If memory serves, this is not the first time this poster has taken the position that "girls in Star Wars are icky and gross."

Never once said that, you are making things up.

 

[starlite_]

Never once said that, you are making things up.

Well that is what your comments imply.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

I have seen essentially identical numbers for Star Wars in years past. Star Wars was a majority male fan base. Yes, women like it too….but the majority was male during PT and OT times.

Why is this threatening information would be my question? No one is saying a boy can’t be a huge Barbie fan, and no one is saying a girl can’t be a Star Wars fan. So why is it threatening so admit that a brand appeals more to one gender?

It’s like saying a cigar companies target demographics for sales are mostly males. Is that an issue to say that? I mean I know a few women who have smoked one, but those are pretty few and far between. Their target market is obviously mostly male.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

Well that is what your comments imply.

So, now you know what I imply?

So, what do your comments imply you think?

 

[BrianL]

I have seen essentially identical numbers for Star Wars in years past. Star Wars was a majority male fan base. Yes, women like it too….but the majority was male during PT and OT times.

Why is this threatening information would be my question? No one is saying a boy can’t be a huge Barbie fan, and no one is saying a girl can’t be a Star Wars fan. So why is it threatening so admit that a brand appeals more to one gender?

It’s like saying a cigar companies target demographics for sales are mostly males. Is that an issue to say that? I mean I know a few women who have smoked one, but those are pretty few and far between. Their target market is obviously mostly male.

The information is not threatening at all - it's the spurious conclusions that you are deriving from it that are problematic. Sure, Star Wars skews male, but it's not exclusive and never has been. If the numebrs ar elike 60 to 65 percent, that's not overwhelming. Nothing changed between the originals and now - it still skews male. It hasn't changed to somehow appease and woo females - it is what it always has been - for everyone - and anyone who likes it IS a fan, regardless of if they are male or female, black or white, young or old, human or droid!

 

[irlandaise]

I am not sure I have ever even heard of that website before. Maybe I have, but never gave it one second thought before being corrected on here. I seek out data, from any source on a topic I am interested in.

So you just grab the first search result without paying any attention to the quality of the source? You can't tell the difference between a website that attempts to produce actual journalism and one that throws together text from a bunch of other sites and presents opinion as reporting?

That article actually quoted a couple of decent sources, but when that information is buried among paragraphs of whining by someone who wants a movie to fail, why should anyone give credence to that website?

 

[irlandaise]

Yes, the website cited is known for having a very specific slant borne out of the "comicsgate" movement. If you don't know that it, it's "gamergate" but for comics. If you don't know what that is...consider yourself lucky as it really is a bunch of nonsense.

Uggh...I'm vaguely familiar with gamergate and am not surprised that something similar happened in the comic-book world.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

Correct I am not a source qualifier or fact checker by trade. I had no idea I was surrounded by so many insanely qualified people at determining what sources can and cannot be trusted. Seems like a good way to greatly limit the information you consume to me and likely end up with a skewed view of reality. I read info from all kind of sources and then make up my own mind. I find that most people prefer to only read / listen to things that support what they already believe to be true. That’s a good way to end up with pockets of people that think nearly identically, because they all believe each others thoughts on a matter. I don’t believe there is your truth or my truth, I believe there is The Truth. Most people have no interest in seeking the truth I find.

 

[BrianL]

Correct I am not a source qualifier or fact checker by trade. I had no idea I was surrounded by so many insanely qualified people at determining what sources can and cannot be trusted. Seems like a good way to greatly limit the information you consume to me and likely end up with a skewed view of reality. I read info from all kind of sources and then make up my own mind. I find that most people prefer to only read / listen to things that support what they already believe to be true. That’s a good way to end up with pockets of people that think nearly identically, because they all believe each others thoughts on a matter. I don’t believe there is your truth or my truth, I believe there is The Truth. Most people have no interest in seeking the truth I find.

But, as you said, you didn't even read the entire article. If you had, you would at least have known that it was a biased source. We're not "qualified" in any other way than we can apply common sense to what we read. It is very unprofessional for someone purportedly covering entertainment to root heavily for something to fail. It makes it quite easy to dismiss the source.

 

[mdmost]

 

[Moliphino]

Correct I am not a source qualifier or fact checker by trade. I had no idea I was surrounded by so many insanely qualified people at determining what sources can and cannot be trusted. Seems like a good way to greatly limit the information you consume to me and likely end up with a skewed view of reality. I read info from all kind of sources and then make up my own mind. I find that most people prefer to only read / listen to things that support what they already believe to be true. That’s a good way to end up with pockets of people that think nearly identically, because they all believe each others thoughts on a matter. I don’t believe there is your truth or my truth, I believe there is The Truth. Most people have no interest in seeking the truth I find.

Being able to verify the legitimacy of news sources is a very important life skill.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

So only the ones that agree with your viewpoint, am I doing that right? Never trust one that presents any information contrary to what you already believe. Ok, I got it!

 

[Smugpugmug]

Must be a slow work week.

 

[ThornXBL]

Being able to verify the legitimacy of news sources is a very important life skill.

Yep.

Media Literacy is important, kids (and adults!).

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

Must be a slow work week.

Yeah very slow, only worked about 57 hours last week. So a little down from my normal 60+.

Actually took off Saturday after lunch to go watch a college football game.

I mean nothing compared to the hard working folks on here I guess, but I don’t claim to be worthy to them from a work ethic standpoint.

Been here since 6:45am and will likely leave sometime around 6:00pm tonight depending on how my crews do today. I’m a slacker that lacks motivation!

 

[Smugpugmug]

Yeah very slow, only worked about 57 hours last week. So a little down from my normal 60+.

Actually took off Saturday after lunch to go watch a college football game.

I mean nothing compared to the hard working folks on here I guess, but I don’t claim to be worthy to them from a work ethic standpoint.

Been here since 6:45am and will likely leave sometime around 6:00pm tonight depending on how my crews do today. I’m a slacker that lacks motivation!

?? Absolutely no one said that but sure whatever.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

?? Absolutely no one said that but sure whatever.

You directly suggested I must be having a slow work week, because I posted something on the board. What am I missing?