*Grabs popcorn*

I just don’t know what to say... “lol” maybe?
Or
If we don’t talk about something, then it never happened.

The world turns into a big correct ass :(

Aaaand cue unhinged alt-right "EsS-jAy-DuByEwS" conspiracy nonsense. Cant have star wars fandom without unreasonable levels of outrage about something completely inconsequential

... And Shmi Skywalker was a "starship" in the service of Watto?

RIP any hopes for Jabba's Palace remake with bikini Leia.

So, Disney tried to slip this under the radar, and now there are multiple articles posted about just this thing? Sounds about par for the course with Disney’s handling of the IP. They failed to keep anyone from noticing, and yet it’s a bit late for them to publicly take credit for it.

It makes sense from a marketing point of view - no one would know what it was called if they only watched the programme and so are more likely to google 'Boba Fett's starship' than anything else - the same logic that brought us 'Knights of Ren transport ship' instead of 'Night Buzzard' and the countless 'General Grievous' starfighter' names

It's a marketing change considering "Slave I" was never directly mentioned by name in any of the movies, and only in 2 episodes of The Clone Wars series. It's a piece of trivia that still exists for people desperate to know what the ship is called, but this product name change would make it easier for people to purchase who haven't previously made a deep dive into Star Wars lore.

Considering Boba Fett is about to have a big resurgence in The Book of Boba Fett, it makes sense to have products on the market that are easier for kids to tell their parents that they want "Boba Fett's spaceship!".

No one is stopping you from calling it the Slave I, this change isn't ruining your childhood, and no, "SJW's" and "woke lefties" aren't ruining Star Wars.

why didn't they just name it the Firespray 31?

I wonder why now with this version? Only 2 years ago it was still sold as Slave 1. Maybe it is linked to the Book of Boba and potentially a name change? As it was called Slave 1 in the Clone Wars, so its canon name is Slave 1. Good to get some clarification on the matter though.

I'm with @GlassBoxTesting here - I think this has rather more to do with recognition than anything else. I don't think there is anything more sinister/political about it.
Forget the secondary media for SW, the primary source for everything (especially marketing) are the films/TV shows and this looks like a good move for brand recognition. If it's not named in the show/film, don't give it a name in marketing.

Same reason engineers are replacing the master/slave terminology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_ (technology)

Boba/Jango/Mango/MOS Fett's Starship is one of my favourite spaceships, and the only UCS I've ever bought.

...but, even excepting controversy, Slave I is a rubbish name.

Look at other starship names: the Millennium Falcon, the Razor Crest, the Soulless One; the Slave I seems to lag behind.

A bit surprising. I know that people make associations because of the name, but by itself it's not pejorative in any way. And it's not like Boba Fett as a character is a saint either, his activities being more problematic than the name. Will they remove him as a character from the franchise?

I watched a documentary recently where an African from a major slavery hub said something like this, with pride: they wanted us for our strength, our resilience, our endurance, to build their countries. I found it to be such a powerful statement, giving credit where it's due. I wish we'd embrace this type of vision and move forward instead of being afraid of the word.

Why do things like this always turn into political arguments? I’m very left leaning and I find this absolutely unacceptable. It has nothing to do with politics, it’s about Star Wars staying true to Star Wars. It’s been called the Slave I for 40 years and nobody has ever had an issue with it. It’s also hypocritical, because they’ve just put out an episode of The Bad Batch where they discuss whether or not the clones were slaves to the republic. This is just another instance of Disney taking what we loved about the OT and distorting it into something unrecognisable. Boba Fett isn’t a villain anymore, he’s an antihero now. Han Solo isn’t a drug smuggler anymore, he’s the fuel guy. Luke Skywalker isn’t the hero anymore, he’s a grumpy old man.

And to all the Americans who are gonna turn around and say “now POC won’t be reminded of their family’s past” and the like: this not only ignores all the American slaves who weren’t POC, this argument ignores the 40 million people who are trapped in slavery today. Is Disney trying to take attention away from this very real problem???? This just proves that Disney doesn’t give a damn, as if filming Mulan next to a literal slave camp didn’t prove that already.

I think it doesn't say Slave only because Disney is positioning Boba as a good guy protagonist now, with his own show (and how he was an ally in Mando). Several iterations of Slave 1 were released in Lego under Disney and it was okay then, because Boba was still a "bad guy," his only on-screen film appearances being as an adversary. But now he's going to be positioned as a protagonist, so they don't want the word associated with him. I don't think it's simply the word Slave in itself, it's that they don't want it associated with a good guy (as if we'll forget Boba was a bad guy?). They've got all kinds of slavery crimes in their current shows, but they're only committed by bad guys.

I can see their reasoning and I'm not gonna throw a fit over it, but I do think it's a tad silly. Something to chuckle at, not something to be angry about imo.

I see plenty of "it makes sense from marketing standpoint, the name isn't that well known anyway" comments. How hard would it be to name the set "Boba Fett's Slave I Starship"? Keep the connection to the lore and all the previous sets of the ship, while also being friendly to more casual fans.

And seeing how "Everybody is" dropping the name, I doubt it's just a marketing move.

I don't see the answer to the question in the article.

Slave I isn't exactly an awesome name anyway, it's just what we are used to. I don't object to changing the name, but you don't call it "Boba Fett's Spaceship" it clearly deserves an actual name, that's the Star Wars way. So if Disney is going to change it, let's hear it. But don't wimp out and just not call it anything.

I suppose we'll hear the ship's new name in The Book of Boba Fett. if not, then they are truly slacking.

@bananaworld said:
"
Boba/Jango/Mango/MOS Fett's Starship is one of my favourite spaceships, and the only UCS I've ever bought.

...but, even excepting controversy, Slave I is a rubbish name.

Look at other starship names: the Millennium Falcon, the Razor Crest, the Soulless One; the Slave I seems to lag behind."

Someone suggested it could be read as a pun, as in "the slave won", as Jango was a slave at one point in the Legends continuity.

@OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
"It's a marketing change considering "Slave I" was never directly mentioned by name in any of the movies, and only in 2 episodes of The Clone Wars series. It's a piece of trivia that still exists for people desperate to know what the ship is called, but this product name change would make it easier for people to purchase who haven't previously made a deep dive into Star Wars lore.

Considering Boba Fett is about to have a big resurgence in The Book of Boba Fett, it makes sense to have products on the market that are easier for kids to tell their parents that they want "Boba Fett's spaceship!".

No one is stopping you from calling it the Slave I, this change isn't ruining your childhood, and no, "SJW's" and "woke lefties" aren't ruining Star Wars."

A very valid arguement. Although it is possible that it's not just 'woke lefties' that are annoyed by the sudden name change? Not everything has to come down to left vs right - especially not LEGO and Star Wars, can we keep politics out of those two things please!

@Brikkyy13 said:
"And to all the Americans who are gonna turn around and say “now POC won’t be reminded of their family’s past” and the like: this not only ignores all the American slaves who weren’t POC, this argument ignores the 40 million people who are trapped in slavery today. Is Disney trying to take attention away from this very real problem???? This just proves that Disney doesn’t give a damn, as if filming Mulan next to a literal slave camp didn’t prove that already. "

Don't know why you're blaming Disney for the reprehensible actions of a government, as if Disney endorsed the actions and filmed inside the camps, when the place in question is a large stretch of desert that's bigger than any US state. Using your logic, does filming in Southern USA secretly endorse all the immigration detention camps there? Or US prisons which use inmates for profit?

Woke culture... I guess we have to get used to it.

@legodimnico said:
" @OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
A very valid arguement. Although it is possible that it's not just 'woke lefties' that are annoyed by the sudden name change? Not everything has to come down to left vs right - especially not LEGO and Star Wars, can we keep politics out of those two things please!
"

I think you interpreted that the wrong way around. The people who are annoyed by the change are primarily the kind of people constantly whining about 'woke leftists', not the alleged 'woke leftists' themselves. Though as many news sites are now maliciously misreporting the situation in order to rile people up, leading people to believe the change is in-universe rather than just for toys, other people are now angry about a situation that isnt even happening.

The simplest explaination above is probably the correct one- The upcoming Boba show is going to have him as a protagonist, and Slave 1 isn't a hero ship kind of name. They don't want to rename it, so they just won't name it while Boba is in a leading role.

The name of Boba Fett's spaceship is so incredibly inconsequential, I couldn't care less either way

@Brikkyy13 said:
"This is just another instance of Disney taking what we loved about the OT and distorting it into something unrecognisable. "

A bit of an overreaction

And there was much pointless crying and REEEEing...

@MainBricker said:
"It's good that this is clarified as people keep blaming Lego for this, when it is Disney behind this decision."
I blame LEGO for quite a few things, and rightfully so I would think, but they're NOTHING compared to Disney in terms of things they are to blame for.

This whole oversensitivity business is getting more ridiculous every day.

I mean, ornithologists are debating about renaming certain birds that apparently seem to have racist names (WTH?), there's no Uncle Ben's rice anymore, because apparently that's now racist too. German food companies also rename all kinds of products that for generations no one gave a damn about, and all just to appease some woke-ists who think the world has nothing more important to worry about.

This whole thing is totally ridiculous imho.

If they don't like this ship, which is called what it is, why not simply stop selling toys based upon it? Like they did with slave Leia, among others.
Ah, now wait, this ship is immensely popular and sells very well. So better let's just rename it to still rake in all those beautiful dollars. We're only sensitive after all until it hurts the balance sheet.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

Equitable Language.

I'd be remarkably surprised if this isn't a change for language inclusivity.

Adobe recently replaced all instances of the word Master in Premiere Pro. Intriguingly to me, they also stepped away from "blacklist" and switched to "blocklist." The etymology of the term blacklist doesn't appear to have racist undertones, but it makes some people unnecessarily comfortable because of how it pushes black as being bad.

Nobody is going to have a hard time finding this set if they're looking for it. If there are other words that are more inclusive and just as effective, from Disney's standpoint, that's a win

Slave I will always stay Slave I to me. Even my five year old son knows it as the Slave I.

As has been said by many others: as long as companies and governments don't actually tackle the actual and still continuing problem of slavery in countries where they do actually have significant influence, such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Qatar, semantics and the 'cancelation' of 'politically incorrect' terms such as 'slave' and 'slavery' don't mean squat to me.

So much controversy over a few small letters on a cardboard box. I thought most of us here would care a bit more about the plastic bits that come inside the box. ;)

Mark my words... in the end of The Book of Boba Fett, Boba is going to die and Mando is going to take possession of Slave I.
After blowing up the Razor Crest they need to get him a bad ass ship... he can't spend his life hitchhiking.
Then we will have a chrome Slave I that will be called the Mandalorian starship.

@BricksAhoy said:
"Adobe recently replaced all instances of the word Master in Premiere Pro. Intriguingly to me, they also stepped away from "blacklist" and switched to "blocklist." The etymology of the term blacklist doesn't appear to have racist undertones, but it makes some people unnecessarily comfortable because of how it pushes black as being bad."
I think I'm going to set a good example and from now on refrain from calling the Black Forest just that, but instead draw on my vast IT knowledge and call it RGB 0 0 0 Forest.

Cancel Culture wins!

@MrBob said:
"So much controversy over a few small letters on a cardboard box. I thought most of us here would care a bit more about the plastic bits that come inside the box. ;)"

It's because Star Wars is the grey-est theme there is!

@MainBricker said:
" @BricksAhoy said:
"Equitable Language.

I'd be remarkably surprised if this isn't a change for language inclusivity.

Adobe recently replaced all instances of the word Master in Premiere Pro. Intriguingly to me, they also stepped away from "blacklist" and switched to "blocklist." The etymology of the term blacklist doesn't appear to have racist undertones, but it makes some people unnecessarily comfortable because of how it pushes black as being bad.
"

Strangely enough, Black Friday hasn't changed its name!"
That's because while black lives matter, black prices (and sales) apparently matter even more.

@busyman said:
"Same reason engineers are replacing the master/slave terminology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master/slave_ (technology) "

I thought you where kidding on this till I read the link, been out of the workplace and IT since 2009 for health reasons and haven't kept up with things. Really thought it was too absurd to be real until I read what it said. This is the problem today when words that have multiple meanings, even some going back hundreds of years, are now considered to have only one meaning ascribed by those that deem it offensive so must therefore not be used by anyone, including the rest of the world.

From the Bronze Age all the way to the arrival of William I England had been invaded, enslaved and settled by people from other European countries. Over 2000yrs of war and enslavement by other countries, they got over it and don't demand the removal of words with various meanings on the off chance it may offend a small part of the population.

Yes I'm white, I'm also 6" tall and weight 160kg, used to 220kg at my biggest and am a women. If you think I haven't been called names or discriminated against because of my appearance just because I'm white, then think again. Try being that tall and weighting about 130kg at 17 in an all girls school, played the euphonium too just for good measure. You want vicious, try living that life for a week lol. Actually wasn't that bad, any bullies probably where too scared of my size to say anything to my face lol!!

*scrabbles around to find old Slave I box to sell on eBay*

@BricksAhoy said:
"If there are other words that are more inclusive and just as effective, from Disney's standpoint, that's a win"

That does not make any sense. How can the name of an object be 'inclusive'? Do you really believe, that a Star Wars fan, who happens to be black, really stops knowing how this ship is named? How many PoC's (another stupidity on it's own because no-one is without color) really care about the name of a fantasy star ship of a bad guy?
How does renaming this thing make the life of any real slave today better?

This is pure virtue signalling.

Next up, all computer hard drive manufacturers will change "master/slave" disks to "primary/secondary". Or is that option itself too oppressive? Perhaps "drive" and "other drive"? Yeah, that'll do it. *rolls eyes*

I suppose the logical conclusion will be that Disney become so fearful of the possibility that Person A might accuse them of potentially being offensive to Person B (who in reality couldn't give a crap) that they'll have to rename the Empire (too British Imperialistic), the Rebels (hereinafter "Activists"), the Stormtroopers (too Nazi-ish), the Force (too forceful), the Death Star (too deadly), ... blah blah blah, ... and probably, for being too war-like, Star Wars itself!

If only they'd apply this kind of history-bleaching mentality to what *really* matters, to what's *really* offensive, to what *really* needs to be eradicated from the record. Yeah, you know what I'm talkin' about. Jar Jar Binks!!!

This reminds me of a time in 1980/81 when Kenner released a playset based on The Executor from The Empire Strikes Back. However, they called it 'Darth Vader's Star Destroyer' instead. This was mostly because its name had not been mentioned on screen (at that point, it only appeared in the sketchbook and the Star Wars comic strip) and the company was hesitant for to put it on the box. So it isn't the first time this has happened

That said though, something like Super Star Destroyer or Firespray-31 would've been a better name for such products. Having the character's name before the name of the craft, in my opinion, just seems like an unoriginal and bland choice. The actual name of the craft (e.g Firespray) strikes a good balance between a good name and standing by company values.

It's also interesting that this is the same company who pressured Lucasfilm into firing Gina Carano, yet they still allowed another Cara Dune figure.

Grandmaster Disney: " No no no, I don't like the S word. Let's call it 'Prisoner with Job I'. "

can't wait for a new Starship Leia

@Pekingduckman
"when the place in question is a large stretch of desert that's bigger than any US state."
Alaska: *exists*

Not arguing the issue at hand, just keeping the record straight that just because Xinjiang and the Taklamakan Desert are massive (1.6mil km² and 340,000 km², respectively) doesn't make them larger than any US state, because Alaska is also massive (1.7mil km²).

It's insane how worked up right-wing people can get over something as tiny and insignificant as renaming a fictional Star Wars vehicle.

Woke culture strikes again...GTFO with this nonsense.

@julianbricks said:
"It's insane how worked up right-wing people can get over something as tiny and insignificant as renaming a fictional Star Wars vehicle. "

It's insane how easily people label other people over something as tiny and insignificant as a comment on a website about LEGO bricks.

Life isn't all black and white.

Some people are trying really hard to be outraged here. The fact is that no one other than hardcore Star Wars fans even knows that the ship is called Slave I, but anyone who likes Star Wars knows who Boba Fett is. It's as funny as it is sad to see people get so bent out of shape over what was probably a simple marketing decision to maximise consumer recognition.

It does also make me remember way back to the year 2000, when I told my Mum I wanted the Lego Slave I for my birthday and she just responded "The Lego what?!"

I guess it's the same reason you're encouraged to stop using the words Master and Slave in database management. Some words have so much baggage that it looks bad to use them for anything other than their primary purpose.

When are they going to rename Star Wars to Star Conflict?

Then call it what it really is, a Firespray class interceptor, which is an awesome name itself

@magmafrost said:
" @legodimnico said:
" @OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
A very valid arguement. Although it is possible that it's not just 'woke lefties' that are annoyed by the sudden name change? Not everything has to come down to left vs right - especially not LEGO and Star Wars, can we keep politics out of those two things please!
"

I think you interpreted that the wrong way around. The people who are annoyed by the change are primarily the kind of people constantly whining about 'woke leftists', not the alleged 'woke leftists' themselves. Though as many news sites are now maliciously misreporting the situation in order to rile people up, leading people to believe the change is in-universe rather than just for toys, other people are now angry about a situation that isnt even happening."

Good point, I did read that wrong! I'm just sad that politics is now invading my LEGO hobby too!

I suppose Starship is easier to write than :

"Kuat Systems Engineering Modified Firespray-31-class patrol and attack craft "

I'm personally not bothered by the name change, as I grew up with LEGO not having set names at all on the box, and smaller catalogs.

Interesting move, and it's significant because someone somewhere thought it was significant enough to insist it's removed from a toy box. If it's no big deal, it wouldn't have happened.

I think we need more reminders slavery exists in the modern world, rather than removing the word. Ignoring things or people doesn't make the world better.

@Bricksrunner said:
"Getting rid of any mention of the word "slave" ? Good !
Getting rid of actual slavery in places like Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen, China and soooo many more ? Nah, don't care, we might offend them.

There MisterBrickster, I set up the kindling, let me grab my popcorn and join you to enjoy the show. *grins*"

This guy gets it. Feefee marketing > real problems.

Extremely interesting to hear about the changes in IT terminology. I was curious if it was going to apply there as well, guess so.

And to everyone out there with the perspective of "lol rightwing outrage, settle down." Stick around and watch a little longer. What's that old saying about inches and miles? It always starts out innocent enough, but just because you're satisfied with the changes doesnt mean there isn't a lunatic waiting behind you to push the envelope further.

Man, it’s just a name.

Putting all the finger-pointing and political arguments aside, could this be as simple as the fact that Disney are going to give the ship a new name in The Book of Boba Fett and have instructed LEGO to refer to it as “Starship” because they don’t know what the new name is yet?

The folks screaming about this "RUINING THEIR CHILDHOOD" are making a mountain out of a molehill as per usual - it's just some words the size of a thumb printed on a cardboard box, it ain't yer mam, you can call it whatever you like and never think of it again once you've cracked it open.

God, nerd culture is tiring sometimes.

I can't believe anyone is upset about this lol. It's like at best a bare minimum effort to make more inclusive language and at worst making the set more SEO friendly like someone said.

If it's just the toys I don't care. A kid will tell their parents they want Boba Fett's ship and the parents will be to find it on the shelf. If it's a larger move to rename it entirely than that is dumb and probably won't catch on. It'll always be Slave I to me.

What I hate whenever something like this happens, is the people being like "Haha, this is such an inconsequential change, why is everyone so OUTRAGED?"

Yes, it is inconsequential, that's why it's a stupid change to make in the first place, and that's why people are complaining.

I wouldn't care if it was named Boba Fett's Starship from the beginning, but the fact that Disney feels the need to remove the name "Slave I" as if it's problematic shows that they're becoming a bit too sensitive as a corporation, and that we're becoming a bit too sensitive as a society.

We're not the ones irrationally outraged at the name of a spaceship, Disney is. We're just reacting to it.

I can't believe this is even newsworthy.

But hey, people gonna react.

Either this is a marketing move to avoid people going “The hell is Slave I, I just want the ship Boba Fett flies!” or it’s a slight attempt at empathy on the part of Disney.
Either way, though more so if it’s the latter, I’m genuinely concerned about the level of animosity and outrage that has been displayed towards the move. Like, seriously guys? Is it really that upsetting for you that the box of a children’s toy doesn’t call a fictional ship a name that is never actually used onscreen anyway? I just don’t get why y’all seem so triggered by this

@Brickalili said:
"I just don’t get why y’all seem so triggered by this "

Please have some respect for the victims of this tragedy.

@magmafrost said:
"Aaaand cue unhinged alt-right "EsS-jAy-DuByEwS" conspiracy nonsense. Cant have star wars fandom without unreasonable levels of outrage about something completely inconsequential "

Aaaand cue the liberal, open-minded alt-left pointedly denigrating any point of view which they don’t share to push their narrative.

Seeing commenters here use words like "wokeness", "wokefulness", "woke culture" is both hilarious and sad. I didn't know that caring about how people may feel is so upsetting to some that it should be an insult.

I completely agree with the argument that the name is for marketing purposes, because the ship is so rarely named in Star Wars visual media. And clearly Disney isn't removing all mentions of slavery considering even recent Bad Batch episodes

@Ridgeheart said:
"Maybe it was Boba's idea to rename the damned thing.

Stop Fett-shaming."

A valid point that again shows Disney missing the boat. If Disney didn't want the name used anymore, they could have easily lamp-shaded it during season 2 of Mando. It would have taken a 2 minute segway showing the Boba then painting a new name on the vessel after repainting his armor. Maybe have him mumble something about it being time for a new direction... Then call the ship "Redeemer," "Vengeance," "Clone Force," or anything... and there would have been no complaints.

As it is, this just reeks of incompetent story telling.

@Ladondorf said:
"What I hate whenever something like this happens, is the people being like "Haha, this is such an inconsequential change, why is everyone so OUTRAGED?"

Yes, it is inconsequential, that's why it's a stupid change to make in the first place, and that's why people are complaining.

I wouldn't care if it was named Boba Fett's Starship from the beginning, but the fact that Disney feels the need to remove the name "Slave I" as if it's problematic shows that they're becoming a bit too sensitive as a corporation, and that we're becoming a bit too sensitive as a society.

We're not the ones irrationally outraged at the name of a spaceship, Disney is. We're just reacting to it."

Completely agree. For those stating it shouldn’t be a big deal they are changing the name, then it also shouldn’t be a big deal if they left it the same. The “political correctness” is getting out of hand. The word “slave” is now a problem? Slavery is wrong obviously, but now we aren’t going to allow the use of the word? Disney needs to stop. I feel like I live in a world full of children with how easily everyone gets offended.

Bring on the "Team of merry weathermen" set (formerly known as Stormtroopers Battle Pack).

I'm amazed how people confuse the name of the ship in universe - which is and will remain Slave -1 - and the name a toy.

Dang, I guess I took part in tAkInG tHiNgS tOo FaR!!! with wOkE cUlTuRe gOnE mAd!!! when I used this same name a few years ago when talking to a friend. I thought it would be a bit awkward to talk about "my Lego Slave I in my crawl space."

Here's an idea:

What if we don't make a fuss or start any crazy theories until AFTER we get more official information? Almost like there are a hundred perfectly reasonable possibilities, and we will likely know before the end of the year exactly what's up.

In the meantime, everyone is free to continue calling it the Slave I. The only thing that has changed thus far is the name of a toy.

Just my two cents!

@Bricklunch said:
"... And Shmi Skywalker was a "starship" in the service of Watto? "

That might become relevant if they do a set with Shmi, but even then, probably not. It’s not like most sets are named with descriptions of individual characters portrayed in them. How many of the sets of Luke’s landspeeder have been officially named “A Tatooine Moisture Farmer’s Landspeeder”?

@magmafrost said:
"Aaaand cue unhinged alt-right "EsS-jAy-DuByEwS" conspiracy nonsense. Cant have star wars fandom without unreasonable levels of outrage about something completely inconsequential "

Agree. Always amazed at the things people seem to care a great deal about. I’ve been a SW and LEGO fan since I can remember 40 years or so. I could not card less about dropping the name Slave 1, it’s not even movie cannon.

@Bricksrunner said:
"Getting rid of any mention of the word "slave" ? Good !
Getting rid of actual slavery in places like Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen, China and soooo many more ? Nah, don't care, we might offend them.

There MisterBrickster, I set up the kindling, let me grab my popcorn and join you to enjoy the show. *grins*"

If and when Disney buys Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen, China, and whatever other countries you’re thinking of, maybe they’ll do something about it. Until then, though…

I’m surprised they’ve kept using it as long as they have tbh. The Executor got renamed for toys also waaay back in the day, which is kinda funny because it’s not Executioner like a lot of people think it means.

@magmafrost said:
" @legodimnico said:
" @OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
A very valid arguement. Although it is possible that it's not just 'woke lefties' that are annoyed by the sudden name change? Not everything has to come down to left vs right - especially not LEGO and Star Wars, can we keep politics out of those two things please!
"

I think you interpreted that the wrong way around. The people who are annoyed by the change are primarily the kind of people constantly whining about 'woke leftists', not the alleged 'woke leftists' themselves. Though as many news sites are now maliciously misreporting the situation in order to rile people up, leading people to believe the change is in-universe rather than just for toys, other people are now angry about a situation that isnt even happening."

"people are now angry about a situation that isn't even happening"
-the internet

@AustinPowers:
Point of fact: the “Uncle Ben’s” name has been announced to be retiring, but a year later this has not actually happened. The only change I’ve seen is that the one flavor of Uncle Ben’s Ready Rice that I actually liked (chicken flavored brown rice) has been taken off the market, while a few new Uncle Ben’s Ready Rice flavors have even been introduced after the name was supposedly being removed from the packaging. I’m sure it will happen at some point, but they have to come up with a new name and a new logo, register their new trademarks (and confirm that they’re not already taken), then get prepped to print the new packaging, make sure everyone knows what the new name will be, and finally start shipping the rebranded product. It’s not going to happen overnight.

@MainBricker:
Ah, but that’s a rare case where “black” has a positive meaning. In the US, that’s the traditional start to the Christmas shopping season, and while it’s not actually the biggest shopping day of the year (that usually ends up falling on the weekend right before Christmas), it is the day when many retail businesses stop operating at a loss and start turning an annual profit. This is signified by switching from red ink (debts) to black ink (profits) in a hand-written ledger.

@Squidy74H:
Master bedrooms are being renamed for the real estate industry, too.

@TheWackyWookiee:
Kenner took guidance from West End Games (publisher of the original SW RPG) on most names, as they made them up whenever there wasn’t an official name on record. You’d have to ask someone who is really familiar with the early sourcebooks if it had been named by that point. Regardless, that name has always been problematic _because_ it was never named in movie dialogue, so nobody knows how it’s supposed to be pronounced (i.e. does the accent go on the 2nd or 3rd syllable).

star wars is inherently political: it's about the French underground fighting the Nazis, or the Afghan mujahedeen fighting the USSR, or the US colonies fighting Great Britain. those of you who think star wars was never about so called "woke political correctness" have missed the point entirely.

It's pretty simple. Disney just don't want their brand appearing side by side the word slave: "Disney's Slave I" and being marketed to kids. Maybe in The Book of Boba Fett they will change the name or they will not mention it any more like they did for a long time except in The Clone Wars.

Oh dear. Just wait until they find out what the pilot's occupation is!

"So what we're not allowed to say SLAVE anymore."
"Well, no one is stopping you from saying what you want. But the preferred term is 'enslaved person' and this is just a toy of a fictional spaceship, so maybe if you coul--"
"NO I WANT TO SAY SLAVE SO BAD ALL THE TIME SLAVE SLAVE SLAVE YOU CAN'T STOP ME"

So, yeah... more power to the people who love saying "slave" all the time I guess? Sorry that Disney won't print the word on a box for a toy for children.

@Blondie_Wan said:
" @Bricklunch said:
"... And Shmi Skywalker was a "starship" in the service of Watto? "

That might become relevant if they do a set with Shmi, but even then, probably not. It’s not like most sets are named with descriptions of individual characters portrayed in them. How many of the sets of Luke’s landspeeder have been officially named “A Tatooine Moisture Farmer’s Landspeeder”?
"

Umm, excuse you, but I think you mean an X-34 Landspeeder. Naming things after their owner is a virtue-signaling sign of SJW insanity and society gone mad!!!! Who cares if it helps people more easily identify a toy; changing it is taking things too far. This is a very serious issue.

I just assumed it was so as not to confuse with the 20 other Slave I sets that LEGO has made over the years.

Meanwhile, we had "Anakin's Custom Jedi Starfighter" rather than "Azure Angel"

@xadrian said:
" @Armante said:
"why didn't they just name it the Firespray 31?"

I think that suddenly acknowledges EU territory. The Falcon wasn't called a YT-1300."

I think they did mention that in Solo, actually. Han is looking around at Lando's ship and says the manufacturer and model number out loud. Says his dad used to work on the assembly line for them. We still don't know what happened to his dad so that young Han ended up on the streets ... then again, maybe Han was just making everything up, as usual.

They should have named it Boba's Jett

I think people just need to chill.

@Slobrojoe said:
" @PurpleDave said:
" @AustinPowers :
Point of fact: the “Uncle Ben’s” name has been announced to be retiring, but a year later this has not actually happened. The only change I’ve seen is that the one flavor of Uncle Ben’s Ready Rice that I actually liked (chicken flavored brown rice) has been taken off the market, while a few new Uncle Ben’s Ready Rice flavors have even been introduced after the name was supposedly being removed from the packaging. I’m sure it will happen at some point, but they have to come up with a new name and a new logo, register their new trademarks (and confirm that they’re not already taken), then get prepped to print the new packaging, make sure everyone knows what the new name will be, and finally start shipping the rebranded product. It’s not going to happen overnight."

Funny you should say that. I saw an ex-Uncle Ben’s advert on TV on Saturday whilst watching the Euros football showing that they’ve changed their name from Uncle Ben’s to Ben’s Original without the guy on the packet. It is happening. "
I was going to say the same thing. Apparently where @PurpleDave is shopping the change hasn't happened yet, but the product now is indeed called Ben's Original and the nice person of colour, whose face has been a familiar sight for decades, has been removed.
Ironic, as he originally was modeled after a very respected person with no ties to any enslaved people whatsoever.

That's what all those commenters saying "why are you making such a fuss" don't understand. It's not about whether the name of some fictional spacecraft appears in a LEGO set name or on the box, it's about it being one of countless incidents nowadays where corporations try to outdo themselves in displaying perceived political correctness in areas that don't matter the least and have no relevance in changing the underlying problem.

Important to mention also that no sane person would actually question the very real need to end any kind of slavery, discrimination, abuse etc.
What irks me is that all these hypocritical and irrelevant measures are only done by these companies in order to make more money, not because they care the least about those serious underlying issues.

That's why I get so angry about these things. I couldn't care less what this ship is called anyway. It's a cool ship that could be called the flying dung beetle and I would still be a fan of it. Come to think of it, that name doesn't sound much more stupid than Slave 1 to begin with.

@OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
"It's a marketing change considering "Slave I" was never directly mentioned by name in any of the movies, and only in 2 episodes of The Clone Wars series. It's a piece of trivia that still exists for people desperate to know what the ship is called, but this product name change would make it easier for people to purchase who haven't previously made a deep dive into Star Wars lore.

Considering Boba Fett is about to have a big resurgence in The Book of Boba Fett, it makes sense to have products on the market that are easier for kids to tell their parents that they want "Boba Fett's spaceship!".

No one is stopping you from calling it the Slave I, this change isn't ruining your childhood, and no, "SJW's" and "woke lefties" aren't ruining Star Wars."

They are ruining Star Wars. This is another example of that.

I guess Darth Vader's armor color will be changing next because it makes black look bad.

@Brick_Connections said:
" @OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
"No one is stopping you from calling it the Slave I, this change isn't ruining your childhood, and no, "SJW's" and "woke lefties" aren't ruining Star Wars."

They are ruining Star Wars. This is another example of that."

Indeed they are - the unmitigated disasters that are last three movies are prime examples of that.

George Lucas be like: "Wow, who the heck did I sell Star Wars to?"

Because Disney is a band of hypocrites. They bend over & praise China, a country with actual slaves....yet a name of one of the most iconic ships in SW is too much. Idiots.

@Brikkyy13 said:
"Why do things like this always turn into political arguments? I’m very left leaning and I find this absolutely unacceptable. It has nothing to do with politics, it’s about Star Wars staying true to Star Wars. It’s been called the Slave I for 40 years and nobody has ever had an issue with it. It’s also hypocritical, because they’ve just put out an episode of The Bad Batch where they discuss whether or not the clones were slaves to the republic. This is just another instance of Disney taking what we loved about the OT and distorting it into something unrecognisable. Boba Fett isn’t a villain anymore, he’s an antihero now. Han Solo isn’t a drug smuggler anymore, he’s the fuel guy. Luke Skywalker isn’t the hero anymore, he’s a grumpy old man. "

Agree on all accounts, bu to be fair, Boba has been depicted as an anti-hero for awhile, even way back in Legends.

@sagh said:
"Mark my words... in the end of The Book of Boba Fett, Boba is going to die and Mando is going to take possession of Slave I.
After blowing up the Razor Crest they need to get him a bad ass ship... he can't spend his life hitchhiking.
Then we will have a chrome Slave I that will be called the Mandalorian starship."

Thank you for the most interesting and original comment in the thread.

@MutoidMan said:
" @Brick_Connections said:
" @OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
"No one is stopping you from calling it the Slave I, this change isn't ruining your childhood, and no, "SJW's" and "woke lefties" aren't ruining Star Wars."

They are ruining Star Wars. This is another example of that."

Indeed they are - the unmitigated disasters that are last three movies are prime examples of that.
"

I’m not going to say there’s nothing in big wrong with any of the recent Star Wars movies (though I might disagree on which ones they are - the “last three movies” includes both Solo and The Last Jedi, both of which I appreciate), but what problems do exist has nothing to do with “SJWs” and “woke lefties”.

While I love to talk about Disney wanting to use societal trends to their gain in public while doing the very same evil things in secret like using Uyghur forced working camps for Mulans production, it is probably easier this once:

Toy names are stupid.
Why are HAWv6 Juggernauts always clone turbo tanks but AT-ATs and AATs are AT-ATs and AATs?
Why is no LAAT/I ever a LAAT/I?
This issue is as old as the line itself.

@BovineBrick:
Yeah, people don’t really understand just how much of Alaska there is. I spent a week there in 2017, and a coworker went there for a week in either 2018 or 2019, and there is literally no part of the state that we both saw. You could buy t-shirts everywhere that said, “Divide Alaska in two and make Texas the third largest state.” There are two US National Parks in Alaska that are each individually bigger than Belgium. The “smaller” one of them (Gates of the Arctic NP) isn’t even meant for people to visit (there are no roads past the Visitor Center at the entrance...in a National Park that’s bigger than Belgium). Alaska State Troopers are spread so thin that each individual patrols an area that’s larger than the state of Rhode Island. And I’ve seen maps where Alaska is superimposed over the contiguous US, and still touches borders in all four directions (you have to angle it just right to hit the S/W borders with various Aleutian Islands, E with the panhandle, and N with the North Slope). Most travel in Alaska is done by plane because it’d just cost too much to build and maintain roads (including plowing in the winter) once you get out of maybe the southern third of the state (excluding all the islands in the Aleutian archipelago and the panhandle).

@Sutures:
Paint it red and call it “Awesome I”?

@Blondie_Wan:
The complaint was that they were filming Mulan in China, enriching China’s government and economy, and were specifically filming right near where the Uighur people were being subjected to a government pogrom, all while remaking a film that casts China in a sympathetic light. They had the option of not making the film, or not filming in China, but they didn’t make either choice.

WHY NOT NAME IT ATLEAST BY THE SHIP CLASS!?!?!?!?!?!

Its a Firespray - 31 isnt it... that would just be infinitely better......

HOW long before its now called STAR PLAN.....

@PurpleDave said:
[ @TheWackyWookiee:
Kenner took guidance from West End Games (publisher of the original SW RPG) on most names, as they made them up whenever there wasn’t an official name on record. You’d have to ask someone who is really familiar with the early sourcebooks if it had been named by that point. Regardless, that name has always been problematic _because_ it was never named in movie dialogue, so nobody knows how it’s supposed to be pronounced (i.e. does the accent go on the 2nd or 3rd syllable).]]

Actually it shouldn't be problematic:
noun: executor; plural noun: executors
1.
LAW
a person or institution appointed by a testator to carry out the terms of their will.
"Hugh appointed him an executor of his will"
2.
a person who produces something or puts something into effect.
"the makers and executors of policy"

So, a fitting name for Vader's ship, as he was very much the executor of the Emperor's will.

NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH executioner:
noun
an official who carries out a sentence of death on a legally condemned person.

@Blondie_Wan said:
" @MutoidMan said:
" @Brick_Connections said:
" @OuterRimTradingCo_ said:
"No one is stopping you from calling it the Slave I, this change isn't ruining your childhood, and no, "SJW's" and "woke lefties" aren't ruining Star Wars."

They are ruining Star Wars. This is another example of that."

Indeed they are - the unmitigated disasters that are last three movies are prime examples of that.
"

I’m not going to say there’s nothing in big wrong with any of the recent Star Wars movies (though I might disagree on which ones they are - the “last three movies” includes both Solo and The Last Jedi, both of which I appreciate), but what problems do exist has nothing to do with “SJWs” and “woke lefties”."

First, we're meaning the Sequel trilogy, not Rogue One or Solo.

Um, yeah they do.
-The characters of Rey, who knew how to do everything and wasn't a good character; Finn, who they threw away after Episode 7; and the OG characters who were nerfed except for Leia, to push an agenda.
-The firing of Gina Carano, but not Pedro Pascal.
-The recent Sasha Banks Twitter situation.
-The postponement of Rangers of the New Republic
-And now, the cancellation of the name, Slave I, because it might offend someone.

@PDelahanty said:
"The should blow up the ship in The Book of Boba Fett. It's a stupid ship anyway. Give him a cooler one.

...and seriously, who names a ship with a "I" at the end? Stupid.

Boba Fett is seriously overrated fanservice. Always has been ever since people cried about him being tossed in the sarlacc pit. Should have stayed there."

Sounds like you have some childhood trauma over the character.

@eMouse said:
"My guess is that Disney started caring about what the ship was named when it was decided to do the Boba Fett series.

It's possible they're re-christening the ship in the new series, so Disney is preparing the market for it as a reveal by phasing out the old name, the way Grogu was known as 'The Child' for so long."

That's different though. In relation to Grogu, Mando didn't know the name until Season 2, so we wouldn't know it either, and it was never established at the time.

The Slave I, however, is a different case. It has already been established as the Slave I, even before Disney bought Lucasfilm. This name change is just an attempt to be woke.

@ahughwilliams said:
"star wars is inherently political: it's about the French underground fighting the Nazis, or the Afghan mujahedeen fighting the USSR, or the US colonies fighting Great Britain. those of you who think star wars was never about so called "woke political correctness" have missed the point entirely."

This is so unbelievably wrong and I can't believe that so many people think the political aspects of George Lucas' movies are the same as the political aspects of Disney's movies. George Lucas used the events of real-life political stories to as a basis for the story to ground it in reality and provide minimal commentary. Disney uses Star Wars to push the creator's political viewpoints and reflects nothing of the current situation beyond the creator's opinions, nor does it reflect a historical situation that could've given the sequels an actual plot instead of 7 hours worth of nonsense. George Lucas made films with relatable characters in situations that reflected real conflicts, Disney made films with cookie cutter characters they ticked off of an inclusivity checklist and put far left leaning political ideologies front and center in the movies. George Lucas never made a point of favoring characters of one gender over the other, nor did he ever dedicate half a movie to an anti animal abuse PSA.

@Brikkyy13 said:
" @ahughwilliams said:
"star wars is inherently political: it's about the French underground fighting the Nazis, or the Afghan mujahedeen fighting the USSR, or the US colonies fighting Great Britain. those of you who think star wars was never about so called "woke political correctness" have missed the point entirely."

This is so unbelievably wrong and I can't believe that so many people think the political aspects of George Lucas' movies are the same as the political aspects of Disney's movies. George Lucas used the events of real-life political stories to as a basis for the story to ground it in reality and provide minimal commentary. Disney uses Star Wars to push the creator's political viewpoints and reflects nothing of the current situation beyond the creator's opinions, nor does it reflect a historical situation that could've given the sequels an actual plot instead of 7 hours worth of nonsense. George Lucas made films with relatable characters in situations that reflected real conflicts, Disney made films with cookie cutter characters they ticked off of an inclusivity checklist and put far left leaning political ideologies front and center in the movies. George Lucas never made a point of favoring characters of one gender over the other, nor did he ever dedicate half a movie to an anti animal abuse PSA. "

You had me initially, but completely lost me toward the end by inserting your own politics. Lucas' Star Wars is dripping with political themes that likely would have been considered "woke" at the time. See:
https://www.history.com/news/the-real-history-that-inspired-star-wars
https://www.amc.com/blogs/george-lucas-reveals-how-star-wars-was-influenced-by-the-vietnam-war--4271

Always funny about these things and yet the story of SW includes many things far worse than this name, i.e. slaughtering of younglings, etc. Should they remove boba fett, jabba, vader, and probably all the bad guys from SW as well? Why they keep creating stories about bad things and yet quietly removing names like this. Or better yet, why they bought SW in the first place knowing the story includes slaves and yet they want to let people know that's against their views...

@Ladondorf said:
" [...]
We're not the ones irrationally outraged at the name of a spaceship, Disney is. We're just reacting to it."

Alright, keep telling yourself that.

@AustinPowers:
Beauty’s in the eye of the beholder. To a small number of people (relative to the US population), Uncle Ben and Aunt Jemima are actual family members. That is to say, the people they’re modeled after were actual relatives. Nobody asked them if they were offended by the brands. Well, some people did, and they’re reportedly upset that (mostly) white people are telling them that their black relatives are no longer acceptable because of racism (it is twistedly ironic). But the corporations have decided to distance themselves from these brand names, and the families don’t get a vote.

Then there was Eskimo Pies, which is claimed to be racist because “Eskimo” is offensive. Except that’s a loaded statement because the Inuit people in Canada and Greenland vastly outnumber the Eskimo people in Alaska, and voted to tell the world that everyone should refer to all of these people (whether they’re Inuit, Eskimo, or one of the other smaller tribal groups) as Inuit. I was told by an actual Eskimo in the Alaska Native Heritage Center that in Alaska they definitely prefer to be called Eskimos (though the subject of whether it’s okay to name a frozen desert after them did not come up).

There’s a related issue with sports teams in the US, where any mascot name associated with Native American tribes is receiving pressure (again, mostly by white people) to be changed. Nobody polled the various tribes before deciding this was offensive. Sure, there are one or two that are actual pejorative terms, but there are also generic terms, like “Braves”, or names of actual tribes, like “Blackhawks”, and from what I’ve heard, the tribal opinion on this matter leans more towards keeping them. In this case, only one team has actually been impacted, and that was more by having their trademark revoked on the grounds that it’s deemed offensive (after five years and a trip to SCOTUS, Matal v Tam resulted in the USPTO being ordered to register a trademark for an all-Asian band named “The Slants”, which likely would have allowed a certain football team to reclaim their own trademark, if they hadn’t announced that they were voluntarily giving up the name before their own lawsuit reached a definitive conclusion).

There are famous black adults who have gone on record as saying they’re not okay with this erasure of history for the sake of not uttering a word that’s remotely offensive, because it means you can’t effectively educate people about past injustices when you have one group of people that’s trying to use the 1st Amendment to censor the speech of others. There are law students who are telling their own professors that they can’t cite historical case law if it involves quoting offensive language that was included in the official court record.

So my main concern is that people are weaponizing the 1st Amendment to deny others their own 1st Amendment rights (thankfully SCOTUS ruled, _unanimously_, that even hate speech needs to be protected, because otherwise someone has to be put in charge of determining what counts as hate speech, and, ironically, that leads directly to fascism). And in a close second, is the fact that a lot of white people have been throwing accusations of racism around on behalf of, and even at, ethnic minorities without ever seriously consulting them on their own opinions. On this specific issue, I’m more offended that Disney is referring to anything they produced as “Star Wars”. Star Wars ended when Lucas handed the keys over on December 21, 2012, exactly as the ancient Mayans predicted.

Actor and digital artists Mark Anthony Austin, who played Boba Fett in scenes added to “Episode IV: A New Hope” in 1997, said on Twitter that the character’s ship will “forever be Slave I”.

LEGO director Jens Kronvold Frederiksen told a LEGO news outlet that Disney had requested the company rename the ship, known as “Slave I,” to “Boba Fett’s starship”.
Neither Disney nor Fredericksen gave an explanation for the change.

Fredericksen would only say that, the change is “probably not something which has been announced publicly but it is just something that Disney doesn’t want to use any more.”

Austin seemed to suggest he believed the change was in response to a Disney effort to sanitize its properties, removing any hit of politically incorrect language.

“My ship will forever be Slave 1. Nothing. Not even Disney can or will change that. This is the way,” Austin said.

In a follow-up Tweet,
“When applying for personalized plates for my car the DMV would not allow ‘Slave1’.
Okay I understand. Had to try. But I get it,” Austin said.
“This Disney idiocy however. Not buying. not conforming to the Mouse, no siree. Not gonna happen.”
“When I was growing up I loved Disney. No more,” he said.

It's only written on the box and I throw the box away so the name change is inconsequential.

@legoDad42 said:
"Actor and digital artists Mark Anthony Austin, who played Boba Fett in scenes added to “Episode IV: A New Hope” in 1997, said on Twitter that the character’s ship will “forever be Slave I”.

LEGO director Jens Kronvold Frederiksen told a LEGO news outlet that Disney had requested the company rename the ship, known as “Slave I,” to “Boba Fett’s starship”.
Neither Disney nor Fredericksen gave an explanation for the change.

Fredericksen would only say that, the change is “probably not something which has been announced publicly but it is just something that Disney doesn’t want to use any more.”

Austin seemed to suggest he believed the change was in response to a Disney effort to sanitize its properties, removing any hit of politically incorrect language.

“My ship will forever be Slave 1. Nothing. Not even Disney can or will change that. This is the way,” Austin said.

In a follow-up Tweet,
“When applying for personalized plates for my car the DMV would not allow ‘Slave1’.
Okay I understand. Had to try. But I get it,” Austin said.
“This Disney idiocy however. Not buying. not conforming to the Mouse, no siree. Not gonna happen.”
“When I was growing up I loved Disney. No more,” he said.

"

Lol. The guy whose role was literally to take a couple steps and nod at the camera in one of the most pointlessly fanservicey additions to the Special Editions is up in arms about changes to Star Wars? That's hilarious. As is his calling Slave I "his" ship, when he never shared a scene with it.

Time to close the comments.

From a marketing perspective this makes total sense. They've done this with countless other vehicles. Much easier for a parent to find Boba Fett's Ship than Slave I.

It does seem like a bit of an over reaction from Disney if they're doing this across the IP. Interestingly enough, the official Star Wars databank hasn't been changed, so I'm fully expecting Slave I to get blown up in the Book of Boba Fett. Regardless, I don't think it's a big deal. Everyone who cares knows it's Slave I.

@EdwinJackson said:
"When are they going to rename Star Wars to Star Conflict? "

Sorry, that name’s been copyrighted by Lepin! ;)

Ridiculous

I couldn't care less about the change. It isn't mentioned in the films and Slave I is a stupid name anyway. It's not incorrect to call it Boba Fett's starship. That is exactly what it is.

Lot of triggered people here wanting to cancel Disney. You know you can call this toy whatever you want, right? If your sense of self is so fragile that some mega company calling a starship a starship triggers you to post wildly on a toy website, you might want to reconsider what’s really important in life.

@PurpleDave said:
" @Squidy74H:
Master bedrooms are being renamed for the real estate industry, too."
What are they being renamed to? One of my almae matres has contacted me to let me know that my “master’s degree” is to be known as my “enslaver’s degree”. Not sure how I feel about that. At least it’s not as bad as “enslaver bedroom”. That’s just super wrong.

In other news, I’ve decide to rename my iron Slave I. I just have to remember not to swoosh it around while it’s on.

Censoring references to slavery is problematic; you can’t sweep the issue of slavery, past and present, under the rug, It is a denial that was in the past practiced by slaveholders themselves. ”Slave” has always been a loaded term. Slaveholders would use euphemisms like ”servant” to sugarcoat the owning of another human being in forced labor. It was by and large detractors of slavery who called it what it is.
For example, a significant demographic of writers of the U.S, Constitution were rich southern planters whose lands were tilled by legions of slaves. In the part of the Constitution where it was decided enslaved residents should count as 3/5 of a citizen for purposes of taxation and representation (the 3/5 compromise) the Framers (writers of the Constitution) were too queasy to use the word slave (it would make them feel bad to admit it) so instead they were called ”all other persons.” Even though slavery is outlawed in the U.S.A. now, that part of the Constitution is technically still the law of the land, ”other persons” are still counted as 3/5 of a regular citizen.

Yes, I did lots of writing in history class. Now that the evil word has been smote down by Mickey D. (Mickey Disney, not McDonalds) we might get an ”other person” Leia minifigure.

@PurpleDave said:
"On this specific issue, I’m more offended that Disney is referring to anything they produced as “Star Wars”. Star Wars ended when Lucas handed the keys over on December 21, 2012, exactly as the ancient Mayans predicted."
I don't feel qualified to comment on the other issues you've brought up (although I would say that the Canadian Inuit have not, to my knowledge, told people to refer to anyone that lives above the treeline "Inuit", it's more of an effort to have others understand that they are distinct groups of people). But you show rare wisdom, sir, when you say that George Lucas's story ended when he sold his company to retire. Disney is only just starting to actually trust the people who Lucas mentored (ie, Dave Filoni), instead of self important genre directors or self proclaimed auteurs. Let's hope this is the case going forward rather than a flash in the pan.

This is not unique to today. Back in the early 80s, Kenner had to figure out how to market the Executor, which sounded a lot like "executioner". Their solution was simply to call it Darth Vader's Star Destroyer.

Is it a politically motivated choice?
Maybe, we don't know for sure.
Is it annoying?
Yeah, a little.
Does it matter?
No, not really.

@MrJackson:
Pronunciation matters more than you seem to think. Consider the Matrix trilogy, where every hovercraft has a name that ties in to one religion or another. Well, all except the Hammer. That’s just something you find in a toolbox. Except if you watch the bonus features on Matrix 2, they explain that it was originally supposed to be the Mjolnir, but nobody could pronounce it. I never found out if they were having difficulty saying “myolneer”, or if they were really screwing it by trying to heave “muhjolner” off their tongues, but any marketing department would hate trying to sell that word. Not only would they have to pitch it to consumers, but they’d have to use it in daily business.

It’s less of an issue with the Executor, but they actually made toys based on that (I’m not aware of any toys or toylike merchandise based on the Hammer). No marketing department is going to want to pitch a product to a consumer public that can’t even figure out how to say the name. So again, if it had been named in dialogue, they would probably use the name more often.

@Zander:
I think I read that Primary Bedroom is the preferred term now.

@Norikins:
Then you should know that the 3/5ths Compromise was repealed in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment. Because they don’t actually delete text from the US Constitution, it will forever be part of the document, but it has been rendered toothless. Hopefully they’ll actually start teaching kids about how it really worked, because I see a lot of “articles” online about how the 3/5ths Compromise was meant to disenfranchise black people (the fact that slavery was allowed, and black people couldn’t vote disenfranchised them, but the 3/5ths Compromise was meant to balance how much power the slave states had in DC vs how much they owed the federal government in taxes, and really only affected white slave-owners).

@Tyrell_Archer:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_Circumpolar_Council

It’s a starting point, so you can do your own research if you want. Basically, though, calling all the boreal native peoples “Inuit” is about as accurate as it would be to call all the native tribes in the contiguous US “Cherokee” because they had the most voting power.

I had never heard of this controversy prior to my 2017 visit to Alaska. The ICC has done a very thorough job of vilifying the term “Eskimo”, but those who prefer the term have basically been rendered voiceless by having a minority status within the ICC, and having submitted themselves to ICC representation. To get out, they’d need to get a lot of Inuit people to agree to vote to let them leave. That would dilute the power of the ICC, and allow the Eskimo people to form their own organization with a potentially conflicting message, so I suspect that’s got a snowball’s chance.

I see a lot of folks say it’s good marketing wise...sure, because I’m sure the last 8 Slave I’s sold poorly because they were called that.

Just a little info for those using the term "Woke" as a pejorative. All it means is awareness to issues regarding social and racial justice. What side of that spectrum you fall on after that, is your own thing. Calling out issues as being woke regardless though, shows awareness and therefore makes you woke yourself. (Also politically, it was first originally used in the 1860s by Republican Lincoln supporters.)

Personally I think its just Disney getting in front of a name change for the series releasing this winter, so you don't have him calling his ship one thing, and the product box saying another. Everyone just needs to take a deep breath and call it whatever makes you happy. And if you're still really upset, grab a Sharpie and edit your box. Problem solved.

"ZOMG!! Is no one going to mention how The Child is now Grogu in 75315!!?? Everyone knows it's Baby Yoda!!"

I hear a lot of that spirit in these comments. I've seen this "movie" before, I think. I'll wait for the other shoe to drop but as it stands now, seems like the latest flavor of the day to appease one group and/or absolve the guilt of another group. My initial reaction, being black, annoyance. But I'll allow room for the whole story to develop and maybe by the time it does I'll care more because since that initial reaction, I couldn't care less (as I don't care at all).

It's LEGO. Just because it's named one thing or it's designed one way, no one but you is limiting your experience. Want to call it Slave I, as I would, do that. Don't want to, don't. I'll be buying one as I never got around to buying Slave I to recreate some scene to make people feel uncomfortable about their own perceptions of life, like having Boba Fett march Mace Windu, in handcuffs, into Slave I. Offended, that's on you. You're the one assigning value to these things. In the end, it's all LEGO to me. I'll find my own value in it and enjoy it while I do.

@MainBricker said:
"A lot of people being triggered by people being triggered."

LOL! So true.
I enjoy the heated debates in the Comment section - I actually learned a lot reading these. This argument may or may not have run its course, but I think it's remaining relatively civilized overall.

I happen to be perfectly okay sharing the LEGO hobby with plenty of people that disagree with me - makes it interesting.

@The_Byzantine_Knight said:
"Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.

I'll repeat this forever until Disney gets that true Star Wars fans REJECT this PC garbage they are trying defile George Lucas' Magnum Opus with AGAIN.

The Force is NOT female.
Anakin Skywalker IS the Chosen One.
Luke Skywalker NEVER gives up.
Palpatine DIED in the Death Star's reactor shaft.
Lando Calrissian ONLY goes for the ladies.
Jar Jar Binks has MORE character depth than anybody in the sequels.
and Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I."

This! A million times this!

Jar Jar is infinitely better than Rey. Jar Jar had a nice simple backstory that allowed his story to fold out in a neat fashion as so he did not take up too much of the movie’s time. Who was Jar Jar? A misunderstood Gungan banished by his people who was on the verge of death when the Jedi saved him. In return he helped bring the Jedi to the Queen of Naboo, a planet which was under occupation of the Trade Federation’s droid army. While this led to the occupation of Jar Jar’s homeland, this would turn out to be a good thing as it would end the feud between the humans and the gungans of Naboo by uniting them against a common threat. Jar Jar led the charge for the Gungans into battle and helped defeat the droid armies once and for all. He was celebrated as a hero and he earned a respectable roll as a representative of Naboo in the Galactic Senate.

Who was Rey? She’s a literal nobody who is somehow good at everything she does. She had no character depth because she could never be defeated. She destroyed the legacy of Star Wars. It pains me to remember the horrible desecration of the characters I love. She randomly finds a map to Luke Skywalker and goes off on her merry way to find him, coincidentally acquiring the Millennium Falcon along the way as well as finding Anakin Skywalker’s lost lightsaber. Sure she fights off street thugs with a stick, but how can she defeat a fallen Jedi in one on one lightsaber combat without ever having held a lightsaber? She made Han Solo look like a fool in his own ship, she stole Chewbacca’s hug from Leia after Han died on a mission to save Rey. She never receives any proper training because Luke Skywalker has turned into a shadow of his former self, a bitter old man who never got to say goodbye to his best friend before he died. And just when it looks like the real Luke has returned, he dies too. With Luke dead, Rey - who is 2 movies in and still no real Jedi training - calls herself a Jedi and steals sacred books from Luke. Then it turns out, she’s been Palpatine’s granddaughter all along. With all the Skywalkers now dead, she assumes the name “Rey Skywalker” and buries Anakin’s lightsaber in the sands of a planet he hated.

Jar Jar was the heart of a massively convoluted story who had a solid backstory while Rey came out of nowhere and served no purpose other than to replace Luke as the main character of the story.

Disney, what a god-awful company. What is next, another re-butchered original trilogy release where slave Lea is wearing a digital jumpsuit and Vader is colored white?

I hear Disney wanted to name it Uighyr I....

@Brikkyy13 said:
" @The_Byzantine_Knight said:
"Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.
Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I.

I'll repeat this forever until Disney gets that true Star Wars fans REJECT this PC garbage they are trying defile George Lucas' Magnum Opus with AGAIN.

The Force is NOT female.
Anakin Skywalker IS the Chosen One.
Luke Skywalker NEVER gives up.
Palpatine DIED in the Death Star's reactor shaft.
Lando Calrissian ONLY goes for the ladies.
Jar Jar Binks has MORE character depth than anybody in the sequels.
and Boba Fett's ship is the SLAVE I."

This! A million times this!

Jar Jar is infinitely better than Rey. Jar Jar had a nice simple backstory that allowed his story to fold out in a neat fashion as so he did not take up too much of the movie’s time. Who was Jar Jar? A misunderstood Gungan banished by his people who was on the verge of death when the Jedi saved him. In return he helped bring the Jedi to the Queen of Naboo, a planet which was under occupation of the Trade Federation’s droid army. While this led to the occupation of Jar Jar’s homeland, this would turn out to be a good thing as it would end the feud between the humans and the gungans of Naboo by uniting them against a common threat. Jar Jar led the charge for the Gungans into battle and helped defeat the droid armies once and for all. He was celebrated as a hero and he earned a respectable roll as a representative of Naboo in the Galactic Senate.

Who was Rey? She’s a literal nobody who is somehow good at everything she does. She had no character depth because she could never be defeated. She destroyed the legacy of Star Wars. It pains me to remember the horrible desecration of the characters I love. She randomly finds a map to Luke Skywalker and goes off on her merry way to find him, coincidentally acquiring the Millennium Falcon along the way as well as finding Anakin Skywalker’s lost lightsaber. Sure she fights off street thugs with a stick, but how can she defeat a fallen Jedi in one on one lightsaber combat without ever having held a lightsaber? She made Han Solo look like a fool in his own ship, she stole Chewbacca’s hug from Leia after Han died on a mission to save Rey. She never receives any proper training because Luke Skywalker has turned into a shadow of his former self, a bitter old man who never got to say goodbye to his best friend before he died. And just when it looks like the real Luke has returned, he dies too. With Luke dead, Rey - who is 2 movies in and still no real Jedi training - calls herself a Jedi and steals sacred books from Luke. Then it turns out, she’s been Palpatine’s granddaughter all along. With all the Skywalkers now dead, she assumes the name “Rey Skywalker” and buries Anakin’s lightsaber in the sands of a planet he hated.

Jar Jar was the heart of a massively convoluted story who had a solid backstory while Rey came out of nowhere and served no purpose other than to replace Luke as the main character of the story. "

Its good to see another Jar Jar fan here. Jar Jar is a well rounded, developed character, while rey is literally nothing but what you mentioned. Im not kidding, I CANNOT watch the sequel trilogy ever again, because of rey. (and obviously many, many other mistakes) But Im good with my routine of watching the Prequel Trilogy every other weekend, honestly enjoying watching Jar Jar be a bumbling fool! George knew exactly who Jar Jar was and what his purpose was. Unfortunately, most people cant see that. Rey on the other hand, I dont think a single person at Disney ACTUALLY knows who she is or what her purpose is. The ST is just a cheesy money grab, and a VERY poorly executed one as well.

@vzarmo said:
"I just don’t know what to say... “lol” maybe?
Or
If we don’t talk about something, then it never happened. "

It's funny how the people that don't want to talk about shameful periods in history NEED to have ALL THE REMINDERS FOREVER.

Do you really think the appropriate time to remember and discuss slavery is through lego sets?

You realize, Anakin is still a slave in the movies. Han still gets tortured. Leia is still kept against her will. I don't think "slave" on toys is going to do any historical disservice.

@gorf43:
Sure. Jar-Jar’s purpose in the films is to keep kids from fidgeting in the seats once the movie passes the 90-minute mark. No, seriously. I read a review from someone who absolutely _loathed_ the character and everything about him (and this is coming from someone who sealed a Jar-Jar minifig in the foundation of a Moonbase module two decades ago and hasn’t opened it up since). Then this person went to watch a matinee of Ep1. He/She said the younger kids in the audience were getting restless just a few minutes into the movie, but as soon as Jar-Jar appeared on the screen, they all shut up, stopped crawling on the seats, and paid rapt attention to the screen. Why? Because George made sure that his Saturday morning serials would appeal to kids, so they could experience the same thing he did as a kid.

Funny, I don’t remember much debate when “Super Star Destroyer,” “Grievous Starfighter,” and “Bad Batch Shuttle” all released with those names printed on the cardboard instead of their proper, in-universe names.

@magmafrost said:
"Aaaand cue unhinged alt-right "EsS-jAy-DuByEwS" conspiracy nonsense. Cant have star wars fandom without unreasonable levels of outrage about something completely inconsequential "

There's no need for outrage or name calling on either side but let's call a spade a spade this is woke nonsense. But not worth getting Triggered over. You just roll your eyes and move on. If anything it's an ironic Lego news story.

Why is it funny or sad? It's just different opinion Disney has their views and we have ours. This is more of a virtue signaling PR stunt to me rather than conventional 'marketing.' Maybe the Show will explain this change.

Makes sense. I thought that name was weird the first time I learned it when I was nine years old and it has never stopped being weird since then.

@Mechalex said:
"There's a complex, nuanced debate to be had about language and its connotations and corporations signalling their virtues without really changing their fundamental ethos, which some commenters are entering into. However the reactionary mob who bandy the word 'woke' around pejoratively as if having empathy is somehow a bad thing just make it hard to find the diamonds among the manure."

‘Woke’ has nothing to do with empathy. It’s all about employing classic methods of divide-and-conquer, revisionism, and thought control to turn people against each other in order to grab power.

Actually, pretty much the same wool what Palpatine pulled over the eyes of the Republic!

@Mechalex:
If that’s actually what was going on, that would be fine. Great, even. But some people in the US have tried to weaponize the 1st Amendment. Following the 2016 election, I read articles that claimed the US Founders intended, by the 1st Amendment protection of Freedom of Speech, that we should use physical violence to suppress “wrong” speech. I have read articles where college students filed complaints with colleges because they wanted campus authorities to prohibit other students from identifying themselves, by speech or dress, as Republicans. I’ve read an opinion piece where it was suggested that the best way to address reparations for slavery in the early US would be for black people to be allowed to enslave white people (never mind that not all black people are descended from former slaves, not all white people are descended from former slaveholders, and that whole problem with slavery still being wrong). This is just the tip of the iceberg, and this isn’t really the best place to address it, but violence committed in the name of justice is still just violence. The stuff I see happening on the far left isn’t really that different from the stuff they are (often legitimately) accusing the far right of doing, but we all know that two wrongs don’t make a right.

I think it's incredibly funny how many people are making the exact same jokes abt Disney removing the word "slave" from SW as if we didn't VERY RECENTLY get an episode of a Disney SW show that had literal slavers as the villains. It's just a marketing thing that makes a LOT of sense given D/LF seem to be pivoting Boba to a much less antagonistic role, so they probably don't wanna be selling his spaceship under a name that sounds pretty villainous

It is a pretty sad state of affairs. Nothing is going to change history about slavery. We know it was wrong to think that you could buy and sell people, even though doing so provided food, clothing and shelter for many involved. But I digress.
In my very humble opinion this is just another example of the Disney enterprise exercising its monetary muscle to get what it wants. Disney slaps its name on everything connected to it, be it Lego sets or Hallmark ornaments. Do they have a right to do so? Sure. But do they need to do it? Absolutely not.
Further, entities shouldn't be allowed to change things just because they can. There are deep rooted feeling in people about certain things such as the Sears Tower becoming the Willis Tower. And don't even get me started on how many sports arenas have changed their names because some wealthy corporation bought the stadium involved. It's shameful. And I believe that if I had the decision making ability at Lego I would have told Disney that Slave 1 will remain Slave 1. Somebody has to take a stand or many things that we've known and loved will disappear into the mist of memory.

@MegaMechaLesbian said:
"...so they probably don't wanna be selling his spaceship under a name that sounds pretty villainous"

I had wondered about the name Slave I - as far as I know the Fetts are bounty hunters, not slavers - and came to the conclusion that the only way it makes sense is if it were named in defiance; like maybe Jango Fett - who we now know was a foundling - was a slave as a child before being saved by Mandalorians. He named the ship Slave I so now it is a slave striking fear into the hearts of powerful beings instead of the other way around. Boba kept the name to honor his father and take advantage of the reputation it had likely already earned.