February 13, 2008...6:09 am
If Bratz dolls were real, Bill Maher would be dating 5 of them.
There are a lot of things wrong with Bratz besides the stupid fucking “spunky”, “hip-hop” use of Z as a pluralizer (what if I started using a Q to make all C and K sounds?). I don’t suppose I’m breaking any new ground by discussing the Bratz phenomenon, but I’m going to talk about it anyway because my take on Bratz is probably more coherent than anyone else’s: Bratz dolls are a tangible distillation of the fact that American girls are expected to grow up to be materialistic, fashion-obsessed, boy-crazed, manipulative sex objects and nothing else. I’ve never seen a more brazen celebration of shallowness, vapidity, materialism, and lowered expectations than Bratz dolls and all of the merchandise and media that accompany them. If you aren’t familiar with Bratz, or even if you are, I’ll break the whole thing down for you here.
Bratz dolls are supposed to be the new millennium’s answer to tired-ass and cliched Barbie dolls: they aren’t all blond, they don’t all have the same hue of tan, and they … uh… don’t hang out with guys named Ken. They also have new-millennium rap-video dancer (or porn) names like Jade, Yasmin, Tiana, Ciara, Noemie, and other shit that gets a red line out of my spell-checker, and they supposedly resemble more closely the diversity of appearances represented in America than the Barbie line (more on that nonsense later). The line includes Bratz Babyz, Bratz Kidz, and the standard Bratz, but even these make Barbie look old as hell, what with their affluent-but-jobless club-hopping teenager vibe.
We all know that Barbies were a bad influence on girls; they gave us the idea that a) life revolved around fashion, being beautiful, and fashion, that b) we could play sports and have jobs, but only if we stayed beautiful the whole time, and that c) if we wanted to be beautiful, we’d better figure out how to be blond, 5′10″, 110 pounds, and have a 13-inch waist, giant boobs, and size 4 feet. Kind of a shitty message and one that I’d be glad to see go the way of Cross Colors.
So are Bratz really different from old Babs? Uh… NO. I would be stoked to see toys on the market for girls that offered more inspiring, or at least less limiting, messages than Barbie dolls did, but the makers of Bratz have somehow found a way to make a line of dolls that offers an even more constrained and unrealistic set of options and expectations to girls, all while creating the illusion of offering more options. It’s really fucking sinister, and it’s a brilliant example of just how insidious marketing and product development have become.
In broad terms, the Bratz world is limited to fashion, being into hip-hop or pop music, and that’s about it. No jobs, no sports to speak of (more on that later), no hobbies: Bratz are here to shop, do their hair, get dates, and be fucking snotty. But wait, you’ll say, they’re better than Barbie because they’re, like, multicultural and shit! It’s true, some of the dolls are a little browner than those in Barbie’s crew, but the vast majority of them are still white, and the ones that aren’t uphold a beauty standard in which non-white women are judged by how closely their hair and facial features resemble those of white women deemed “beautiful.” If there were actually any kind of diversity here (I’m talking about actual, not just ethnoracial, diversity), the dolls wouldn’t all look like clones dyed different colors; they’d be different heights, weights, and body types, they’d have different facial structures and hair textures, and they’d have different interests, talents, skills, and backgrounds. Arguing that these dolls are a progressive force because they come in different shades of do-able is like saying that racism is over because sports talk radio fans have agreed that they’d be willing to fuck Halle Berry, Jennifer Lopez, and Lucy Liu.
And speaking of that… the most disturbing feature common to Bratz dolls, even some of the Kidz and Babyz, is that they are completely and totally sexualized. I’m not a sociopathic marketing asshole, but I can see the hand of one in the faces of these dolls: giant collagen lips, huge half-closed eyes reminiscent of a cooing Playboy playmate, massively dilated pupils (which I have heard are a sign of sexual arousal), more make-up than Brett Michaels, long and (somehow) promiscuous hair, and completely stripperific clothing and shoes. Look at the lip liner on the one in the middle. She looks like Pamela Anderson. Honestly, the vast majority of these dolls look like porn “actors” on a day off.
And look at the fucking Babyz! They somehow have floor-length go-go dancer hair, the same heavy-lidded sexual stares as the regular Bratz, and the same plumped-up lips that remind one of the gross reason why men like Angelina Jolie, all at the age of 6 months! Did I mention that, in addition to the baby bottles they wear as fashion accessories, they are all wearing bathing suits? I truly would not be shocked to find one of these Babyz wearing a thong diaper. Seriously, have you ever seen sluttier looking babies?[1]
If kids have to play with miniature plastic humans, it’d be cool if they actually reflected a little bit of reality and gave girls something to think about besides how to get people to want to pork them. As it is, every single one of the dolls fits into the Bratz Fashion Slutz model. Even the obligatory sporty line (which of course includes a Z in its name), the Play Sportz collection, consists only of a doll who SCUBA dives in a silver wetsuit that looks more like the outfit of a Duran Duran back-up dancer, a doll that is into hip hop (which I didn’t know was a sport), one that has a silver hula hoop, and, of course, a fucking cheerleader (who apparently cheers for the pink team, judging by her ridiculously pink uniform). Sporty. Outside that perfunctory nod, the makers of Bratz dollz, gamez, bicyclez, underwear, televisionz, hamperz, lampz, suitcasez, chairz, and moviez are pretty comfortable with their message: being a girl means being overtly sexualized, being way into pink, being popular with boys with date-rapist names like Jordan and Skyler, and being a little asshole about it. The unfortunate part is that only about 1 in 100 girls gets to be a stuck-up sexbot. The rest just get to feel completely worthless because they don’t measure up to such a lame and vacuous standard.
The picture above pretty much sums up the the vibe Bratz are laying down and is a pretty succinct visual distillation of Bratz ideology. I hope people will comment with what they think these three would be saying if they could talk.
[1] Note: I use the term “sluttier” here for rhetorical impact. I don’t call people sluts, but I do recognize that that is one of the two default identities, the other being prude/wife material, that our culture allows women to assume.
56 Comments
February 14, 2008 at 9:17 pm
I’d normally disagree with you, but I can’t because you’re exactly right, these dolls are the reason millions of pre-teens are going to horrible lays when they get older. We might diverge when it comes to reasons why we hate them, but we can at least agree that they’re 2-bit whores. I, too, wish they’d make dolls that were all intellectual, curvy, funny, and kinky as fuck in bed, so that it would teach these soon-to-be-whores what’s really sexy.
I wouldn’t want to oversaturate sexy. These dolls are like an instruction book how to be made fun of and ultimately despised by people like us. Life would be boring otherwize.
February 14, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Alright, Halston. I’m going to have to lecture you for a minute about calling people whores. It isn’t cool. There’s no equivalently derogatory term for men who are promiscuous, and besides that, it’s a shitty thing to call someone. For the victims of Bratz ideology (which is my new favorite world view), I prefer something like “girls who have been brainwashed into believing that their purpose on this planet is to be used sexually by dudes named Todd and Dave.”
I suppose I could say that your comments refer to the hypothesis that feminists have better relationships and sex lives, which was just borne out by a study done somewhere or other. I think that has to be true; women who have their own interests, have a sense of personal sovereignty, and require that they be treated respectfully are probably more fun to date and have sex with than women who have the idea that they’re just there to be looked at. Still, your comments reflect a lot more of the (retarded and piggish) idea that a woman’s worth should be determined by her relative desirability to men than they do of my argument. But at least you’ve mentioned intelligence and funniness as factors, which is at least on the right trail.
February 15, 2008 at 10:27 pm
I try not to use euphamistic language. Your “term” consisted of 30 syllables whereas mine was 1. Oftentimes the intended meaning gets lost with sugarcoated terminology (see insurance/medical industry jargon). It’s true that it’s not fair that men aren’t identified in kind. I guess that’s eerily similar to blacks not having a suitable racial slur for white dudes. This is the main reason I hate being white.
I don’t want to refer back to the natural desire of humans to copulate but I guess I am. Sex has always held the attention of people (regardless of ethnicity, culture, whatever) far greater than anything else. I really do wish I could exchange this hellbent truth for something like space exploration or alt means of jet propulsion but that’ll never be.
February 20, 2008 at 4:33 pm
No, I think the real meaning is lost in the simple but excessively derogatory 1-syllable word. Mine’s more precise and explains what is actually going on rather than reducing complicated and multifaceted people with a variety of motives to “whores”.
February 27, 2008 at 12:20 pm
[...] Against the Man-chine rages against Bratz dolls and their outrageous hyper-sexualisation. A Broad Writes a Letter about primate sexuality, [...]
February 28, 2008 at 4:14 am
I think they would say, “Where the fuck are our noses?!? We don’t care if men don’t find them as sexy as our eyes, mouths or breasts - we want noses!!!”
February 28, 2008 at 4:26 am
Good one.
March 6, 2008 at 12:08 am
I have been trying to figure out why I have more of a problem with Bratz than with Barbie, which I loved as a girl (and who certainly isn’t unproblematic) and this is why. I was beginning to think I was just old and out of touch. I believed that my Barbie’s could do ANYTHING- after all they had the accessories for pretty much anything a (white, middle class) girl could think of. Bratz don’t even offer what Barbie offered.
I think they would say ‘I have really big feet, but I can still buy fashionable shoes’.
March 6, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I’ve actually noticed the big feet thing, and it may be the only thing Bratz are good for, helping girls with big feet not feel abnormal. But of course, there’ll be something or other to make sure they still feel substandard in that regard.
March 29, 2008 at 1:12 am
you have you seen the bratz movie yet … oh yes there is a movie on this shit …and the babys hair dos are very stripperish, m think nomi malone - showgirls..
April 13, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Jeez wtf?! They’re only bloody dolls. You know there’s other dolls like that right? Like Myscene or Top Model dolls. They’re both Mattel creations and trust me,they are fugly. You know,some Bratz dolls actually don’t look bad to me,some have not a lot of make up or skimpy clothes. Some even have tracksuits! And also Bratz are more diversed. They have Latinos,African Americans, Asians and loads more cultures and what does Barbie have? A blonde girl. Seriously you people are just too used to your precious little Barbie and you just can’t get used to the fast that the Bratz are better than Barbie.
April 13, 2008 at 5:54 pm
You obviously didn’t read the post. Either that or you’re stupid. I do know there are other dolls like Bratz, but they are by far the top sellers today and are some of the most offensive. Fugly? Nice. What, may I ask, does “diversed” mean? The dolls may be different colors, but how does that equate to different cultures? In my book, they’re all a part of the same culture, and that culture is defined by materialism and shallowness.
April 23, 2008 at 6:04 am
Miss Anonomous Bratz lover - I would like to state that I had African American, Asian and Latino Barbies growing up.
April 23, 2008 at 9:10 am
Really well written, Thanks for posting it.
April 25, 2008 at 12:18 am
American culture is one big oxymoron. In multiple senses.
… I used to make my Ken and Barbie dolls have sex when I was little. I didn’t even know what sex was, but I made them have it on their wedding night in the oh-so-convienient bed that tagged along with “Wedding Barbie”
Lets not argue about the meaning of words because really, how is that going to fix this problem? .. Which is essentially what we are trying to do, yes?
April 25, 2008 at 12:41 am
I really hate how their feet pop off… it is so creepy!
April 25, 2008 at 5:07 am
It’s great to hear this conversation going. It would be even greater to hear it without the hateful name-calling, but as a guy, I can’t pretend to know what it’s like to grow up as a woman in America. If I were subject to the same expectations, I might resort to name-calling too.
Anyway, keep the conversation going. And who’s ready to start a line of dolls/action figures that offer kids (regardless of gender) positive role modeling?
April 25, 2008 at 5:12 am
Thanks! But where’s the hateful name-calling? I assure you my strong language was meant for entertainment.
April 25, 2008 at 5:48 am
Sorry, less from you and more from some others leaving comments. And really, it’s not that big of a deal. Strongly aggressive reactions are better than no reactions at all. At least the issue can be discussed.
April 25, 2008 at 7:33 am
Hmm. I don’t know either what it’s like to be a woman growing up in America. I’m from South Africa.
I wonder how the views on women differ from here to there? I mean, here, we’ve got possibly the highest rape stats in the world. Yet, we have a system of BEE (black economic empowerment) which makes a disabled black female the ideal employee. So, I as a women (albeit white and able-bodied) have a better chance of getting a job than a white, able bodied man with the same qualifications.
April 25, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I love the Simpsons episode where Lisa invents an intelligent, feminist Malibu Stacey. Go Lisa! I would have loved these BRATZ as a kid, I’m ashamed to say I was the girly-girl and those subliminal messages would have gone straight into my mind. My mother always fought it, didn’t allow us to have Barbies, etc. That made me feel at a disadvantage to other girls who were allowed sexier things. Even if you don’t understand “sexy” as a little girl, you kind of figure out what is and isn’t attractive in a grown-up way. And you so badly want to be attractive in a grown-up way.
About the big feet: I know it’s to make them stand up, but on some of them it looks like stripper shoes.
In some ways I’m glad my child is a boy, but you should see the violence they market at him! Whole aisles of violence! Our poor children. I want my son to feel free to be sensitive and caring and gentle and not to feel this aggression is expected of him. Likewise I would want a daughter to think of herself as a person, not a doll. Not something for show.
Can they PLEASE make non-commercial toy shops? Oh Please? Mr. Magorium, we need you!
April 25, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Patricia - I’m not familiar with the dynamics down there in South Africa. Based on history here, though, I’d probably be bracing myself for a patriarchal backlash were I in your shoes.
April 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm
I loved cutting my barbies hair and dressing her in my best friends Action Man (not sure if you have those in america) clothes. Butch Camouflage Barbie FTW!
What I still think is hilarious is that the toy industry thinks girls /like/ playing with dolls. They don’t. They’re just told they’re supposed to by everyone around them. All little girls would rather be playing out side with laser tag guns then sitting on the floor calmly brushing they’re dolls hair. Advertising of course makes you think you want them and need them and then you end up begging your mum for that pink convertible car that the doll really need to get around your bedroom with and bla bla bla
Bratz, as dolls, suck. Their hair is put into a certain style with some form of glue so when you brush their hair they look like they’ve had a bad perm.
Girls like them because they’re told to by the adverts, I actually think that by making them /so/ extreme that girls can’t think that they should look like this because they look /so/ fake. Mainly because I had a long conversation with the younger girls I did ballet with about them.
“being popular with boys with date-rapist names like Jordan and Skyler” - Fucking LOL.
The problem with Barbie was that it looked like a real woman, a perfect version yes, but still a real woman in a lot of respects, so you were being told that this was what you were meant to be. But Bratz just look stylized and kinda funny to young girls.
And the thing about shopping and stuff, seriously, that’s just a general teenage thing. I know girls of all different types, goth, emo, Barbie types, and the normal variety - all of them like shopping. I think Bratz are meant to show you how to be a teenager, not a woman. And seriously, what productive things do us teenagers do except whine?
So I guess what I’m trying to say is that these things are pretty annoying, but I’ll go on hating Barbie more.
April 26, 2008 at 8:08 pm
I actually did break down and buy my daughter one of the ‘babyz’. It did have a tong. Good post.
April 26, 2008 at 8:13 pm
God, I was kidding about the thongs. It’s even worse than I thought!
April 27, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Wow. “date-rapist names like Jordan and Skylar”? Way to be name-ist.
This is one thing I can’t stand. Blaming toys, music, “the media” for the way children turn out.
If a parent can’t raise a child well enough so that they can think for themselves and not be influenced by this, that’s their own fault.
April 28, 2008 at 2:04 am
I just wanted to point out that, as a child, I loved playing with dolls. In fact, I had an immense collection of Barbies. I never focused on their appearance- they were just little people I found useful for enacting elaborate plotlines. So… “Brainwashed Teen”, not EVERY little girl would rather be outside playing with laser tag guns.
And not every teen loves shopping- I loathe shopping for clothing, although I can spend hours in a bookstore.
Anyway, brilliant article.
April 28, 2008 at 2:09 am
[...] a totally rant against Bratz, see this. Totally [...]
April 28, 2008 at 4:10 pm
A non-brainswashed-teen? - I guess I was wrong, I just base my knowledge on the girls I know and/or grew up with.
April 29, 2008 at 4:26 am
The thing about SA is, I know that women are oppressed here, but growing up in a fairly liberal household, I can’t say I’ve ever been treated unfairly.
But I have heard horror stories about women wanting to leave care packages at police stations for rape victims and the policemen refused - because they claim there is no such thing as rape.
And a while ago, it was in the definition of rape that a man could not be raped. If a man is violated, it’s not rape.
I think the more African cultures are strongly patriarchal, but not in the breadwinner kind of way. Our housekeeper told us her husband is a very good man because he shares his money. Apparently it’s the women’s duty to pay for and take care of the children.
But don’t quote me on it, I only have experience in my little world, which is the middle class white folk.
But our possible future president (ie, the president of the ANC, the ruling party) has been accused of rape and had a… shower to prevent AIDS.
Ok, enough of that. Sorry for the long post. Sorry it’s off topic.
May 7, 2008 at 4:14 am
Personally, I HATE Bratz. I think they are bad role models for anyone of any age. And yes, that is what they are, role models. Anything a child looks up to and tries to emulate is a role model whether they like it or not.
I mean, just LOOK at them, I would not want my future children dressing like that (I am 19, btw), and I would also not want them to play with them.
Maybe it’s just me, but i had a heck of a lot more fun with Cabbage Patch dolls and stuffed animals than I ever did with Barbie. But then again, i was never really a doll person to begin with.
May 7, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I’m 19 too, and I’ve never thought of Barbie as a role model. I didn’t even know she was an actual persona versus a doll to abuse until I got older and started reading stuff about how the media warps growing childrens’ minds. My role models growing up were probably not any better than Barbie — they were the female characters in the classic 90’s PC adventure games. And also, even though I was 17 when I played this … Alyx Vance from Half Life 2 is the best female videogame character of all time! I secretly look up to her when I find myself in a social bind. I ask myself … “How would Alyx handle this?” Sad! But true.
May 9, 2008 at 1:29 am
I always loved Barbies, and looking back, I think one of the best things is that Barbie always had a job (within my lifetime). Like being an Astronaut, or a ballerina, or a firefighter or a cop. Bratz dolls are mostly just creepy, and they don’t seem as versatile to actually play with.
As for who likes to play with what toys- I had loads of Barbies, my brother had these action figures designed like Barbies (though if B.’s 5′11″, these guys were 7 to 8 feet tall) based on Old West heroes. We also used to play together with these little animals, Mapletown figures- dunno if anyone’s heard of htem. Kids will be all right. They play with whatever they want, to heck with the commercial messages.
May 18, 2008 at 6:50 am
They don’t need feet, because they should always be laying down or kneeling. They don’t need noses, because if they had noses, they might object to that funky smell teh menz has after a long day at work and refuse to provide service.
May 21, 2008 at 12:59 am
I worked at a daycare once with two girls, and a little boy who were bratz fanatics. The two girls, both sisters had bright blue eyes, shiny brown hair, and cute personalities. The little boy was adorable, though he had a disconcerting thing for lip gloss that got him teased mercilessly by the other kids. Anyway, one day these girls were talking and the eldest said “I’m not pretty, I want to be so and so” she was talking about one of those hideous dolls. She was 7 or 8. Her sister agreed…she was only 6. The little boy was 6 too and he wanted to be one of the bratz as well.
What the fuck are those damn dolls doing to our children? What are parents doing allowing their daughters to play with them, without any guidance, or support for when they get self image problems?
May 21, 2008 at 7:26 pm
If only some one would take off the market all the things that make people feel bad about themselves, then people could find other reasons to feel bad about themselves.
How come I was raised looking at over-masculinized images and I’m an out-of-shape intellectual who could care less about being Arnold Schwarzenegger?
All of these arguments do such a good job of avoiding the real issue: the individual people and their responsibilities to themselves and to others. Any negativity that arises from these or other of cultural artifacts has much more to do with the social relations that surround them then they do with the artifacts themselves.
But it always easier to blame someone else than to look at what you yourself are doing, isn’t it?
May 21, 2008 at 8:16 pm
I would like to say a few things. I totally agree with you on much of what you say. but Jade is not a pornstar name. It is my name and i have never been told it sounds like that of a pornstar.
May 21, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Reduction - You’d be right if it weren’t for the fact that we don’t make our choices in a vacuum. I’m not now, nor have I ever been, advocating banning anything, but I do think it is people’s job to be aware of the messages they are sending to kids who have yet to develop critical thinking ability. What exactly should I be blaming myself for instead of pointing out things I see that are questionable?
Young girls (and boys) are impressionable, and we’re telling them strange things, girls more so than boys. Girls get the message from all directions that their worth is defined chiefly by how attractive they are, and that’s not cool. Boys get weird messages too (from seeing ‘roid monkeys like Arnold, for example), but at least theirs are balanced by other messages.
You libertarian types are always telling people the same bullshit: we’re all responsible for every aspect of our lives, despite whatever forces may be at work in the world. That’s either naive or dishonest, neither of which is anything to be proud of.
Jade - It was a joke.
May 21, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Bratz don’t even look real. I was too old for them when they first came out (I think I was almost in middle school by then), but I remember thinking that they just looked way too freaky. I also hated the name-since when it being a “brat” a positive thing? I would never have wanted them. I think that Barbie, to a much greater extent, tried to be a positive thing for kids. I remember having a bunch of Barbie computer games and they were things like saving the ocean or rescuing stray animals (or designing dresses, but hey). I never liked dolls much, though. I much preferred stuffed animals.
And the reason you can be raised on images of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Reduction, and be fine is that, in the real world, your worth will not be measured by your appearance. Although many of us figure out that the appearances game isn’t worth it (at least, I have), I know that other people still, and will, judge me based on my appearance much more than men will have to face. While I may be able to know that my value has nothing to do with my appearance, I am powerless to change the rest of the world. Only people like you can do that and you seem to refuse to do so.
May 21, 2008 at 9:57 pm
As for the thongs on the babybratz, there was an issue with that. The manufacturers explained it as a functional strip of fabric used to keep the little skirts from riding up. But they didn’t have nay underwear on aside from that. They’ve changed it since there’s been a complaint.
With the whole cultural thing, there was a Bratz doll named May Ling (Chinese?) who sported a Chinese take-out container and a shirt or a bag or something with the Rising Sun (Japanese?) on it.
Talk about cultural confusion. She’s Asian so let’s give her some Asian accessories and call it a day. And for all the different colors they come in, they all look the same to me.
May 21, 2008 at 11:01 pm
*stands up and applauds*
I just wanna say THANK YOU and BRAVO- I have been bitching about these freakin’ dolls forever!! I feel like and it all falls on deaf/dumb ears-
Women have told me that it’s up to the parents to use these dolls as a tool to teach the opposite- it’s not the toy it’s the parenting- whaaa…??? oh so excuse me- you mean it’s not the SOCIETY it’s the parents cuz they are magically not part of the greater society- grr!
I am an United Statesian living in Mexico. I participated in a toy drive for Christmas. I was horrified at how many Bratz dollz were given to children below the Mexican poverty level- not shoes, clothes, school supplies, building blocks, markers, play dough, soccer balls, tennis rackets- nope- Bratz- Bratz Make-up disembodied head, Bratz babyz, Bratz clothes, etc.
The girls that didn’t receive Bratz stuff were seriously bummed out- of course, they don’t know better (no one taught them) than to want to be objectified and viewed as sexy vs any other quality that they could project!
*heavy sigh*
There were also a large number of 7 year old girls running around in tee shirts that said SEXY across the front.
I guess it’s the parenting, though, not our society at large as a general mind melding, role defining mass.
May 23, 2008 at 2:13 am
Okay so were going off about dolls, guess what…my daughter is 6 and she loves the Bratz dolls. and yes I buy them for her anytime a new one comes out. Why? Because I can and another thing. Honestly people have you turned on the TV? Sex is everywhere and it is going to be everywhere until the end of time! I can go into the nearest department store and buy thong underwear for my 6 year old, and you want to bitch about dolls….get a life!
May 23, 2008 at 2:15 am
I’m bitching about TV, thong underwear for kids, *and* about dolls. Because I can, and because I should. The fact that the sexualization of children is becoming more widespread doesn’t mean we should just embrace it with a sigh. You ought to at least be aware of the fact that, by buying her Bratz, you’re helping train your own daughter to see herself as a sex object.
May 23, 2008 at 3:27 am
Yes, sex is everywhere but that doesn’t mean we don’t have to be mindful of how it impacts young girls. Dolls are not just dolls. They are powerful tools that have the potential to send harmful messages that contribute to low-self esteem and body image issues. In addition, Bratz dolls that come in various skin tones are not necessarily culturally relevant but rather an importation of Western culture in the guise of diversity. Give me a break. If they were truly attempting to be representative of the various cultures, then how about a doll that reflects the collective sense of community that is inherent in the African American identity.
May 23, 2008 at 5:04 am
Yes! I despise that argument that “Oh well, we can’t do anything about it. Sex is here to stay!”
Yes… sex is here, but maybe if we pointed out to the kids how incorrect TV sex or lollipop shapes dolls are, there would be less young girls losing their virginity at 12 because of peer pressure.
Children can’t make proper decisions yet. And, yes, reduction, the issue is with parenting. Unfortunately, many people let the media raise their kids. Hence, the issues discussed here.
May 23, 2008 at 6:12 am
There are 3 ‘B’s that are never ever allowed into my house: Barbie, Barnie and Bratz. I’ve mentioned this to parents during birthday party time.
I have 2 young girls. The older one is starting to recognize more toys on the shelves that she sees in commercials. So far I’ve lucked out and she hasn’t really asked for them, except for once, she said “Oh look!”. I said no and we moved on. She notices the Dora playsets more than anything.
But yep. Your whole article was bang on. You couldn’t pay me to let one of those dolls in my house.
May 25, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Kylie: there ARE places to get wonderful, non-commercial toys. Toys not tied into marketing campaign. I’m new to this board, and don’t know if this will constitute some kind of TOS violation, but if it helps I am not affiliated with any of the following, other than as a customer and a fan:
Hearthsong.com
Fat Brain Toys.com
MagicCabin.com
BacktoBasicstoys.com
schylling.com
and moderators, remove the links if you must, but please leave this advice posted: google old-fashioned toys and/or educational toys to find non toysRus-sexist-plastic-tv character toys in crap toys. They are out there, and they are wonderful.
May 25, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Ivy - You needn’t worry. There’s no way I’d delete info for parents on toy companies that offer alternatives to Bratz for girls. Links are fine with me, as long as they don’t lead to anything that conflicts with my values or the site’s.
June 2, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Thank you so much for writing this! Mostly because it is exactly what I have been thinking all along. I even posted it on facebook!
The number one thing to remember: adults aren’t the ones the dolls are made for. They are made for 12 year old girls. Is this really what we want young girls comparing themselves to?
I also saw a long time ago that it won some toy award and I was shocked–it was the first time I had seen them, and all I could think was “they gave a stripper doll an award for being a toy? How did they give kids these in the first place?” It’s disgusting. Thanks for writing it all out!
June 9, 2008 at 1:51 am
I’d like to bring your attention to this link (via Bluemilk (http://bluemilk.wordpress.com/) , she blogs frequently on the same subject. It sort of spells things out (esp. the first bit).
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/05/20/lolita_effect/
June 9, 2008 at 1:57 am
Thanks for the links. Interesting stuff.
June 13, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Thank you!
When I was 5 years old, my aunt told me she would buy me a book whenever I asked, but would never buy me a Barbie. Because of this I am (a little) less affected by the Barbie Effect. Even at 16, I’m pretty sure I’ll never EVER buy my child that anything like this.
How are over sexualized dolls like Bratz and myScene and Barbie any different than the Loli Shotas of Japan?
June 21, 2008 at 11:40 pm
As a kid, I was into Sindy, the U.K. answer to Barbie, even though I’m U.S.ian. She had kick-ass accessories, flat feet, and somewhat reasonable proportions aside from her oversized head.
I think the fantasy that kids engage in when they play with dolls like these can be okay. I just wish they weren’t presented in such a strictly gendered way - That it wasn’t verboten for boys to play around in the Townhouse without his fatigues and his gun. And that girls had something to aspire to besides acquiring clothes and boyfriends.
I like the idea of making dolls with different body types, hair textures, features, etc.
African American Barbie and Ken have pretty African-looking features.
This is an AA Ken doll from 1980:
http://www.mastercollector.com/articles/dolls/ken4.jpg
He looks pretty black to me. Black Barbie’s features are more European-ish than black Ken’s, which is problematic, but she doesn’t have the same features as white Barbie.
June 23, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Ginny, Bratz are marketed to six year olds. It’s really frustrating as a parent. I won’t buy Barbie or Bratz for my daughter but her friends have them, so she still will play with them when she’s at a friend’s house.
July 11, 2008 at 10:58 pm
I have a suggestion. In stead of just lying over and saying “get over it, sex is here to stay,” or “I will never allow that into my house,” you can always do what my genius Mensa mother did…
She bought me the Barbies, she bought all the crap that came with it… and modified it. She would tell me, “O.K. here is your new and IMPORVED Barbie, she has been given ‘The Sarah Touch!’” Which basically meant that she took her stripper clothing, and made something to match an outfit that I owned, we worked together to make her a soccer jersey to match mine. We would make awesome “sets” for them to play in that consisted of things that I was into, like chemistry sets and veterinarian offices. I begged for a Barbie mansion and I got one for xmas one year. My mother and I took it apart and fixed the “design flaws” and the facade. I am an architect now. Thank you, mom! Just because America is trying to fuck up your kid doesn’t mean you have to let them :)
July 12, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Based on what I’ve learned about how human sociality works (I’m not a scholar in the officially sanctioned sense of the word, but I was cursed with a great deal of curiosity–if I want to learn something, I do, and I give a shit if there is alphabet soup after my name), I think it’s a bit disingenuous to claim that it’s always the parents’ faults if a child turns out a certain way, or that parental influence can override the influence of the media (including corporate-made toys, which are a “medium” for a message all on their own). Children are wired to learn from ALL their influences, NOT just the parents’. Do not imagine for one second that because you pose a responsible example to your children that they will not be influenced by irresponsible messages elsewhere. People who think these kinds of things about kids apparently don’t have any of their own. It’s practically a truism by now that some of the worst kids come from some of the best families.
We are a social animal and we are wired to imitate what we see other animals of our species doing. From an evolutionary perspective we *have* to be wired to imitate other human influences in addition to our parents. Parents die all the time, and even when they don’t, they would quickly become overwhelmed if they were the only ones who could raise their children. We simply require too much care for far too long for anything else to be true.
So… YES. We SHOULD be concerned about the influences available to our children out there. For that matter, I’m beyond tired of seeing commercial values insinuate themselves into aspects of human living that ought to be left out of the market entirely. Sexuality… cultural mores… childrearing… and so on. In other words, being human should not ever come with a price tag attached. When humanity is pitted against money, humanity almost always loses.
Leave a Reply