So I just wrote a paper on Barbie and her effects on youth. Although this is an argument you all have probably heard before, I thought it was interesting enough to share portions with you anyway.
There have been numerous debates over the effects of Barbie on young minds. How is Barbie affecting our youth? Is Barbie giving young girls wrongful expectations of their bodies? Or is she an icon for independence and strength? The primary reason that this debate over Mattel’s plastic doll is such a hot topic is because there is significant evidence to support both sides. In the article, “Dumb blonde – or diehard feminist?” written by Moira Redmond and Julie Bindel, it is easy to see both sides of this argument. While I never really had a strong opinion either way, Redmond and her multiple ideas on how Barbie is a role model for young girls seemed to be the better argument, convincing me that Barbie is not so dangerous for children after all.
As mentioned, the Barbie debate has come up plenty of times in the media. Most often you hear of the negative impact the doll is having on young girls. Bindel and others think that Barbie is giving our children the wrong message. The most common argument is based on Barbie’s figure and size: “Barbie syndrome strives for an unrealistic body type. If Barbie was life-size, she’d measure 36-18-33, stand five foot, nine inches tall, and weigh twelve to thirty-five pounds underweight for a woman of that height.” Critics are saying that this is a false image we are giving to our children. The last thing we want to do is encourage girls to be skinnier or tell girls that they are fat. This opinion is shared by Alisa L. Valdes, author of “Ruminations of a Feminist Fitness Instructor.” She states, “If a woman of Barbie’s proportions existed, she wouldn’t be able to walk, breathe, or digest food.”
Barbie creates and follows many gender stereotypes. According to the article, Barbie is “modeled on a German porn doll called Lillie.” There is a French Maid Barbie the Black Canary, hooker Barbie, Barbie with a wedding dress, Barbie as a nurse, and Barbie as Medusa. Bindel argues that these dolls are most often based on gender roles, convincing little girls that their future lies only in fashion, marriage, or pornography. There is even a phrase, “Barbie and Ken,” which is meant to classify “men and women who behave as their prescribed, polarized gender roles.” A woman’s role in society has progressed so much to where women are now pastors and political leaders and doctors, that we do not need a little doll retracting our advancement.
Although, Bindel makes many valid points, I do see the positive aspects of Barbie that Redmond points out in her section. She talks about the Barbie’s body shape, affordability, her independence of men, the variety of nationalities of dolls, and the argument that the doll stimulates the imagination and can be seen as a role model for any young girl. Redmond comments that Barbie “has impressive proportions, but they are by no means outside of the normal range.” She disagrees with Bindel who says that no real human being could ever be that skinny. Who’s actually right is debatable. Redmond explains that although Barbie has a multitude of accessories, buying only the Barbie is actually quite affordable, only about $15.00., which allows families of many classes to purchase this toy for their children. These dolls also come in a variety of nationalities, pushing diversity and acceptance to children and providing kids everywhere with a Barbie who relates to their culture.
The two most important arguments Bindel makes are Barbie’s independence and role model attributes. The doll is communicating to children that they can be anything they want to be, just like Barbie: a doctor, vet, astronaut, teacher, or firefighter. Barbie screams independence to young girls, whose brothers don’t have an equivalent toy. While the Ken doll does exist, Barbie is never portrayed as needing Ken to help her camp or sail or ship or mountain bike. She is autonomous and well-rounded, just like all women should grow up believing.
Because there are arguments for and against the Barbie, I do not think it’s feasible to start pulling them off the shelves. I personally think that more than anything, the Barbie doll inspires young girls to be interactive and let their imaginations run. I remember playing with Barbies as a young girl, and for me it was more about creating the world of Barbie in my mind through the design of her house, her job, and her family, than it was picking out her clothes and gloating about her skinny waist. I actually thought that changing her clothes and brushing her hair was too much work anyway. It gave me time to interact with my sisters and create a world all of our own with our dolls.
Sometimes I think that this whole debate on the Barbie doll and how it is affecting the world’s youth is a little over the top. I am not a psychiatrist or expert on children’s growth and maturity, but I sometimes feel that we analyze this way too much. Does a little girl really see her Barbie as herself? Does she know that she can be more than an object to men? And even so, buy the child a Barbie plus a G.I. Jane doll, a Tickle Me Elmo, and a box of Legos. This Barbie doll does not need to be the only toy that a child ever plays with.
