Wednesday, March 4, 2009

I ♥ Barbie

I wasn’t planning on using this blog as a place to rant, but I can’t help myself. Another instance of some well-intentioned but common-sense-deprived lawmaker trying to save us from ourselves has popped up.

It seems that a West Virginia state delegate is trying to introduce a bill that would ban Barbie™ from the state. The basis of this law is that those kinds of toys have an undue influence on the development of young girls and teach them that physical beauty is more important than intellect. Good grief. We’re talking about toys here, not state-mandated grade school curriculum. And more importantly, this is something that is (or should be) within a parent’s ability to control.

And why stop at Barbie? If he really is interested in the issue of self-image of girls (of which I am very skeptical – I smell something more insidious afoot), then why not hold the cosmetics and fashion industries’ feet to the fire? And don't forget the car ads that equate hot cars with gorgeous women as the ultimate man-prize. And don’t get me started on the anorexic moviestar/faux celebrities that tout themselves as role models these days. No, the self-image of young girls is under attack from far more sinister sources than a doll.

People don't realize that Barbie’s creator, herself the mother of a young daughter named Barbara, developed the doll as a response to an absence in the American toy market: the vast majority of toys suitable for girls at the time were baby dolls. There were no representations of adults in the doll market, other than paper dolls. So role-playing was pretty much limited. Barbie™, and all of her many outfits with their implied lifestyles, was created to show young girls that there was a wider world out there. Today, thanks to a lot of courageous, pioneering real women, our daughters and granddaughters have options some of us could never have imagined, well beyond anything that a fashion doll could inspire. But in 1959, Barbie, the Teen-age Fashion Model™ was a very big deal.

Besides, she is just plain fun.

The good news is that this legislator couldn’t get anyone else to sign on to the bill, and it got sent to committee, hopefully to die in oblivion. The bad news is that it takes the focus away from real solutions and positive actions for something that is in fact an important issue.

By the way: Barbie™ turns 50 this month. Happy birthday, girl. May you have many, many more.

1 comment:

sarah manville gann said...

This clown has concerns about Barbie, but apparently no feelings about the abject poverty in Appalachia affecting development, or adolescent motherhood, or any of the other truly negative influences on child health.

I have two Skipper dolls that are right now being loved up by the twins. I highly doubt their likelihoods of getting into Princeton are negatively affected.