Ever since it was first introduced in 1959, the Barbie doll has gained immense popularity among children, especially girls, thanks to its prominent position in the toy industry. Throughout the years, Barbie has consistently sparked controversy and generated discussions, a trend that is expected to continue. The idea behind Barbie revolves around young girls imitating the doll and aspiring to be like her as they grow older. DuCille argues that toys and games are not just sources of entertainment but also play a crucial role in aiding children’s comprehension of their environment and shaping their values.
According to the author, dolls, specifically Barbie dolls, encourage children to imitate and envision themselves as these dolls (268). In terms of Barbie’s occupations, they have evolved considerably since the second wave feminism era and now include more progressive roles typically associated with men’s work. When compared to other toys for young girls and the jobs they portray, Barbie represents forward-thinking and innovative careers for young women. In contrast, Bratz dolls are less revolutionary compared to Barbie.
Despite Bratz dolls only having one occupation in their name, which is pop star, Barbie is considered more progressive when it comes to career options for young girls. However, without comparison to Bratz dolls, Barbie’s progressiveness may be questioned. Parents should consider allowing their children to play with a toy that, although progressive compared to Bratz dolls, may still have regressive qualities when not being compared to them.
This paper aims to evaluate the evolution of Barbie’s occupations from second wave feminism to third wave, as well as compare her progression to that of Bratz dolls. It also questions whether Barbie’s positive image remains intact when she is considered on her own, without comparison. Additionally, this paper will explore the placement of other toy options for girls within Toys “R” Us and analyze the role of parents in controlling their child’s play and interactions.
The Barbie doll line called “I can be” seeks to inspire young girls by using Barbie to imagine different career paths for themselves. When Barbie was first introduced in the 1960s, she was depicted as a fashion model, wearing an ensemble that highlighted her legs, arms, and upper body. This portrayal not only attracted photographers but also drew the attention of the public.
Barbie’s role in this occupation is purely for others to gaze at, lacking any substantial career prospects. The Barbie Media webpage presents various other career options that are deemed gender “appropriate” such as fashion editor, ballerina, ice skater, Miss America, Aerobics instructor, and more (barbiemedia. com). These careers primarily revolve around fashion and Barbie’s attire, with little emphasis placed on the actual duties involved.
During the second wave of feminism, these jobs represent typical professions for women and restrict Barbie from pursuing career paths that are not centered around fashion. However, in the third wave era, Barbie embraces careers that were previously and are still predominantly held by men. A recent addition to the Barbie “I can be” line is Barbie architect. This profession portrays Barbie clad in conservative attire, including a jacket, a hard hat, blueprints, and a dream house to complement her outfit.
The inclusion of Barbie in traditionally male-dominated professions is a significant and progressive step in the “I can be” line. Notably, the Presidential Barbie represents the most groundbreaking version of Barbie to date. Although there have been several Presidential Barbies during the third wave era, this paper will specifically focus on the 2012 edition. Similar to her predecessors, this Barbie wears a conservative pink suit with a knee-length skirt and a jacket covering most of her skin. However, her distinguishing feature is the addition of platform shoes that allow her to stand independently for the first time in 53 years. This not only showcases her independence but also emphasizes her leadership qualities as she doesn’t rely on anyone for support. The fact that she is running for President and embodies stability speaks volumes about the kind of woman this Barbie aims to portray. Furthermore, the Presidential Barbie features a platform called ‘5 ‘B’s’, which stands for ‘B’ a dreamer, ‘B’ creative, ‘B’ informed, ‘B’ confident, and lastly ‘B’ involved.
Barbie’s platform showcases empowering messages for young girls and their futures. Also, a noteworthy aspect of Presidential Barbie is that Mattel, the creator of this new doll, collaborated with The White House Project. The mission of The White House Project is to promote women’s leadership in both business and politics (thewhitehouseproject.org). The partnership between Presidential Barbie and this project, which aims to empower women in male-dominated careers, solidifies Barbie as a symbol of progressiveness.
Although young girls who play with Barbie may not resonate with this, it is the parent’s responsibility to stay informed about the strides Barbie is making. Barbie has taken on various progressive careers, such as being a Unicef Ambassador, a business executive, a computer engineer, and a dentist (barbiemedia.com). When comparing Barbie’s occupational progressiveness since the second wave to her counterpart Bratz dolls, she appears to be a more viable option for young girls.
Bratz dolls are characterized as pop stars who relish in wearing makeup and frequenting trendy nightclubs on a nightly basis. Their sole objective is to revel in parties, and any insinuation otherwise would be inaccurate. Bratz dolls are frequently considered less forward-thinking compared to Barbie and fail to convey positive messages for young girls. Nonetheless, Barbie possesses an exceptional capability to captivate and deeply connect with little girls in a manner that few other toys can achieve. No matter what endeavors Barbie undertakes, she effortlessly brings them into the realm of women while also possessing the power to make certain career paths appear natural and appealing to young girls.
Even though she may not possess the physical appearance and physique that is deemed attainable, the phrase “I can be” aims to encourage young girls to aspire to attainable professions. Despite the fact that the “I can be” line includes job roles that are typically associated with women, such as ballerina, fashion designer, babysitter, and flight attendant, these career options must remain available. This is crucial in order to prevent young girls who aspire to pursue these careers from facing criticism for their choices.
Barbie now enters male-dominated careers, providing girls with more choices and options. This is a significant contrast to Bratz dolls, when considering Barbie’s traditional dominance in women-dominated careers. If we exclude the comparison with other dolls like Bratz, does Barbie’s inclusion of new careers still represent progress? For example, with Presidential Barbie, she inspires and delivers a hopeful message to young girls.
However, despite her aggressively pink outfit and platform shoes, they still allow her to maintain her femininity and stay within the realm of women. So, does she truly challenge the barrier and enter the male-dominated world of work? This poses a conflicting situation. On the one hand, Presidential Barbie represents a positive step forward in terms of career choices. Yet, the manner in which she is portrayed in this profession poses an issue. Undeniably, Barbie running for President is a progressive move. However, as Sue Stern points out in her documentary Barbie Nation, she is “pink coated” with her choice of attire.
The text points out a contradiction in Barbie’s appearance as she embodies both progressiveness by running for President and femininity by wearing pink. This contradictory aspect of Barbie’s image can be seen as both a gain and a loss of progressiveness. On one hand, her increased emphasis on the color pink can be seen as regressive, returning her to her traditional, stereotypically feminine look. On the other hand, this particular outfit includes even more pink than previous versions of Barbie, indicating some level of progressiveness.
Examining the question of whether Barbie is progressive or regressive when viewed individually, separate from other options available to young girls in the market, reveals the complexities of audience perception and consumer preferences. However, it also raises the inquiry of what alternatives exist. Unfortunately, there is a scarcity of options for young girls’ toys, as observed through an analysis of Toys “R” Us. The dominating presence of Barbie, Bratz dolls, and Disney Princesses within the store signifies the limited choices. Upon entering the store, young girls’ attention is immediately captured by a wall displaying Barbie dolls on their right. Further exploration is necessary to find a few alternatives, as Barbie, Bratz dolls, and Disney Princesses occupy a significant amount of store space. Four entire walls are dedicated to Barbie alone, while one full wall is dedicated to Bratz dolls and Disney Princesses.
Toys “R” Us has a dominant selection of toys for young girls, prominently displaying three popular choices: Barbie, Disney Princesses, and Bratz dolls. These options occupy a significant amount of space while the other alternatives receive much less attention with only a small dedicated section or stand. The overwhelming variety and appeal of these three choices make the other options appear insignificant and uninteresting to young girls. Additionally, Barbie extends her influence beyond the toy section by having her name featured on scooters and bikes in the bike and scooter section.
In the party section of Toys “R” Us, young girls can celebrate Barbie-themed birthdays with Barbie napkins, hats, streamers, and more. Barbie dominates the entire store by being prominently placed at the front, in the middle, and even at the exit. This solidifies Barbie’s control over Toys “R” Us and constantly reminds young consumers of her influence as they navigate through the store. By strategically placing more Barbie products at the exit, the image of Barbie is etched in the young consumer’s mind until their next visit, perpetuating this cycle.
Although there are other options available to young girls, both positive and negative, Barbie, Bratz dolls, and Disney Princesses dominate the market. This leaves parents with a decision: either disregard this monopoly and buy the “others,” or inform their children about these popular toys that immediately captivate any young child. It is commonly thought that parents have the ability to choose the most suitable doll or toy for their child.
Regardless of parental desires, children often acquire toys, dolls, and video games without consent. This can occur during school recess, at friends’ or relatives’ houses, or through exposure on television or in advertisements. Rather than forbidding young girls from accessing toys like Barbie or Bratz dolls, parents should educate their children about the positive and negative aspects of each toy, as well as its level of progressiveness or regressiveness.
According to Kathryn Fischer, the provision of toys for parents is primarily dependent on education. Instead of granting or refusing toys outright, Fischer suggests that children should be presented with ideas and perspectives to interpret them. She asserts that children will naturally make their own choices and discoveries, irrespective of parental consent. Interestingly, denying a toy from a child often sparks even greater interest and motivation for the child to play with it regardless.
It is important for parents to educate their young girls about Barbie, highlighting both the positive and negative aspects of her while emphasizing that she is not a human. However, the most crucial lesson is to teach them respect and love for all women, regardless of their choices. Fischer emphasizes the importance of parents encouraging their daughters to accept and appreciate their natural bodies, without demeaning or vilifying women who choose to alter or utilize their bodies for sexual empowerment (60).
When young girls begin playing with Barbie dolls and looking up to them as role models, it is necessary to give children a comprehensive education about Barbie. This involves acknowledging both her positive attributes and negative aspects, which may vary depending on individual perspectives. While some parents may perceive certain qualities of Barbie as unfavorable, others may see them as advantageous. It is crucial for children to grasp that Barbie is not a real person and that certain elements of her appearance and lifestyle may be unattainable. However, it is also important for children to recognize that some young girls and even adult women might aspire to emulate Barbie’s looks without facing criticism.
In Fischer’s view, children should not have their choices limited in exploration and play as a means to dismantle the current racist and patriarchal societal structure effectively. To create lasting change, parents should engage in open conversations with their children, encouraging them to make loving choices in life (61). Both parents and children have the power to influence this transformation. By exposing children to different options and educating them about these choices, they are less likely to deviate from their parents’ preferences or engage with disapproved toys. Instead, they will comprehend why certain dolls or toys are favored by their parents. An example of this is Barbie, which is a beloved doll among young girls. Compared to Bratz dolls, Barbie can be seen as more progressive for girls because she represents various career possibilities. Barbie’s Architect and President dolls under the “I can be” collection symbolize progress made since the second wave feminist movement when traditionally feminized professions were associated with her.
Bratz dolls have no occupation but are known for being professional partygoers. In contrast, Barbie is a positive role model for young girls. Through the “I can be” line, Barbie shows that girls can pursue any career they desire. However, when not compared to alternatives like Bratz dolls, Barbie’s progressiveness is called into question.
Despite Barbie’s campaign showcasing the power of women in male-dominated careers, her clothing contradicts this message. Compared to previous career outfits, Barbie’s current attire is excessively pink and emphasizes her femininity. This contradictory image raises the question of whether Barbie’s perceived progressiveness when standing alone, supported by her platform shoes, is genuine. Alternatively, she may simply remain the same regressive doll. Ultimately, Barbie’s regressive outfit undermines the progressiveness of her chosen career.
Young girls often feel compelled to play with Barbie dolls due to the limited availability of other options for them. Even when other options are available, they are typically scarce or not well-represented in toy stores. As a result, children are inclined to desire the most popular dolls, such as Bratz dolls and Barbie dolls. Consequently, it becomes the responsibility of parents to provide these popular dolls to their children, while also prioritizing the importance of educating them about these dolls. Education empowers individuals with knowledge, enabling them to make informed decisions that they believe are in their best interest.
When children are given a Barbie doll, it is crucial to educate them about both its positive and negative attributes. This allows children to decide what they will adopt from the doll. Equally important is for young children not to judge others on their preferences and choices for emulation. Ultimately, whether the toy or doll is progressive or conservative, the key to fostering imaginative play is ensuring that children are well informed about the toys they play with and imitate.
Works Cited
“Barbie.” Barbie. Mattel Inc., n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. http://barbiemedia.com/www. DuCille, Ann. “Dyes and Dolls: Multicultural Barbie and the Merchandising of Difference,” [from Shiach, Feminism and Cultural Studies] Fischer, Kathryn. “On Barbie, Guns, and Control.” Off Our Backs 36.2 (2006): 58-61. Proquest. Web. 09 Nov. 2012. “The White House Project.” The White House Project. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2012. http://org.thewhitehouseproject/.
