Strollerderby : barbie

Barbie’s Dream House Becomes a Reality

SunnyChanel — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:30:00 GMT

Barbie is stoked. Today is her 50th birthday, she looks fab, she’s still famous and her Dream House has finally become reality. As part of the festivities to celebrate a half a century or plastic and pink, the potter and interior designer Jonathon Adler was commissioned by Mattel to create a Barbie paradise in a 3,500 square foot beachfront mansion in Malibu.

"Barbie was a dream client because she doesn't exist as a person," Adler said. "She exists as fantasy and is the perfect client because she's always happy and fun and loves everything. I thought to myself, 'How would Barbie live?' What I thought was Barbie would have a house that is glamorous, kittenish, chic, colorful and happy — as well as functional.”

What does a real life Barbie Dream House include?
• A closet filled with 50 pairs of pink peep-toe stilettos.
• A kitchen stocked with ingredients for cupcakes
• A bedroom with wall to wall pink carpeting
• A Warhol portrait valued at $200,000
• A garage with a pink Volkswagen Beetle
• Plus an in house museum with 25 vintage Barbies

To celebrate the new digs there will be a star studded birthday party organized by “event-planner-to-the-stars” (and the dolls) Colin Cowie with A-listers, a signature drink and much pink partying.

If you weren't invited to party with Ken, Skipper and Midge, you can still spend the night is such saccharine sweetness. A large part of the décor will be transported to the Palms Casino Resort in Vegas for a special Barbie Suite. Would you live in Barbie's Dream House?

Source

Barbie Gets Inked

Madeline Holler — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:01:00 GMT

The West Virginia state lawmaker who wants to outlaw Barbie is going to lose his mind when he finds out about this: Barbie's got a tattoo!

In fact, she has many -- and plenty of extra for the girls who play with her.

Mattel will introduce "Totally Stylin' Tattoos" Barbie in its spring line. She comes with gobs of tattoos for herself, tattoos for the kids and also an accessory that seams to put many parents over the edge:

A tattoo gun for ease of fake tattoo application.

It's too much too soon, outraged parents are arguing. Barbie tats will no doubt be the gateway to out-of-control body alterations.

Tattoo Barbie is selling pretty well, which must be a relief to Mattel, makers of the 50-year-old icon whose diminishing relevance is no small source of pain for the toy company.

I don't think I'll be getting one of these for my daughters, but I'm not frothing at the mouth over the latest offering. First, tattoos are so commonplace -- even the frumpiest moms where I live sport some kind of ink on a visible patch of skin. And also: "Totally Stylin'"? Cringe! Even my 8-year-old daughter would totally scratch out air quotes when referencing that particular doll.

Still, we like the idea of Mattel flailing its corporate arms just looking for some kind of edge -- any edge -- to ratchet up sales. We think Marty, commenting on a news site had a few good ideas:

What's next? "Totally Pierced Barbie Girl" with piercing gun and simulated diamond studs for ears, nose, eyebrows, lips or belly button! She can even have her tongue pierced. Be sure to look for "Totally Huge Earlobes Ken", with stretchable earlobes to insert large rings and other jewelry!

A gauging Ken doll!

Oh, and that tattoo gun? Totally beats having to get out a wet washcloth every time the kid wants to pound skin.

Lawmaker Wants Barbie Outlawed

Photos: cbs13.com; news10.net

Lawmaker Wants Barbie Outlawed

Madeline Holler — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:29:00 GMT

A West Virginia lawmaker's heart might be in the right place. But his head? It's clearly in a different part of his body. State delegate Jeff Eldridge, a Democrat (or commie?), wants to ban Barbie and other 36-24-36 ilk from store shelves around the state.

This leads me to ask many questions, starting with:

Has this guy ever heard of the Internet? Because it turns out you can buy stuff online. And won't a ban actually boost sales of the 50-year-old doll whose popularity is most certainly on the wane?

Eldridge wants to rid his state of toys that place too much emphasis on a girl's physical beauty, at the expense of emotional and intellectual development.

From MSNBC:

"I just hate the image that we give to our kids that if you're beautiful, you're beautiful and you don't have to be smart," Eldridge told West Virginia news station WOWK.

Is he calling Barbie stupid?

While he's at it, then, he might want to do something about cheerleading, toddler beauty pageants and all things Miley Cyrus if trading in looks and glamour for self-confidence and smarts are his goals.

The lawmaker said he has little hope of actually getting his bill passed, but let's say Barbie is outlawed. What about ... D'Arbie, Barbie's possible long-lost twin? What about the MILF next door? Will she have to move too? Enforcement, sir, enforcement!

Barbie Gets Inked

Photo: MSNBC.com

Is Shame the Answer to Childhood Obesity?

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:00:00 GMT

The creative geniuses behind the anti-childhood obseity ads featuring Barbie certainly seem to think so.

Perhaps the Active Life Movement, the (well-intentioned) organization behind the ads, could benefit from this Onion video--a roundtable discussion of the question, "Should We Be Shaming Obese Children More?"--which uncovers the pros and cons of teaching kids through negative reinforcement.

(Hint to the Active Life Movement: the Onion was kidding!)

Photo: New York Times

Taking Style Tips From Your Daughter

SunnyChanel — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 04:31:00 GMT

I don’t know about your kid, but mine has a penchant to dictate to me what I should be wearing at all times. And generally it’s something completely inappropriate, such as a party dress for a trip to the supermarket or heels and a tank top when it’s raining. In her eyes I “dress like a boy”. See, boys wear pants. Girls i.e. “princesses” wear skirts and dresses. Her fashion constraints are pretty damn concise and she tries to sell them to me with oodles of conviction. Apparently I am in good company. As reported in The Times Online piece "Should Mums Take Style Tips from Their Daughters?", Kate Winslet takes her eight-year-old daughter’s opinion of her clothing seriously. She recently stated that her “mum” wears too much black, a city dwelling sin that I am also guilty of.

The Times fashion editor, Lisa Armstrong, explored the daughter/mother clothing dilemma saying “When it comes to their mother's appearance, all daughters have views, ranging in ferocity from mildly scathing to fathomless reservoirs of scorn.” To avoid the scorn and the scathing, contributor Carol Midgley allowed her five-year-old daughter to dress her in, among other things, a salmon pink evening gown that made her looks like a “thick-waisted prawn”. Which just begs the conclusion that Armstrong came to that ,“I don't mean we should heed the stuff from five-year-olds about how they'd want us to dress like Barbie…” Yes, that is why I try never to let my own little fashionista near my closet.

If your daughter had her druthers, what would she dress you in?

Mine, a hot pink party dress with oodles of tulle (see her fantasy mommy dress above). Classy? Or maybe just Barbie.

Barbie Teaches Kids About Obesity

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:30:00 GMT

A new ad campaign by an organization called the Active Life Movement is relying on the paragons of impossible beauty to teach kids about the perils of obesity. Since toys like Barbie really encourage healthy body images and lifestyles….

The goal of the Active Life Movement is laudable—to encourage kids to be active and healthy—but this ad campaign is certainly not serving that goal. As Jezebel points out, toys like Barbie and Superman hardly have body types that kids should be striving for. (Check out the superhero version of the ad here.)

And the ads’ tag line—“Keep obesity away from your child”—is unnecessarily harsh, making it sound as if being overweight is a contagious disease. Being healthy does not necessarily mean being thin, just as being thin does not necessarily mean being healthy. I would hope that the epidemic of eating disorders among increasingly young kids has taught us that by now.

This ad is the visual equivalent of shouting at kids, “Don’t be fat! Be beautiful! Or else everyone will hate you!” Active Life Movement, I suggest sending your creative directors back to the drawing board.

Photo: AdFreak.com

The Barbie Runway Show – The Hot Ticket at Fashion Week

SunnyChanel — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:09:00 GMT

The hot ticket at New York Fashion Week? It wasn’t the Badgley Mischka, Narcisco Rodriguez or Zac Posen show. No, it was the exclusive Barbie fashion show held at the main tent at Bryant Park on Saturday.

The epic production included fifty-one high end designers such as Donna Karen, Diane Von Furstenberg, Betsey Johnson along with smaller fashion houses like Marchesa and Rag and Bones.

The show began with a projected bio of the life and time of Barbie. Then the first model hit the runway wearing an outfit inspired by the swimsuit featured on the first Barbie ever released.

Along with the oodles of press and fashion buyers, in attendance were “by several hundred New York mothers and their young daughters who greeted each model's appearance with screams of delight.”

They were all there to celebrate Barbie’s 50th birthday. She’s aged pretty well. How she kept that waistline in beyond me.

You can check out the runway show below.

Destroying Kids As We Know Them . . . Or Not

JeanneSager — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:34:00 GMT

I am all for toys that force kids to think and be creative; for some, I've completely given up hope.

So you would think I'd be all over the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood's TOADY (Toys Oppressive And Destructive to Young Children) Awards. Except, I think the folks a CCFC need to get out more.

To counter the Toy Industry Association's TOTY (Toy Of The Year) Awards on February 15, CCFC is asking parents to put in their votes for the TOADY of 2009. Their picks are perfectly annoying, I'll grant you.

You can pick the pooping Baby Alive, the over-the-top Power Wheels Cadillac Escalade, the Smart Cycle, Barbie Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader Doll or the Lego Batman video game. None of these would I personally pick up for my daughter (and for further proof, read up on my thoughts on bimbo Barbie here!), but I can't summon quite the vituperativeness of the folks at CCFC over a toy.

Take the concern over the Smart Cycle, which they say gives kids "monotonous exercise to replace those boring trips to the park." Hello, CCFC, winter called. It wants you to know you need to keep the kids inside today - and they're still going to have the SAME energy to burn today that they'd get out on a sunny summer day at the park. They'll also want to eat the same filling foods they'll eat in the summer - maybe more to fight the cold - and sitting around playing puzzles with Mom all day is guaranteed to pack on the pounds. So, how bad is that exercise looking now?

Lego gets the stinkeye for "partnering with media companies to sell that toy in branded kits designed for recreating movies like Star Wars, rather than creative construction." Because, of course, no kid would ever link those blocks in any way, shape or form that would differ from the original picture on the box, thus allowing them to be creative and enjoy one of their favorite characters at the same time? And no little kid would possibly test their imagination with a Star Wars or Batman toy, crafting their own stories of how to defeat the Dark Knight, in the privacy of their bedroom. So silly. Of course, this is a video game, which draws their real ire because, they insist, "instead of deciding what to build next, children choose which cyber weapons to use to beat up their opponent." Because they won't use a toy good guy to kick the toy villain's ass?

Think the CCFC is on the right track, and I'm just one of those parents who spends too much time playing with real kids? Check them out and vote. Then get off the computer and go play with your kids - because as far as they're concerned, letting a kid play on a SmartCycle is tantamount to parents not "interacting with their preschoolers at all."

And who would want five seconds away from their child?

Image: CCFC

Smackdown: Aw, Just Let Her Have a Barbie

JeanneSager — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:27:00 GMT

I used to be on the other side of this Smackdown. Bimbo Barbie wasn't prancing into my house, no way, no how.

Then came Christmas. And Santa at the firehouse. And kindly volunteers in the ladies auxiliary who put a lot of time and effort into being good neighbors and buying goodies for all the little kiddies in my neighborhood.

Damn them.

Because the moment my daughter opened mermaid Barbie (who my gay best friend promptly told her must be named Ariel), she was a kid transformed. "Barbie, Mommy, look, I got a Barbie from Santa!"

I didn't even know she knew who Barbie was. She spent hours that night, ripping Barbie's clothes off. Making me put them back on. Ripping Barbie's clothes off. Making Daddy put them back on. Brushing Barbie's hair. Tangling Barbie's brush in knots in Barbie's hair. It didn't matter what I thought. Barbie had found a home.

She's now up to three Barbies - all gifts - and I've given up on a lot of my feministic outrage. It's a doll. She has impossibly big boobs and an impossibly small waist. But she's hardly the only doll to be lacking in realism.

My daughter's favorite educational doll, the Learn to Play Emma from International Playthings, has a ginormous head, big bulbous feet and a squarish body. No one's picking on her lack of realism, however, because she's A) educational and B) not overtly sexual (not sexual at all, really). But is the Barbie really all that sexual? She's got a plastic non-crotch (trust me, my little brother, as all little brothers do, cleared that one up a long time ago). She's got boobs with no nipples, and her body is made of the most uncomfortable-to-cuddle-with material known to kids.

She has skanky make-up, and skanky clothes; I'll grant you that. But by the time my daughter - or most little girls - gets done with undressing Emma (or her equivalent) and toting her naked around the grocery store, she's looking quite the skank herself. Not to mention what happens when our kids get ahold of some paint and try to put "make-up" on their dolls. They don't have to see it on their mothers; they can see it on the grocery store clerk and think it's "so pretty, Mommy!" Chances are, at some point, they'll try to recreate it on their dolls, whether her name is Barbie or not.

Also making the Barbie concern take up less and less of my time is the amount of her time spent with Barbie. By not making it a big deal, we've managed to make Barbie no more special than her collection of Hess trucks or her art easel. The three Barbies are in the toybox - usually naked - when she wants them. If she wants them. Often, she does, pulling them out as the favored toy for about an hour of fun before she sets her aside and begins begging for Play-Doh (now there, I have true toy hatred). She seems no more attuned to her own body after playing with a Barbie, no more obsessed with hair, clothes, make-up or or weight. And let's not forget the play-acting she does, the elaborate stories she makes up about Barbie going out and having fun (no dating or having sex, clean, wholesome, three-year-old stories of going to play with Mr. Cow or driving a plastic firetruck).

Can we really blame one toy for the destruction of little girls' psyches? My mother didn't buy me Barbies, and I still developed an eating disorder. My neighbor, on the other hand, who has one of the most well-adjusted tweens I've ever met (future babysitter of my daughter, right there), spent hours playing Barbies on the floor with her. That was their mom/daughter bonding time. Now a high schooler with a wide smile, she has the kind of self-assurance I envy even at my age. The Barbies don't seem to have hurt her. Maybe because what's more important are the strong female role models, the moms who are present, available and involved in their daughters' lives (as my neighbors was then and still is).

I'm not calling Barbie the pinnacle of perfect toydom, but as long as Barbie is just one toy in the box, I'm willing to just let her be.

The Other Side:

Smackdown: Barbie and the End of the World

Image: Amazon

Why Do Pacifiers Piss So Many People Off?

Mom Bugs Kid's Teddy Bear to Spy on Ex

Babble Talk: Is Ditching the Baby Monitor Child Abuse?

Smackdown: Barbie and the End of the World

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:06:00 GMT

We planned this Smackdown awhile ago, not long after my daughter opened a Scuba Barbie for Christmas. Her grandparents, who had refused to purchase a Barbie for their own daughter, were beyond thrilled to buy one for mine.

"Every girl should have a Barbie," they gushed. My wife stared at them in slack-jawed, open-mouth wonder.

"What the hell?" she said, "I wanted a Barbie for years!"

If someone had taken Tiny Tim's crutch and beaten him about his frail, twisted legs while eating all the Christmas goose, it still would have been a merrier scene than the one at our house at that moment.

My wife stewed, my in-laws beamed and I sat on the couch, staring at this plastic creature I had successfully avoided for nearly three years.

I never wanted a Barbie in the house.

Her clothes don't bother me so much. The early Barbie wore some swinging outfits and I've seen some newer Barbies that sport the kind of clothes your cool, older sister might have worn while packing her belongings for college. Unlike Bratz, you have to purposefully find Slut Barbie.

Her hair, her makeup. These things are easily changed, cut, washed off, shaded -- any girl can style the doll to her own liking.

Except, of course, for the body.

Barbie has an impossible body.

Now, before the great Christmas Barbie Episode of 2008, I was originally worried not that my daughter might grow to look and dress and act like Barbie. Rather, I was worried what she might do to try.

A friend's daughter, then 7, told her mother one day that she needed to go on a diet so she could look "more like Sally" -- the name she had given to her Barbie. I'm not saying Barbie is the gateway to eating disorders. But I also don't think dieting fits into the realm of playtime. How fun is that to look at a toy and think you're suddenly not good enough? Yay! And our friend's daughter is not the first to bring this up. And I doubt the same emotion overcomes a girl playing with a chubby Cabbage Patch Doll.

Some young girls see Barbie, want her body and then destroy their own. After all, isn't Barbie a model for the perfect female?

Then Barbie did in fact come into our house.

When she did, my daughter, Emmeline, picked up her new toy, examined it for a bit, played with her clothes and then eventually abandoned the thing for the two dolphin friends that came in the same pack and lent testimony to the fact that this was, indeed, the real Scuba Barbie. (Why the dolphins are wearing mascara, I don't know -- even animals have to be sexualized now, I suppose.) But at this moment, Barbie lays forgotten upstairs, buried underneath a pile of clothes.

I'm not going to throw it away or keep it from her, although now is my chance. No, it dawned on me that I, her father, probably have a lot more sway over how she will one day view herself and her body than some stupid doll. Do I really want to be the person whispering in her ear about body issues? Do I want to make such a big deal out of it that an issue heretofore unknown to her suddenly becomes a cause for serious familial discussion? (And of course a story about Iran banning Barbie didn't help, when it left me thinking, "Great, now I'm the fucking Ayatollah of the toy box.")

But what really sent me over the edge in the past week was when a friend of a boy said, "You've got Barbie to deal with, sure -- but what am I going to do when my son wants a gun?"

A toy gun. I had 35 of them. Cap guns. Laser guns. Electronic talking hippy pacifist guns that fired words instead of bullets, man! And I never went on some drunken rampage and shot up the post office (although I suppose there's still time). I was never the bully. I've been in all of one real fight.

It's just a toy, I caught myself thinking.

But then what of Barbie?

This was supposed to be the side of the Smackdown in which I let loose on the dangers of letting young girls play with shapely molded plastic -- how it's only setting them on a course of crash diets and the latest fasting fads, tweenish liposuction and adolescent insecurities. But now I've seen the actual impact of Barbie up close and I'm not too worried. I still maintain that I'm not going to buy one (there are actually a hundred cooler dolls out there, including the freaky-eyed Victorian-era porcelain cherubs my daughter has come to love) but if another Barbie enters the house, I think I'm the last person who should be making a big deal of it.

The Other Side:

Smackdown: Aw, Just Let Her Have a Barbie

Also, Barbie's Sordid, Swinging History

Bratz Back on the Corner ... er, I Mean Shelves

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:24:00 GMT

Bad news for parents who don't like the slutification of toys: A judge who earlier this month ordered Bratz dolls off the shelves because of a patent infringement, could rule the vixens in cellophane should remain through the end of 2009.

Oh yay.

The fight has something to do with a party where Barbie was all, "Like what up?" and the Bratz were all, "Biatch!" and then they went to court where Bratz lost for totally mimicking Barbie's every move, or something. (Here's a better recap of the tussle.) It doesn't really matter.

I still think Barbie's a bad enough play model but Bratz are even worse, with their focus on risque clothes and the early sexualization of kids. Four year olds don't need mini-skirts or role models who sit around and look "pretty" while their male counterparts actually do shit. (The American Psychological Association singled out the dolls as moronic.) So I was pleased to see Bratz going to toy ho heaven, but now it appears there's one more year to go.

Am I just a prude, some puritanical preacher shaking his fists at the sky during a round of musical chairs and screaming, "Children! Stop that wicked dancing!" or does anyone else get bent out of shape over Bratz dolls? (And am I just as bad as the marketers of Bratz by my demonization of something ultra-feminine with words like slut or ho? Hmm, food for introspection -- and stay tuned next week at the 'Derby when we debate the merits of Barbie.) But still, it makes me wonder: Why can't we give young girls toys of real role models to play with? I can't stand watching Dora for its repitition, but man, that girl works hard!

Last Day For Free Holiday Shipping

Brett Singer — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:15:00 GMT

With the economy in shambles (even the wealthy are losing big money) I wanted to do my part to tell people how to save a little cash this holiday season. We began with Please Buy Stuff Part 1 – Cheap Toys, which featured a half-off toy sale at Target. Now here is Please Buy Stuff Part 2 – Free Shipping.

If you put off your holiday shopping because you were (a) busy, (b) waiting until the last possible second in an attempt to secure the best price, or (c) all of the above, more than 100 merchants are in your corner. On Thursday, December 18, web retailers from 1800Mustang (specializing in Mustang parts – the cars, not the horses) to Zappos.com (shoes) will ship your stuff for free AND guarantee delivery by Christmas. On the list are Babies R Us, Apple, Big Toe Soccer, OhToy.com – a huge list, and it keeps growing, according to FreeShippingDay.com.

Once again, procrastinators are rewarded. In fact, the web site even says, "Free Shipping Day is the last chance for many procrastinators."

As one who celebrates Chanukah, I wish the same deal applied for the festival of lights. That said, The First Night of Jewy Christmas coincides nicely with Actual Christmas this year – the evening of December 21, with the final night occurring on December 28. So you can pick up some chachkis to give the kids on the first few days (thereby supporting your local merchants), then give them the good stuff later in the week.

That actually works well for the way we do Chanukah in our house. We do eight gifts, but most are of the smaller variety, with a big one on or about the final night. So although FreeShippingDay unsurprisingly focuses on Christmas, it also works for Chanukah, as well as Kwanzaa, which begins on December 26.

It's as if merchants everywhere are saying, "Please – please buy something! The toys are half price, you get free shipping with guaranteed holiday delivery even if you wait until the last minute – wouldja just buy something already? Please? No, really. Buy something. Anything. What's that? My watch? Um, it's not for sale… oh, you'll take a Barbie Dream Car Set if I throw in my watch? And my shoes? Uh… sure! It's the holidays. Why not? Merry New Year!"

Anyone else feel like retailers are desperate? And while it's nice to be the beneficiary of some of this stuff-based holiday cheer, doesn’t it feel a teeny bit weird?

Oh well. Get it while the getting's good. Nothing distracts a kid from the world's problems like a shiny new toy. And seeing them open it is still one of the best freebies around.

Are You Cutting Back This Holiday Season?

Indiana Planned Parenthood Sells Gift Certificates

What NOT to Tell Your Child After You've Been Laid Off

White House Sends Chanukah Card With Christmas Tree On It

It's Hip Hop . . . for Babies

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Parents Make Son Hold 'I Will Never Shoplift Again' Signs

Mini Baby Sculptures Not Edible, Selling Like Hotcakes

Toy Libraries: An Idea in Need of a Comeback?

Girly Gift Guide

Vonage Offers Free Calls To Santa

Make Your Own Religious Doll

Half Price Toys at Target

Brett Singer — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 21:00:00 GMT

With the economy in shambles (even the wealthy are losing big money) I wanted to do my part to tell people how to save a little cash this holiday season. So here is Please Buy Stuff Part 1 – Cheap Toys.

* * *

Has anyone else noticed how cheap toys are right now?

I get at least one email per day from Toys R Us practically begging me to buy something… anything… just buy a toy! Please! 50% off is not uncommon. It seems like the closer it gets to Christmas, the cheaper everything becomes.

Now Target is joining the party with a 50% off sale. The cheapest item is the game Monopoly Town, now priced at $7.99 (down from $15.99). On the high end, you can now get a Kota My Triceratops for $99.99 (was $199.99). Click the image below to see all 50% off items in all their glory, and also visit Target.com.

What's interesting, to me at least, is the fact that I don't seem to care much. Let me explain. I'm a cheapskate and I like bargains. Sometime in the past few years, however, I became less and less interested in shopping. It's not that I don't buy things when we need them. But it's less fun than it used to be. I would attribute this feeling to the economy, but it started before our financial system did its imitation of David Caruso's pre-CSI career. Part of it could be perspective – with two kids, stuff seems less important than it once did. But I'm not buying that (no pun intended). I think it has more to do with being tired (see: two kids), and also slightly overwhelmed by the array of choices out there. As an example, our toaster oven has been broken for several weeks. This thing owes us nothing – I believe we've had it for well over ten years. But it SORT OF works. And when I go online looking for new ones, I quickly get bored and decide to just deal with the old one for a little bit longer.

Some of my merchant-based malaise does have to do with the economy, of course. It seems…unseemly to lust after hi-tech stuff when people are being laid off all over the country.

That said, the kids don't need to suffer for my mishegos. (Except for the toaster oven. That they'll just have to deal with.) And if the toys they want are this cheap, go for it. Besides, isn't it our patriotic duty to go shopping?

Next: how to get free shipping and still get your stuff in time for Christmas (or Chanukah, or Kwanzaa).

Are You Cutting Back This Holiday Season?

Vonage Offers Free Calls To Santa

Make Your Own Religious Doll

Barbie Beats Bratz in Battle of the Dolls

Kate Tuttle — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:29:00 GMT

After a four-year legal battle, toy empire Mattel has finally vanquished Bratz, the vaguely hooker-ish doll line that had nearly sunk the company's venerable Barbie brand. US District Judge Stephen Larson ruled Wednesday that MGA, which makes and sells Bratz, must immediately cease and desist, siding with a lower court's finding that Bratz inventor Carter Bryant had developed the pouty, vampy dols while working for Mattel. That case, decided by jury, gave Mattel $10 million for copyright vilations and another $90 million for breach of contract.

Fear not, Bratz lovers: MGA plans an immediate appeal. And hey, if they lose, remember to steal a motto from the crazy gun fans out there: when Bratz are outlawed, only outlaws will have Bratz. Fess up: aren't you glad these skanky items will likely be off the shelf before your baby girl gets old enough to ask for one?

More by this author:

Baby Nearly Starves to Death, Diluted Formula to Blame
Grandmother’s Right? Or Totally Obnoxious?
Health Scam: Crisis Pregnancy Centers
Mama’s Got a Brand New Bag

Alvin Ailey Barbie A Refreshing Change

Amy Kuras — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 22:32:00 GMT

After an interesting backchannel discussion with some of my fellow Derbyites about the whole princess-industrial complex that seems to suck in little girls somewhere around age 3, I found this news fairly refreshing in its own way: Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater is partnering with Mattel to come up with a Barbie doll modeled on the dancers in the troupe.

Posed in a soaring leap and perfectly-applied stage makeup, the doll wears a flowing white lace costume worn in the “Wade in the Water” section of Alvin Ailey’s masterpiece “Revelations.”

Artistic director Judith Jamison designed the doll, the first Barbie inspired by a dance company. It commemorates the 50th anniversary of the dance troupe and licensing fees from the doll will support the company.

One legit complaint about the princess thing is the incredibly narrow standard of beauty shown by the Disney princesses — usually white, thin, and mostly blond and blue-eyed. And while there are black and Hispanic Barbies, face it, that’s not what you think of when you hear the name. So I think it’s outstanding that they are offering an African-American doll that evokes images of grace and skill and strength, not mere empty princessy beauty.

The doll’s on sale at Target now and will be available everywhere by December. My little one’s verdict: “That princess is beautiful.” And she is.

Is Your Daughter a Princess?

JeanneSager — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 15:29:00 GMT

My daughter informed me a few weeks ago that she's Princess Pooty Pants. For those of you not familiar with this member of the Disney hoochie patrol, she's never made it on screen. She's been banished to the back of the kitchen. Where Cinderella would be if she had bad gas and butt as big as her wicked stepsister.

Yes, the big girls are always the baddies in kids movies. Which is why I've had a harder time than some moms accepting the princesses into our lives. But unlike my mother, who refuses to buy my daughter anything royal on principle (although somehow Tinkerbell has flitted through by batting her tiny wings), I've swallowed my own demons in favor of making my daughter happy.

She doesn't get everything she wants, but the princesses are the lesser of a number of evils in the world - the bimbo Barbie among them. I'd even invite Belle to join Miss Pooty Pants for a playdate if she was a kid from around the block. Any girl who knows her way around a library and calls a big beast out when he's being a baby can sit in my corner. Hey, they both talk to inanimate objects; it could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

I've dug around and found some bits of gold inside the princess fairy tales. There are girls who kick some butt and girls who love to read.

Sure, there are skinny mini "oh, I'm so delicate, I need a man to help me" girls in there too. And when my daughter plays that game, I do my best The Rock eyebrow and remind her she's brave and strong. And that's the end of that. The rest, I let fly. I'm not inviting the whole parade into my living room, but I'm not ready to throw a bunch of poofy dresses out with the bathwater either. Indulging in the princess fantasy is just that. Fantasy. There is plenty of time for growing up, for dreams of learning to speak Chinese and fix computers so she can make a real living.

But she's not 13 or 18 or 23. She's 3. Watching a 3-year-old wander up to the local dairy princess (yes, we have those in upstate New York) and stare, wide-eyed, at a farm girl who drives a tractor with her pink Lugz and spouts off facts about the importance of getting enough calcium, I'm OK with her thinking princesses are cool. Because I can show her examples of princesses living out big dreams. I can supplement the Disney princesses with any woman who is out there kicking butt and reading books because at 3, she's still just as impressed with what Mommy says as she is with an animated character on the bottom of her cereal bowl. Only, Mommy's here, not at the bottom of that bowl.

Mommy's telling her that Princess Pooty Pants is just perfect for her - even if she's got some Daddy-type gas.

Image: Disney

Stuff Parents Dream About: Life Without Play-Doh

Three-Year-Old Romanian Girl Youngest Singer, and She's Cute As All Get Out

Disney movie to feature black princess

Banned Books Week: R.L. Stine's Goosebumps

Part I: Why Parents of Girls Have it Better

Playdate: Do You Pick Their Friends?

Do You Leave Your Kids in "Car Care?"

Barbie to Bratz: Pay Up B*tch

SunnyChanel — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:50:00 GMT

The headline of the Los Angeles Times business section read “Mattel Wins Skimpy Damages in Bratz Doll Case”. How much is skimpy? Well I guess in plastic doll circles, 100 million dollars is considered skimpy. That’s some math I can’t even begin to comprehend. But Mattel had asked for 1.8 billon so they ended up with only about 5.5% of what they really wanted and felt that they deserved.

Why was Mattel looking for some payback in the first place? Well in a nutshell, if you haven’t been following the "war of the dolls", Bratz’s Daddy, and former Barbie designer Carter Bryant, developed the line while under an exclusive contract with toy giant Mattel. But Cater played the field and ended up having the toy company MGA develop the dolls even though Mattel owned his ass (and all his ideas). MGA’s chief officer, who was found to have “secretly aided the designer in breaking his exclusivity” also got a bitch slap from the jury.

But the story doesn’t end there. Mattel will “seek an injunction as soon as next month to stop MGA from making more Bratz dolls.” Oh those dolls, why can’t they all just play nice.

For more information about the trial check out the more informed and eloquent musing on the situation by our own Jen Chaney here:

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

In Barbie v. Bratz, Barbie Wins

In The Courtroom: Barbie V. Bratz

Man Makes Record Catch ... With Barbie Fishing Rod

Madeline Holler — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:56:00 GMT

Having a little introspective moment here, bear with me.

I've always hated -- gagged over, sworn at, waved off, flipped off -- Barbie labled stuff that had nothing to do with the buxom dolls, her Corvettes, or her fancy townhouse with elevator. I mean, why Barbie toddler sneakers? Barbie's feet aren't shaped for sneakers! Why a notebook? Barbie can't write! And why the pink Barbie fishing rod (come on, you've seen them at Target, too)? No way does Barbie leave Ken poolside to go load up her tackle box and catch the big one.

But you know what? She might. And even if she doesn't, she's got great equipment if she ever decided to. A North Carolina man caught a record-size catfish recently -- with a pink Barbie rod and reel. Here I thought all the pink plastic was of poor quality and barely functionable.

Here's the deal: David Hayes was fishing with his granddaughter Alyssa. She asked him to hold her rod while she went to the bathroom. Two minutes later, he's tugging and reeling, pulling and netting a 21-pound 1-ounce channel catfish. A state record! And perhaps a personal best for the much maligned doll and her namesake crap. (What next? A marathon winner wearing Barbie sneakers?)

This calls for an extra hour at the Barbie beauty salon, no?

Photo: AP

Hunka hunka burnin Barbie

Brett Singer — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:00:00 GMT

Proving once again that P.T. Barnum was right, fans lined up to get the latest Elvis doo-hickey: Barbie dolls fashioned after The King and his bride, Priscilla Beaulieu.

According to the AP, 150 people waited to get their hands on a boxed set of the…"toys" doesn’t sound right, so let's say "collectibles." Brenda Moore, an Arkansas resident who works at Wal-Mart's corporate headquarters, bid – make sure you're sitting down – $6800 for a pair of Barbie's signed by Priscilla herself. Moore and her husband "believe the money is for a good cause." That cause is Presley Place, the charitable arm of the Elvis empire. Plus, they get these cool…collectibles.

Elvis died on August 16, 1977; this unveiling was part of a weeklong series of events at Graceland to commemorate the day he died while simultaneously separating Elvis fans from their money.

Here are some photos from the blessed event:

The unveiling...

Brenda Moore, winner of the signed Elvis/Priscilla Barbies, with her prize.

Elvis and Priscilla, Barbie-sized.

Thank you. Thankyouverymuch.

Images/source: Yahoo!

Retarded movie boycott

5 ways to get revenge on your kids (Spend their inheritance on Elvis crap)

Upcoming Sesame Street Guests

Old Jonas Brothers CD priceless

Sad footnote to sad story

More Kids Stuff I like that my kids don't care about

Baby Penis Album only five bucks

Matthew McConaughey keeps placenta

5 things that would make parents' lives easier

It all started when Mary needed a laxative

Bernie Mac dies for real

In Barbie v. Bratz, Barbie Wins

Jen Chaney — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:02:00 GMT

In case you missed the news a few days ago, it looks like Barbie has won her court battle with those younger, sluttier Bratz.

The jury in the Barbie vs. Bratz trial ruled that MGA Entertainment, the company that makes Bratz, is guilty of contract interference and copyright infringement. The reason: Former Mattel designer Carter Bryant was, in the jury's eyes, still under contract with Mattel when he came up with the idea for Bratz. In other words, MGA stole what was rightfully Mattel's, and now MGA will have to pay.

How much is unclear. The second phase of the trial will determine the amount of damages. And of course, there's always the possibililty of appeals, not to mention another pending lawsuit in which MGA accuses Mattel of stealing designs from them. It appears MGA won't give up their Bratz without a fight.

Now, I don't have a dog -- or a doll -- in this fight. But I'm kinda glad to see Barbie as the victor only because, you know, she has seniority. And despite the debut of S&M Barbie, I still think she's classier than those big-headed mini-hos.

Related Post

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

In the Courtroom: Barbie v. Bratz

Topless Barbie Leads to Man's Arrest

S&M Barbie

Brett Singer — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:00:00 GMT

Let me take you through my reactions to this story.

Hello, what's this? S&M Barbie? The toy? The overdeveloped, underfed doll? The one dating a man with no genitals? That seems… odd. Let's take a look.

Yowza! Barbie in fishnets! F'real! All right. We had the high heels for babies. But those were supposed to be a joke (not a funny one, but still). This is just bizarre. I hate agreeing with the Christian Right, but when they say, "Barbie has always been on the tarty side and this is taking it too far," I'm tempted to agree.

I have to admit, though, that she sort of looks like Black Canary from DC Comics…

Wait a minute! That IS Black Canary! So it's Barbie, dressed up like Black Canary. That… still seems odd. Why would they choose her? For a non-JLA fan (that's Justice League of America, in case you are yourself one of those non-fans), she's a bit of an obscure character. Why not someone better known, like Wonder Woman? Black Canary is a blonde, I guess. Well, actually she's a brunette but she wears a wig instead of a mask… I'm sorry, did you fall asleep? OK, I'll stop geeking out.

So it's Black Canary, which makes it an action figure. But there already is a Black Canary action figure. Actually, there are several, but here's one for comparison purposes:
Source: flickr

For what it's worth (excuse me while I geek out again) Black Canary is, despite her appearance, a fairly positive female role model. She's considered one of the best hand-to-hand fighters, male or female, in the DCU (that's "DC comics Universe") and is currently the leader of the Justice League. She takes no crap, kicks major ass, and asks questions later. Barbie once said, "Math class is tough!" (source) So you could make an argument that Black Canary is a better role model than Barbie, and therefore the doll is empowering.

I don't really see the point of doing this, especially since Barbie's target audience is young girls. So while I think the Vast Christian Right Wing Conspiracy is a bit over the top, I do think it's kind of an odd choice for a Barbie doll. What's next, Big Gay Ken? Oh wait, they did that already.

Source: flickr

A commenter on Boing Boing says that this is a collectible meant for an "older" audience and that young girls don't play with such things. Another commenter says "uh-uh, they totally do." (Not a direct quote.)

So there you go.

It's weird, but is it really offensive? Would you buy one of these for your daughter? Is this sexist, empowering, just a bad choice for a doll?

image: boingboing.net

Jim Abbott is a ballplayer you can look up to

Hulk want puny blogger to review Hulk movie

Breast Self-Exams May Do More Harm Than Good

Foster Care Worker Pregnant with Teen's Baby

Topless Barbie Leads to Man's Arrest

Top 5 Worst Sweet-to-Sexy Toy Makeovers

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

Topless Barbie Leads to Man's Arrest

Jen Chaney — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:34:00 GMT

"The only regret I do have is probably having the Barbie doll up on the dash board. Being topless, maybe that drew some attention."

Those are the words of Robert Martin, a New Jersey man arrested last week for displaying a topless Barbie doll, pornographic magazines and other salacious materials inside his car, which was parked at a rest stop off the Garden State Parkway.

In addition to half-naked children's toys, Martin's car also contained explicit DVD cases, a Bible, a cross and, weirdest of all, a thong on a golden serving platter. You know, the usual stuff you set on the seat of your Honda Civic before heading to work in the morning.

Martin was charged with maintaining a public nuisance and, after police found a pointed shank in the car, possession of a weapon. But the guy, who was released on bail, has an explanation for all of it.

The shank?

He uses that to to pop tapes out of the cassette player.

The porn, naked Barnie and thong on a platter?

He was keeping it in his car because he's in the process of moving to a new apartment. (Um, ok-ayyy....)

"I didn't think that possessing porn inside your car, in the back seat, was a public display," Martin told NBC10. "It was not on public display, it was not a public shrine."

To be fair, most people probably wouldn't know that either. Then again, most people probably don't keep porn in their cars. And if for freaky reason they felt like it was necessary to do that -- you know, because of a big move -- they'd keep it in that new-fangled, high-tech thing ... shoot, what do they call that? Oh yeah. THE TRUNK.

My real concern in this whole situation is poor Barbie, who was essentially abused. I sincerely hope someone has arranged for that doll to seek solid therapy from Psychologist Skipper.

Image: CBS3.com

The Latest on Barbie v. Bratz

Jen Chaney — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:28:00 GMT

The epic Battle of the Dolls -- otherwise known as the trial over who really owns the concept for Bratz, Mattel or MGA Entertainment -- is getting underway in California. And some of the proceedings are already providing fodder for comedy.

Yesterday, a judge ruled that lawyers can present evidence that shows Carter Bryant, the creator of Bratz and a former Barbie designer for Mattel, erased files from his computer a few months after Mattel sued him. The best part? He deleted the files by using a program called ... wait for it .. "Evidence Eliminator." Where did he download that software, at reallyiamnotdoinganythingsuspicious.com?

Mattel's attorneys contend that Bryant was attempting to get rid of proof that he came up with the Bratz concept while still under contract to Mattel. Meanwhile, lawyers for MGA are using what I'll call the porn defense: Actually, he was just using "Evidence Eliminator" to rid his computer of sexually explicit pop-up ads. Really, Bryant doesn't win either way on that one.

More updates from the trial will come as news, or just stuff that makes me laugh, breaks. (It's going to be a sweet, sweet day when Ken takes the stand. You can bet that dude knows a little something about "Evidence Eliminator.")

In the Courtroom: Barbie v. Bratz

Jen Chaney — Thu, 29 May 2008 12:32:00 GMT

The trial of the century -- okay, maybe the No. 2 Trial of the Century, just after R. Kelly -- is underway. It's Barbie v. Bratz in a civil suit destined to rock this nation to the very core of its being. As the court proceedings get underway, here is a brief primer on what's at stake in this battle of the less-than-progressive-toys for little girls.

The Barbie Side

Who is involved in the suit: Mattel Inc., the company behind one of the most enduring dolls in toy history.

Their argument: One of their designers, Carter Bryant, crafted the Bratz dolls while he was working at Mattel. Therefore, Mattel deserves a share of the profits from the Bratz franchise.

Their argument, in easier-to-digest form: "Those slutty dolls with the oversized heads and collagened lips were totally our idea!"

What's at stake: The reputation of the less slutty, though not necessarily liberated, Barbie, as well as potential revenue for Mattel, which has not been strong of late.

The Bratz Side

Who is involved in the suit: MGA Entertainment Inc., the company behind the lucrative Bratz franchise.

Their argument: Bryant came up with the concept for Bratz while on hiatus from Mattel, and therefore Mattel is not entitled to any Bratz profits.

Their argument, in easier-to-digest form: "Those slutty dolls with the oversized heads and collagened lips were created by someone who used to work at Mattel, but didn't when he created these dolls. So suck it."

What's at stake: If they lose the lawsuit? Potentially precious profits from the multi-billion-dollar Bratz line.

Who Will Testify:

A number of Mattel designers and possibly Bryant himself, who apparently settled a separate set of claims this month for an undisclosed amount.

Who Would Testify if This Trial Took Place in My Barbie Dreamcourthouse:

Skipper (Don't think for a second that she doesn't know about some serious, lowdown s@!%.)

Jon Voight, who starred in the "Bratz" movie.

Da Brat. Granted, she has nothing to do with this. But maybe she could bust out a little "Fundafied."

Members of the group Aqua, who sang "Barbie Girl," a track that, on more than one occasion, made me question my reasons for continuing to exist on this planet.

Updates regarding the trial will be posted here at Strollerderby as warranted.

Photo: theage.com.au

Pole Dancing Kits and Other Modern Toys

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 21 May 2008 22:30:00 GMT

Padded bras for first graders, bikini waxes for eight-year-olds, pole dancing kits sold alongside Etch-a-sketches in the toy store—excuse me, but how did this happen? How is it affecting girls' self-image? And, um, what happened to feminism? These are a few of the questions tackled in a recent Salon interview with M. Gigi Durham, author of “The Lolita Effect: The Media Sexualization of Young Girls and What We Can Do About it.”

As her book title would suggest, Durham places the burden of sexualizing girls at increasingly young ages squarely on the media’s shoulders. She argues that many companies are looking to exploit tweens’ increasingly significant contribution to the commercial sector by selling them traditional messages about femininity that the older generation of women has by and large rejected.

Interestingly, Durham connects the commercial sexualization of young girls with women’s inability to enjoy their sexuality later on. The abstinence-only sex education programs that have become increasingly prevalent in the Bush years combined with media’s message that “You must look like Barbie to be sexy” creates a very confusing, potentially dangerous backdrop against which young women come to understand their sexuality. Even as teen girls are encouraged to ignore their own sexuality, they’re told, “If you’ve got it, flaunt it. And if you don’t have it, spend a lot of money until you get it.”

Durham’s advice to parents? Discuss, but don’t censure. For instance, instead of forbidding your daughter to read Seventeen magazine, ask her what she thinks of that model’s look or that article about how to make boys like you. And she says that this dialogue about media propaganda should start, in modified form of course, as soon as your kids can talk. Anyone out there tried this method?

Photo: Girlshop.com