creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Lenore Skenazy
Lenore Skenazy
24 May 2012
The New Nanny Norm?

Our beloved nanny who worked for us for five years — Joan — called to say she's on the job market again.… Read More.

17 May 2012
Examining Jewish Doctors

The middle-aged lady is running frantically down the beach, waving her arms at the lifeguard: "Help, help!… Read More.

10 May 2012
The Slippery Slope of Parental Advice

At the risk of reading a lot — and I mean a LOT — into one cautionary little tale, today we … Read More.

It's Scorsese Barbie!

Share Comment

So now Barbie comes with a camera. Not a camera in her hand. Not a camera in her phone. A camera in her ... how shall I put this? The aperture is below her neck, right above her famous cleavage. If you think about it too hard (which I don't recommend), it makes her look a little like Tracheotomy Barbie.

Not a big seller.

Anyway, if you look at X-rays of this new Barbie's body (which I also don't recommend, but there they were, on one of the websites about her), her thighs are comely as ever on the outside but filled with batteries on the inside. These are connected to wires that thread up to where her stomach would be, but instead, there's the camera's hardware. Her back? It's a full-color video screen.

It's enough to make Ken run straight to his shrink.

Or G.I. Joe.

Which is where he always seemed to be heading anyway, right? I suspect that's why he never needed his own house or car or job beyond "beach bum." He's the original rent boy. But I'm getting a little off topic.

The truth is this new $50 doll is more empowering than a space shuttle's worth of Astronaut Barbies. That's because it's cute, prissy and girlie. The demo video shows a movie Barbie "made" of Skipper looking through a closet of clothes. Gag me with a plastic shoe. But what's cool is that now technology is just a normal part of a girl's childhood.

It's a snap to make a movie, a snap to snake the cord from Barbie to the computer, a snap for this generation to edit films as easily as my generation made Barbie clothes out of fabric scraps we'd cut two armholes in.

Most of us didn't grow up to be dress designers (at least not those of us who made those dresses that looked like egg roll wrappers with arms poking out), but the world of fashion was one we felt at home in.

That held true even for girls like me, who didn't really care about dressing up. We had Barbies when we were little, and Barbie had a lot of outfits. So there was never anything foreign about fashion.

Likewise, most boys don't grow up to be soldiers (or rent boys), but camo and guns and lightsabers are part of their collective past. They're even part of my own middle-school boys' past — and present — and I'm one of those pacifists who resisted toy guns for a long time — till the Nerf arsenal won me over. But somehow my boys are at home in the worlds of war, sports and technology.

With Video Girl Barbie, the technology part becomes a level playing field (to use a male phrase). The new Barbie does what Surgeon Barbie and President Barbie and AP Biophysics Student Barbie all tried to do: It empowers girls.

Even if all they do is take videos of their doll friends' clothes, they still become the producer/director/key grip who isn't afraid of a USB port. And if they need someone cute to film riffling through the closet?

There's always Ken.

Lenore Skenazy is the author of "Free-Range Kids: How to Raise Safe, Self-Reliant Children (Without Going Nuts with Worry)" and "Who's the Blonde That Married What's-His-Name? The Ultimate Tip-of-the-Tongue Test of Everything You Know You Know — But Can't Remember Right Now." To find out more about Lenore Skenazy (lskenazy@yahoo.com) and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

4 Comments | Post Comment
No one can be empowered by a piece of plastic junk. Let's look for empowerment in our decisions and actions, and encourage our children to do the same.

Empowerment comes for self-respect, which--unlike the fashionable self-esteem--is earned by good ethics, good citizenship, and a healthy relationship with others around us. It's earned by respecting our bodies, our minds, our rights--and those of others.

Riffling through your closet for something cool to wear won't do it. Even if you film the riffling on a cheap plastic camera that's headed for the landfill when this year's fad for Video Girl Barbie is replaced by another piece of environmentally destructive, mind-numbing trash.

You've written some intelligent articles in the past, Ms. Skenazy. Please cool it with the ads--they're beneath you.
Comment: #1
Posted by:
Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:10 AM
Re: Anne W.
With all due respect to your opinion, I agree with Skenazy. As a career computer software engineer, I have long noted that the difficulty in achieving equal computer presence for girls and boys stems from a lack of *interest*. We just can't seem to come up with enough interesting reasons for girls to *want* to interact with computers.
The internet helps, particularly with social networking sites, because it provides an avenue for girls to explore and expand social relationships. But FarmVille aside, there aren't enough games to encourage true creativity for the typical girl.
Video editing is an extremely complex task, involving both artistic creativity, and procedural discipline (an important prelude to learning to write software). This seems to give girls a reason to *want* to interact with computers at this level of complexity, so I'm all for it.
I read between your lines a bit, but I interpreted your disagreement to be based on the concept that Barbie's [dis]figurement encourages girls to be self-critical of their bodies. I understand that viewpoint but I don't actually believe it, not at that stage of development. Rather, the teenage and adult "women" magazines (Cosmo, Us, People, etc) do a substantial amount of damage in that arena. I find it sickening that pictures are photoshopped *at all*, perpetuating a myth of blemish-free, flab-free, "perfection" as the yardstick against which a woman should measure herself. If only I could get women to stop supporting the myth with their money.
Comment: #2
Posted by: -rb
Tue Aug 3, 2010 10:14 PM
rb--Let's give girls real cameras and computers, not dollies. Let's teach them to photo-edit for real, as we would teach boys. My objection is less that Barbie is degrading--though she is--than that it's patronizing to give girls toys instead of tools.
Comment: #3
Posted by:
Thu Aug 5, 2010 2:26 PM
Ah, I see your point. My perspective (biased as it is, of course) is that there is plenty of access and opportunities for girls (and boys) to use computers and the tools on them. What is mostly lacking is the desire and the interest. There are lots of things people *could* learn to do, but ultimately, people are drawn to their interests. A girl interested in computers won't be tempted to use this Barbie to learn how to photo edit -- she'll be drawn to "real" photo editing software. But a girl interested in Barbie and fashion may become interested in (or at least exposed to) photo editing because of this toy.

I see the toy as a way to expand the horizons of those not otherwise drawn to computers. It's better than no computer exposure at all.

Of course, this is all my perception of the situation, and may not truly reflect real life.

What would be interesting would be to see a scientific study (or even a basic poll) of girls who used this toy, to see how it affected them.
Comment: #4
Posted by: -rb
Tue Aug 10, 2010 7:40 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Lenore Skenazy
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

31 Dec 2009 Resolutions for the Geeks Who Keep Designing New Electronics

19 Jan 2007 Why Boxer, Not Condi, Got it Right

23 Dec 2007 Take That, Mr. Smug Sperm