Leave Barbie Alone! She's Not the Skinniest Doll on the Block
Photo by Bas Czerwinski/AFP/Getty Images
On Monday, Fast Company’s Co.Design interviewed Kim Culmone,
vice president of design for Barbie, about why Mattel maintains
Barbie’s impossible figure in light of decades of criticism that her
dimensions set extreme physical expectations for young girls. (If
Barbie were a real girl,
her stomach could not accommodate her full liver, her thin ankles and
tiny feet would force her to crawl on all fours, and her head would be
unsupportable by her spindly neck.) “Barbie’s body was never designed to
be realistic,” Culmone responded. “She was designed for girls to easily
dress and undress. … Primarily it’s for function for the little girl,
for real life fabrics to be able to be turned and sewn, and have the
outfit still fall properly on her body.”
It’s true: As a woman with a normal human body, it’s impossible to find astronaut crop tops in
my size. “There’s also the issue of heritage,” Culmone continued. “This
is a 55-year-old brand where moms are handing clothes down to their
daughters, and so keeping the integrity of that is really important.” If
Barbie fattened up, millions of girls around the world would have to
buy all-new wardrobes for their dolls, and that would be … I don’t know.
Lucrative?
I wonder if the real reason Mattel isn’t interested in giving Barbie some breathing room is that she is still the world’s number-one selling doll,
and many parents and kids will keep buying endless iterations of her
just the way she is. The market for meatier Barbies is less clear. In
fact, Mattel has given Barbie a full-body makeover before, heritage be
damned: In 1997, the company downgraded Barbie’s
cup size, filled out her waist a smidge, and slimmed her hips, which
brought her in line with the prepubescent fashion ideal of the '90s, but
not any closer to realistic human dimensions.
And Mattel hasn’t shown much interest in molding healthier bodies for its non-Barbie dolls, either. In 2010, Mattel launched Monster High,
a new line of gothy fashion dolls modeled after the fictional teenage
daughters of various horror monsters and mythical beasts. These dolls
are obviously awesome. But they are also impossibly thin. Even the werewolf one.
And there’s no “issue of heritage” to fall back on here. Mattel created
a fantasy world, and it chose to make it one where teen girls hobble
around on pairs of disjointed twigs.
Perhaps our endless scrutiny of Barbie’s body is a bit misguided,
when there are so many other dolls out there with similar proportional
issues. Take a look at Clawdeen Wolf’s thigh gap—you could drive a
Thomas the Tank engine through there—and unrealistic figures appear to
be an industry-wide problem. I took the dimensions of four popular
girls’ dolls from a collection of fan measurements, then multiplied them by six—the standard playscale used to dream up Barbie’s real-life measurements—to see how the dolls measure up.
Barbie
Height: 11.5 inches
Bust: 5 inches
Waist: 3.5 inches
Bust: 5 inches
Waist: 3.5 inches
If Barbie became human and was cast in a sequel to the 2000 Lindsay Lohan-Tyra Banks made-for-TV vehicle Life Size, she would stand 5’9” tall and have a 21-inch waist and a 30-inch bust. The average American woman's waist measures 37.5 inches around.
Monster High
Height: 10.5 inches
Bust: 2.75 inches
Waist: 2 inches
Bust: 2.75 inches
Waist: 2 inches
If monsters horrifyingly came to life, then settled down with each
other to raise teenage daughters, those girls would stand 5’3” tall and
have 16.5-inch busts and 12-inch waists.
Bratz
Height: 10 inches
Waist: 2.5 inches
Bust: 3.5 inches
Waist: 2.5 inches
Bust: 3.5 inches
If Yasmin and Sasha were sassing up your local high school, what with
their pouty lips and their midriff-baring tops, they would stand 5 feet
tall and have 21-inch busts and 15-inch waists.
American Girl
Height: 18 inches
Bust: 11.25 inches
Waist: 11 inches
Bust: 11.25 inches
Waist: 11 inches
For the American Girl dolls, which are designed to look like girls
and not teenagers or adult women, I multiplied the dimensions by 3.5 to
put the girls in the 4-foot range. If American Girl dolls came to life
to help their Swedish-immigrant family on the farm or miraculously escape American slavery, they would stand 4’6” tall and have 33.75” busts and 33” waists. Good for them!
So why all the focus on Barbie? I suspect it’s because, while Monster
High dolls come and Bratz dolls go, Barbies appear to be here for the
long haul. We can hope that the next fad in dolls is more proportionate,
but Barbie is not going to just waste away. Another clue as to why
Barbie inspires so much ire may lie in her pretty little head. Monster
High and Bratz are both designed to have absurdly large heads.
That doesn’t excuse their teensy waists and tiny arms, but it does make
it easier to claim that they aren’t actually supposed to look human.
Meanwhile, Barbie was specifically designed to look like a grown-up. Her
waist is impossible and her ankles are frail, but her head is only slightly larger than
a real woman’s would be. When girls look at Barbie's face and a
recognizably human woman stares back, it's a lot harder to avoid making
comparisons from the neck down.

No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment-- or suggestions, particularly of topics and places you'd like to see covered