Dear Mattel,
Ask me how upset I am that my Saturday began with my bright and beautiful six year old bounding into my bed, saying she wanted to put on all of her make up so that she could look like a Monster High doll. Ask me how upset I am that try as aggressively as I might, you have snuck into my home like a pestilence. Me, an expert in the field, has a daughter ravenous for your awful Monster High and Barbie dolls, because she says they look “so cool”. I think your dolls are twisted and sick.
Today our family is traveling up to Madison to see my daughter’s art displayed for a state contest. We are then going to go to a bookstore and let each of our children pick out a new book. A day meant to celebrate creativity and bright minds began with an explanation as to why your sexualized and unrealisitic dolls are not the look our family strives for, all the while I try not to use the words “street walker” and “stripper”. My God people, these are toys for children. Children.
I had to explain how companies like yours are more interested in making money than making happy hearts in kids. I had to explain that real women who wear such small and tight clothing are usually more concerned about how their body looks to other people than how their thoughts and ideas sound. I told her our family is focused on bright minds and healthy bodies and happy hearts.
But my word do you make my job so, so hard. You make me tap dance around the topic that your dolls are dressed like women who sell their bodies for sex, often to men who offer zero respect to the human being that lives inside. My husband cannot even talk to his little girl about this, because his voice catches in his throat, knowing how awful the world is to its girls. He also knows the thousands of girls who aren’t having this conversation with her parents, and it scares him.
It took me 14 months to become pregnant with this child, 20 hours to birth her, and six years, one month, ten days and one hour to bring her up as the vibrant, creative, intelligent, wild, kind, and imaginative beautiful being she is today. I take the job of being a mama very seriously, and this morning the bear inside was stirred. Actually, it was kicked in the face. It is never wise to be in the space between a mother and her child. Not this mother. Not this child.
Before, when I spoke about your products, I did so as sort of a far-off and removed concept that might someday touch my child. Today, I am speaking from a place of deep anger because you have reached her. Today, more than ever, I am dedicated to making change. Serious change. Today it became personal. Today, the gloves came off. It is never wise to be in the space between a mother and her child.
Seething,
Melissa Atkins Wardy
Mattel Monster High dolls.
Amelia with her Go Go Sports Girl doll.
54 Responses to “Dear Mattel, I’m Seething”
Leave a Reply
Word. It’s a whole new ballgame now. Well said.
[Reply]
Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 11:57 am
Pure and simple, the Monster High line needs buried. Mattel is NOT listening to parenting pushback/psychological pros (APA study and beyond) when these freakin zombies keep rising from the dead to seep toxic cues onto kids. Sexualization and appearance over substance has quantifiable costly damage to kids self-worth
Now maybe folks can see why I hit the roof when I heard Mattel had cut a deal with my beloved Playworks ‘save recess/get kids moving’ pals as all I could think of was ‘omg, that $2mill deal could open up backdoor branding big time’—what if they nudge in Monster High under the guise of the ‘kindness campaign’ bit again?” Truly evil and subversive.
(fwiw, I phoned Playworks pronto asking about whether the Mattel brand name would be associated at all w/their program in schools or if it would be ‘white label’ entry ..I followed with a stern/strident “We are ALL watching you and counting on you not to fail us” warning; I was told it’s all ‘new’ and TBD…
Clearly THIS is the kind of influence/under the radar insurgency of corp marketing polluting kids that makes parents in the trenches go ape. It makes us feel like we keep getting lobbed sidewinders in the warfare for the hearts and minds of our children. It’s one thing to get backing for sustainability to get kids playing (and even use outdoor ‘gear’) but it’s another to subversively bring the Mattel brand into the play yard of institutions at any level…So I for one will be watching veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery closely as I feel Mattel has proved themselves to represent profiteering over constructive play, with a very broken ethical compass.
And yes, Lisa, it’s a whole new ballgame. We need you back on the mound to help pitch some fastballs! First team needs a rest w/player fatigue; tho thanks to Melissa’s tenacity and several other all-stars, we’re getting some unstoppable traction…Time to truly create “A League of our Own” and teach corporations how to ‘play fair’ even if it means we have to play hard ball to get their attention. I’m in.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
I’m in. And remember, there’s no crying in baseball. Time for hardball.
[Reply]
Freddie Reply:
April 26th, 2012 at 7:14 pm
I had Barbies since age 12. I had no sisters. Nobody told me about Barbie. I knew it was just a toy of pure imagination and not reality. I am a straight married man that never expects females to be like a lifeless plastic mold. That is the fun of Barbie. It makes no sense to me that some plastic GI Joe that I played with would determine how I look or my career. I never was obsessed with huge muscles or joining the military. I have an inability to swim and a fear of great heights. The toys never reflected my reality. Barbie is just pure fantasy. I never judged my girlfriends nor wife on appearance. Inside counts more than the outside.
[Reply]
If you’re not angry, you’re not paying attention. To everyone who thinks “what’s the big deal?” I’d explain it this way: we are raising a generation of girls who must one day become confident, happy, healthy young women. This is not the way to do it. My heart goes out to every young mother today battling this craptastic bill of goods being sold to little girls. If Melissa Atkins Wardy can’t keep it out of her home and her daughter’s life, think about how hard it is for the rest of the parents. Damn.
[Reply]
Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
Well said, Lori. And same goes for yours truly w/ambient intake of tween/teen tripe (e.g. you don’t have to ‘watch’ to be Snookified with behavioral/RealityTV messaging, as Jenn points out in RealityBitesBackBook.com)
Media/marketing producers need to connect the dots with ‘what they’re putting out there’ to begin with, otherwise we have a culture of ‘oops, I did it again’ starpower, selling toxic cues/crud and then recanting as they have kids when they finally ‘get it.’
It’s akin to when gutter-mouthed 50cent shifted gears to sell his ‘bullying’ books and Vitamin Water. Hypocrisy and gall in a pop culture zeitgeist of short term $$ gain over long term impact on mental/physical health of human beings.
Wish we had a ‘do no harm’ Socratic oath for those putting this stuff out into the universe. Or better yet, a ‘pay for harm’ fine to slap on these companies as an ‘outcome and measure’ pain point BEYOND just a consumer boycott/wallet whacking. grrr…Mama bear is riled today.
[Reply]
Lori Day Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 1:55 pm
I’m so totally cynical. CSR means nothing. It’s all about the mighty buck. I think the ONLY way to fight this is to hit them where it hurts, and that’s in the wallet. So we HAVE to reach parents and get them to stop buying, and that is so hard to do because so many parents don’t see the issue, or don’t care, and it is just so hip to say, “Don’t you have something more important to worry about? Something better to do with your time?” These CEOs are often parents themselves. They psychologically distance themselves from their own behavior. Nothing will cut the cycle besides choking off the demand. And I also believe you can’t say “no” without providing the alternative “yes.” So if it’s “no Monster High” it’s “Yes, Go! Go! Sports dolls” or other products by responsible shops like Pigtail Pals, Princess Free Zone, etc. There actually IS wholesome stuff out there, but it tends to be hard to find and expensive, and it stays expensive until enough people “buy” into it and bring the price down. I just really don’t think these corps feel shame. We have to keep up the pressure in ways that hurt their bottom line. They’ll never do what’s “right” if it produces less revenue.
[Reply]
Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 11:36 am
Well said. Though the corp shame DID work when Joe Kelly of Dads & Daughters talked man to man to corp execs (and media people!) in his tireless crusade w/CCFC against Hasbro & the Pussycat Dolls (stripper songstress type dolls for 6 yr olds) asking the execs to put their own daughter/granddaughter’s face in the ad/toy/campaign.
In fact, I’m about to make a similar appeal to ad agency/AA execs (tho there are only a handful) to show and tell how the toxic ‘brands’ of certain personalities in the music sphere (misogynistic/DV perpetuation etc) are bringing down cultural “perception vs reality” of AA communities, doing MUCH more harm than good. Worth a shot.
Gotta hit from all angles of mindshare as the proliferation and financing put parents at a disadvantage.
It’s not even a ‘turn it off/don’t buy it’ issue anymore.
Exposure is ambient and 24/7, polluting kids with ‘shoulds’ that shouldn’t be there. Lack of corporate ethics/accountability is a monstrous problem. Truly.
Maybe I’m just in a mood today … but what if your child had bounded into your bed and announced that she wanted to put on all of her make up so she could look like her favorite super hero? Or a Butterfly? Or one of the fae?
I understand your anger if this were something she wanted exclusively, but I have read enough of your posts to think you have a well balanced child, and is teaching her this, as an OPTION when SHE chooses, is bad, are you not skewing the balance the other way?
I am female, and I in no means fit the traditional roles all the time. I don’t wear make up on a day to day basis, in the bush, on the range, etc. I rarely wear make up. I do wear it in situations when it is appropriate, including sometimes in “play” (cosplay or Tribal Style Bellydance, for example.)
Are you telling me that when I choose to wear make up, that I am being swayed by mass media, as opposed to making a choice of my own free will? That I am not looking at the options I have available, and choosing the one that I feel like, the one that appeals to me, at the time? Does it make me a bad person?
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 11:21 am
Basinah -
I literally just got done putting on my make up for our day out shopping, and came to check blog comments before we left for the day.
This isn’t about make up. It is about sexualization.
[Reply]
Jackie Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 6:01 pm
I concur. Even if you took away the pounds of makeup these dolls wear, you are still left with streetwalker clothes and provocative poses. The dolls are marketed to Tweens, meaning girls under the age of 13. Does anyone truly want their 10 year olds emulating one of theses dolls? We do on watch monster high on tv, and my daughter knows that the toys will not grace the floors in our house. When she asked me why I told her plainly that they were not good role models. That and encouraging imaginative, confidence building play is the best I can do. Even then, the influence seeps in from commercials, school and agressive merchandising.
Thank you for being a voice in the wilderness Mellissa. Your intelligent and on target arguments cause far reaching ripples. Keep throwing stones.
[Reply]
MZW Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Yes, I think the issue is not the fact that she wanted to put on make up, but that she wanted make up so she could look like a Monster High Doll. If you noticed the picture of the dolls at the bottom of the post, this is NOT how a six-year-old (or any girl) should be looking. Butterflies and superheroes don’t really read “street walker” to me like those dolls do. Like Melissa said, it’s about sexualization.
[Reply]
I have watched as little girls become more sexualized and it is distressing. Why would Mattel make such gross and demeaning looking “dolls or tarts” to sell to little girls. Girls are first off children who happen to be female. They are not miniature women who should look like tarts on the streets. Really Mattel get a grip. What is wrong with girls being children and treated as such. They will grow up and hopefully not be influenced to dress like those dolls/tarts and not buy your products. As a grandmother, I know I won’t.
[Reply]
its a toy… calm down….. and if u look deeper into it all the monster high girls are different monsters and they all get along the message is that no matter who or what you are we can all get along and be friends. i mean clawdeen(a wearw…olf) and draculaura(a vampire) are best friends and in myth vampires and wearwolves are mortal enemies. its not about setting how girls should look its saying to be yourself…. and its a freaking toy! its the same lady who made my little pony so calm down
[Reply]
and seriously its not like your girls are never gonna grow up so calm down i mean its not like they understand what sex is. look at like every single doll ever. baby dolls promote having babys and yet you still buy them for your daughters. barbies have been around forever and yet im sure u still buy them for your daughters. and any other dolls are still setting standards for how girls should look or act leaveing little to the imagination. im sure u buy your daughters fake makeup sets. put ur girls in gymnastics or ballet make them more flexible and are able to do other (more sexual) things. honestly this is a very sexual society. if you dont like some things dont get them for your kids but for those of us who see no problem with it leave us out of it because there is no point in you trying to control all kids lives. dont like it dont buy it its plain and simple. if the monster high series was made to sell sex they would show the girls in tube tops and booty shorts and they would be all up on all the boys in the school which they dont. if you think about it in actual high school its ALOT worse then the monster high series so calm down its just a toy
[Reply]
Just don’t agree. I have a feminist Lego For Girls eschewing athletic daughter who also adores Monster High. She is being raised to our values of balances and critical thinking. Her older sister, who wants to be a chemical engineer, went through a Bratz phase. These dolls don’t exist in a vacuum. They can be enjoyed while still having healthy self image and feminist values. (In the 70′s I had Darcy, the Model, aka Darcy the Swinger). You can teach your child to evaluate her playthings and still allow her to enjoy them. My brother being told his vampire bat toy was twisted and sick made a far deeper negative impression on him than a more welcoming but evaluative discussion of his enjoyment would have.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Meoskop -
You are correct, they do not exist in a vacuum. In fact, Monster High reinforces every single misogynist and sexualized gender stereotype your daughters are receiving in all the other media they take in during the day. Critical thinking skills or not, you allowed some of that to become normalized when you allowed those products into your home as toys because ultimately you said “This toy isn’t all that great and we need to desconstruct this quite a bit, but we’ll buy it anyway.”
Media is a diet, so let’s compare it to food. I allow my kids sweet treats, but in moderation. So we enjoy cake, but we surely don’t eat cake every day. You’ve allowed your children to eat cake every day, even though you sit around the table and ask them to think critically about why it isn’t a good decision.
Your girls sound like wonderful people. I’m just choosing to give my daughter what I consider to be a healthier media diet.
[Reply]
Meoskop Reply:
February 25th, 2012 at 10:29 pm
They are, and I’m not judging your choices. Just not sharing your view. If the cake analogy were to hold, cake would have to be the only thing I let them eat. And I don’t disapprove of the dolls in and of themselves so I didn’t buy them anyway, I bought them in addition to. They are part of a balanced diet of playthings. Maybe once a week she plays with them. I choose to use them to educate her instead of denying the world she and her peers operate in. Can she dress like that? No. She is not a Monster, she is a little girl.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 10:07 am
I do not deny my daughter the world, I just choose to make my home a safe haven from sexualization. Just like racism or sexual abuse, toxic toys may be a part of the world my daughter’s peers operate in, but I certainly do not have to allow it into my home to educate my children.
Ugh. We do not watch monster high. No more commenting from the iPad.
[Reply]
I had no idea how terrible those dolls were. It’s just not good for our girls to want this look, what are we telling them? Great article. I have boys but these dolls are terrible.
[Reply]
As a recently retired teacher, believe me when I tell you it is much worse than this. At the elementary level, girls are coming to school in short shorts, halter tops, and tight tight tops. Years ago the District recommended a uniform policy (which, by the way, makes a huge difference) but the principal is too intimidated by parents who actually have no objection to their daughters dressing in this fashion, and are absusively vocal about that. Have you seen South Park: Season 8 Episode 12? It’s worth the watch. All of us–regardless of politics, religion, age, ethnicity, or anything else need to be up in arms about this! Melissa, I will post your article on my facebook page, and encourage everyone to share, tweet, and repeat. As women, we do have a voice, and we are capable of having it be heard!
[Reply]
You said it perfectly! Sexualizing children is NOT ok ever! Mattel has become part of a societal problem. Sure, they can’t fix it all, but they don’t have to keep being part of the dark side. (Who’s running a company that wants “sexy” little girls, anyway?!)
[Reply]
Way to go Melissa. A lot of those ‘big boys’ are void of feelings or concern for anybody. As you said, the best way to fight is about the ONLY way to fight them …by aiming at their wallets. If you can persuade lots on mothers to listen to you, you WILL get their attention. You have my full support.
[Reply]
You super strong minded women need to lay off the derogatory use of stripper as a former dancer I am offended. Hooker fine, porn star ok, but really you want to bash strippers who prefer to be called dancers btw, I danced out of choice but just fyi strippers don’t really dress like that, obviously haven’t been to a stipclub lately have ya? I have never and will never sell myself to anyone so please drop your bs, being a stripper isn’t that bad to be honest makes quite a bit of money and atleast I’m not a douchey soccer mom that cheats on my husband with some alky from the dumpy corner bar. I think if you want to make such a big statement offending strong women that could back you up you could just watch the terms you use to decribe undesirable women. Infact go yell at all the rich girls from the expensive schools that dress worse than strippers, and they do it in public.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 9:56 am
Dancer -
Calling a stripper a stripper is calling a spade a spade. You strip off your clothes until your naked, or nearly naked, body writhes around on stage while strange men stuff dollar bils in your g-string and between your breasts, selling the illusion of sex. I’ve been to strip clubs. A stripper is most definitely part of the sex trade. Please drop your bs by calling yourself a “dancer”.
I want more for my daughter, and would be deeply disappointed in her if that is what she chose to do with her life.
Maybe to you being a stripper isn’t all that bad. But it isn’t all that great.
[Reply]
Megan Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 5:06 pm
Well said!
[Reply]
Here’s a radical idea – turn off the TV! My 6-1/2 and 5 year olds have no idea what Monster High is! They’ve seen the dolls in the store, and we agreed that they look “creepy” and like they don’t have very much respect for themselves. End of discussion.
The TV is on in my house right now – but they’re watching Mickey Mouse Clubhouse. Or we watch DVDs.
If these arrive as a birthday gift in March or August, we will graciously thank the giver and then return them. I’ve managed this long without a single Bratz doll taking up residence in my home, and I’m confident I can keep out the monsters.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 9:50 am
Amy -
Your comment sounds very judgemental, specifically since you do not know my family. My children’s media is very closely monitored by my husband and I. They watch only one show that is not on PBS or Nick Jr, and therefore only take in a small handful of commercials each week. In general they do not spend a lot of time watching tv.
My daughter’s desire for these dolls did not come from tv commercials, it came from exposure at school and while out shopping.
[Reply]
Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 12:40 pm
Ah, FINALLY the AMBIENT conversation. THANK you, Melissa.
People need to understand that what manufacturers ‘put out there’ in the media and marketing universe is now ambient in its proliferation. It’s beyond dismissiveness in a ‘look the other way/don’t buy it’ stance—it’s everywhere.
To me it’s like second-hand smoke. Should my child have lung cancer from pervasive exposure to unhealthy environs even though I choose not to smoke?
Should children have to breathe in the polluted sphere of formulaic pop culture with its body image soul erosion and snarky/mean-spirited hyper-sexualized ‘dead Bratz’ imagery and vapid values?
The only option consumers are entitled to is to ‘leave the building’ to get some air (getting harder to do with mega-bucks marketing proliferation) or to ‘deconstruct and desensitize’ with media literacy (tune out the crud with ‘why not to buy’ which in itself presents a judgmental conundrum, since lil’ Sally is bound to have peer posses playing w/MH)…when the larger question should be:
Why isn’t the default for ‘clean air?’
Why isn’t Mattel/Monster High put out on the stoop? Why should healthy kids be forced to leave play environs to eke out some fresh air away from cancer-causing agents of ‘secondhand smoke?’
Why are we as parents undermined by cruddy ambient cues, essentially putting Non Smokers into a Smokers den…then asked to ‘do our jobs as parents’ by not letting them breathe in the fumes?
Why are peer parents entitled to dismissively tell nonsmokers to ‘calm down’ and start the eyerolling and name-calling as ‘over-reactive’ when we’re just trying to find some freakin’ fresh air to breathe? It’s the ultimate ‘pass the ashtray’ peer perpetuation hipster moment and frankly, I’m sick of it. Instead, let’s ‘imagine’…(channeling Lennon here)
Imagine if Mattel embraced healthier products w/the same fervor and financing imparting POSITIVE caring credos (eco/animals/ocean/whatevs) and amped ‘em up with ‘coolness cache’…Imagine if we replaced toxic items like MH with healthier ones and ditched the coffin nails to try a “switch pitch” so children could breathe healthier air?
It’s doable. Really it is. We shouldn’t need to live life with 21st century inhalers to filter; instead, let’s task corporations NOT to light up toxic media/marketing tripe in the first place. Accountability and a free market economy CAN go hand in hand.
[Reply]
Marisa Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 10:46 am
Amy, YES!
When I read your letter I cried. I am from the generation that fought mightily in the ’60s and ’70s to change the image of women in the world. It upsets me mightily that it may all have been for nothing. Thank you for your work. Keep the pressure on!!!
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 4:23 pm
Becca -
I often wonder how the women of the Women’s Lib Movement during the 60-70′s view my generation of moms, the majority of whom are completely drinking the Kool Aid on all things pink and princess…and worse, not marching in the streets over the rampant sexualization of childhood. You ladies worked so, so hard back then, and I do feel like so much has been undone.
If anything, I think it shows how far we came that my generation can take it for granted so much so that we allow the backwards slip.
[Reply]
Wow, so much venom in this article… What ever happened to the old saying “if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all”???
Get over it, they are selling a product and guess what?? You don’t have to buy it!!
Kids are always going to see things we don’t want them to see and don’t always agree with. How do you think all the people that oppose gay marriage feel every time their child sees people of the same sex holding hands, etc???
The price we pay for freedom is that there is a place for everything at our collective “table.” Some things we like, some we love and some we hate. Our job is parents is to explain and set an example for our kids to follow.
Rather than spew aggressive rhetorict, how about just talking to yor daughter and choosing not to buy Mattell??
[Reply]
Natalie Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 12:16 pm
Well, really do you think from the tone of her letter that she lets things go UNSAID to her daughter? C’mon, the woman and the child are obviously bright enough to have conversations about it. The problem here is that we’ve let our culture demean women and girls to the point where a great deal of people think its ok or normal. And, yes to the ambient thing concept! I can only let my 4 yr old watch Curious George til the cows come home but in September she is going to Kindergarten and she will be exposed to all of it. The capitalism argument just does not hold any water here it is a question of social mores. So, it’s ok to sexualize little girls because someone somewhere is making a buck? Um, no. Yes, it IS my job to set an example for my child, talk things over, teach her. I know this and you bet Melissa knows this as well. It’s the constant barrage that we are not equipped to fight! And what happens when the OPP or my daughter or your daughter get to the age where they don’t value our opinions above all others? When their peers and friends suddenly take precedence? This fight is worth fighting and I, for one, am grateful for Melissa’s work.
[Reply]
Reading these comments, I am trying to understand why Melissa is getting backlash. She is fighting for your daughter – or, if you don’t have a daughter, your granddaughter, future daughter, and/or any other girls in your life. If you feel attacked by how she describes these dolls, that’s unfortunate, and I mean that. But do you know what? This really isn’t about you. It’s about young, impressionable girls who are still forming their identities and who should be concentrating on doing so in a non-sexual way until they are old enough to encounter sexuality in a positive, healthy way. It’s also about body image, imo, the same way that Barbie debates often are. I played with Barbie all the time growing up, and I’ve generally turned out alright… but I have also suffered body image issues for as long as I can remember. Is their a connection? Maybe not, but probably yes. So while I’m sure it’s true that most girls playing with Monster High dolls will “be fine in the end,” is it really fair for our society to throw these sorts of toys in their faces, and in doing so dig them into a deep hole and say, “You’ll be fine. All you have to do is climb out”? When I have a daughter I want her starting her life on even ground, not digging herself out of a messed-up identity society has created for her. Thanks, Melissa, for fighting for this.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 4:17 pm
Thank you, Richele. I will never stop fighting.
I played with Barbies, too. But our childhood was so much different than it is today. It is MH + Barbie + Bratz + LIV Girls + Moxie Girls + sexualized clothing + tween make up + oppressive marketing + age-compressed tv shows + hypersexual pop music (and stars) +++++++ Everything for our girls tells them to focus on fashion, manufactured beauty, and attracting guys. It isn’t just one toy that needs to change, it is the entire culture of girlhood that needs fixing.
[Reply]
Richele Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
I absolutely agree. Also, although I’m not sure how much it matters, I was born in ’89, so I would guess I’m more of an intermediate between you and the girls of today (with regard to “our childhood”). Either way, very well put.
[Reply]
I’m officially mystified. Who on Earth are these people who are disagreeing with the idea that these dolls are inappropriate? It’s like we’ve been invaded by consumers from Mars!
Of course, I was mystified the first time I saw the MH dolls for sale in the grocery store. (Yes, GROCERY store — so every week, I get to walk my little girl past these abominations in order to buy food.)
So, consumers from Mars, please ask yourself this: if you saw a woman (or worse, a teenage girl) dressed and posed like these dolls, standing by the side of the road, what would you think her profession would likely be? What do you think her view of herself, her body, and her personal autonomy would be like? And finally, would she be a role model for your daughter? (In anticipation of the “you’re being judgmental!” response, let me take a moment to say, YES, I’m being judgmental. That’s why we have brains — to, y’know, exercise judgment.)
[Reply]
I personally think that Michelle Obama with her “Let’s Move” campaign should back a company that is willing to release a round of dolls such as the early 90′s “Playground Kids”. Promoting friendship, movement (each doll came with her own piece of Playground equipment) and diversity. I wish that ALL the companies would quit putting so much focus on fashion, makeup, and looks.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Pam -
That is a great idea!
[Reply]
Getting back to the subject of how we keep our daughters from embracing these hypersexualized images of what Mattel (and other companies/industries) think that girls and women should look like…
Banning them from our house was never the answer. Instead, we opted for the “teaching opportunity” approach. We would never buy this garbage – but, of course, someone gave us my daughter one as a birthday present. And the statement, “Mom, I don’t want to BE Barbie – I just want to play with her,” calmed my fears a little. But having her in the house enabled us to talk about her in a more substantial way. “Look at her feet. Can you imagine having feet that were stuck in that pointed toe position all the time? What would that be like?” And I was able to share what I knew about how, if Barbie was a real person, what her proportions would be – and how much it would hurt to walk around.
I believe in doing everything I can to protect my kids. And I also believe in giving them the tools they need to see the inappropriate imagery that will bombard them in school, at friends’ houses, on TV, etc. in the appropriate light.
The key isn’t to pretend this stuff doesn’t exist. And even if Mattel were to listen to the anger of the parents who find their ideas of “appropriate dolls and toys” outrageous (and I do think it’s valid and important to speak out about it), they would still exist. So, the best we can do is talk about it with our daughters and each other. Equally important, we should encourage our daughters to think and talk about it. And we should listen to our daughters. It’s not an exciting, “change the world” kind of approach. But it’s the one that my daughter (now 13, still self-confident, still carrying a healthy image of herself) and I have found works best for us in the long run.
[Reply]
My DD was given a MH doll. I thought it was pretty creepy myself. She also owns one Bratz doll, a bunch of Barbie stuff and Polly Pockets. However, I’m not even sure where the MH or Bratz dolls are. I haven’t seen them in months, thank goodness. I do however, know where her books and puzzles and legos (yes, she was given some of the new “girl” stuff which is now mixed in with all the rest) are…all over my house! It’s a tough job balancing everything for our girls. We were watching the Oscars last night and she asked, why do people keep asking “who are you wearing”? I then had to explain about designers and designer clothing. She understood and we moved on. I’m hoping she doesn’t think she has to look like those women in their painted on dresses and over the top hairdos and makeup. Sigh….keep up the good fight everyone!
[Reply]
Hmm. I’m wondering… To all the people who say “Just don’t buy it,” is there any possible toy marketed to children that you believe would be bad enough to justify speaking out against? Would it be okay to market a doll that is not only dressed like a sex worker, but actually labeled “Prostitute Barbie” on the box? What if the advertising overtly stated “Girls, you can grow up to have sex for money too?” Would that be okay?
If your answer is no, then the “Just don’t buy it” defense just doesn’t make sense. If your answer is no, then there you recognize that it is at least possible that a product could go too far, and your disagreement with Melissa is whether or not Monster High dolls are over the line or not. That’s a different debate.
I really don’t understand the anger directed to Melissa for speaking her mind on HER OWN BLOG from people whose ultimate defense of these toys is “If you don’t like it, just don’t buy it.” Why then would people criticize this blog, when they could say to themselves, “If you don’t like it, just don’t read it?”
Personally I think Melissa is entitled to criticize any product she wants to in any way she wants, and I’m glad somebody is speaking out about the implications of marketing on childhood. I think it’s probably good for people who disagree to debate the issue, but the “Just don’t buy it” argument doesn’t make a lot of sense unless you really believe that nothing in popular culture should ever be criticized by anyone at anytime.
[Reply]
Ive been thinking on this since reading your post over the weekend. And here’s the thing, if the OPP had come in looking for black makeup to look like batman, or silver to become a robot, would you have been upset? It is my belief that at ?5? She is exploring different roles and identities. She was exploring the monster high imagination.
While WE see the bigger picture of over sexualization of little girls, she sees a new character and world to explore. You can provide her freedom to explore it while explaining your boundaries and reasons why you don’t like it. By banning it completely you don’t allow for a conversation about it.
I have 2 boys who have a deep yearning need to turn everything into war play. I hate it. I don’t disallow it though. I explain tp them why I don’t like pretend shooting and tell them that I won’t ban it but I would prefer other types of play. They were given need guns for Xmas (imagine!!!) and my first instinct was tp return them. Instead we had a talk about guns, gun safety, when guns may be used and why mom doesn’t like them. They are allowed to play with them but they know the rules. I hate it. But accept it. Within the confines of my belief and value system.
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Penny -
No, if she had asked for robot or Batman or fairy make up, that would all be age appropriate and fine. This isn’t about make up. It is about her exposure to and now wanting to look like the highly sexualized products that Mattel calls “toys” for children. It is one thing to want to explore with make up, it is another to want to paint yourself to look like she is going clubbing or walking the streets. That notion would not have come into her head had she not been exposed to Monster High.
She sees a new character and story she wants to explore. BECAUSE I see the big picture and the harms of sexualization, I say no to the toxic, but yes to the healthier version of what she is interested in – like yes to Tim Burton’s “Corpse Bride” and “Alice in Wonderland”, both full of exquisite creatures and amazing use of make up. But in an entirely different context. It is that context that makes ALL the difference. This weekend we looked at the make up and outfits worn by Circque du Soliel performers. Again, context.
I can ban the toxic, and still have the conversation. Just like as my son grows and may/may not move into fighting/war play. He will not have toy guns. He will be allowed to grab a stick and team up with his buddies to shoot at or swashbuckle imaginary enemies. He will not be allowed to pretend to shoot at people or pets, but he will be allowed to zap bad guys.
Like you said, within the confines of my belief and value system. The sexualization of children lies far outside those lines for me.
[Reply]
The media teaches our daughters that their only worth is as a sexulized being, while law-makers are asking for the boycot of Girl Scout cookies and trying to take away access to birth control! Some of these commentors are correct – these toys do not exist in a vacuum. Rather, they exist in a roiling sea of sexualized images and role models, mixed messages, and hypocrisy. Is their any hope for society?
[Reply]
Dear Melissa,
I feel your pain! As a child, I was a Barbie fanatic and now have a toddler daughter. One day I found a Baby Bratz doll on the street and was absolutely sickened by her! She was supposed to represent a child my daughter’s age (around 2), yet she had a full face of make-up (including a full pout of highly glossed lips, a crop-top, fishnet stockings, and a leather mini-skirt. The really devastating part of the whole picture was that she had a baby bottle, full of milk, chained across her chest. I have been a dollmaker my entire life and am now designing a line of dolls for girls. In the past few months, I have come across other brilliantly expressed complaints from concerned parents and I am collecting them for my blog. With your permission, I’d love to add you as a contributor. Please let me know if you’d agree. In any case, I will avidly follow your eloquent thoughts on Pigtail Pals.
Respectfully yours,
Christina
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 2:32 pm
Hi Christina -
I’d love to hear more about what you are planning! Email me any time at melissa.wardy@pigtailpals.com.
[Reply]
Curious… “my bright and beautiful six year old bounding into my bed, saying she wanted to put on all of her make up.” Why does your 6 year old have makeup?
[Reply]
melissa Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 9:43 pm
Christine-
My daughter has a little bag that holds a compact of eyeshadow, blush, and a lipgloss. It is all irridescent and sheer but when she chooses to play dress up with it, which is not very often, she gets to feel like she is visiting the land of grown ups for a little bit.
The important thing to note is that she has it for dress up play. When she asked to wear it during our normal day’s activities, the answer was an emphatic “No.”
[Reply]
The big question here is how can we raise our daughters to believe in things like positive sexual experiences, consent, and making good choices when all the bad choices are becoming normal, little girl experiences?
I know personal anecdotes aren’t proof of any one thing, but I gotta share this: when I was a little girl (5-6) I had brothers about my age, and I had Barbies (granted, my Barbies did things like leave Ken at the alter to go join the Peace Corps. Your mileage may vary) and I had a crap-ton of Barbie clothes. I remember vividly how *into* my toys I was; how each Barbie had a life and a backstory and feelings! And then my brother’s friends would take my Barbies and look up their skirts and laugh about how Barbie had no panties. I cannot begin to tell you how violated *my* feelings were at the time, and I was a budding feminist for whom the amount of crap taken usually numbered about zero. My Barbie, and by extension, me, had not given permission for our skirts to be lifted. But the boys had learned somewhere that this was an acceptable way to treat a girl’s Barbie. Barbie got zero respect, because she was a girl toy and she was *my* toy and therefore less respected. And this was back in the 90′s when Barbie wasn’t *as* bad.
Flash forward to now. That little piece of burgeoning sexual harassment probably repeats itself in mixed-gender places of play all the time. Only this time, the message isn’t righteous indignation. The message is that the unwanted sexual attention is the *point*. So while I got right and properly pissed at my doll’s treatment, I imagine now little girls would figure that, perhaps this is the way of the world. I fear for their adolescence.
I also have a one year old niece who is immediately becoming a PP once she gets out of onesies and into big girl clothes.
[Reply]
[...] “Mattel, I Am Seething” post by colleague Melissa Wardy, parent of a 6-year old girl who has watched the toddler high [...]
I read this letter online last night and was haunted with worries about my own daughter. I didn’t even know about Monster High Dolls before I read your letter. What else don’t I know about? Are we sending her the right messages? Is she hearing them? Having been impressed with your explanation of family values to your six year old girl, I awoke this morning and, while cuddling with my 4 year old daughter in bed before starting the day, tentatively gauged her temperature on the issue.
ME: Sophia, tell me, what is more important? How your body looks to other people or how your thoughts and ideas sound?
SOPHIA: Neither, Mommy. What’s important is how kind you are to others.
Well then…I guess the student has become the teacher.
[Reply]