NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,383642,00.html

Must be because she's so rich. That's what happens when you own ten mansions, a hundred cars...

Dude, I totally saw this coming, like, 5 years ago.

Wait a minute, Barbie in a bikini is not "sexually suggestive," but Barbie in a motorcycle jacket is?

I am so very confused.

Wait a minute, Barbie in a bikini is not "sexually suggestive," but Barbie in a motorcycle jacket is?

I am so very confused.

That's nothing. I heard she was out clubbing with the gay Teletubby.

Wait a minute, Barbie in a bikini is not "sexually suggestive," but Barbie in a motorcycle jacket is?

I am so very confused.

Kids that ride motorcycles bring down property- I mean are disturbed sexual deviants. Don't you remember the 1950s?

Kids that ride motorcycles bring down property- I mean are disturbed sexual deviants. Don't you remember the 1950s?

You know, I do have vague memories of the 1950s - wasn't that the time when someone created a wildly popular doll in a low-cut, strapless bathing suit with impossibly huge breasts, a tiny waist, and spike heels? She totally wasn't sexually suggestive, though.

http://imagehost.auctionwatch.com/preview/zo/zoilacastilla/1SwimsuitBarbie.jpg

Nope, that is a nice, modest totally unsexy doll right there.

I'd totally buy my kid that barbie doll.

Compare this:
http://imagehost.auctionwatch.com/preview/zo/zoilacastilla/1SwimsuitBarbie.jpg

with this:
http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00531/SNN1623F-280_531780a.jpg

You don't know the history of Barbie, do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild_Lilli_doll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbie

And it IS a depiction of Black Canary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Canary

Nope, that is a nice, modest totally unsexy doll right there.

I would argue that it's a different kind of sexy. I mean, there's a sophisticated kind of sexy, and then there's skanky, or whorish, or in this case, kinky. I mean, don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the female body that needs to be hidden from children, but I don't particularly think they need to be exposed to kinky.

Well the company makes a point that it's based off a DC superhero that was featured on a children's TV show. Although then again I don't think she had fishnets. Although I would say that they are being a bit harsh, but then again...Barbie IS evil. She's physically impossible and horrifyingly ugly when put into real life dimentions. I mean you shouldn't give a barbie to a little girl PERIOD, so she doesn't end up anorexic or other evil body imagine issues.

I would argue that it's a different kind of sexy. I mean, there's a sophisticated kind of sexy, and then there's skanky, or whorish, or in this case, kinky. I mean, don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the female body that needs to be hidden from children, but I don't particularly think they need to be exposed to kinky.

I just kinda think "Barbie is sexually suggestive!" is an analogous statement to "The Pope is Catholic!"

And, for that matter, is this one a "sophisticated kind of sexy"? (This is the third result on a Google image search for "Barbie doll," just to be clear that I didn't hunt down any particular Barbie.)

http://www.sadiestoybox.com/img/productImages/Beach%20Fun%20Barbie%20blonde%20J0709.jpg

A fetish doll without nipples or genitalia? Pffft..... How tame.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,383642,00.html

Must be because she's so rich. That's what happens when you own ten mansions, a hundred cars...

well...My first thought was..thats hot, lol...then, thats pointless...then i read it was opposed by religious groups...

Now i want to defend Barbie to the death, lol...

I just kinda think "Barbie is sexually suggestive!" is an analogous statement to "The Pope is Catholic!"

And, for that matter, is this one a "sophisticated kind of sexy"? (This is the third result on a Google image search for "Barbie doll," just to be clear that I didn't hunt down any particular Barbie.)

I'd call her more cute than sexy. She looks 16 or 17ish, and I wouldn't particularly describe any 16 or 17 year old girl as sexy. Hot, good looking, attractive, fuckable even, but not sexy.

The bathing suit, though, looks fashionable, I guess. Like something you would see at the mall and go "OHMYGAWD, THIS IS LIKE, SO TOTALLY CUTE! I can like totally wear this to the sorority beach trip this weekend!" As opposed to the fishnet outfit, which looks mostly like Hells Angels Barbie, with a good bit of Working the Corner Barbie. And maybe a hint of The Safety Word is Purple Barbie.

I'd call her more cute than sexy. She looks 16 or 17ish, and I wouldn't particularly describe any 16 or 17 year old girl as sexy. Hot, good looking, attractive, fuckable even, but not sexy.

The bathing suit, though, looks fashionable, I guess. Like something you would see at the mall and go "OHMYGAWD, THIS IS LIKE, SO TOTALLY CUTE! I can like totally wear this to the sorority beach trip this weekend!" As opposed to the fishnet outfit, which looks mostly like Hells Angels Barbie, with a good bit of Working the Corner Barbie. And maybe a hint of The Safety Word is Purple Barbie.

I just don't see it as some sort of radical departure from Barbies past. To be clear, I don't think a Barbie in fishnets and leather is a particularly great toy for a small child, but I've never thought any Barbie is a particularly great toy for a small child, given that she's always been ridiculously proportioned and obviously designed to be "sexy." (And don't even get me started on the infamous "Math class is hard!" Barbie...)

Out of curiosity, though - objectively, why is a Barbie in fishnets and leather more sexual than a Barbie in Daisy Dukes and a super-low-cut bikini top? The latter quite obviously shows more skin, after all.

I thought barbies were great as a small child...I mean, without them, who're the action figures gonna save, guys? thats just gay, lmfao...

I thought barbies were great as a small child...I mean, without them, who're the action figures gonna save, guys? thats just gay, lmfao...

Well, you could always go with these (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE6D9143EF932A05751C1A965958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1) dolls... :-p

Barbie is a lesbian now :confused:

Well, you could always go with these (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE6D9143EF932A05751C1A965958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1) dolls... :-p

Interesting!

I like guerilla activity like that, but I think they went about it wrong. Swapping the voices of GI Joe and Barbie is clever work which speaks for itself (as well as a crime: anyone who speaks as the perpetrator of it is immediately discredited.) I think a lot of kids would actually keep their "malfunctioning" dolls to get a laugh from friends, and the story would get a much bigger effect if the subversives weren't openly doing it for a publicity stunt. It should have been left as a mystery.

As to the kids being "victims of terrorism" because their doll didn't do what they expected it to do -- pfah! Toys do far too much nowdays anyway, they're supposed to be a vehicle for the kid's imagination, not a little role-model robot.

Barbie is a lesbian now :confused:

I've seen girls like that. I just assumed they were fun-loving types who had the leathers on in case they saw a nice motorbike to steal, and the fishnet stockings in case they got hungry in the vicinity of wild seafood.

Now you tell me that's some kind of lesbian symbolism? I'm disappointed.

To quote Thomas Dolby:

"If she's an airhead
it has to be said:
it was men made her that way
it was us made her that way
it was us made her that way..."

Wait a minute, Barbie in a bikini is not "sexually suggestive," but Barbie in a motorcycle jacket is?

I am so very confused.

Uh...I'm pretty sure it's the fishnets with no pants/skirt that they're upset about, not the jacket. I could be wrong.

the fishnet stockings in case they got hungry in the vicinity of wild seafood.

well duh :)

To quote Thomas Dolby:

"If she's an airhead
it has to be said:
it was men made her that way
it was us made her that way
it was us made her that way..."

Yeah, but Dolby is some kind of nerdy crypto-fascist.

And Barbie was designed by a woman.

Really, my main objections to Barbie isn't the hedonistic lifestyle implied by all her roles (some of them were working roles, after all) or even her bizarre proportions (she's a gender-role toy, all the "adult" characteristics are exaggerated) but the fact that she's a stiff and unresponsive doll. You don't hold her under the arms and wave her about fluidly, you pretty much pose her standing propped against something. It's for the kid (or adult ...) playing with the toy to make him/her look natural by not bending the joints in ways they shouldn't go. But Barbie can't bend in ways even an late-teen or adult (or whatever she is) would be able to. No wonder kids rip her head off ...

Yoga Barbie FTW!

Reason for this Barbie:

[In November 2002 a New York judge refused an injunction against the British-based artist Susanne Pitt, who had produced a doll called Dungeon Barbie in bondage clothing. Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated: "To the court's knowledge, there is no Mattel line of S&M Barbie."]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbie


lolz

Yeah, but Dolby is some kind of nerdy crypto-fascist. *snip*

You'll have to elaborate on that, as it's really way off as it reads.

You'll have to elaborate on that, as it's really way off as it reads.

The last song I remember of Thomas Dolby's was "She Blinded Me With Science" -- a lukewarm hit -- and it didn't impress me with its feminist values. He wore nerdy spectacles in the film clip, hence the "nerdy."

I was so little impressed, that I need your recommendation before I will do any further research into Thomas Dolby. Name a track, I'll go get it off my grey-legal, almost-free source of copyright audio.

No youtube links please. Just name a song which you commend. At least, the song you quoted from.

Reason for this Barbie:

[In November 2002 a New York judge refused an injunction against the British-based artist Susanne Pitt, who had produced a doll called Dungeon Barbie in bondage clothing. Judge Laura Taylor Swain stated: "To the court's knowledge, there is no Mattel line of S&M Barbie."]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbie


lolz

*awards triangular gold star for good research work*

The other two points? Nope, big joke there, deserved two posts. You lose one point for "bad punchline" (lolz) and one for "bad setup" (Reason for ...)

Study the classic skit comedy: A:Perplexing, B: Outraged, C: Wise-to-joke, A: Punchline.

A: Punchline doesn't work. Story of my life.

Really. There are unresolved issues around Barbie, from my own childhood.

And an exquisite half-hour trying in my clumsy, grown-up way to play Barbies with a little girl. No lecture, no essay, no half-hour of prostrate epiphany before stars or falling batshit ever taught me what I learnt that afternoon. That little girl taught me like it was my first day in school.

If I seem to dis-respect Barbie, please don't think I disrespect dolls. A doll is a child of children, it's the crux of choice in a life: "do I do as was done to me, or do I do as I would have done to me?"

I expand on my earlier point: dolls should not talk. Dolls should not have automated motions. You who have children (I am not so blessed): give your child a floppy but durable, vulnerable but fixable, primitive and simple doll. Not a fragile, frangible, fashionable piece of plastic. Not a 3-D manifestation of media, which communicates with the child in a moronic (70's AI) way, some dreary memes from the 50's. Enlivened only by the third dimension of apparent physical presence. What an insult! "Here, kid, it's better than what you see on the screen, because it is physical, it's three-dimensional, and you own it now because it's a present for you!" Fuck that.

I sit here, a grown-up boy, and think of the favourite toys of my childhood. The control-panel of my rocketship, the invulnerable Panzer which my older self set fire to with metholated spirits (I discovered air-power), the crazily-modified billycart I risked my own life on. I sit here, typing this up on the ultimate toy of my boyhood, a machine that does half my thinking for me ... and I say:

Children deserve real toys. They deserve toys they can put themselves inside, live through without having motions put to their limbs, words put to their mouths. They deserve (by symmetry, a less-human-being that they can impose their will on, as they are imposed apon) dolls and tools and thoughts they can command themselves. Lest they grow up always supplicants to the toy which is better because it is newer, which does what no toy has done before.

I'm well drunk, and I'm done. Thanks to any who wred all of the above. NSG is not my blog.-

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,383642,00.html

Must be because she's so rich. That's what happens when you own ten mansions, a hundred cars...

:eek:

I knew it!


I KNEW IT!

Barbie is a lesbian now :confused:

It made me think of Grace Jones

:eek:

I knew it!


I KNEW IT!

YES! Me too!

/me is really Remote Guppies, just an older nation restored, Guppies is no longer needed, and I shall be the one to replace him

Honestly, I can't really state that I'm upset with what Barbie has gone and done. I figured that it would come sooner or later. It's how they did it.

My message is not to Barbie, it is to the supplier of this look: DC.

*ahem*

What the F*&K?!?! I mean, seriously, what chaotice force of nature actually made you license out a cool as hell super-heroine to Barbie?!? ARE YOU INSANE?!?!?!

You've got The Dark Knight coming out (totally catching the mid-night show for that one). You've got a decent thing going with Smallville. Sinestro Corps War was a great success. 52 soared. Countdown is doing a damn fine job. Sure, Superman Returns wasn't exactly the box-office and super-hero film that the original was. But to go and mess it all up with this S*%T?! What happened, Starro get a hold of all of you?

The last song I remember of Thomas Dolby's was "She Blinded Me With Science" -- a lukewarm hit -- and it didn't impress me with its feminist values. He wore nerdy spectacles in the film clip, hence the "nerdy."

I was so little impressed, that I need your recommendation before I will do any further research into Thomas Dolby. Name a track, I'll go get it off my grey-legal, almost-free source of copyright audio.

No youtube links please. Just name a song which you commend. At least, the song you quoted from.

The song I quoted was "Airhead" from his 1988 release Aliens Ate My Buick. Dolby has been much more a force behind the scenes than as a popular artist. "Blinded" was far from lukewarm, but that doesn't matter. Popularity has never figured into my preference for a performer. Check out other tunes like "Hyperactive" (from 1984's The Flat Earth), "Silk Pyjamas" (from 1991's Astronauts and Heretics), and the soundtrack to The Gate to the Mind's Eye (http://odyssey3d.stores.yahoo.net/gatetomindseye.html).

I can't convince anyone of anything they'd rather not believe, but he's been a favorite of mine since 1981 ("One of Our Submarines") and has been a big factor in producing and engineering, building his own synths and making real music possible on cell phones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Dolby

Fulla > Barbie.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/125085306_c509d7fc47.jpg

Yes that's a real doll.

Fulla > Barbie.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/125085306_c509d7fc47.jpg

Yes that's a real doll.

She looks like Sherlock Holmes' next apprentice who will only stay one story.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,383642,00.html

Must be because she's so rich. That's what happens when you own ten mansions, a hundred cars...

If we have S&M Barbie now, there's only a matter of months before we have a Prostitute Barbie.

Wait... do we have a whore Barbie already? Am I behind the times? I'm gonna suffer a nervous breakdown!!

Creepy man... Just creepy.