Vote 2020 graphic
Everything you need to know about and expect during
the most important election of our lifetimes

Barbie Design Boss Explains Doll's Ludicrous Measurements

Illustration for article titled Barbie Design Boss Explains Dolls Ludicrous Measurements

For years, Barbie has been the go-to example of the ways our culture teaches girls to strive toward unrealistic beauty standards. Well, the brand's VP of design has finally responded to the critics. She counters that the realism isn't the point—the doll's design is mostly about making tiny clothes that actually fit.

Advertisement

Fast Company visited Mattel recently and sat down with Kim Culmone, who defends Barbie's proportions as a practical decision: "Barbie's body was never designed to be realistic. She was designed for girls to easily dress and undress," she said, explaining:

So to get the clean lines of fashion at Barbie's scale, you have to use totally unrealistic proportions?

You do! Because if you're going to take a fabric that's made for us, and turn a seam for a cuff or on the body, her body has to be able to accommodate how the clothes will fit her.

Advertisement

Having spent years working rubber dolls into garish zebra-stripe minidresses, I'm skeptical that the tiny waist and improbably large tits are helpful, much less necessary. Plus, the ability to make properly fitting doll clothes shouldn't outweigh the possible impact on girls. But Ms. Culmone doesn't think kids actually compare themselves to Barbie:

Girls view the world completely differently than grown-ups do. They don't come at it with the same angles and baggage and all that stuff that we do. Clearly, the influences for girls on those types of issues, whether it's body image or anything else, it's proven*, it's peers, moms, parents, it's their social circles.

When they're playing, they're playing. It's a princess-fairy-fashionista-doctor-astronaut, and that's all one girl. She's taking her Corvette to the moon, and her spaceship to the grocery store. that is literally how girls play.

Obviously, it's not just Barbie teaching girls to be preoccupied with their appearance. And maybe in a perfect world, you could hand a five-year-old a Barbie and she'd understand she's holding a caricature, no more a real-world objective than Minnie Mouse. But the evidence suggests that the doll, with her idealized figure, sends all the wrong signals.

Culmone's best argument is that Barbie's been around for more than 50 years, and they want to keep the doll consistent enough that moms can hand their own dolls and accessories down to their daughters. As someone who grew up playing with her mom's exquisite mid-60s doll clothes (made by my great-grandmother!), I'm sympathetic. But sometimes heirlooms aren't worth the accompanying baggage.

Advertisement

And it seems parents have caught on—Barbie sales have hit the skids over the last year. If only there were alternatives beyond Monster High dolls.

Photo via Getty

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

weetzie
It'sTheGayChemicals

Maybe it's just the way I was raised, but I never compared myself to Barbie. She was just the same as Minnie Mouse, except that she was cooler than Minnie Mouse because instead of being second fiddle to Mickey, she could go off and be whoever the fuck she wanted to be. I don't think she teaches girls to get caught up with appearances, so much as she teaches girls to play around with shit. Careers, personalities, weird ass outfits and hairstyles.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Moms, watch how you talk about yourself in front of your kids. Girls soak that shit up like a sponge. You want to find the source of little, prepubescent girls going on diets and thinking they need make up, designer clothes, etc? Look at how their moms behave. Mummy going on a diet, talking about how fat and ugly she is... that's where kids learn it from. Not Barbie.