When I think of being in elementary school again, I imagine myself learning cursive, memorizing timetables, playing kickball at recess, and having backyard play-dates with my best friends after school. The important things on my mind were the newly released Beanie Babies I had to have and what snacks I could trade with my friends to get those fruit roll-ups my mom never bought.
These days kids have more on their minds than just stuffed animals and math problems though.
A study of 261 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders assessed the children's view of their current body shape.
The results found that over 50% of the children reported they were "dissatisfied" with their current body shape.
(Skemp-Arlt, 2006)
41.8% of those children wanted to be thinner. Almost half of the surveyed 8-11 year-olds didn't like the way they looked and wanted to lose body weight.
There's no other way for me to describe these statistics other than to say that those numbers just make me sad. When kids are growing up, starting to get a sense of the world and gaining life experience, it is heartbreaking to know that part of their social education is learning that their bodies just aren't good enough.
So what's the relevance between children's body dissatisfaction and Barbie?
According to a journal article published in the American Psychological Association, there definitely is a correlation between Barbie and young girls' low self-esteem.
The journal article was titled "Does Barbie Make Girls Want to be Thin? The Effect of Experimental Exposure to Images of Dolls on the Body Image of 5-8 Year Old Girls." Check out the link to read more about the study.
162 girls were exposed to Barbie dolls, Emme Dolls (a size 16 doll,) or no dolls at all (this was the control of the experiment.) After the girls viewed the dolls, the girls took a test to assess their body image self-esteem.
The results of the assessments were very conclusive:
"Girls exposed to Barbie reported lower body esteem and greater desire for a thinner body shape than girls in the other exposure conditions."
The study further suggests that early exposure to dolls exhibiting an unrealistically thin body ideal may damage girls' body image, which would contribute to an increased risk of eating disorders and weight issues.
(Dittmar, 2006)
It seems pretty clear that there are body-image issues plauging children and their self-esteem these days. It also seems pretty clear that a certain plastic doll might have something to do with these image issues too. So, Mattel, the evidence is against you, can we please stop pretending that Barbie isn't contributing to the problem?
(Dittmar, Helga et al. 2006. "Does Barbie Make Girls Want to be Thin?..." American Psychological Association, Journals Department. vol. 42-2; 283-292.)
(Skemp-Arlt, Karen et al. 2006. "Body image dissatisfaction among third, fourth, and fifth grade children." California Journal of Health Promotion. vol. 4-3; 58-67.)
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Not My Size Barbie
Roughly 80% of women in America are dissatisfied with their appearance.
Out of ten of your girl friends, eight of them don't like the way they look. My roommate is one of them, my boss is one of them, my sister is one of them, my mother is one of them, I am one of them. And why do we hate our own appearances? Because we are constantly being told our own bodies aren't the desired prototypes of female beauty. What is the "ideal" female body type? Barbie, of course. Barbie has the body we all wish we had. She is precisely what women want their bodies to look like. She is the model of perfection.
And here's why she shouldn't be:
The average American woman age 22-32 is 5'4" and weighs 140 pounds. She has a 37" bust, a 29" waist, and 40" hips.
If Barbie was a real person, at a height of 5'6" she would have a 30" bust, an extraordinarily small 20" waist, and 29" hips. Even super-skinny Victoria Beckham has at least a 23" waist.
Check out this article from BBC to get a visual idea of what Barbie's proportions would look like on a real human being, and read about the body proportion stats mentioned in the blog.
Not only would Barbie's proportions make her taller and skinnier than most women in the world, but if she was a real human she would not even have the 17% body fat necessary to menstruate. Also, her legs are 50% longer than her arms. The average woman's legs are only 20% longer than her arms.
If Barbie's proportions were applied to a woman's body, the woman would have to increase her height by 24 inches, increase her bust by 5 inches, reduce her waist by 6 inches, and lengthen her neck by 3 inches to attain a Barbie's body.
(Brownell, K.1995. Distorting reality for children: Body size proportions for Barbie and Ken Dolls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 18, 295-298.)
Here's another visual representation comparing average women and barbie from teen-beauty-tips.com. Slightly different measurements but the same idea.
So let's recap:
Barbie's human dimensions basically give her a waist 9 inches smaller than the average woman, hips 11 inches smaller than the average woman, 30% longer legs than the average woman, and a lack of body fat that would classify her as clinically underweight.
It is possible that one in 100,000 women could have the potential body proportions to have the same body shape as Barbie, So is her body type impossible? No, but it's extremely rare. The important point to understand is that achieving this body type for any woman is extremely unhealthy.
So my question for Mattel and Mr. Dickson is why would Barbie be marketed as a role model with a body type that is virtually unattainable for most women and is blatantly unhealthy? Considering Mattel is very aware of how influential and iconic Barbie is, why would they market their doll, who is the epitome of beauty and something that women try and model themselves after, as this image that will never be possible for almost any woman to ever achieve?
Mattel, stop pretending Barbie is just a plastic toy, she represents much more than just a child's plaything and females of all ages realize that. Give Barbie realistic body dimensions and make her body something that women can attempt to look like without having to starve or liposuction themselves to death.
Out of ten of your girl friends, eight of them don't like the way they look. My roommate is one of them, my boss is one of them, my sister is one of them, my mother is one of them, I am one of them. And why do we hate our own appearances? Because we are constantly being told our own bodies aren't the desired prototypes of female beauty. What is the "ideal" female body type? Barbie, of course. Barbie has the body we all wish we had. She is precisely what women want their bodies to look like. She is the model of perfection.
And here's why she shouldn't be:
The average American woman age 22-32 is 5'4" and weighs 140 pounds. She has a 37" bust, a 29" waist, and 40" hips.
If Barbie was a real person, at a height of 5'6" she would have a 30" bust, an extraordinarily small 20" waist, and 29" hips. Even super-skinny Victoria Beckham has at least a 23" waist.
Check out this article from BBC to get a visual idea of what Barbie's proportions would look like on a real human being, and read about the body proportion stats mentioned in the blog.
Not only would Barbie's proportions make her taller and skinnier than most women in the world, but if she was a real human she would not even have the 17% body fat necessary to menstruate. Also, her legs are 50% longer than her arms. The average woman's legs are only 20% longer than her arms.
If Barbie's proportions were applied to a woman's body, the woman would have to increase her height by 24 inches, increase her bust by 5 inches, reduce her waist by 6 inches, and lengthen her neck by 3 inches to attain a Barbie's body.
(Brownell, K.1995. Distorting reality for children: Body size proportions for Barbie and Ken Dolls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 18, 295-298.)
Here's another visual representation comparing average women and barbie from teen-beauty-tips.com. Slightly different measurements but the same idea.
So let's recap:
Barbie's human dimensions basically give her a waist 9 inches smaller than the average woman, hips 11 inches smaller than the average woman, 30% longer legs than the average woman, and a lack of body fat that would classify her as clinically underweight.
It is possible that one in 100,000 women could have the potential body proportions to have the same body shape as Barbie, So is her body type impossible? No, but it's extremely rare. The important point to understand is that achieving this body type for any woman is extremely unhealthy.
So my question for Mattel and Mr. Dickson is why would Barbie be marketed as a role model with a body type that is virtually unattainable for most women and is blatantly unhealthy? Considering Mattel is very aware of how influential and iconic Barbie is, why would they market their doll, who is the epitome of beauty and something that women try and model themselves after, as this image that will never be possible for almost any woman to ever achieve?
Mattel, stop pretending Barbie is just a plastic toy, she represents much more than just a child's plaything and females of all ages realize that. Give Barbie realistic body dimensions and make her body something that women can attempt to look like without having to starve or liposuction themselves to death.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Let Kids Be Kids, Give Them Back Their Toys
"My thighs are too big."
"My stomach is too fat."
"I wish my boobs were bigger."
Considering the bombardment of beauty images women are faced with everyday, hearing body image complaints such as these from women really isn't all that surprising. What is shocking is the sad reality that children as young as six years old are saying the same things about their own bodies. Young children in this country are already wired to be dissatisfied with their tiny, undeveloped bodies. They resent their bodies for not looking just like the "perfectly sculpted image of female beauty," before they even have a chance to grow into their adult figures.
It's impossible to pin-point one culprit responsible for poisoning women's minds with the message of body inferiority, there are too many companies out there targeting women's insecurities to determine which one sends the worst messages. The messages are everywhere at all times, and the fact is that children are going to absorb negative body image messages in TV, movies, magazines, and on the Internet. There is just no way to censor everything a child is exposed to.
I can't pick a fight with every marketer that uses women's insecurities to sell them beauty products. That is an endless battle. What I can fight, and will fight, are companies that market body image values to children through their favorite and most cherished toys.
Mattel has been marketing Barbie to little girls since 1959. In fact, the perfect plastic doll recently celebrated her 50th anniversary, while miraculously maintaining the body features of a twenty-something year old supermodel. For 50 years, Barbie has been marketed as a little girl's best friend... someone to look up to. They do a good job convincing parents and children alike that Barbie is a necessary part of a young girl's childhood. Mattel markets this so-called "role model" that has a body type only attainable through countless plastic surgeries, an obsession with shopping and materialism, and exemplifies stereotypical female gender roles.
I implore Richard Dickson, general manager of Barbie and senior vice president of Mattel, to rethink the company's marketing practices of the influential brand, Barbie. It's time to take responsibility for the impact the brand has on children's self-esteem, and stop marketing beauty values to an easily influenced and emotionally malleable target audience. Let kids be kids and create their own perceptions and opinions, and stop telling them what's important to strive for. Stop telling children how to look, what to buy, and stop teaching them that narcissism, fixation on outer appearances, and consumerism equates happiness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)