Finally, Barbie Goes the Big "A"

"No pants to be ready for surprise orgies"????

Um, so is that what atheists do?

brokenfingers said:

"No pants to be ready for surprise orgies"????

Um, so is that what atheists do?

Click to expand...

Sadly, yes. And you know she's packing at least six types of birth control in that shoulder bag, the slut.

The no pants thing was funny, but the best part is the bag with the baby in it labeled as lunch.

Just the other day I was thinking that Mattel does quite well separating church and barbie. Barbie has been many things, but never clergy.

Barbie has been many things, but never clergy.

Click to expand...

An idea whose time has come.

according to that chart Atheist are also horny cannibals.

Run for your lives.

Or stick around just to see what happens.

Thanks, Ted.

I feel the Power now, all right:

When it comes to indy Barbies I think fetish models outnumber clergy by about 1000 to one or more....

On the whole I think a better job could have been done on the atheist barbie rather than a recycled atheists-are-pretentious-and-promiscuious trope.

Silver King said:

Thanks, Ted.

I feel the Power now, all right:

Click to expand...

church attendance certainly would rise, don't 'cha think?

Course, for those who didn't want to go all the way to church just to look at her pretty face could go play with atheist Barbie, who seems to be up for just about anything.

I've always wondered why Barbs has such impossibly small feet. Do you suppose they were bound in the old Japanese custom when she was just a small doll?

@Ted: I get that. I just think it is an unimaginative response. The Christian barbie is sincerely intended and nicely made. The atheist response is knee jerk and sarcastic. I think that puts us 1/nil down, personally.

Silver King said:

I've always wondered why Barbs has such impossibly small feet. Do you suppose they were bound in the old Japanese custom when she was just a small doll?

Click to expand...

if BIG feet were commonly accepted as more sexy, then they'd be big...

Cella said:

if BIG feet were commonly accepted as more sexy, then they'd be big...

Click to expand...

Long, skinny giraffe-necks must be sexy then.

(Scary Image: Forbes.com, showing a normal model visually distorted to Barbie proportions)

I don't think that her feet are small, but her legs have grown improbably long for them. And then there's that ringless karen-tribe neck she has, and the fact that she has no room in her thorax for a liver... I've never really understood why this is a shape we'd want in our mythology. It doesn't look like a standard of health, fitness or beauty to me. Perhaps there are some practical, toy-based reasons for it, but I'm unclear.

veinglory said:

@Ted: I get that. I just think it is an unimaginative response. The Christian barbie is sincerely intended and nicely made. The atheist response is knee jerk and sarcastic. I think that puts us 1/nil down, personally.

Click to expand...

Unimaginative yes. But in all sincerity, an "atheist" barbie couldn't ever exist, without reducing atheism to some sort of external quality. Even as a spoof, though, it could have been done better.

And while Mattel is a good target for almost every type of pop culture critique--they have never said or implied that Barbia is religious or church going that I can recall.

Perhaps there are some practical, toy-based reasons for it, but I'm unclear.

Click to expand...

As a former little girl, I think that there are. The doll's proportions serve the same end skeletal models do--showing off clothes, which is a big part of Barbie play. Of course, it would be far healthier to promote positive body image in kids by molding Barbie in the proportions of Jane Everywoman, but then the toy wouldn't look as cute wearing the wedding gown, the apres-ski outfit, the Malibu beach romper, the pink prom strapless, etc. All sold separately.

Whether Mattel should create an Eating Disordered or a Rehab Barbie (pull the string in her back, kids, she says "No! No! No!") is left as an exercise for the reader.

Barbie is a skinny teenager wearing high heels, a corset and a padded bra. Her proportions are perfectly realistic for that scenario. Don't know about the neck though. Maybe it's a manufacturing issue.

Larger and more naturally proportioned feet would be more inclined to snap off too. the leg reinforcement ends mid calf (as i learned in my childhood exercises in vivisection).

What about a "full Heidi" model with adjustable shape?

Barbie is a skinny teenager wearing high heels, a corset and a padded bra. Her proportions are perfectly realistic for that scenario.

Click to expand...

Given one of those Victorian whaleboned corsets that prohibited deep breathing and a particularly munificently padded bra, yes.

Actually, her chest to hip ratio is not outrageous. I had a breast reduction three years ago, but before that, my chest to hip numbers were way past Barbie's. It's the waist that's not reasonable. It may be that the waist size is a function of the joint they use, but it's still doable with a Victorian or Edwardian corset. I'd call it an Edwardian, not a Victorian corset though, because she doesn't have that leaning forward, bottom out look Victorian's went for. It's a waist cinch, and, yes, she's got it down really tight, and it would be steel, not whale bone. Apparently she's 5'6", and 39-21-33. If her "real" measurements were 39-27-33, then she'd be, well, me, when I was younger.

her neck has to be long so that when your bother pulls her head off, you have a substantial enough nub to reattach it to.