Barbie’s dirty secret: she’s a material girl made of plastic!
LIVING DOLL: The new Barbie film, starring Ryan Gosling and Margot Robbie
And of course, as is driven home in the movie Barbie, the doll can be anything she wants to be, from presidential candidate to astronaut to McDonalds worker (because Barbie is no snob.)
It’s as if feminists have achieved the apotheosis of their influence on culture now that Barbie can be all things to all women.
All the fuss about the film – which I admittedly enjoyed – has led to reams of coverage about how empowering Barbie is to young girls and how in tune with the zeitgeist this doll is. (Even if she is at peak commercial status, raking in the bucks for the people behind the movie, not to mention the pink merchandise she’s helping to flog).
The ageless doll represents the acceptable face of feminism among the not-so-radical, who don’t get upset at just what a commercial swizz the whole Barbie phenomenon represents.
Barbie is that very nice kind of modern woman (sorry, girl) who proves that the old idea that you couldn’t be a feminist and wear make-up or be blonde or feminine is so over.
What a Goddess send she is. Barbie, trussed up in pink, is having her cake and eating it.
Not that we see much in the way of Barbie scoffing food. Funnily enough, the film hints that all is not well with Barbie when her beaker of milk turns out to be sour and her breakfast waffle is burnt.
She also notices that, instead of being permanently on tip-toes, her feet have gone flat. Cue, lots of hysteria (in a knowingly ironic kind of way.)
And then there’s some very dark stuff when Barbie undergoes something of an existential crisis when strange thoughts assail her; thoughts about death and cellulite. (Could it get any worse?)
In a world where body-shaming is not supposed to be acceptable any more, it’s interesting that an American mental health organisation, Rehabs, analysed Barbie’s anatomy. It concluded that if Barbie was a real woman, she would be forced to walk on all fours and that her waist could only accommodate “half a liver and a few inches of intestine”.
That was back in 2014. While Barbie is still available in her long-legged version with tiny waist and full bust, she can also be short and have wide hips. What’s not to applaud?
Well, what about the elephant in the room? The actual materiality of Barbie is deeply problematic. She is made from plastic, as are her accessories such as cars and houses and yachts and whatever else a capitalist doll desires.
Plastic, as we all know, is a pollutant. How can this be overlooked in the hype surrounding Barbie?
Sorry to be a party pooper (and with respect to the pink fishnet tights-wearing teens, I spotted queuing for tickets at the Gate Cinema with their admirable sense of occasion) but there’s nothing fantastic about a plastic doll.
The reality is that many plastic toys are made out of fossil fuels as well as various chemical additives.
Items made of plastic release toxicity, which are easily inhaled and ingested. They can lead to eye, nose and throat irritation as well as organ damage and nausea. They are said to be potentially carcinogenic.
What to do about Barbie? The movie has ignited a surge in sales of the dolls and accessories. The day a Margot Robbie (the actress playing Barbie) version of the doll went on sale, it became the number-one selling doll on Amazon.
The doll is a pollutant, like an awful lot else in your kids’ toy box. But plastic producers haven’t been transparent about the toxicity of their products.
Mattel, the company that makes Barbie, says that it is working towards a “goal of 100% recycled, recyclable or bio-based plastic materials in both products and packaging by 2030”.
One can’t help wondering how many more seabirds will have to die in the meantime, so that Barbie can live?
App?
