Recently I noticed a trend in toys industry that still didn’t caught interest in media and newspapers. Over the decades, toys have increased in size, putting the emphasis on muscles and curves. Although I don’t know much about barbie dolls, I recognized the great difference in the look of 1950s Barbie and 2012 Barbie. Lets analyze the picture below.

1950s Barbie
                  1950s Barbie                                                                          2012 Barbie
Old Barbie looks classy, elegant and natural. No special importance is put on her body constitution. New Barbie, on the other side, promotes the significance of… well, different attributes. Such new trend is not only reserved for girl toys. Similar thing is happening with our favorite Action Man. On the left is picture of Action Man from 1978 and on the right is the picture of new 2012 Action Man.
1978 Action Man

             1978 Action Man                                                                  2012 Action Man
Clearly, the new action man has visited the gym few times, and by the look of his arm veins I believe he experimented a bit with steroids too. What is the reason behind such dramatic change in physical proportions of modern toys? Are we sending a wrong message to our kids that play with those toys every day? Are we creating the wrong standards for socially acceptable appearance? Naw, here is my modest suggestion.

We should all continue to impose the societal standards for fake breasts and huge muscles to our young children. Why stop there? We should create even bigger and less natural toys, so that kids have what to strive for. Parents should force their sons to start going at the gym when they are 10 years old. That way the kids are not going to be at home much and they will have a nice hobby in the free time. Of course, the use of steroids in the early age is highly recommended. Not only the kids would be buffed in no time but they would look so much like their action figures. Plus, we all know how kids usually have no energy and they just sit quietly in the room all day. Now think of them on steroids, they would be piece of cake to handle. We would actually do favor to the parents around the world. Oh, speaking of favors around the world, I’m sure Nike’s sweatshops in Indonesia could use more muscles on their underage workers.
Now why should boys have all the fun? After all, the new Barbies set a pretty high standards too. What more ethical thing the parents can do for their children than to schedule them appointment with the plastic surgeon. Talking about suitable presents, happy sweet thirteen with breast enlargement and liposuction. That way little girls will look similar to their favorite Barbie and they are granted to become more popular in elementary school.  In addition, their new floating devices would help them so much with swimming classes.
All in all, their are so many benefits for staying on this prosperous road of toys modification. I can’t possibly imagine why you wouldn’t agree with me. After all, what wrong can happen with altering children perception of real world in early stages of their development?

6 responses »

  1. Jordi says:

    I would like children who are much better looking and who can run the 40 yard dash in 4 seconds.

  2. Scout Berger says:

    It seems that most people have small parts about them that they would like to change; that is human nature. The media and toys like Barbie and GI-Joe set unreasonable standards that make human kind and children feel inadequate. Yes, as Jordi stated, it would be great to have better looking children that run the 40 yard dash in 4 seconds. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that argument. The question is how do you do this? It is a matter of approaching the subject in a healthy manner. Should a thirteen year old girl get breast implants? I would hope that most people would agree with me and say probably not. Who creates these impossible standards and what can we call too much? I don’t question that the media and toys can influence how children perceive themselves…I just wonder to what extent. I have a 12 year old brother that owns many macho male toys. I have never once thought that these toys have had an influence on him. Until a certain age, I believe that toys are just toys. However, as children reach their teenage years and young adult years that is when I think that the media and pictures (or even toys) can instill a message of dissatisfaction in individual’s brains. When girls walk into CVS they see a picture of a celebrity on the cover of the magazine rocking an awesome beach body; it seems only natural for these days for girls to then curse their most recent ice cream trip to The Freeze. While I don’t think that toys really have a significant influence on children, perhaps they spark children’s self awareness at a young age which eventually develops as they get older.

    • Zach says:

      I would have to agree with you that 13 year old girls should not be getting breast implants; that would be illegal. Having said that, when looking at these action figures and dolls, as well as quality TV such as the Jersey Shore, I think it is pretty clear that the “natural” look is nearing the end of its life as a socially acceptable fad. I could definitely see the trend going the way of Bell Bottom jeans; a skeleton in the closet that you don’t really want anyone to remember or know about.

    • Hannah says:

      Getting breast implants isn’t the only thing that is being addressed here though. Yeah, the most noticeable different between the 1950s barbie and the present day barbie was that she is bigger in certain areas, but her teeny tiny waste size also remained the same. A lot of people can’t control some things about their body, but girls can (to some extent) control the size of their waist and whether or not they have defined abs. Looking up to Barbie may inspire girls to remain skinny and healthy, and would perhaps decrease obesity in our country.

  3. Marko says:

    Yeah, I agree with all three of you. To see a kid who can run 40 yard dash in 4 seconds would be both amazing and entertaining. Also, it would be interesting to see his dad trying to catch him up in the park and bring him back home. Considering Scout’s comment, I do agree that sometimes toys can be just toys, but toys can also influence kids perception of the real world. Think about how much hours per day they spend with those toys. I would feel more comfortable if my (future) kid can play with the toys that doesn’t look like they just had Dr. Jekyll’s potion. Zach, speaking of Jersey Shore, they probably have Jersey Shore Action Figures in WallMart. What are we waiting for?

  4. […] Most anti-Mr. Rogers goes to “Kids on Steroids”–Marko […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s