Scheme to give Barbie dolls to primary school children

[ArabeIIaScott]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/21/scheme-to-give-barbie-dolls-to-150000-children-is-alarming/

'Primary school scheme is ‘gender stereotyping’ and ‘stealth marketing’ by Mattel, experts say'

'Mattell's "Barbie School of Friendship" programme, in which free dolls are given for children to carry out role play exercises, has been rolled out to 700 schools across the UK, "with the potential to reach more than 150,000 pupils", according to the company.'

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230720/Mattel-accused-of-stealth-marketing-after-giving-away-free-Barbie-dolls-to-schools.aspx

'experts have criticized the programme, raising questions about potential negative effects of Barbie dolls in terms of gender stereotyping, questioning the use of research to justify the programme, and asking whether companies should be able to freely market their products through schools."The project makes me suspicious that it may be exploitative", said Philippa Perry'

I imagine there are many thousands of families who would be delighted to receive a free doll.

Not much expansion in the article of the headline reference to the unrealistic body ideals of Barbie, or the regressive stereotypes of the dolls' outfits, accessories or narratives.

Which I've been slightly surprised to have seen absolutely no evidence of in the recent relentless push of the new Barbie movie.

Well by that logic, maybe schools should hand out free cans of Coke; I imagine there are thousands of families who would be delighted to receive free soft drinks.

I think there are benefits (social, verbal) to encouraging role play over screens. And kids who've been given devices in the high chair or buggy won't pick up the skills for creative play unprompted

Just what schools need lots of plastic Barbie dolls! Id have Hated that as a kid. But then I hated dolls full stop

But a can of Coke would have been gratefully received!

Are they only giving dolls to girls and not to boys? Or are they not using any Ken dolls? Really don't see the issue here from a feminist perspective, although obviously any private businesses benefiting from an impressionable captive audience is a bit questionable.

ArabeIIaScott · Today 09:21
MrsSkylerWhite · Today 09:19

I imagine there are many thousands of families who would be delighted to receive a free doll.
Well by that logic, maybe schools should hand out free cans of Coke; I imagine there are thousands of families who would be delighted to receive free soft drinks”

Coke is banned in most schools. Toys generally aren’t.

I'm sure there are thousands of families who would like any kind of free corporate goodies. Still doesn't mean it's acceptable to turn schools into their free marketing arm.

Yes to this

I think the dolls are for the schools not individual kids? I really can't see the issue if there's a number of options for children to choose and one of them is playing with dolls.

I've seen 4 kids through pre school to secondary spanning the last 30 years and I don't think I've ever seen Barbie or Barbie type dolls as part of the classroom.

Obviously this is just anecdotal and It's not like I've been in every setting but I've been in a lot.

Dolls as part of classroom play have been the baby/toddler type dolls that live in the 'home corner' set ups. Or the lego/playmobil sort of 'dolls' also used for imaginative play.

I'm sure its just a complete coincidence they did this just as the Barbie movie is released.

The amount of marketing is insane

My IG has Barbie in so many feeds, fashion etc

Mattel have been working hard at this. Last year The Guardian ran an article promoting some research that found playing with dolls improved relationship skills. We discussed it on FWR. That research was sponsored by Barbie’s maker, Mattel (and it wasn’t very robust). And I’m pretty sure MN did a sponsored Q&A with a psychologist who was basically promoting this idea that kids should play with Barbie to develop empathy skills (I can’t find it to link to now but I recall posting a bunch of questions asking about Barbie’s historical, sexist messaging.)

Various colours and shapes of dolls and in both sexes in the same amount with accessories would be gratefully accepted in most schools.

This current Barbie ( the film out now) craze is very strange......and so regressive. What on earth is going on? Yes, it is no doubt a marketing ploy by the makers of the doll, but at the same time that the big corporations have been taken over by gender ideology and are marketing that too.

The whole thing is giving me shivers.

I think care has to be taken accepting commercial products into schools, on the other hand, I think if it was something like tinker toys, we wouldn't really hear this complaint.

I am fairly b;ase about Barbies, despite it all, in my observation playing with Barbies in no way prevents girls growing up to understand sex stereotypes or women's issues.

And I do think that "adult" type dolls offer the chance for play that is totally different to baby dolls. But of course there are a number of options for that.

The dolls are designed to solidify very certain images and stereotypes in the developing minds of young children. The market has always used TV advertising to influence children ( unless you only permit the BBC); but to my mind this is a step even further into brand and product placement. I don't like it at all.

There is also the fact that Mattel and Disney work side by side in furthering their own interests. Personally find Disney responsible for so much of the gender streotyping that we have been witnessing, and which has been on the increase since the late 1980's. Disney is so influential and powerful, and some children are brought up on a diet of it, and for them Disney is their childhood.

I don't have a problem with the gender stereo side of this, to me it's the other side of the let toys be toys coin. Every child should be free to play the traditionally boy coaded football, lego etc, but equally every child should be free to play dolls, home corner and other toys traditionally associated with girls.

Removing the 'girl' option doesn't make things equal, but making both options accessible and equally encouraged to all is (I think) a step in the right direction.

The marketing thing is questionable, but I would have thought most school would unbox and dispose of packaging before putting in the classroom. As a parallel I'm sure sports brands have been donating pe equipment to schools for years without anyone raising objections, how and why is this different?

I'm sure there are thousands of families who would like any kind of free corporate goodies. Still doesn't mean it's acceptable to turn schools into their free marketing arm.

Yep

I don't have a problem with the gender stereo side of this, to me it's the other side of the let toys be toys coin. Every child should be free to play the traditionally boy coaded football, lego etc, but equally every child should be free to play dolls, home corner and other toys traditionally associated with girls.

Of course all children should be as free to play with dolls as they are with toy cars. But Barbie dolls are in themselves heavily sterotyped - they aren't 'generic people' dolls.

As a parallel I'm sure sports brands have been donating pe equipment to schools for years without anyone raising objections, how and why is this different?

They probably have. But one basketball is much like another - most won't notice the brand stamp - whereas a Barbie is instantly recognisable. It the difference between Blue Peter talking about covering everything in Fablon, or covering everything in 'sticky backed plastic'. (More so - Barbie isn’t just a brand, it's a BRAND. Instantly recognisable and very heavily enforced.)

And a set of agility cones or a hockey stick don't promote an unrealistic (physically impossible) body image.

I never played with Barbie as a child and as an adult I used to look at her as a regressive stereotype doll. But My DS got really into her as a preschooler and I've changed my mind. He thought she was cool as she had loads of jobs and puppies. He mainly liked her little sister Chelsea the best as he said she was clever and a funny kind of naughty. I came to see her as a fun, mainly positive role model for kids, one that enhanced my son's view of girls and women as real, interesting people. And Barbie, Life in the Dreamhouse, is genuinely hilarious.

If it encourages role play and opens communication skills them I'm all for it

Life is going to be so insufferably boring soon. Barbie has all sorts of jobs, now comes in different shapes and colours and Ken is...just Ken. The state of the toys at most primary schools I'm sure most will be grateful for free toys, perhaps you can donate some you deem as acceptable if you like OP, I'm sure they'll be as equally well recieved.