First autistic Barbie doll launched with sensory-sensitive features

[UFO]

Back in 90s the media began to be more sensitive about minorities. Gay people got more representation both in movies and in tv: In tv-shows "compulsory quota homosexuals" ended up being stereotypical nasal-toned "fags" with an unapologetic raunchy humor and girlish behavior, a mixture of people to be laughed at, and to be laughed with. It took until the 21th century when such minorities began increasingly being expressed as normal human beings without exaggerated stereotypical features. I'll take that it is just a phase: First the existence is recognized, then the acceptance of their human nature follows. Autism is inch by inch following the same development cycle.

They aren't interested in autistic customers other than the cash they have to purchase their products.

Yep. But I take a pragmatic approach: Does it matter what handful of board members think if their product can change thinking of thousands of people? Assuming that the new product really works in that sense...

 

[Judge]

Yep. But I take a pragmatic approach: Does it matter what handful of board members think if their product can change thinking of thousands of people? Assuming that the new product really works in that sense...

Sounds fine in principle, but I just don't see the limited demographics of toy products being at the forefront of profoundly changing society's perception of a neurological minority.

 

[cooljethro]

Sounds fine in principle, but I just don't see the limited demographics of toy products being at the forefront of profoundly changing society's perception of a neurological minority.

Perhaps it'll make a small difference only, like you say, but even a small step is a step in the right direction.

 

[UFO]

Sounds fine in principle, but I just don't see the limited demographics of toy products being at the forefront of profoundly changing society's perception of a three percent+ minority.

Not the point... It is still better than nothing, small streams here and there make big rivers, and so on. I'll put it this way: You wouldn't want to prevent them doing this only because you think that it is not for the right reasons...

 

[Tired]

Not the point... It is still better than nothing, small streams here and there, and so on. I'll put it this way: You wouldn't want to prevent them doing this only because you think that it is not for the right reasons...

Yeah this reminds me when people tell me that being vegan wont help all animals. Helping all animals isn't the point, t he point is helping as much as you can. This is similar in the way that if some kids and parents will now learn about autism because of Barbie dolls - it's a win!

 

[Judge]

Not the point... It is still better than nothing, small streams here and there make big rivers, and so on. I'll put it this way: You wouldn't want to prevent them doing this only because you think that it is not for the right reasons...

It's not a matter of prevention. Just a foregone conclusion. That success in sales is the ultimate goal. Not to change society's perception. And when sales or fad purchasing wane, so will your optimism.

Nothing wrong with the idea. It's just that realistically we need a more robust catalyst for social change and acceptance than a child's doll.

Despite all kinds of ethnic-based dolls on the market, have they tangibly advanced the civil rights of various minorities in the US? -No.

 

[GrownupGirl]

I've just seen The Daily Tism post a savage satire news article about the new Autistic Barbie. It says to recreate your least favorite autistic child moments, such as hiding under the school library table at lunchtime and crying at party balloons, and it says that Playground Bully Barbie can't wait to play with her and can't wait to give Autistic Barbie a swirlie with her toilet that really flushes.

In my case it would be a group of Middle School Bully Kens who can't wait to throw rocks at me when they see me walk by wearing a Garfield sweatshirt.

 

[velociraptor]

I think moves like this towards inclusivity for the autistic community, can only be a good thing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/autistic-barbie-doll-mattel-video-b2898705.html

I think there are people out there who will enjoy this doll and I am happy they have a choice they see themselves in. I remember what a big deal it was for a friend's daughter to have a Chinese barbie as the family is of that ethnicity. Kids have the right to see themselves in their toys. Adults too.

I would rather see those who are unhappy with this doll arguing in favour of having another one that is inclusive to them as well, rather than denying someone else a toy they like because they are personally affronted.

 

[UFO]

Just a foregone conclusion. That success in sales is the ultimate goal. Not to change society's perception. And when sales or fad purchasing wane, so will your optimism.

I didn't think of optimism here, just your negativism about Mattel's motives. You are still missing the point. It still shouldn't matter why they have launched the autistic barbie. It should matter if it has any potential of doing any good. Even if it actually does not, it is still better than nothing. As a gesture and recognition, instead ignoring, so to say. No big bang of world change is even imagined here. So why to complain about the motives instead the doll itself? As much as you don't see an autistic barbie changing anyone's attitudes, I don't see how Mattel's motives and the doll's potential effects are related.

Realistically we need a more robust catalyst for social change than a child's doll.

Agree on that.

 

[velociraptor]

It's just that realistically we need a more robust catalyst for social change and acceptance than a child's doll

Young children are still learning the world, it's too much to ask them to change it in their early stages. If a new or different toy helps them fit in better or feel like they are more welcome in society, that's okay.

 

[Judge]

Young children are still learning the world, it's too much to ask them to change it in their early stages. If a new or different toy helps them fit in better or feel like they are more welcome in society, that's okay.

Sure. I have no objection to such possibilities, merely attempting to point out how fleeting such a product can be in the market. Especially if the target market is relatively small. In this case much of anything appealing to autistic persons translates into limited demand.

Where behind closed doors the public relations element may potentially be their priority over sales. Especially if and when the appearance of goodwill is translated into shareholder equity, apart from the usual promises of quarterly returns. Would make particular sense given this corporation is a midcap investment on the stock market. More volatility, more abstract strategies to lure shareholders and tantalize consumers, even if a small segment of them.

 

[Tired]

Matel: /makes an autistic doll/
Autistics: yay woo
Judge: doom and gloom, investments, stock market, shareholders, consumerism.

Like... what

 

[Judge]

It's not doom and gloom at all. Just a matter of understanding business fundamentals tied to a publicly-traded corporations. One with a published track record of both good and bad happenings.

A publicly-traded corporation is always going to be loyal first and foremost to their investors and the shareholder equity they bring to a corporation's bottom line. Second, to enhance the same bottom line through profitability beyond research and development costs.

Using capital to make capital. A business and their shareholders in search of profits- not a charity paying a morally perceived debt to society or any societal minority. So when consumers think they are doing us all a huge favor, that's just plain sad. Unless you too are a shareholder and make the most of it. And if you work for such entities, just know you're just an expendable asset.

It's still "business as usual". Love it, hate it...but it will still be here tomorrow. With midcaps like this always pressured into creating new gimmicks to attract shareholders in the least amount of time possible. And in the process, tantalize a few consumers.

The truth may not "set you free", but sometimes it pays to know who- and what you are dealing with.

 

[velociraptor]

Especially if the target market is relatively small. In this case much of anything appealing to autistic persons translates into limited demand.

Maybe, maybe not. I am surprised at how "trendy" ASD and ADHD are lately. Lots of self-labeled people out there now. The market is larger than expected from what I'm seeing.

In any case, the toymaker isn't acting from any moral impetus here. They're looking for either real capital or social capital (which is also good to have). If any kids are helped it's probably more by accident than design. Life's like that.

Take your victories where you find them.

Edit: My fave dolls were Stretch Armstrong and whatever the one was with Kung Fu Action. The world needs more of that, yo.

 

[Judge]

In any case, the toymaker isn't acting from any moral impetus here. They're looking for either real capital or social capital (which is also good to have). If any kids are helped it's probably more by accident than design. Life's like that.

Agreed. Social capital/goodwill is noticed by investors as well. It's all about business. Frankly if any product out there could make a serious impact in our favor, I'd prefer it to be within the realm of medical science. Not entertainment or leisure.

Also that our numbers are higher than officially reported, but I seriously doubt our ranks approach the numbers of other more prominent minorities. But I also suspect the real number will remain a mystery for longer than it should.

In my day I had both a full complement of GI Joe gear, weapons and uniforms, as well as "Captain Action".

Hasbro gets credit in 1964 for shifting dolls towards male children without much social backlash. All the military kids in my VA neighborhood had them. With my neighbor next door making shorts for them. It was great as I even had scuba gear for my GI Joe. (The rubber wetsuit was hell to put on or take off...lol.)

Though back then all eyes were on the Beatles and rock music, and even more so a war that grew progressively unpopular.

 

[JayCee]

Well am not as good as others ,holding back on the cynicism ...Granted love the social acceptance aspect.
Otherhand , hate to see people making money on anothers disability.
Just a Thought : ( So what are the limits Corporations will goto to make money ) ?

 

[the_tortoise]

Strategies not to be confused with altruism or a genuine wish to aid the disabled.

Absolutely agree. However:

I still believe this is a sign of positive change in the world-- because it is only when we are recognized more broadly as part of the world and not so reviled/seen as so defective that a company making toys for mainstream, typical children (autistic children are nowhere near even half of children ) will even consider they could maybe profit from a toy that is so arguably inclusive.

Do you really believe that if ABA and the pure-disease/pure-bad/kill-us-off-forever model of autism were not being challenged with at least minimal success that any mainstream company would actually attempt to make a toy that socially normalizes autism?

Virtually guaranteed they will get hatred for this from the kinds of people who insist no person with ability to write or speak has autism and in any case see us as empty-subhuman things to be fixed or purged from human existence...but those people no longer have 100% control of the mainstream narrative about autism.

There was likely some cost/benefit analysis, some marketability research done with respect to this doll; 20 years ago this idea of autistic barbie would not have gone anywhere.

It could still be a massive disaster for the company, depending on how accurately they have estimated public opinion and demand for an autistic doll. But I have hope.

 

[the_tortoise]

Sounds fine in principle, but I just don't see the limited demographics of toy products being at the forefront of profoundly changing society's perception of a neurological minority.

I don't see anyone here saying Mattel is leading the way for autistics...

All I personally said was that small, everyday things are what give people the strongest social signals and tend to sustain attitudes.

 

[the_tortoise]

Well am not as good as others ,holding back on the cynicism ...Granted love the social acceptance aspect.
Otherhand , hate to see people making money on anothers disability.
Just a Thought : ( So what are the limits Corporations will goto to make money ) ?

I am not sure I view this as quite as potentially evil and exploitative as you do....

If Mattel was claiming autistic barbie cures autism...

Or if they at any point start donating profits from sales of autistic barbie to Autism Speaks...

Or introduce ABA therapist barbie and/or a range of accessories for autistic barbie that are all 100% about therapies and 0% about fun or autistic people's common strengths...

Then I will be right with you.

For now I see this as positive, and no more inherently exploitative than making barbies in more than one one skin tone. (Which I don't see as exploitative at all.)

(Note I have a lot of criticisms about many toys like barbie, in terms of sexism and reflection of rigid gender expression/roles and racism and hetero-normativity, and especially in promoting unrealistic body image to female children - but given that barbies exist, Mattel could do a lot worse than work towards being more inclusive and minimally representative of human diversity in its product lines -- even if they only do so for profit. )

You don't get away from the fact that someone profits from even the most inclusive and even therapeutic products unless you get away from capitalism itself -- and that's not happening any time soon, if ever.

 

[UFO]

I doubt it will be a hit like Earring Magic Ken. But like I said before: an autistic toy here, a good characterization there, increasing social commentary everywhere, and little things pile up...

It's all about business.

Well am not as good as others ,holding back on the cynicism ...Granted love the social acceptance aspect.
Otherhand , hate to see people making money on anothers disability.
Just a Thought : ( So what are the limits Corporations will goto to make money )

Yes. For the record, I understand very well that the whole western economy is based on exploitation by individuals of individuals. However, I would say (with a little twisting of words, I admit) that Adam Smith saw motives as much irrelevant as I see them, using a concept of "invisible hand": selfish actions create beneficial effects, not intentionally, but as a side effect of supply and demand. (I don't think he meant social inclusiveness specifically, but still...)