Our Barbies, Ourselves Response

834 Words4 Pages
In Our Barbies, Our Selves, Emily Prager’s main point is that Barbie® was created by men to embody their idea of a perfect woman, with features that are usually impossible to have, and that she was a symbol in the anti-feminist revolution that she (Prager) was very much a part of. She goes into great detail about how Barbie looked more like a Playboy Bunny rather than a businesswoman, even when she was wearing a suit. She refers to Barbie as a “weapon” against feminism, but then goes on to introduce the idea that perhaps Barbie is actually a symbol OF feminism, switching tracks completely, before tying the story up by implying that Ken has “dominated” Barbie because his genitals are just a blob in his pants, and she has boobs. I really wanted to agree with Prager. I really did. I can totally sympathize with the plight of women throughout the world, and I support equality. Truly, I mean that. However, she started to lose my support halfway through the second paragraph, and she had lost all of it by the first sentence of the fifth paragraph. Her regretful, almost mournful tones about this “attack on feminism” reminds me, very vividly, of Rush Limbaugh and FOX news moaning and griping about their so-called “War on Christmas”. But at least Rush Limbaugh can pick one avenue and stick to it. In paragraph 6, Prager, for whatever reason, goes on to discuss how Barbie could actually be a SYMBOL of feminism. In a matter of minutes, she goes from describing Barbie as a possible escort for Howard Stern or Hugh Hefner to calling her “a liberated woman”. In a matter of minutes, she goes from describing Barbie’s giant bust as the worst thing to happen to humanity, to an expression of individualism and a giant middle finger to the stuffy “Elizabeth Taylor” dolls of the previous generation. Later, she goes on about how “millions of women who are subliminally sure that a

More about Our Barbies, Ourselves Response

Open Document