The 'average proportions' doll

[mistic_imp]

I do remember this coming up a while back-  I love the idea of it although I think they would do better if they had cuter clothing (which I think is what kids focus on)

Love the jointed ankles

 i agree with this, she needs to have some funkier cuter clothes that are really " in " right now.  also varied hair styles, i think those things are really important in fashion dolls. I know clothes are half the reason I will pic up a doll LOL ( clothes and shoes)



Post Merge: March 06, 2014, 06:00:14 PM

or if they want to go with a more girl next door look, give her  some cool  professions  Kind of like they tried with some of the barbies..

Post Merge: March 06, 2014, 06:02:30 PM

Ill be interested in seeing what results pop up.

unfortunately, ill have to agree with real people affecting kids though.

The amount of times ive heard my own grandmother say some not soo nice things when both my sister and I were average was insane..and I don't recall caring what Barbie looked like figure wise.  But that was the past..and this is now.  So we will see

 agreed  def- real people  are not so nice, and have a HUGE impact on  Ones  self- esteem .

 dolls never effected  how i viewed my self..  growing up , I never compared my self to barbie,  only the  other  real life women and girls around me.

[Strawberry Swirl]

Cute as heck. You know what would be cool though?

Dolls with multiple body types. Fat ones, skinny ones, in between ones. YES.

[mistic_imp]

Cute as heck. You know what would be cool though?

Dolls with multiple body types. Fat ones, skinny ones, in between ones. YES.

 i was just gonna mention this too!    becuase if they  really want to do well they shouldn't be says this  doll  is " normal"  body type.  that sort  of implies that other body types aren't..  they should make a line of  various body types,  to reflect everyone.

Post Merge: March 06, 2014, 06:13:08 PM

I hope they don't really mean it when they say she's going to only dress in "normal" clothes like GAP.  She's never to wear anything goth, steampunk, never in clothing from the middle ages, princess, wild west and so on?  I guess I don't like the implication that liking things like that isn't normal.

 i agree , and i really wish people would stop with the whole  " gap store " is considered normal clothes, where   princess, goth , steam punk  middle ages what ever is not.. clothes are just clothes,   people need to quit judging.

[MiRaja]

I don't think anyone is saying that kids' body image is based solely on dolls and toys, but as they are part of the world around us they will at least in part affect our ideals on some level, and I also believe there's been serious studies that have shown this to be the case.

Personally I think the key word is diversity. I think it's important to show young girls and boys that it's ok to be tall, short, skinny, curvy, blue eyed, have a wonky nose, whatever, as long as you are healthy. If dolls like this will affect 1 single child in a positive way, I think it's all worth it.

Exactly.  It's a symptom and part of the problem.  Little girls are constantly bombarded by images of the unattainable.  These images and the way their presented is that if they don't look like that, they will never be successful, they will be considered ugly and they certainly won't be able to get a man. (!)

I've seen a lot of people go on and say it's just a toy and that the popularity of Barbie this and Barbie that proves that it's just a toy.  Barbie was only ever popular to begin with was because Mattel undercut every other doll company when they produced her.  She was the cheapest doll money could buy and Mattel is very much the reason why so many amazing doll companies went under.  American Character, Effanbee, Ideal, etc.  Mattel and Hasbro are one in the same of producing toys as cheap as possible and using overseas production to keep overhead to a minimum.  I would love it even more if Lammily were produced in the states. 

Prior to Barbie, dolls WERE much more realistically proportioned.  :/  And I'd like to see that return, as well as dolls produced with quality and being actually pretty without looking like they're wearing 2lbs of makeup.  Nevermind when I wear makeup I wear enough to put a drag queen to shame. . .  << >>

To me, it's proof positive our society has an issue with perception when I've seen countless people criticizing the Lammily doll and saying she's OBESE.  Are you kidding me?!  Sure, there are young girls who are skinnier than that, but that doll is not in the least obese.  To me, I think Barbie and other dolls who are obtainably thin are a gateway to low self-esteem and body dismorphia that is then compounded by the media such as the over abundance of photoshop on women to make them impossibly thin. 

By some of those comments, all of these dolls would be considered obese as well.  :/ 

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Stormness_1]

She'd sell if she had awesome accessories, like sportsy stuff (because she's articulated, how awesome!?) like team uniforms, raquets, ball, heck a HORSE would be awesome! She could fit into a car really well, and be part of a gazillion different playsets that all qualify as normal, but have her diversity be like that of barbie.

I had equestrian barbie & nibbles, workin out barbie, vet barbie and dozens of pets, bikini barbie, picnic barbie.... all normal things to do, but loads of fun scenarios for kids. You could even get her a gorgeous designer frock for valentines day, because normal people splurge now and then for a hot date, right?!

I like the doll, even though I'm not a doll person, but I would have way preferred her to barbie as a child - I always hated barbie's feet... urgh.

[Vertefae]

I'm not impressed. I think the only hearts dolls tried something similar at and failed miserably. I actually don't prefer her proportions either. Playtime is imagination and fantasy. I don't need normal Jane trying to rock it with the Monsters. I am also sort of sick of blaming dolls, toys, tv, games and music for all the ills of the world. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. Be a positive role model. Put others before yourselves. And stop demonizing everything you don't agree with.

[CupidStrikes]

I hope he's successful! I do worry about the affect of dolls on little girls (and my dislike of them as a kid likely had a lot to do with that fact that none of them looked like me or were "interested" in things I liked) so I would love to see the success of a line of dolls that don't come in one or two skin and hair colours or one body type and that could include children with disabilities and illnesses, too.

[InkyMilk]

I'm not impressed. I think the only hearts dolls tried something similar at and failed miserably. I actually don't prefer her proportions either. Playtime is imagination and fantasy. I don't need normal Jane trying to rock it with the Monsters. I am also sort of sick of blaming dolls, toys, tv, games and music for all the ills of the world. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. Be a positive role model. Put others before yourselves. And stop demonizing everything you don't agree with.

But isn't this man, and the people who support him, doing just that? Trying to put a little positivity out into the world about healthy body image in his own, unique way?

I'm kind of annoyed people are acting like this is a horrible idea because he hasn't created more dolls with more body types yet. If you read the article he does state that he DOES hope to create more dolls with more diversity in their skin tones and builds, but obviously just getting the funding for this one doll is going to take a lot of work since he can't just pull money out of nowhere. Maybe this doll's proportions don't apply to everyone, but she's WAY more realistic to a majority than Barbie ever will be, and as far as I'm concerned that is definitely a step in the right direction spreading positivity and healthy ideas to a new generation about the way they view their bodies.

[Ringlets]

I like the idea of something a bit different , and I like that its not another out of proportion skinny  fashion doll and the guy has good motives and would like to make more dolls with different shapes color etc to help kids self esteem and promote positivity about body shapes that arent super skinny   
 
..... but gap clothes.. normal clothes.. Hmm.. problem with that it its boring for kids if thats all the types of clothes this doll would have. I personally was never into average looking, everyday clothes (I'm still not)    Ordinary clothes are fine , but you need diversity in clothing types too - like some of the Barbies mentioned (eg: Vet barbie, Doctor barbie,  F1 barbie) or Pedigree Sindy doll from the 60's-80's was more normal , and you could get everyday clothes for her, but also more fashionable clothes, fantasy clothes, career clothes, sports clothes etc etc . For this to really take off this doll needs a really good range of outfits and accessories 

[OLumeVaSti]

They should make the abnormal proportion doll. They could use me as the model. Short, fat, and too much chest.

[Hervoyel]

I'm not impressed. I think the only hearts dolls tried something similar at and failed miserably.

Didn't those have weird cloth-over-wire bodies?  I think they might have been unpopular for reasons other than the intent behind the marketing.

I actually don't prefer her proportions either. Playtime is imagination and fantasy. I don't need normal Jane trying to rock it with the Monsters.

So don't buy the dude's dolls.  This is what I don't understand - this doll isn't replacing anything,  you can still rock your monsters -  it's just another option that'll be on the market for people who do want a "normal jane".  How is that not a good thing?  Personally, I like to see lots of different options, even if I'm not going to by them - and that can be this doll, president barbie, an anthro doll, a monster doll, or that doll with the crazy pooping unicorn accessory. 

And frankly, a creative kid (or collector) could easily make this "normal" (I'm not a fan of calling it "normal" myself, that strikes me as rather snarky on the part of the makers) doll into some fantasy character anyway. 

People need to take responsibility for their own actions.

This guy thought there was a gap in the market and produced a doll - if that's not taking responsibility, what is? 

[MiRaja]

I'm not impressed. I think the only hearts dolls tried something similar at and failed miserably. I actually don't prefer her proportions either. Playtime is imagination and fantasy. I don't need normal Jane trying to rock it with the Monsters. I am also sort of sick of blaming dolls, toys, tv, games and music for all the ills of the world. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. Be a positive role model. Put others before yourselves. And stop demonizing everything you don't agree with.

And stop demonizing everything you don't agree with. 

You should take your own advice.  I also don't like you saying that people who have anorexia or bulimia should take 'responsibility for their own actions.'  Which is what you're saying seems to come out and say.  No, the overly skinny dolls are not the sole cause for our little girls developing eating disorders earlier and earlier, but they are CERTAINLY REINFORCEMENT IN THE PROGRAMING OF LITTLE GIRLS TO THINK THAT BEING SKINNY IS EVERYTHING. 

I have an eating disorder, though I suffered mostly from the age of 12 to 17.  Twelve.  I was twelve.  I was not an adult, I was a child, and I had been conned by the world that I was disgusting and awful because I was 5'2 and weighed 142lbs.  Kids taunted me at school, I had my dad constantly calling me fat.  I was always into fashion design when I was younger and everything was about being thin.  Including my dolls.  I always used to think I wanted to look and be that skinny as a child EVER WHEN IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE THOSE PROPORTIONS.  I get sick of people saying, "OH I GREW UP WITH THOSE TOYS AND I TURNED OUT FINE AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!"  Good for you!  You're not me and I'm not you.  And you're certainly not everyone either.  I look at my childhood drawings and it's really damn telling that there was something wrong with how I perceived the world and how I perceived bodies.  I remember I always tried to draw normal looking people, and I used to be artistic and what not, and while I'm nothing much now, I did have the spark so to say when I was younger, and I drew well for my age, except all the women I drew were impossibly thin!  Yet I know when I drew them that was never my intent!  I was trying to draw what a woman should look like, and when I initially drew them they did not look terribly skinny to me, yet now!  Oh my goodness!  It's scary! 

[brightberry]

I think people are annoyed by the doll because it seems to be attacking barbie and calling skinny people  unnatural or not-normal.  I'm glad people are looking for an alternative.  But introducing it by calling it "normal" or claiming that girls shouldn't have barbies because they're unhealthy is probably not the best way to win over people who like barbie.  Doubly so because people who like fashion dolls are the ones most likely to buy a doll like this.  I think they could just give her a name and some awesome outfits without all this hub bub and let people decide from there.

As a child, I wasn't interested in barbie or any doll with mature proportions.   I preferred fantasy and child-like like my little pony or Strawberry Shortcake or Charmkins. 

[STLGusty]

I think people are annoyed by the doll because it seems to be attacking barbie and calling skinny people  unnatural or not-normal.  I'm glad people are looking for an alternative.  But introducing it by calling it "normal" or claiming that girls shouldn't have barbies because they're unhealthy is probably not the best way to win over people who like barbie. 

I agree.  I think the basic concept of this doll is great in order to introduce more variety into the doll spectrum, but I think the ill feelings by some centers around it being called a "normal body."  I think the creator would have won over a lot more people if he would have omitted that word. 

By using the word "normal," it would now seem like anyone who is tall and thin should now be ashamed because they don't fit the mold of the "normal" doll...right (just playing devil's advocate here)?  Obviously I think that's a little adbsurd for anyone to feel that way over a doll, but if people feel justified thinking that way about Barbie's body, then they should also be able to think that way about this new doll's body.  It doesn't matter how you slice it, there's always going to be an unhappy party (who is usually an adult...because a lot of kids [in my opinion] don't really care too much)....so let's just leave out labels.  If I'm a child and I want to play with Barbie instead of this new doll, great.  If I'd rather play with the new doll instead of Barbie, splendid.  For me to say one is far superior than the other would be to undermine what the doll actually is...a toy for a child to play with - a toy a child can play with and use their IMAGINATION

I, personally, think it really IS just a doll (sorry lol).  I think she's cool because she is a different shape than what is usually released as a toy doll, but I think he's going to have a very hard time marketing them to children (as many have mentioned before) without an intriguing storyline, cartoon, awesome outfits, etc. That imagination factor needs to be there.

I was never really into dolls, but I did have a few Barbies.  Whenever I would play with them, they would go camping in the Barbie RV or Barbie Tent.  They would race their Barbie cars.  They would go hiking (through the living room).  I thought they were pretty, but I never said, "I want to look just like Barbie!"  I wanted to do the THINGS Barbie did.  I think the developer of this new doll needs to focus on developing what this doll will DO now that he has the design of the doll itself. 

[InkyMilk]

I think people are annoyed by the doll because it seems to be attacking barbie and calling skinny people  unnatural or not-normal.  I'm glad people are looking for an alternative.  But introducing it by calling it "normal" or claiming that girls shouldn't have barbies because they're unhealthy is probably not the best way to win over people who like barbie.  Doubly so because people who like fashion dolls are the ones most likely to buy a doll like this.  I think they could just give her a name and some awesome outfits without all this hub bub and let people decide from there.

As a child, I wasn't interested in barbie or any doll with mature proportions.   I preferred fantasy and child-like like my little pony or Strawberry Shortcake or Charmkins.

Well what's upsetting is that this new doll IS thin!! Honestly, look at her without standing next to Barbie and with some of her average clothing on and she really does look like a thin, real girl in the real world. She just isn't AS thin as Barbie who, as everyone knows given the mathematics behind her measurements, almost NO ONE in the world would be able to obtain. So no, this doll isn't saying thin people aren't normal or average or real, because this doll looks MORE like them than Barbie ever will. Maybe some girls don't have quite as much meat on them as this doll does, but she's still far more realistically proportioned to them than Barbie.

This doll IS healthy looking AND thin, just standing next to Barbie it's difficult to tell because Barbie is so disproportionally thin. I know what very thin women look like, and though they are thinner than the new doll, I have never in my life seen one who looks like Barbie without some sort of surgery involved.