As of Thursday, the Barbie doll we all know and love comes in three new body types: tall, petite and curvy.
The release of the doll’s new shapes, sizes, skin and hair colors are long overdue. Although we knew Barbie’s body proportions were unrealistic, a 2013 study by Rehabs.com showed that Barbie’s measurements on a real life human wouldn’t even allow her to walk.
Shocked yet?
A human Barbie’s head would be two inches larger than the average U.S. woman’s, her waist nearly 19 inches smaller and her hips 11 inches smaller. The website found that a real-life Barbie wouldn’t be able to fit all of her vital organs in her body, due to the fact her waist would be four inches thinner than her head. The site’s study also found that her ultra-thin ankles and small feet wouldn’t allow her to walk, making it necessary for her to move on all fours.
Now with those incredible findings in mind, these new, more realistic Barbie bodies are revolutionary for young girls — but they’ve received mixed reviews.
Many are asking about Ken’s unrealistic body.
Some Twitter users even joked about wanting a Ken doll with a “dad bod.”
.@Mattel just released a new chubby #barbie doll...I can't wait for curvy Ken to come out! pic.twitter.com/7SeLLNRID4
— Will McFadden (@willmickyficky) January 28, 2016
#barbie where is fat ken? where is short nerdy ken? where is tall lanky ken?
— Ubiquitousidiot (@ubiquitousidiot) January 28, 2016
These users may have been messing around, but they have a good point.
As much progress as this is for the Barbie doll and Barbie’s manufacturer, Mattel, we need to set the same body standards for men as we do for women. For true progress and complete Barbie diversity, Ken’s body needs to evolve, too.
It is a valid question to ask: Why isn’t Ken’s body being released in alternative shapes, sizes and colors?
Let’s face it, like modern women, not all men come in one size. Not every man is toned, tanned and blonde.
Richard Dickson, the President of Mattel, told The New York Times, “Barbie is truly representing what girls see.”
Dickson is right on; Barbie has always had an immense influence. It’s great to see that finally, the company understands the doll’s impact, but the company seemed to forget all about Ken and his body influence.
Sure, Barbie and Ken may be primarily advertised to young women, but even Barbie male doll equivalents, like G.I. Joe or any other superhero with massive biceps, set incredibly impossible body standards for young men. These male dolls have just as much of an impact on body image for young men, as Barbie does for young women.
Complete body positivity and inclusivity starts by acknowledging that both sexes come in all kinds of body types. I’m talkin’ to you, Mattel.
Although Barbie’s body alternatives are a huge step for young women everywhere, for the sake of gender equality, let’s hope one day we really do see Ken with a “dad bod.”
Related Links:
Body Project spreads acceptance at ASU
Don't worry about weight, focus on healthy self-image
Reach the columnist at ambice@asu.edu or follow @alliebice on Twitter.
Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.