thanks to Dave for sending a link to the UK's SUN newspaper and the story bellow:Published: 16 Jul 2008
BARBIE’S new S&M look has whipped up a storm – with protesters dubbing it “filth”.
The doll’s image is transformed with kinky fishnets, motorcycle jacket, black gloves and boots.
Makers Mattel say Black Canary Barbie, out in September, is based on a DC comic superhero of the same name.
But religious group Christian Voice said: “Barbie has always been on the tarty side and this is taking it too far.
A children’s doll in sexually suggestive clothing is irresponsible – it’s filth.”
the Sun page is here and you can add your comments. a bit more information on the doll is at barbie collectors site here.
xx
11 comments:
(*holds my head, groaning*)
Fundies...fundies...those miserable, pathetic fundies. And here I thought the UK and Continental Europe were *relatively free* of that plague of inbred, rampaging idiocy.
To Elaborate: The outfit as displayed in the picture here...is the *current continuity* Black Canary outfit in DC Comics *itself*. It is an *AUTHENTIC* replica of what's in the actual in-print comic books. *IF* anyone has a problem with the *outfit*, they need to take it up with Dan DiDio (Editor In Chief over at DC Comics, since he has to approve this stuff).
And honestly, if you think *THAT* outfit is bad....the original (Golden and Silver Age) Black Canary uniform was *worse*. Higher heels, she wore (and fought crime in) a corset with push-up cups, and also a *tiny* short jacket that didn't close *over anything*.
And there was a point to it. The Black Canary, *as a vigilante*, was supposed to be a sort of Female Batman originally. Where Batman said "Criminals are a Superstitious and Cowardly lot", Black Canary said "...and Hormonal too." *Playing* the blonde bombshell who is tougher than she looks was *part of the act* and utterly in character (the Golden/Silver Age Canary was a *brunette* in plain-clothes and wore a blonde *wig* to fight crime).
Point is: this is Black Canary's modern, and *modest* outfit, the one that reveals *less skin* than previously. It makes *Wonder Woman's* clothes look slutty, since she's *still* in the heels and bustier...but does anyone *complain* about Wonder Woman? Hell no....it's hypocritical really.
(*ends comic book geek mode*)
And as for Barbie...has she *not* always been tarty? Really, did Mattel not originally copy her from a German novelty doll that, to put it politely, was seen more often in *barrooms* by grown men than in little-girl's bedrooms?
Honestly, Mattel's *detuned* copy of that German doll was the *first* mass-produced doll to have *somewhat* adult-female proportions (breasts and such). Go to your Public Library, fundies, and *look it up* please, rumor has it that you *can* read after all...can't you?
And please....for the love of God, find something *less trivial* to complain about next time, ok? This is only a limited-issue collector's item that will most likely be owned mainly by *grown up* comic book geeks...so chill already.
You're making the Muslims in your neighborhood seem *ordinary and rational*.
But this is all really just *MY* humble opinion, and does NOT in any way, shape, form or fashion represent the opinions of Asudem Latex or her weblog. Just so we are clear.
--Bradley Poe (who gets tired of negative, obsessive ninny-ism, truly....imagine that)
Speaking of odd barbies.. look up the first gen fairytopia.. they got a solid pink and a solid blue that look awfully like a corpse barbie.
MoF
They already did a Halle Berry-style Catwoman barbie. That came with skintight leather pants, clawed opera gloves, and a WHIP. S&M Barbie has already been done.
Looks like Miley Cyrus, kinda.
Hey
Those religious groups get upset pretty easily for a bunch of people that worship a naked guy nailed to a cross.
Which they of course merchandise to death themselves.
M
Brad, WE know that. But the fundies will see it in the Sun and think "that's terrible" - because they don't know the background, and someone's just told them what to think...
Elizabeth Rees
@ Ms. Rees...
You do have a point. However, I didn't exactly copyright that vent, now did I? Not that it was original, merely a synopsis of what's on public record, plus attitude.
My point: Feel free to copy, paste, and spread the word as needed. The only reason bad news triumphs is because people are scared to spread *good news*.
My apologies for preaching to the choir here. I had no intention to annoy the loyal and faithful here.
But, if we can *forcibly DRILL* a clue into the brain of at least one intolerant fundie (something along the lines of "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..."), then yeah, maybe it might be worth the hassle.
We don't need to let the ignorance win here. We dollers are fairly more organized than most fringe interests--we know each other almost to the point of mutual annoyance, right? ^_^
Ok then. Maybe someone could send an old issue of _Wizard_ magazine to the appropriate parties, or a _Birds of Prey_ comic book. Maybe someone could send a link to a *history* of Barbie as doll....
Which would be cruel irony considering that Mattel is suing AMG, maker of Bratz dolls, for "conversion" or industrial IP theft. After all, Barbie wasn't original herself, was she? Google "Barbie" and "Ruth Gordon" sometime (that latter being her original creator, or one of them).
Point is, any one of us could do this in seconds and *rebut* their whole entire point, line by line, in seconds. Both Mattel's and the Fundies at the _Sun_, by the way.
It's so easy if I had the cash free to do it *I* would do so myself, but shipping to the UK is a little pricey lately. ^_^
My apologies for not helping more,
--Bradley Poe (who again apologizes for the vent above)
Obviously they have never seen "Brats" dolls. Now those are discusting. They have ones with babies wearing slutty makeup.
Jesus christ. If it was another of Todd McFarlane's blood spattered, gun weilding action figures, no one would care. But it's a doll that's in a vynil costume so some Christian group is about to shit!
@ Dr. Purple....
One of my points exactly. Nobody mentions the *real* bad influences, the violent ones, but the minute a doll of a female sort wears anything sexy...
And the irony of it is, it's a *plastic doll* wearing *plastic*. Shouldn't this actually be appropriate?
Not to mention, Mattel is actually *suing* MGA, the makers of those Bratz dolls, because apparently they can't compete fairly with them otherwise....but I digress.
Point is, we have a lot, *A LOT* of so-called grown men and women, who apparently are much MUCH, more immature than us dollers are--they can't *even* cope with it, that a doll or toy or comic book could be for grownups, and not like, infants or something. O_O Ye gods.
The wee ones already have Barney and the Teletubbies and on and on...when do the *rest of us* get ours?
But yeah. I am sorry I dove headfirst into this can-o-worms, but really. I'm just appalled that the disease of *insane* fundie intolerance has seeped into otherwise civilized nations.
Again, my humble apologies for exceeding the RDA (recommended daily allowance) of drama here.
It just frustrates me...when is enough enough? When do we get to call stupidity *stupid* again?
--Bradley Poe (who says these fundies *don't* have to look, *don't* have to buy, and really *don't* have to care so long as their own souls are all right...what a bunch of insecure bungholes we have here...)
But religious group Christian Voice said: “Barbie has always been on the tarty side and this is taking it too far.
Fuck the X-tian activists groups. It's just hot air. They need something to fill up their time. Their reasoning is total crap. These Barbies are obviously manufactured and marketed (and priced!) for the collector's market. If the adult Barbies were being specifically marketed to children, then they would have a basis for complaint/general activist cock & bull.
But anyway, free speech is free speech. It cuts both ways.
Post a Comment