Pimp Ken and Slut Barbie

I'm not sure how many people have heard what next year's new toy du jour will be. It's likely not what you think, and even less savory once you know.

The toy is the Ken Doll from the Barbie collection. In honor of the 50th year of Barbie dolls, Ken has a new line that is called officially Sugar's Daddy Ken Doll. You might have heard of it more commonly as the Sugar Daddy Ken doll. Or even perhaps as the Pimp Ken doll.



Now Mattel has made it clear that they do not agree with the renaming of the toy, geared to adult collectors.

"While the name of the doll does refer back to the dog, I think people are going to interpret it as they want to interpret it." - Mattel spokeswoman Michelle Chidoni

Really now? Mattel spends untold millions on market research for every toy they make. Every detail of the toys , from the colors used to the packaging, to the names are market researched and designed to click with their target market. There is no interpetation of a Barbie or Ken doll that Mattel has not envisioned and tested long before anyone in the world sees it.

Mattel knew this would be the reaction. In fact I believe they planned on it. Not only because they get free publicity, but because they want to stay relevant to how they see society.

It's the same reason that there was a pregnant Barbie, which lined up with the spike in unwed mothers and pregnant teens in the nation. It's the same reason they made a Tattoo Barbie, to match the ass stamp (or tramp stamp as some call it) that is now overwhelmingly popular among young women. In fact it is the same reason that Lawyer Barbie and Professional Barbie are things of the long ago E.R.A. past.

"We are a good brand and we inspire girls around the world to do amazing things, and we are very proud of who we are and what we are." - Richard Dickson General Manager of Mattel

Oh yes I can see how this is inspiring young girls. Matching Tattoo Barbie with her ass stamp and inhuman figure with Sugar Daddy Ken (or in this match up I like to say Pimp Ken) young girls are inspired to find a man to take care of their needs. To use a man via sexuality to gain material goods. To effectively become a cheap prostitute.

It's an image straight out of almost any rap music video. It's an image found commonly in movies of the last decade or so. It's a theme found on various CW television shows. And in case any young girl has yet to be infected from those sources - because they are too young - Mattel is there to usher them in.

Maybe I am making too much of this. Maybe most girls have too much self-esteem to fall into this trap. But most is not all.

In the same way some women are eased into anorexia because of media influences, and the way that getting a tattoo on the ass of a 16 year old is the current common way to express individualism, this doll and combination reinforce the worst of society. It's no different than the aforementioned music videos and pregnant Barbie. In fact, adding this to those elements and movies, television shows, and magazines I am unsure how any young girl might be at least subliminally unaffected by the image of dependency and prostitution that is being sold to them from all sides.

Is Mattel free to make the toy? Yes and they should be in a free capitalist society. That is not my point. Simple morality and decency should have prevented them from creating these doll lines in the first place. There are some things unworthy of selling for profit. This, to me, is a clear example of such.

The new 90210 - is it cancelled yet?

Ok. Please stop. I’m speaking to the CW network.

The CW network is the channel that has brought us such hits as Hidden Palms, Aliens in America, and Online Nation. If you don’t recall those television shows don’t worry, no one else did either – even when they were on the air. This network was the reheated remains of the corpses of the WB and UPN networks (birthplace of Homeboys in Space - thank god they went bankrupt). It’s only successes to date being Smallville, Supernatural, Everybody Hates Chris, and America’s Top Model each from the old networks that went out of business.

So in search of new ideas that might sustain this still miserable network there has been an nearly unending hype about the new 90210. Yes sheer joy will fall from the heavens and ratings records will be set anew when the sequel to the original 1990’s television show hits the airwaves. Or so the CW keeps using all kinds of media to let us know.

Honestly, do they think that the return of Jennie Garth, and Shannen Doherty will cause some kind of uproar? Neither of these women have had a success in years. Unless you count the short stint Doherty had on Charmed (before she reportedly was fired and the series really took off) or her season of work on “Sci-Fi” Channel’s Scare Tactics [which has nothing to do with scifi and does not deserve to be on the channel]. That says nothing of the fact that the fan base left their teens over a decade ago.

But let’s look at what the show has to offer the youth of today.

The most notable change to the show is that suddenly the Beverly Hills area has a touch of color. And I do mean A touch. Tristan Wilds will play the adopted brother of Shenae Grimes – essentially the Brendan and Brenda of the old show.

So the only way that a Black kid can get into Beverly Hills is via an adoption, or so the show seems to present. Because the original certainly had as many Blacks as were to be found on Happy Days, The Brady Bunch, Friends, Seinfeld, and E.R. combined. Oh wait, that’s not true because there was 1 African American on E.R. at it’s start. Well at least the new show follows the far more enlightened and standardized format of 1 Black, 1 Latino, and at least one woman. (Well at least one of the women in the show looks sortof Latino so that counts right? And Asians? They don’t exist in America)

Well it won’t matter. The show has good looking rich people (everyone can relate to that right?), and they have Youtube in the show too (they are just like you, just in a Ferrari - if you are also White). It must be cool. And just for added effect they threw in an alcoholic/addict grandmother (because who doesn't have one). It's just a good wholesome television show, with drugs, and drinking, and sex, and paparazzi, and clothes that cost more than what most parents make in a year.

I think Brian Austin Green, who is among virtually all the old cast that refused to be on this program – except for Tori Spelling who dropped out because she thought she was worth more money like she has an acting career now that nepotism is not an option – stated it best

“The new ['90210'] could be good. Or it will suck terribly."

The odds stack up that it will suck. But in a world engorged with American Idol and ‘reality’ television shows, drivel might just pass for drama and entertainment. Unrealistic views of American population or success, a deep need to exploit real issues, and a drive to suplant style for substance. No wonder why I avoid broadcast television.