I don’t have kids either, but here’s a quote from the Wiki page:
To me, the most disturbing thing about them is their lack of noses.
They’ve actually gotten somewhat better in the past - I’d say two years. I still think they dress whorish, but they’ve toned down some of the oversexualized (the stilletto heels, the midriff shirts, the boas and fishnets) in response to criticism - and put in more Active lines - sort of the “Dr. Barbie” response. Or perhaps teenage fashion has changed. My daughter is Bratz age (has been for a few years) but she isn’t old enough for me to pay attention to what teenagers wear.
There seems to be two major lines of criticism - the oversexualization and the materialism. Both have been toned down.
What do you mean? I saw the preview (Og save my soul) at the theatre and one of the characters was doing generically sciencey type things (naturally it was the Asian one. Hey, I bet she’s good at math too!). I can’t see why anyone would think that these toys are indicative of a tendency for our culture to steer girls away from academics.
Well, they’re obviously cartoons and that’s a common cartoon convention. Females have no noses, except perhaps in profile, while males have no upper lip or no lips at all.
I think a child’s doll with a thong is most definitely on the whorish end of the spectrum. (Although that was later claimed a manufacturing defect and replacements offered to parents.)
Here’s where I admit there’s something wrong with me…
I’ve watched some episodes of the BRATZ cartoon. The Bratz girls are in high school. I assume since things like class presidents, school newspapers, proms, etc are brought up. The core characters are smart sassy independent girls. The villains are two blonde pink wearing barbie types who actually act like brats where our girls are just sassy.
I think the toys themselves have toned down alot… except for the Baby Bratz which are babies who are sexed up with makeup and bling etc… but they’re babies so it’s inherrently comical (anyone remember the SNL short where they had a burlesque photoshoot looking thing with babies done to the tune of the Doors cover of “Last Whiskey Bar” Baby Dominatrix is just funny!)
It is interesting some of the recent sub-lines within BRATZ. A brit-punk line and a Tokyo fashion line (with sushi bar playset) are really kind of cool.
I’ve got a daughter, and yes, you’re right, Bratz has changed a lot. When they first appeared they were complete gangsta bling-bling ho-dogs. Now you can get Bratz ice princess playsets and Bratz camping adventure playsets. They’re basically Barbie with a bit of urban attitude.
It’s a doll, not the end of Western Civilization … . :rolleyes:
Damn it! And here I’d gotten my hopes for nothing.
There was a great article in the Dec. 4 New Yorker about the whole Bratz vs Barbie phenom. Here’s a link to an abstract of the article on the New Yorker web site. If you have access to back issues, it’s definitely an interesting read.
I honestly don’t think I can put it into words, but I’ll try.
I can see they’re pitching for a sort of ‘yay! friends are so cool’ vibe, but it’s delivered in such a grotesquely mechanical, soulless fashion that it has the exact opposite effect on me. It feels like a recruitment video for the bodysnatchers.
Yeah, I don’t get why they’re supposed to be ugly, either. Because they have big lips? As a white girl with big lips, I have to say I’d prefer to have grown up with Bratz than with Miss Aryan Nation, or Barbie, as she’s generally known. Anyway, plenty of people thought Barbie was a ho, back in the day.
I don’t think the lips are the problem. I think it is the giant heads and teeny bodies. They look like they have had cranial implants or something.
Ugh. Put me down for hating both Barbie AND Bratz. My daughter just missed the Bratz debut (thank god), but was hooked on a much higher priced type of doll crack: American Girl. At least those girls look like girls and not just Pretty Baby wannabes.
Yes, it’s just a doll. But do we really need a doll with that name, that focus and those clothes? (good for them for toning it down-someone has some sense-I still wouldn’t buy one for anyone. YMMV).
I loathe them, and resisted buying them for my daughter, now 12. Finally I gave in, bought one mini version, and she was over them immediately. (Go, me.) I have repeatedly asked for years why they just don’t call them Whorz and get it over with. It’s interesting that they’ve toned it down since they were introduced.
Early on I remember an arguement made that they were a doll a minority girl could relate to and the Iranian founder was specifically mentioned. My reaction was great, minority girls are supposed to aspire to looking like prostitutes?
Hey! So long as they’re above the age of consent, there’s nothing wrong with prostitutes! 
I’ve long thought Bratz look like Victoria Beckham (or perhaps the other way 'round) with her skinny body and bizarrely enormous head. Of course they lack the enormous fake boobs…
I’ve never noticed their lips, actually. I have noticed the bizzarely big heads, of course, but mostly what bugs me is the eyes. They’re huge and slanted (and not in a realistic “ethnic” way, so don’t jump on me for being an epicanthal-fold hater or anything). They make me think of insects, for some reason. It’s a trend that’s carried over to other babydolls, as well. It took us quite a while to find a nice realistic looking doll for our daughter - everything out there has these huge eyes now. It’s disconcerting.
Yet more evidence to support my developing theory that one should never buy any product whose name ends with a Z.
Not buy Pez?!?
Pistols at dawn.