Barbie Vs Bratz: Barbie Wins! Court Stops Production Of Bratz Merchandise
This may well be the last holiday season for Bratz dolls, as a federal judge ordered their manufacturer to cease production and stop selling the popular dolls.
Mattel, maker of Bratz's main rival, Barbie, sued the company, alleging that their creator came up with the concept when he was working for Mattel. Whoopsie!
Some parents are thrilled that Bratz are going away (pending appeal), says CNN:
The judge's ruling came as a relief to some parents who see the popular dolls' clothes and makeup as too racy for their young daughters. It also eliminates heavy competition against Barbie — a doll often seen as less provocative, but whose slender body also raises parents' eyebrows.
"I'm happy to not see [Bratz]," said Kristi Cassell of Sandy Springs, Georgia. Her 5-year-old daughter, Emily, has amassed a collection of Barbies.
"Barbies come across more wholesome," Cassell said. Barbie has some "questionable" clothes, "but it seemed like all the Bratz dolls were on a darker side of Barbie," she said.
Six-year-old Sierra Curry-Corcoran of Newport News, Virginia, also has a Barbie collection and no Bratz dolls. But not by choice.
"I like Bratz better. They have more fancy clothes, and they look more cool," Sierra said.
Her mother, Tasha Curry-Corcoran, strongly disagrees. "Bratz are trashy: They wear too much makeup. Their clothing is too short; their boots are too high. They look like prostitutes. That's why we don't have them in our house."
For the record, Consumerist morns the lack of available She-Ra dolls for today's youth.
This is a test contextual ad for the SHOPPING category. It should appear on all SHOPPING entries, unless the subcategory has its own ad.
Post a comment
Comments:
I wouldn't mind them squashing all the little companies if only they'd bring back Trailer-Trash Barbie.
No, they look like little prostitots. They are trashy and I've never even considered letting my 8 year old have any. In fact, in spite of my wishes, she's been given a few as gifts over the years and they've all found the trash bin. She doesn't crave the prostitute look and I think I've done the right thing.
Do you want your 8 year old girl to aspire to that kind of "diversity"?
Any parent who would spend $200 on that kind of garbage for a child has no business being a parent. I would venture to say that the look disghusts most (I know some think it's cute, but I can't imagine why) parents, but they need to learn how to say NO to their children. The children will be a heck of a lot better off for it.
@iknowrebekah: I just went to Barbie's website and saw what appeared to be a caucasian barbie, a hispanic barbie, and an african american barbie on the front page. Perhaps Barbie was pressured into making more diverse dolls, but however it came about, it seems they don't just have blonde, blue eyed dolls anymore.
Even if Bratz were more culturally diverse, they're still much sleazier, and I wouldn't think of it as a victory to have latinos or african americans depicted like that.
@iknowrebekah: When I was in India I saw an Indian Barbie. But she was light skinned and cost $60 USD. I still wanted it. (No, I didn't get it. I have some restraint.)
@rockasocky: Its a good idea but I wouldn't do it because they will likely just be rebranded and sold again. Since everyone else will be doing the same, you will probably lose money. These dolls are mass-produced for the most part. The Bratz franchise is simply too big of a cash cow to just let die.
Either that or something else equally popular will take its place and Bratz dolls will just be considered a thing of the past while the new thing is what all the kids want, thus rendering your Bratz dolls useless.
@HogwartsAlum: Some of them are not that bad, no worse than Barbie. You have to be selective about which ones you buy. The only ones I really have a problem with are the babyz line, because having a baby or toddler walking around with their stomach hanging out of their skimpy clothes is NOT something to teach any little girl out there.
I played with barbies as a kid and those were equally trashy with their super short mini skirts of the 80s and high heels and I grew up normal and not wanting to dress like that so there is hope. But dressing a baby or toddler in skimpy clothes is just... wrong. Barbie was at least considered an adult. The barbie line never had skimpy clothes targeted at babies or small children, we had Skipper but her clothes were extremely modest and she even had flat feet so she couldn't wear heels.
@Corporate_guy: i disgree. i hate barbie so i destroy barbie. then i sell the results. THAT'S my interpretation of the freedom of living in america - i can avoid OR destroy something i hate as long as i don't hurt anyone
Speaking as someone who worked at Mattel for about 4 years, Mattel is making the mistake of trying to litigate their way to profitability. Jill Barad was a moron. During her tenure, if it wasn't 11 1/2" tall and had blond hair, they didn't want to know about it. Somehow these twits think that Barbie is God's gift to intellectual property and that frankensteining the doll with any current piece of pop culture would sell. Hot Wheels and every other toy concept always took a back seat to Barbie (which belongs in the back seat, har har). They completely blew the concept of licensing film/toy rights. Every since Judge Dread I kept wondering if ANYONE in the company ever read the script they were about to license. Ugh. And then they totally screwed up a golden opportunity to get into the console and PC game market. I tried to interest a few of the higher-ups in it and they always wanted to know how they could license their existing IP to a third-party company for development. And there was constantly a battle between the marketing-flakes and the actual designers. The marketing-flakes always saw themselves as these enlightened individuals working on a higher intellectual plane than everyone else when in reality the designers came up with really cool stuff that marketing regularly shot down.
ugh, dolls have always freaked me out...even when i was a little girl. their fake hair gets all over the place and they're sooooo gross. i was all about the teddy bears. my ideal universe would have no dolls at all, except for many raggity ann.
i worked at toys r us for a period of time, when bratz first came out and where the HOTTEST thing. i could spot a parent who would purchase a bratz doll for their kid a mile away. they tend to look very similar to the dolls.
@TechnoDestructo: i know when i worked for disney you signed a document to that effect during the hiring process.
it was a form of intellectual property agreement that states everything creative you think of while in their employ is theirs forever.
This is fantastic news. While I think the Barbie line certainly has its... issues, the Bratz line (and especially the "Babyz" line... wtf?) is absolute trash.
Someone said "It won't be long until the line is replaced by something equally disgusting and trashy". While that's true, this will be a welcome relief, however short.
I agree with the parent who said the Bratz dolls look like prostitutes. They really do. They're like the Paris Hiltons of the doll world, like slut training for little girls. Not only do they look like baby tramps, the very name "bratz" implies that a snotty attitude is attractive. Not what I want my kid to emulate! Barbie has remained pretty much the same since the 50's, and has a much better image. She has a pleasant smile on her face, versus the Bratz' pouty-lipped sex-kitten gaze. WTF is up with KIDS toys getting sexier & sexier? I wonder how many little boys masturbate to their sisters' Bratz dolls?
Go Barbie!!!
@catastrophegirl: I signed the same sort of intellectual property agreement years ago when I worked for Mattel- and I was in customer service and had nothing whatsoever to do with product development.
@iknowrebekah: I don't care how diverse. It's the ugliest doll in the world. And look like a hooker, too.





















can we vote neither?