Posted on 01/03/2006 4:47:36 PM PST by wagglebee
A third gender choice available to young participants of a poll on the Barbie doll website was changed after initially offering children the options of "I am a Girl," "I am a Boy," and "I don't know" eliciting charges that Mattel, the company that owns Barbie, is intentionally promoting gender confusing among kids.
Barbie poll's original options. |
Apparently due to the criticism, the third gender option has now been changed to "I don't want to say."
Concerned Women for America, or CWA, believes by including the "I don't know" choice the company was promoting the homosexual agenda.
"It's the idea that well, maybe people aren't born a particular biological sex, or they are but that shouldn't determine their gender identity," Robert Knight, director of CWA's Culture & Family Institute, told the Christian Post. "And that's a very big component of the homosexual activist agenda now."
Knight pointed out the homosexual movement now goes by the acronym GLBT for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered and sometimes adds Q for "questioning youth."
"In other words, any kid who's not sure about who he is, he's fair game to try to persuade to have same sex acts," said Knight.
CWA has posted a screen shot of the original poll's options on its website. The poll question itself asked about what activities the respondents participate in during January.
Knight also questioned Barbie's emphasis on material things and physical appearance.
"Some critics have said the Barbie dolls really have convinced American girls that the materialistic way of life is the way to go," he told the newssite. "You have to have the hot cars, and the tropical scene. And Barbie has the perfect figure and the perfect outfits.
"It's really steering girls away from the idea of womanhood as predominantly in terms of Christians serving the Lord, getting married, having kids, building a home. You don't see any of that with Barbie it's all about things."
Left-wing blog Big Brass Blog ridiculed the suggestion that Barbie had an agenda by including the "I Don't Know" option.
Under the heading "Now this is just beyond silly," poster the Green Knight writes:
"I'm not sure why 'I don't know' is there; it might be just a programming mistake, or it might be a reflection of the fact that, yeah, sometimes really young kids might not have thought about it too much yet, but this mostly invisible drop-down item in an obscure section of a web page is not evidence of anything. It's certainly not a promotion of anything, other than, well, Barbie.
"And yet CWA honestly think that this is some nefarious plot to indoctrinate 4-year-old girls into homosexuality and transsexual surgery. Yes, that's what they really think."
Mattel flatly denies any effort to purposely encourage gender confusion with the poll.
"Whenever we ask a child's gender, we provide her/him with three different answers: 'girl,' 'boy' and 'I don't want to say,'"explained Lauren Bruksch, a company spokeswoman. "Barbie.com always provides children with a neutral or non-response option."
Continued Bruksch: "In this particular case it was an innocent mistake; it should have read 'I don't want to say' as it does now. To suggest anything otherwise is ridiculous and irresponsible."
The spokeswoman said the answer "I don't know" is built into the sample answers of the rotating poll, and the fact it was not corrected before going live was an "unfortunate mistake."
The homosexual agenda leftists are now using Barbie dolls to promote their immorality.
"Concerned Women for America, or CWA, believes by including the "I don't know" choice the company was promoting the homosexual agenda."
Hmmm sounds like a CWA over-reaction. But then I guess they have to keep the base energized...
Any boy at a Barbie website should be checking I don't know.
I am a Boy
I don't know
When I saw the title, I wondered if this would have something to do with the strange "anatomy" of Ken dolls. They sure confused the heck out of me when I was a little girl, with no brothers as a basis for comparison.
This survey question is pretty whacked, but I think most little girls who see it would laugh, think "wow that's weird!" and dismiss it.
Didn't they retire Ken for being too gay and get Barbie a new boyfriend>?
It wouldn't suprise me if they came out with "anatomically correct" Barbie and Ken dolls.
I've got no special love for that CWA either.... whenever they went on strike management had to do their jobs... I lost quite a few family vacations and holidays because my dad had to fill for them.
Cute... vey cute.
ROFLMAO!
Good point!
It seems the questions only need a better 'framing'. . .to get to the truth of the issues here. . .i.e:
How do you feel?
Like a Girl?
Like a boy?
or last. . .just 'NOT SURE'. . .
Beyond pathetic. . .'Family Stone' and Brokeback for the 'big kids'; and now. . .Barbie reaching out for a new friend, perhaps. . .
She will probably not have to wait until next Chrismas either; for 'it' to show up.
If there are any kids out there who "don't know" then their parents are doing something VERY wrong.
Ditto.Last week some group claimed barbie was being mutilated because she made the kids seem inadequate or something.
It's a dman doll--kids destroy them all the time.
CWA sounds batso.
>>>Thank goodness! A new target for my unfocused outrage. I didn't know what I was going to do without the War on Christmas.
But the "War on Christmas" continues. All this past week retail clerks and advertising have been assaulting me with wishes for a Happy New Year in the midst of what the church calendar tells me is the Christmas season. I'm sure that I am not the only one. Where are the the calls for boycott that seemed ubiquitous all through Advent? 8^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.