Dolls with disabilities

Lunar_Eclipse

Yes, it's a great idea. Many parents will love their realism, unlike totally fake 'Barbies' etc. Sadly kids seem to love fake, eg princesses, those horrible Bratz dolls (what a brand name!), the Frozen frenzy etc.

£69 is far too expensive though.

Transformers

Toys can be too lifelike though - isn't play sometimes about fantasy too?

Yes, it's great to have stuff that a child can relate to but it's equally great to have toys for escapism too.

I think these are OK for an educational / healthcare environment but I don't think they're necessary for home play.

As to the price, at £69 that's just a rip-off.

What next? Obese dolls carrying a Burger King bag? Tattooed girls?

Corelli

I like the idea of these dolls in principle but I'm not sure about these. They need to be cheap enough so they are an everyday option when buying toys. And attractive enough that they would appeal to all children. Not be 'special' for 'special' children.

Going off at a bit off a tangent, I love what this woman has done to Bratz dolls. http://treechangedolls.tumblr.com/

tattycath

Corelli wrote: »

I like the idea of these dolls in principle but I'm not sure about these. They need to be cheap enough so they are an everyday option when buying toys. And attractive enough that they would appeal to all children. Not be 'special' for 'special' children.

Going off at a bit off a tangent, I love what this woman has done to Bratz dolls. http://treechangedolls.tumblr.com/

Thanks for sharing this. That's brilliant!

j.e.j.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

I see no reason why a child without these conditions shouldn't enjoy playing with them either - there were adults who dismissed or ridiculed the idea of having black or dual heritage dolls once, but most (hopefully) have grown up past that stage now.

rotfl, dual heritage :rotfl::rotfl: is that the latest in-word now?

It used to be half-caste, then that was replaced with mixed race (I tend to use the latter)

heritage sounds like a National Trust building

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Transformers wrote: »

Toys can be too lifelike though - isn't play sometimes about fantasy too?

Yes, it's great to have stuff that a child can relate to but it's equally great to have toys for escapism too.

I think these are OK for an educational / healthcare environment but I don't think they're necessary for home play.

As to the price, at £69 that's just a rip-off.

What next? Obese dolls carrying a Burger King bag? Tattooed girls?

Keeping them as educational or medicalised reinforces the idea of children with those characteristics as being different. Being in the toybox with all the other dolls (or scattered across the bedroom floor, this being real life and children, after all) makes them more normal. The nearest thing to an inclusive doll when I was a kid was my Six Million Dollar Man. Yes, it was fantasy - but it was a doll with prosthetic limbs and a replacement eye.

Never mind obese dolls, it's rare enough to find them with a healthy build - the increase in eating disorders and body dysmorphia in boys and young men ties in with the increasingly unrealistic bodies of male dolls.

I do agree that the dolls in the OP are stupidly expensive. They're aiming for a particular market - people with more money than sense, or educational/healthcare budget holders, when what is needed is difference available at the same price as other dolls. Mind you, the awful talking ones aren't cheap, and the baby dolls are expensive in my mind as well. But Barbie technically had a butterfly tattoo for years. And fantasy dolls have always existed.


Toys with physical differences shouldn't be locked away in hospitals or specialise play environments, just like the children shouldn't be.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

j.e.j. wrote: »

rotfl, dual heritage :rotfl::rotfl: is that the latest in-word now?

It used to be half-caste, then that was replaced with mixed race (I tend to use the latter)

heritage sounds like a National Trust building

That's the most important part of my post to you? Really?

Would you rather they were labelled as [racks brain for previous phrases I've heard] half-chat, mongrel or mulatto? Language changes. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. In the case of describing appearance, definitely for the better.

My heritage is Scots and Ashkenazi. I'm white. Very white (except for the freckled bits). My race is white. But I'm more than just that. As everybody is.

Corelli

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

That's the most important part of my post to you? Really?

Would you rather they were labelled as [racks brain for previous phrases I've heard] half-chat, mongrel or mulatto? Language changes. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. In the case of describing appearance, definitely for the better.

My heritage is Scots and Ashkenazi. I'm white. Very white (except for the freckled bits). My race is white. But I'm more than just that. As everybody is.

Spot on, Jojo, as with everything you've said on this thread.

j.e.j.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

That's the most important part of my post to you? Really?

Would you rather they were labelled as [racks brain for previous phrases I've heard] half-chat, mongrel or mulatto? Language changes. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. In the case of describing appearance, definitely for the better.

My heritage is Scots and Ashkenazi. I'm white. Very white (except for the freckled bits). My race is white. But I'm more than just that. As everybody is.

Not the most important, but it stood out, because I'm interested in words and language, generally. I'm not sure I've heard the term dual heritage before and it sounds to my ears a bit overly PC and quite funny.

The term mixed-race is fine. Half-caste sounds a bit old-fashioned now.

My heritage is London and Kent.. :whistle: Probably a bit of Irish if you go back a few generations. I'm also very white :cool:

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

j.e.j. wrote: »

Not the most important, but it stood out, because I'm interested in words and language, generally. I'm not sure I've heard the term dual heritage before and it sounds to my ears a bit overly PC and quite funny.

The term mixed-race is fine. Half-caste sounds a bit old-fashioned now.

My heritage is London and Kent.. :whistle: Probably a bit of Irish if you go back a few generations. I'm also very white :cool:

In practical use at my school, we're more likely to use phrases such as 'light' or 'similar skin tone to x', 'more of a golden tone', 'freckles', 'blonde Afro', 'green eyes', 'tall', 'stocky', 'hangs around with y' and suchlike when describing a student, just as we would any other student.