http://www.care2.com/greenliving/this-doll-sucks-what-a-breastfeeding-doll-says-about-society.html
This Doll Sucks: What a Breastfeeding Doll Says About Society?
From the “I took the bait” file:
Being a journalist, you quickly start to figure out the way things work pertaining to product and subsequent hype. A particular product will be released that holds some trivial interest or inherent controversy and media savvy PR people will push out that product into various media channels and the blogosphere. It will be picked up, reported on, blogged about and invariably become a viral phenomenon for a matter of days. For the most part, these little cultural flares are short lived, provide very little in the way of discourse or illumination, and are generally entertaining on the most rudimentary of levels. I would like to think that I am either too smart or too jaded to really fall for such cynical pandering, but alas it is the middle of summer, and sometimes even my high standards are momentarily subverted.
So with that introduction, meet Bebe Gloton, which translates from Spanish into English to read “Baby Glutton.” This somewhat quotidian looking baby doll (manufactured in Spain and no doubt on its way to world wide distribution and infamy) is remarkable because, unlike other popular synthetic baby stand-ins that eat, cry, and even pee and poop, this one is breastfed, not by you, but by your child. Bebe Gloton comes equipped with baby doll and decorative halter, which is intended for your child (presumably a girl, but by no means does it have to be!) to wear over her chest. The halter has two benign looking flowers where the nipples should be, and when Bebe Gloton is brought close to the bosom blossom, the nursing commences. This particular toy is hardly unique in the respect that it provides little girls (again, little boys are indeed welcome and able to play with Bebe Gloton, as I think it would be an interesting alternative to Transformer robots) the attractive opportunity to pretend to be a mother and indulge those dormant maternal instincts. The truly remarkable and incendiary characteristic of this breastfeeding toy is the participation of the breast (even if it is shielded by a bouquet of flowers) in play, which by many is deemed as far too suggestive and sexual.
Needless to say, the press and the blogosphere has been set aflame with concern, outrage, affirmation as well as mockery. Predictably Fox News (an outpost for reactionary conservativism) has disregarded this toy even before American children have had a chance to let it corrupt them. They claim that the idea of breastfeeding is “too grown up for young children” and may even contribute to early pregnancy. In other sectors the reaction has been dismissive, but more along the lines of too much too soon. While there are a vocal few that view this toy as a positive reminder that breastfeeding is natural (although breastfeeding a piece of molding plastic is certainly not) and that anything that anything that reminds young girls that their bodies are more than just sex objects is something to be embraced.
Personally, when I first happened upon this coverage of Bebe Gloton, I thought it was kind of creepy, but not really any more creepy and unsettling than any other plastic animatronic doll. I don’t find the necessity in this particular item, considering that girls are already deep in play about being a mother as well as nursing their children (take a look at any issue of Mothering magazine and you will see it for yourself) and a toy like this seems to not excite the imagination of children, but replace it with battery operated animatronics. I wholeheartedly believe that American culture has not found its peace with the necessity, or even existence, of breastfeeding. I think the reasons why are so deeply rooted in sexual shame, body image, as well as pervasive social pressures, that it will likely take decades to disentangle the granny knot of puritanical beliefs that hold us back.
As for Bebe Gloton, I could take it or leave it, but then again I am hardly a 7 year-old girl. If, however, it empowers children, engages their imagination (this is where I have my doubts) and redeems the act and practice of breastfeeding, I am all for it.
What do you think? Is Bebe Gloton a worthwhile addition to your child’s pretend play arsenal? Is it too much too soon? Should breastfeeding be something best kept beneath a burp cloth? Are we all crazy?
related stories
-
(17 comments)
-
(12 comments)
-
(215 comments)
Robyn
Melissa
Deepak
Eric
Dave
Dr. Brent
Isha
Susan
Delia
Michelle
Wendy
Megan
Hilary
Ann
Judi
Ronnie
Kelly
Lily
Terri
Betsy
Cait
Andrew
Jana
Annie B.
Veronica
47 comments
add your comment »And let me say that I LOVE THIS SITE, in that there's a place where the majority not only doesn't freak out about this but supports it! YAY!!!
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
As with MANY of the toys on the market for kids, I find this one a bit disconcerting, a little overwhelming, and on the tacky-yuck side. But at the same time, I'm about to have my second baby, and my 4-year-old is fighting hard against identifying with the baby side of things as opposed to the caretaking, older-sister side of things. I think the difference between mommy and older-sister is important to observe, but a doll like this could help her be more comfortable with not being the baby nursing--it could help her identify more with her new position in life.
Do I like it? No, heck no, but I don't like most of those animatronic make-me-a-mommy-early babies. If it makes her happy and helps her to grow, though, it's a worthwhile toy. And this might be just that.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Why make breastfeeding "dirty" for kids, let them play with the doll as they chose! there is nothing wrong with a woman breastfeeding their child! Nor instilling the values of breastfeeding in children to later breastfeed their own! How many people go on WIC because they cannot afford formula-when they should be breastfeeding because it is healthier and FREE! Too many see formula as "easy" and "nonsexual" or "not dirty" what is so wrong with feeding your baby with what God made our bodies to do. The people that complain are also the ones that think it is ok for bra ads, and sexy commercials i am sure!
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
All my daughters "nursed" their dollies. It is only natural. I nursed all of them. If a doll came with a bottle, the bottle went straight into the trash. They also had slings to carry them in and cloth diapers to put on them.
My older daughter had a wonderful cloth Momma and baby doll set with breasts and a snap for nipples and the baby doll had the other part of the snap for a mouth. They attatched together. My daughter loved those dolls.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Just from example, without this fancy doll, I observed my daughter at a very young age, nursing her babydolls beneath her shirt. This doll isn't necessary, but isn't innappropriate. A child who is brought up with breastfeeding as being the norm, will obviously do the same with their dolls. It's amazing to me how many baby dolls automatically come with pastic baby bottles when babies are meant to be nursed at the breast!
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Dolls were not originally intended to be toys. The first dolls were created by primitive cultures to house the souls of the dead or the energies of demons. Later, when more advanced nations (such as Britain) ventured off and visited these tribal paradises that brought home these odd trinkets and created their own versions. Now we have a bunch of variations of dolls. Personally, I think dolls are creepy and hated them as a young girl. I preferred stuffed animals to barbies. Many young girls don't even like dolls and the ones that do are just slightly more feminine in nature. While I'll admit such a creation is at the least odd, I have no positive or negative reaction to this as the doll is merely a toy. Toys are meant to prepare children for adulthood, dolls in western culture were meant to prepare girls for the traditional roll of motherhood while wagons and similar "boy toys" were designed to prepare men for the traditional role of being a tradesman. The only reason I feel that this doll is an issue is because it reinforces the traditional mentality that women should run around barefoot and pop out babies. Are we not more than baby machines? Toys like this only reinforce negative stereotypes regarding gender.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Personally, I find dolls a bit strange, To me they resemble dead babies. They just are pieces of plastic. You know that the perverts are going to be snapping up these dolls just like the Japanese "love dolls". Remember when the anatomically correct dolls came out? I think they were called "Little Brother".
Give your child a pet to take care of; not some piece of stuffed plastic.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
As a mother of a now 16 year old and almost 3 year old girls, I will be waiting for this to hit my local stores shelves for my baby, IF she ASKS for it. I am all for it, welcome it. De-SEXING the breasts, I am all for that.
I think that is what most people are up in arms about, it shows the natural need for the breasts, not the sexuality of men sucking on them for pleasure.
I find it very funny to see people saying there is plenty of time for growing up, when they, themselves know, they have given their children baby dolls with fake bottles, barbies dressed in the shortest skirts labeled as Dr. Barbie or Teacher Barbie. Or have even bought their child an easy bake oven for them to play barefoot and pregnant, in the kitchen.. Yeah they are so endangered to grow up to fast with this doll, but not with any other play toys they have been forced to play with all their small lives already...
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Yes, Sophie, it is quite strange that outside the US, even members of highly conservative religions (not just Catholics) seem to have no trouble separating sex from breastfeeding. I wish I had an explanation other than the fact that that the collective social consciousness in this country is highly contradictory. We scream bloody murder because a doll that emulates breastfeeding might draw attention to a little girl's (non-existent) breasts with daisies, but we don't mind dressing her in teeny triangle bikinis that do the same, or other questionable clothes that are merely scaled-down versions of her big sister's sexy styles, or things like short-shorts that say "Princess" across the derriere. And we also don't mind letting her have little-girl versions of the cosmetics that adult women use to look and feel sexier. Crazy, right? It's the American way, it seems.
I always wonder how Europeans must shake their heads in disbelief at the crazy Americans. We do little but shrug and **look away** when 14-foot-tall billboards display a near-nude woman, her nipples only barely covered by the fingertips of someone of the opposite sex (a la Calvin Klein style ads). But we shriek in indignation when a sliver of flesh is exposed on an airplane or at a restaurant, in the context of a child being nourished. And we wail that it's unreasonable and a violation of our rights if we are asked to simply **look away**.
And this is why it may take decades for any real progress to take place.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Yes, my five years little boy plays dolls a lot. He loves dolls that can say "papa" as much as "maman".
But he also loves ragdolls, or plush toys, etc... Who said this doll was the best, anyway ?
;-)
I don't have it at home, and my 13 years old girl certainly wouldn't want to have it now.
It is just a new plastic toy we can buy.
To me, not worse than a plastic bottle equiped baby.
sophie
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Facebook account: