Tag Archives: Dolls

Trump & Tariffs: Increasing Inequality Is the Whole Point

Donald Trump’s attacks on parents who buy a lot of toys for their children have nothing to do with dolls or pencils. His recent comments have made some parents think, “I feel guilty about how many possessions my kids have; maybe Trump’s right and they SHOULD have fewer toys.” But he’s just attempting a diversion from the real issues he doesn’t want you to think about.

A Way to Shift More Power to the Richest 1%

Do you think Trump ever gave a thought to whether rampant materialism would make his children more selfish or shallow? Of course not. He doesn’t want you thinking about how he’s trying to create a future with even greater wealth inequality. He supports the restrictions on freedom, product availability, and product quality caused by restricting market availability. He likes billionaire-owned companies that engage in monopolistic practices. He’s all for power grabs by autocratic government entities and corrupt politicians—as long as he gets a cut.

The autocrat in chief and his friends want to tell you what you should and shouldn’t be able to buy, at what prices, and from whom. They want to control the market so they can create more opportunities for themselves to receive more financial kickbacks or power. Their support for heavy tariffs is about increasing their power while taking away yours.

Free Trade Increases Peace, Prosperity & Safety

Isolationism doesn’t make a nation stronger, safer, happier, healthier, or more peaceful. Strong international relationships, including trade, lead to a greater variety of available products, lower prices, and many more chances to buy things of better quality. People have known this for literally thousands of years. By trading with other countries, all countries involved can optimize sales of products they’re good at and that they have enough resources to create. That way nations can import things that are too hard or expensive to make at home, improving the standard of living across nations.

Greater access to affordable commodities leads to fewer wars. Wars interfere with the benefits of free trade, destroying trade routes and stopping the influx of needed materials, and the outflow of products from exporters who rely on foreign markets.

Beneficial Trade Agreements Lead to “Soft Power”

Making trade with other countries easier and more affordable makes our trading partners fonder of our products, sure. It also makes them fonder of us as people. The incentives to treat our trading partners with greater respect and appreciation lead to warmer relations. When we make trade deals, we also build positive relations that give us “soft power”—the power that comes from positive feelings, trust, and mutual respect. Strong trade agreements can lead to greater tourism, cross-border business deals that allow for faster innovation and business growth, stronger border agreements, and more information sharing regarding health and security matters. Strong trade agreements also help countries build alliances against rogue states who might want to attack or invade them.

Limiting Trade Restricts Freedom

Adding heavy tariffs and destroying trade agreements benefits oligarchs and corrupt government officials. Such people have the power or money to create regional monopolies, decide what items the market will or won’t sell, and push resources toward their favorite suppliers. When oligarchs and autocrats are in charge, they make international trade agreements giving lower tariffs to countries that promise to bend the knee politically, or that pay kickbacks to corrupt officials in our country.

The reason for Trump’s tirades about how many dolls or pencils small children own isn’t based in concern over modern child-rearing methods. He’s not stoking your guilt because he cares about your children’s welfare. Trump harps on dollies and pencils because he doesn’t actually believe in a free market. He wants to up-end conservative support for free-market capitalism, the holy grail of traditional Republicanism.

For its many faults, pure free-market capitalism does support the freedom to buy what you want, whether the purchase is wise or foolish, well-made or shoddy, bad for you or good, as long as you can pay for it—or can pay the bank fees on your line of credit. A free-market economy is the antithesis of having a government entity tell you what you can and can’t buy, use, or enjoy. It also tends to lower prices, and lower prices on commodities means increased freedom and opportunity to buy exactly what you want, at a price you can afford.

Protectionism & Isolationism Don’t Lead to Safety or Prosperity

Protectionism is the belief that taxing imported goods more highly, restricting or refusing their importation, and giving special deals to domestic businesses benefits domestic businesses and helps one’s own nation’s economy to grow while avoiding providing unfair benefits to those outside one’s borders. Isolationism, which often increases at tiems of greater protectionism, preaches that outsiders, their products, and their ideas are not to be trusted, and that we leave ourselves weakened and vulnerable if we make treaties, trade agreements, or join organizations like the United Nations that seek to create international legal structures and encourage economic, social, and health equality.

Such “America first” protectionist and isolationist politics and economic leanings have been popular at various times during the last two centuries. Many who have followed them believed that such policies would exclude unwanted “foreign influences” on culture and business, and would avoid the dilution of a supposed American way of life.

The result of this distrust of interactions with outsiders has instead often been a more insular way of thinking that led to greater xenophobia. What’s more, protectionism and isolationism left U.S. businesses and financial institutions at greater risk of failure because they did not diversify their funds, product pipelines, or markets across national or continental borders.

Doesn’t Capitalism Have Significant Flaws?

Free-market capitalism tends toward rampant materialism and encouraging ever-expanding markets, even when that causes pollution, dwindling natural resources, or social problems. It supports a mentality that says buying more is necessarily better, and that your success and appeal are based on what and how much you buy. It encourages waste and disposal instead of repair or reuse of resources.

Clearly, this system has many terrible flaws. But there are limitations on these downsides, including environmental impact laws and free-trade agreements that ameliorate many downsides of unfettered capitalism.

For millions, the chief attraction of a free market is that it supports the individual’s freedom to choose what to purchase and how much, IF a person has sufficient capital to do so. A good thing about a free market open to many sellers and buyers is that competition provides downward pressure on prices, and it tends to push the worst products out of the market based on lower demand. Those who can provide a greater variety of goods at better prices tend to do better.

Antitrust Laws Help Balance Free Markets

For the past century, the U.S. has had strong antitrust laws to avoid monopolistic practices (like having one big company buy up or destroy all its competitors, thereby driving up prices and driving down quality). Limits on monopolies help us avoid price-gouging and lowering of quality standards, and allow small businesses to compete more fairly with larger ones.

Other Laws Affecting Free Markets in the U.S.

Over the past century the U.S. has also developed a strong legal framework regarding the health and safety of products sold in the U.S. We’ve also passed thousands of laws about the safety and working conditions of those who produce goods and services on U.S. soil. These laws help to ameliorate further downsides of expanding markets. These include risks to human beings that are increased when competitiveness is prized above health, safety, and wellbeing.

Heavy Tariffs Are Hardest on Small Businesses

On the other hand, creating significant impediments to free trade through untargeted tariffs widens imbalances between resource-rich and resource-poor countries and people. This often leads to greater hostility between nations, and between people of different financial means. Smaller, more entrepreneurial companies bear the greatest brunt of high tariffs, and are at greatest risk of failure because they don’t have the scale and resources to pay huge tax levies or customs bills.

Higher Tariffs on Imports Can Lower Our Own Standard of Living

When Trump slaps tariffs on foreign-made goods imported to the U.S., he drives up prices at home, destroys jobs, crushes U.S. businesses and industries that rely on export sales, and destroys the trust of other nations in our government, or financial instruments, and our companies. The primary reason for a U.S. president to do that is so he and his friends and family can make more money and consolidate more power by taxing people in the U.S. who want or need imported goods. This takes money from everyday people and lowers their standard of living.

That shift, which disempowers the vast majority of the U.S., is the point of this unnecessary financial mess. Trump doesn’t care about you or your child. He doesn’t want to reset U.S. buying habits out of concern for the moral or financial welfare of the nation’s people. He just wants to grab a greater share of your resources for himself and his buddies.

Don’t fall for it.

I’m a Creep

I was talking with my daughter the other day about something I enjoyed that was a little creepy, and we laughed about that creepiness. I’ve always thought of myself as someone who doesn’t really DO creepy—I detest horror and zombies and vampires and gore. I loathe scaring people. I hate practical jokes and nasty surprises and causing people fear.

But then it dawned on me that I love The Twilight Zone, which I think of more as a source of slightly chilling campiness than creepiness. When I received a box set of every Twilight Zone episode as a Christmas gift a few years ago, I actually burst into tears, I found it such a touching and generous gesture.

I thought a little further about what constitutes creepiness and I realized that I love cemeteries, which I see as beautiful memorials to lost love. I seek them out in my travels and I have hundreds of photographs of headstones. Indeed, on the walls of my home hang several small casts of particularly lovely elements from New England’s grave markers.

Hmm.

I followed this train of thought a bit further down the track, and I had to admit to myself that I get a kick out of hiding weird disembodied hands and arms from antique baby dolls in my houseplants. I see them not as frightening but as absurd and laughable when they’re stuck randomly in nonsensical places. I also love them because I collect hand-related art—it reminds me of creativity and connecting with people and holding out one’s hand to others. To me, those creepy little hands are actually a mental shorthand for being willing to lead people toward something funnier, less expected, better. I don’t assemble them into horrific tableaux; I use them to accessorize my home and inspire me to stay close to those I love, to beauty, to my muses. My creepy baby hands also keep me from taking myself too seriously. They remind me to stay goofy, which I think is vital to staying human.

Then came the epiphany: Creepy people never think of themselves as creepy.

Uh-oh.

It turns out that I’m a creep. I’m a weirdo. But I’ll bet I’m the perkiest little creep you know.

Emotionally Scarring Toys

Pooduck

In December 2005 researchers at England’s University of Bath released the results of a study that found that children, especially girls, see torturing and mutilating their Barbies as a common and enjoyable form of play. An article in the London Times stated that “mutilation ranged from cutting off hair to decapitating and putting the dolls in microwaves.” Children ages seven to eleven were said to “see Barbie torture as a legitimate play activity, and see the torture as a ‘cool’ activity,” according to the article. The children were aware that they were being exploited by “over-marketing and over-charging” and that rejecting the doll was a “rite of passage” engaged in by children who felt they’d outgrown their Barbies. “Barbies are not special,” said the researchers. “They are disposable, and are thrown away and rejected.”

I’ve thought about my history with Barbies, and my daughter’s, too, and I take issue with some of the article’s findings. Cutting Barbie’s hair isn’t really an act of mutilation in the way that putting her in the microwave is. Children know that cutting their own hair gets them in trouble, and cutting Barbie’s hair gives them the satisfaction of distorting her appearance and messing with the standard and approved way of viewing her, it’s true—it also lets them know what it feels like to cut hair without getting in trouble. The Barbies I grew up around often had missing toes; this is not because we wanted to bind their feet golden-lotus–style and further fetishize their sexual-fantasy-based bodies, but rather because chewing the rubbery plastic felt good. Gnawing away at them resulted in their coming off completely in the mouth in a pleasant if slightly disturbing fashion. Pulling Barbie heads off was common when I was a child, not because we were acting out scenes from Robespierre’s Reign of Terror but because we wanted to trade them around among dolls with different features and outfits. We also pierced our dolls’ ears (leaving them looking grey and infected) and bent their knees back and forth so much for the sheer pleasure of hearing the click click click of their joints that their skin tore.

But do people take pleasure in creating their own torture tableaux featuring Barbie, Ken and all their plastic molded-bodied friends? Of course. Their constantly perky expressions and injection-molded perfection do invite children to challenge their prefab poise. They look so inviting in the box, but take them out of the vivid fuchsia packaging and their clothes are hard to put on, and their hair gets bunched up and never lies flat again and gets permanently dull and stringy when Barbie is invited to play in the bathtub. Ken’s spray-painted hair wears off and he ends up with flesh coloring showing through in patches that have nothing to do with standard male-pattern baldness. Barbie is not only free of genitalia, but sometimes has molded skin-colored patterns simulating underwear built right into what would be her buttocks if she had any gluteal musculature.

Barbie’s original design was based on that of the Bild Lilli, a sexually suggestive German doll from the 1950s. A German brochure from the 1950s states that Lilli was “always discreet,” and that her wardrobe made her “the star of every bar.” When Barbie debuted in 1959, many parents found her obviously sexual nature disturbing. Of course, this aspect of her is partly what has always made her so alluring to children. She’s the premiere socially sanctioned sexualized plaything, and she allows young children to engage in pre-sexual roleplay and pretend to embody the roles they think are expected of them as they mature. Children live out stereotypes with Barbies, but they also challenge and laugh at them.

The widespread delight that children take in trashing their Barbies when they feel they’ve outgrown them might be a reaction to the stereotypes, the expectations and the mass-merchandizing overconsumption extravaganza that Barbie represents, at least in part. But often Barbie’s mutilation is an unintentional byproduct of trying to personalize her and make her more interesting and individual. When such an attempt results in a Barbie who is less appealing, her loss of allure and inability to be made into something uniquely appealing make Barbie a sorry remnant of a time of earlier naivete, as well as a reminder of failed attempts at creating more individualized beauty. Rather than feel bad every time we see what our attempts at beautification have done, it’s easier to dissociate her from her former status as beauty icon if we take her destruction even further. If she’s ugly and all the gloss and perfection that we once admired in her is gone, why not turn her into a doggy chew toy, or see what happens if we take nail polish remover to the paint on her face? If we turn her into a science experiment, we feel less disappointed in her lost glory.

Barbie’s reputation for mindlessness was bolstered by the 1992 release of Teen Talk Barbie. This talking Barbie spewed forth phrases like “Math is hard!” and “Will we ever have enough clothes?” A group calling itself the Barbie Liberation Organization soon became famous for engaging in acts of Barbie sabotage, exchanging Barbie’s talking guts for the voice hardware found in Mattel’s Talking G.I. Joe dolls. The BLO repackaged three hundred dolls and slid them back onto store shelves. When unsuspecting little girls tried their new Barbies at home, the fashion dolls grunted out “Vengeance is mine!” and “Dead men tell no tales,” while little boys’ new G.I. Joes cooed “Let’s plan our dream wedding!”

Of course, some toys are less than glorious to begin with, and only become more disturbing or ridiculous with time. Others begin attractively and grow frightening with disuse or misuse. Such are the toys found at DisturbingAuctions.com. The site’s home page states that Disturbing Auctions “is dedicated to the research and study of the most bizarre items found for sale on Internet auction sites. Not the obviously fake auctions, like the infamous human kidney, but truly tacky stuff that people really, honestly, believed that someone would (and in some cases did) buy.”

DisturbingAuctions.com features home furnishings including the velvet painting of Jesus blessing an 18-wheeler; accessories like the purse made of a bull’s scrotum; clothing like used gym shorts and a matching used jock strap; and haute cuisine, including 200 freeze-dried pork chops. But nothing can compare to discovering the hideous figurines, including the “Check Out My Ass Clown” (make sure to look at the optional magnified view for ultimate flamboyant clown perusing pleasure), the items classified as Terrifying Dolls, or, my favorites, the Emotionally Scarring Toys.

The Terrifying Dolls category features the pained, shriveled and body-part-challenged Puppet Assortment, the pinheaded Li’l Head Doll, and Baby Tears-Your-Flesh, a.k.a. Little Dolly No-Head. Big Hands Baby and the Saddam Hussein puppet also get honorable mention.

Clowns have a special place on Disturbing Auctions; here you’ll find a clown brooch, a clown ashtray and a vicious Cranky Clown Lava Lamp, among other items. Dead stuffed frogs also have their places, as does the stuffed and mounted genuine Deer Butt. The Clark Gable candle puts one in mind of a wax-covered severed head, and why the seller of the Inflatable Ladies’ Legs had to mention that they fit in the mouth when not inflated is anyone’s guess.

Still, the Emotionally Scarring Toys is the biggest, juiciest treasure trove of outrageous kitsch. From the Dean Martin Hand Puppet to our beloved Big-Ass Donkey, from Darth Small to the marvelously named Pooduck, it’s hard to find an entry that isn’t deeply, horribly, hideously wrong down to its very core.

While most of the site has stayed static for years, there is a related site, DisturbingAuctions.com/daily, where visitors can post their own horrific online auction discoveries and attach their own witty (or, more frequently, just vulgar) commentaries. There are occasional gems to be found here, but the older, original DisturbingAuctions.com site has the most consistently hideous and perfectly captioned offerings. All hail the Pooduck!

[Revised from an article which originally appeared on Laura Grey’s Little Hopping Bird blog.]