In going home this past weekend for the Thanksgiving holiday, I found myself snowed into my parents’ house by two inches of slush. In order to keep myself from going stir-crazy, I began to rifle through an assortment of my childhood toys. I had an intriguing conversation with the See-and-Say, I realized the futility of Tinker Toys, and I realized the sexual innuendo goldmine that is the Erector set.
But what’s more, I found my Barbie dolls. And I was suddenly flooded with harsh realities.
For starters, let’s be real — Barbie looks like she belongs on Hugh Hefner’s arm, not in an innocent child’s bedroom. I’d half expect to find her on Cinemax after midnight. And it’s a proven fact of Barbie’s design that her breasts are so out of proportion to the rest of her body that if she were a real woman, she would fall flat on that unnaturally perfect face.
But the real thing that bothered me about my Barbie dolls — and this bothered me from an early age — is the anomaly that is the Ken doll. I always considered Ken’s lack of genitalia to be ominous. It was always a little weird. I mean, here was Barbie, with her humongous breasts, these super-sized sexual organs, and Ken just had an indiscriminate lump.
Why was Barbie designed with such obvious equipment, while Ken was not? I sense injustice at work.
Ken received very little attention in my Barbie Dreamhouse. What savvy six-year-old gave him the time of day? He was equipped only with that vague lump and that even vaguer, insipid smile. He was cursed with the painted-on, plastic tighty-whities. There was no way he could ever play a role in my ever-evolving Barbie sex drama if I couldn’t even pretend he was naked.
It’s a harsh reality for any child to come to, knowing that no matter how many Dream House Jacuzzis they lounged in, no matter how many Princess Castle balconies they canoodled on, Ken and Barbie could never consummate their love. Ken could never satisfy Barbie. Despite those enormous breasts, Barbie could never even remotely turn Ken on. And as a woman, I feel this to be a grave injustice.
What makes the penis so taboo? Does it possess so much more dignity than the female breasts that it is worthy of concealment? With this in mind, I am offering a simple plea:
I want to see Ken’s penis.
That’s right. You heard me. It’s time Mattel stopped sheltering our youth, and started showing us Ken’s quivering loins. Perhaps they could market it as an accessory. On the same shelf as Barbie’s shoes and career outfits, so shall be Ken’s detachable penis. From now on, Barbie’s male companion could be produced with a penis-adaptable groin, and the accessory could simply snap into place.
According to a web site I found detailing the history of Barbie and Ken, Ken was created with a “genital bump” because a penis would prevent his pants from fitting right. I have to refute this claim — there are millions of men among us today whose pants fit just fine while containing a penis. That is just a corporate cop-out. And we deserve better.
Ken and Barbie were the golden standard of the American dream, and I don’t think Ken’s genitalia should be any different. As a little girl, I grew up aspiring to be Barbie. I am still holding out for that hot pink and turquoise dream house, and I’m waiting for a man who will blankly stare at me with that blank grin while doing everything I say. I have problems with men because I can’t find one who looks as good in color-coordinated polyester outfits as Ken did.
The problem isn’t solely Ken’s, however. At ten, I investigated my brother’s GI Joes and discovered they too lacked “goods”. GI Joe had gorgeous biceps and a six-pack to die for, but still lacked the essential quality of manhood. No wonder he is always lashing out in anger. That guy had a lot of aggression and resentment to burn, and what better way to do it than with an M14?
So I have decided to boycott Mattel until my appetite for doll penis is satisfied. It’s time we as women stood up and declared equal opportunity for indecent exposure. In the meantime, the only sex dramas we can re-enact in our toy chests are with spare puzzle pieces or play-dough.
Chelsea is at the top of her field in terms of doll genitalia theory. To find out more, e-mail her at [email protected].
