• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Mattel introduces fat Barbie

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JEDI said:
kids have influence in what parents buy them.

they did a study with 2 dolls. both were exactly the same (including clothing) except one was black and the other was white.

black kindergarten aged girls picked the white dolls overwhelmingly to play with.
they asked them why. they said white is better. 🙁

I predict the same response. being skinny is better
Click to expand...

My daughter seemed to prefer black dolls, or she at least didn't care. I had a pretty good mix around the house, but her favorites were the black ones.
 
Oyeve said:
Now all we need is fat black barbie.
Click to expand...

tumblr_m2nm8qkUt71rtb03io1_500.jpg
 
Scarpozzi said:
I bet she still tries to fit in regular Barbie's skinny swimsuits at the beach.
Click to expand...

^^ This is the whole point of the new dolls. The old clothes won't fit and parents will have to buy whole new wardrobes for the new dolls. Can't get them cheap at garage sales, got to buy them new.
 
Fat Barbie isn't really that much more realistic than the old one. Other than making the fat acceptance dipshits happy, it's still not really a real representation of women.
 
stlc8tr said:
Ummm... 91 kg = 200 lbs.

Here's another shot of her.
Click to expand...

200 on a 5'9" frame is fine, an unflattering picture doesn't change that.

BoberFett said:
Fat Barbie isn't really that much more realistic than the old one. Other than making the fat acceptance dipshits happy, it's still not really a real representation of women.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it looks like all they did was give her stupid thighs with a marginally thicker waist and limbs.
 
Last edited:
Ruptga said:
200 on a 5'9" frame is fine, an unflattering picture doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

I think it borders a bit on too heavy but that wasn't what was being debated.

The question was if curvy Barbie was real, how much would she weigh. Rakehellion thinks "at least 220", a few people disagreed so he posted that photo of Ashley Graham, who's only around 200. Personally I think curvy Barbie would be 170-180 tops if real so I tracked down that other photo.
 
Ruptga said:
200 on a 5'9" frame is fine, an unflattering picture doesn't change that.



Yeah, it looks like all they did was give her stupid thighs with a marginally thicker waist and limbs.
Click to expand...
No, actually it's not. 175 would be normal for 5-9. 200 would be ok if they're bodybuilding.
 
stlc8tr said:
I think it borders a bit on too heavy but that wasn't what was being debated.

The question was if curvy Barbie was real, how much would she weigh. Rakehellion thinks "at least 220", a few people disagreed so he posted that photo of Ashley Graham, who's only around 200. Personally I think curvy Barbie would be 170-180 tops if real so I tracked down that other photo.
Click to expand...

As I stated before, obviously she's going to look different naked than wearing flattering attire.

And you're hung up on a number on the scale when the point of this product is outward appearance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top