Time to gripe: can't please everyone

Over the past couple of decades I've noticed that Mattel is extremely responsive to the complaints of its customers.  Evidence of this can be seen in the new Fashionistas and their modified bodies.  I'm not sure if Mattel wanted to shut the Barbie Body Shaming Team up, or if they are trying to compete with Lammily, but either way they've started making Barbie bodies in new, "realistic" shapes.  One of them is a heavy body, referred to on the packaging and the website as "curvy."  I'm fortunate enough to own all three body shapes, and the curvy body is...well, it's definitely curvy!

My curvy doll is on the right, and it's pretty obvious that she's got a different body shape than the others.  I owe you a review on these, by the way; I need to speak to Talolili and ask her if she'd like to do a co-review.  She too has the blue-haired doll and her opinions may be different than mine.  But I digress.

Most of the responses I've seen regarding these dolls have been positive.  Liberal-rag TIME Magazine even ran a cover story on the subject, lauding Mattel's move and attempt to be more "all-inclusive."  But wouldn't you know, someone is having a tizzy fit anyway.  Jennifer Pitt, writer for liberal-rag Huffington Post, is upset because the separate sizes are labeled.  Yeah...she's mad about LABELS!!!  The different-sized dolls are in the Fashionistas line, and good ol' Jennifer thinks that's putting an unfair label on them.  "Why can't all Barbies be Fashionistas?" she whines.  She's also upset that each size is labeled.  Don't believe me?  Read the article!

Jennifer apparently is unaware that the Fashionistas are a line that's supposed to be set apart from the regular playline dolls.  The Basics were that way, the Barbie LOOK dolls are that way, and the Fashionistas are too.  The Fashionistas are the exact opposite of the LOOK dolls and the Basic dolls, being intended as budget toys.  Indeed, I got my three girls for eight bucks a pop.  Without the Fashionista label, it gets a little tricky to differentiate budget doll from doll that may cost a Jackson or more.  As for the "curvy," "tall," "original," and "petite" labels, let's be honest.  The dolls look highly similar to one another when they're in the box.  If you look up at my picture again, you might notice that it's a smidge tricky to tell the tall and petite dolls from original-bodied dolls.  It's easier when they're all standing together, but suppose a shelf had a cluster of petites or a cluster of talls.  How could anyone tell a difference in height if the box isn't labeled???  I admit that I had trouble telling the dolls apart when I saw them for myself.  The curvy girls stood out of course, but the petites and the talls sort of...blended in, I guess you could say.  I wouldn't have had any clue that they were there had the box not been marked "TALL" or "PETITE."

I thought for sure that having a chunky doll would shut the haters up, but I guess the phrase "haters gonna hate" is true.  No matter how hard Mattel tries, they can't please everyone.  I think they know that, and while I admire their attempts to rectify problems, I think that there's only so much a toy company can take.  If I were calling the shots at Mattel I'd gather my crew together and say "Screw it, we're doing it our way from now on.  We're going back to the 1966 TNT body."  Well, maybe I wouldn't.  Because the new bodies sure are fun!  I can see a few problems that I'll discuss when I get the review up and running, but they add a lot of visual diversity to my little dolly group.  

Cordially yours,

RagingMoon1987

A message from the newcomer

Dear Ju-hwang,

I'M HERE!!!  I poked my head in earlier, but you were asleep and I think it rude to disturb someone's sleep.  I look forward to meeting you.

And to the rest of the lady's viewers, here is what I look like.

The lady of the house says it's not a very good picture, but I must disagree.  It catches my good side.

Love to all,
John Alec "Johnny" Hailey

How the big girls compare

RagingMoon1987 here, and this is a spur-of-the-moment post, inspired by a brief chat I had on the My Twinn group I belong to on Facebook.  We had a brief discussion about Ideal Kissy, and that led me to wonder how my mother's old Kissy would compare to my Rael.  As you can probably guess, that led to a photo op.  Hey, when's the last time I passed on a photo op?

I threw in Saucy Walker (right) for good measure.  As you can see, the three dolls are of similar height.  Rael is allegedly an inch taller than Kissy and Saucy, but it's next to impossible to tell.   Unfortunately, these three do not look like they can share clothes.  Kissy is too chunky to wear the clothes I have for Rael.  Saucy might be able to wear some of Rael's things, according to a Facebook friend.

After I put the dolls away I remembered that Kissy and Saucy are both Ideal dolls.  The two deserve a comparison of their own, so different are they.  But that's for another time.

In marginally related news, my Johnny finally shipped.  He was already at Cincinnati when I learned he was coming, so that was either some uber-fast shipping or some sloppy communication on the part of Alice's Collections.  My vote is for the former.  Anywho, last time I checked the tracking his package departed Hazelwood, Missouri and was on its way south.  I figure I'll get it tomorrow or Monday.  This afternoon is a long shot, but it's very slightly possible he could get here today too.  We'll all just have to see.

Love always,
RagingMoon1987

Jeepers creepers...

...where'd you get those peepers!  LOL, this blog has been pretty quiet lately, so here's a random picture of Ju-hwang with new eyes.

These are arguably the cheapest doll eyes I've ever purchased...and the catch is that they're not even doll eyes!  These are dragon eyes from Hobby Lobby, and they're supposed to be jewelry fixings.  Since I occasionally make jewelry anyway I bought these, reasoning that if they do not make good doll eyes I can still make some epic earrings.  As it turned out, the largest pairs are eighteen millimeters, the smallest size Ju-hwang can wear.  The others are twelve and fourteen millimeter eyes have been put aside for anyone that I might get in the future.

In BJD-related news, I'm learning the hard way just how difficult it is to wait for one's order to be completed.  Today makes seven weeks and one day since I ordered Johnny, and the website still says "processing."  I understand that it takes a long time to cobble together a nice ball-jointed doll, and I also understand that the holidays slowed things down a bit (Alice's Collections took a week for the Chinese New Year).  The anticipation makes being patient very difficult, but that'll just make owning Johnny that much more rewarding...and it'll also buy me some time to find a restringing tool.  Crochet hooks do work, as I learned from Ju-hwang, but my hooks are all aluminum and they're bad to slip out of my hands when I pull on the elastic.  So I'm looking for a clamp or a hook with a better grip or SOMETHING that will do the trick.

As always, when something comes up I'll give y'all a holler.  Talolili and I are both working hard at our respective jobs (my hours at the library got extended, in fact), so posts may get a little more sporadic as time passes.  But if something earth-shattering comes up, I WILL give y'all a heads up.

Yours truly,
RagingMoon1987