Source: Bigstock

As we saw last week, a long-dormant sinister art-world trans-terror group, the Barbie Liberation Organization (BLO), has recently risen from their pink plastic coffins to terrorize the previously innocent world of childhood anew, just in time for Christmas.

Back in July, hijacking the popularity of last summer’s smash-hit Barbie movie, the BLO deployed double agent Daryl Hannah, Hollywood’s former onscreen blonde Barbie girl of choice herself, to falsely announce Mattel’s entirely nonexistent “groundbreaking commitment to stop using plastic [in its toys] by 2030.”

Instead, promised a series of fake Mattel-branded BLO psy-ops websites, the U.S. toy giants had agreed to replace all their plastics with organic, environmentally friendly, and easily recyclable alternative manufacturing substances instead—namely, mushrooms. As such, a new “Barbie MyCelia Eco Warrior Edition” range of dolls was supposedly being launched, “mycelia” being the technical term for “fungi.” New, mycelial polymer-based mini-dolls of leading real-life Far-Left Green figures like Greta Thunberg were being launched to help get Mattel’s new message across, it was proclaimed—a fully posable non-plastic spastic.

Hoax MyCelia Barbie accounts quickly began sprouting all over social media like, well, mushrooms, the combined effect being so convincing it persuaded various mainstream media outlets, notably The Washington Times, to report the BLO hoax as being actual fact.

Terror in Toyland
Yet this was not the BLO’s first media manipulation maneuver. As we saw last time, the BLO’s previous campaign of terror came back during 1993, when they cunningly swapped around the voice-boxes of talking Barbies and G.I. Joe dolls, so Barbie unexpectedly started growling toxically masculine things like “Kill all the towelheads!” whilst Joe began squealing girly-simpering lines like “Good girls do as hubby orders!” (or something like that, anyway) in order to subvert traditional gender roles amongst previously normal Janets and Johns who innocently and unknowingly received such items in Santa’s sack that Christmas morn.

The terroristic idea of “queering Barbie” was all theoretically there in America’s left-leaning humanities faculties already, however. Igor Vamos, the art-world prankster who acted as the BLO’s chief Yasser Arafat figure during its early days of Joker-style mayhem, just rescued it from dusty university libraries and unvisited gallery spaces and disseminated it into the wider mainstream media-sphere for ordinary public eyes to see.

A good summary of such pre-BLO-era Barbie-related activism can be found in the 1995 gender-studies text Barbie’s Queer Accessories by Erica Rand, which traces the strange development of Barbie into, first of all, a feminist icon, and then a gay and trans one.

Barbie’s ostensible transformation into a modern, liberated woman begins with the work of Jill Barad, a former cosmetics executive who got a job at Mattel in 1981 by the alarming means of pitching them a new range of makeup aimed specifically at children (and, thereby, also indirectly at the likes of Jeffrey Epstein). In 1985, Barad, who later served as Mattel CEO, then created a new “Day-to-Night Barbie” line of dolls. This new Barbie was a high-flying business executive just like Barad, wearing an office jacket and matching skirt—which could be reversed into evening wear, just like that. Now Barbie could fulfill both traditional male and female roles whenever she fancied, simply by adjusting her clothing, just like Eddie Izzard.

Day-to-Night Barbie’s new slogan was “We Girls Can Do Anything,” as exemplified by her ever-expanding range of new jobs: Doctor Barbie, UNICEF Ambassador Barbie, Teacher Barbie, Astronaut Barbie, Rock Star Barbie, Businesswoman Barbie, Chef Barbie, Obersturmbannführer Barbie, even Marine Corps Barbie. And yet, with only a subtle shift of emphasis, Barad’s slogan could easily become “We Girls Can Be Anything”—including being boys.

Pink Valley of the Dolls
Rand’s book next traces the way in which the traditional figure of Barbie stands as a paradigmatic emblem of all-American blonde WASP womanhood—or, to put it another way, of normativity, that dreadful concept that Queer Theory exists purely to subvert and dismantle wholesale. “Can you wrest Barbie from Mattel and refunction her to challenge rather than abet dominant ideologies?” asked Rand’s book. Very easily, yes.

Some feminist-cum-pedophile mothers began by proudly painting nipples and pubic hair onto their daughters’ Barbies, to undermine their image of smooth, nonthreatening femaleness. Then artists and pranksters took this one step further by taking photos of Barbie paired with dildos rather than her usual innocent rubber accessories like hair dryers and handbags, or even surreptitiously slipped actual sex-aids onto toy-store shelves to tar the dolls as tiny plastic whores by association.

Next came fake adverts for AIDS Barbie, together with attached chemical drip, on the bizarre grounds that “In the interest of making Barbie look wholesome, Mattel makes silence about sex the rule and doesn’t give its teens condoms for the same reason that most school boards don’t: to avoid appearing to have authored or authorized sexual activity.” That’s right: Because Barbie dolls didn’t come with free condoms for Ken, Mattel was somehow partly responsible for the 1980s AIDS epidemic.

Ken or Kendra?
Acting as an agent of “hegemonic-discourse content,” another “problem” [sic] was that Barbie was not noticeably lesbian or bi, leading to the production of various obscene novellas, poems, plays, and films depicting Barbie going on Gay Pride marches, pervily facilitating oral sex between Ken and G.I. Joe, or even encouraging Ken to become Kendra, a “pre-op transsexual” who, despite being a man, self-identified as a lesbian, or “a dyke trapped in the body of a dream-boat.”

In 1993, parodying the new Totally Hair Barbie doll, greetings cards were sold depicting a rival Totally Out Barbie, who dressed as a stereotypical Megan Rapinoe-style comic-book lesbian and spouted speech-bubble slogans about her clitoris: “Press her button to hear more radical phrases!” Which “button,” precisely?

Also in 1993, activist artist Bee Bell introduced the Barbie universe to the confusing concept of “genderfuck dykehood,” i.e., men who dress like lesbian women who themselves dress like gay men. Appropriately enough, Bee’s resultant fake art-doll of an obscure male Barbie character gone queer looks uncannily like Ellen DeGeneres.

Rechristened as Glenn (a possible reference to Ed Wood’s 1953 cross-dressing B-movie Glen or Glenda?), this new “Passing Butch Glenn” was styled with short, cropped, beached-blond hair and advertised on his box as the “Cool boyfriend of Skipper,” another minor Mattel Barbie figure. Gayboy Glenn even came packaged with a series of intentionally offensive stickers for kids of all ages to slap all over his body—including “MASS-PRODUCE MY FIST,” “QUEER GIRLS MAKE ME HARD,” “FUCK YOUR GENDER,” “FUCK MY GENDER,” and, most prophetically of all, “YES, I KNOW IT’S THE WOMEN’S BATHROOM.” Don’t forget, this was thirty years ago!

The Body Unbeautiful
Ten years ago in 2013, just before the Great Awokening suddenly and arbitrarily redefined gender dysphoria as something for young girls to aspire toward rather than a blatant psychological disorder to be avoided at all costs, a U.S. mental health website and addiction treatment resource center, Rehabs.com, got great media attention by putting out an imaginative Barbie-themed media pack.

By juxtaposing photos of the underwear-clad frames of Barbie and another smiling real-life young flesh-lady of average size and shape, Rehabs.com argued Mattel was pushing dangerously unrealistic ideals about female body image to naive teens. Barbie’s neck was twice as long as that of an average American female and six inches thinner, it was shown, meaning in reality she would be unable to even lift it. With ankles so impossibly thin, Barbie would also have to crawl around everywhere on all fours grazing upon grass like a ruminant quadruped.

Her scaled-up sixteen-inch waist, meanwhile, would leave room inside for only half a liver and a few inches of intestine, necessitating a lifetime spent on or near the toilet in the bathroom of her famous Dream House, which would hence end up being far more brown than it was pink. She wouldn’t even have enough body fat to be able to menstruate.

Barbie’s BMI would be infinitely worse than that of the average anorexic, the implication being obvious: Mattel was fueling dangerous body dysmorphia amongst teens. In 2015, Rehabs.com warned of how, “starting with their very first toy doll, girls are exposed to highly unrealistic images of female bodies,” thereby being implicitly told that Barbie’s unachievable and unhealthy frame was “a body to emulate.”

In the 1960s, Mattel’s Slumber Party Barbie came with a miniature bathroom scale “permanently stuck at 110 pounds” and a small How to Lose Weight book, whose only on-page words were “DON’T EAT!” Yet, said Rehabs.com: “Decades later, this advice would re-emerge as the code-word acronym ‘IDEA’ used online by sufferers of eating disorders—short for the chilling slogan ‘I Don’t Eat Anymore.’”

Living Dolls
But if Vitruvian Barbie was once said to encourage anorexia, then one plausible assessment of the transgender cult of today is that it is merely the contemporary version of anorexia, at least amongst teenage girls. However, unlike its unspoken predecessor, transgenderism now has semi-official social sanction, even full-blown social prestige.

The Rehabs.com website of 2023 today has a special subsection listing “LGBTQ+ Drug and Alcohol Rehab Centers” for patients to use, bemoaning how “Research shows that members of the LGBTQ+ community have higher rates of substance misuse and substance use disorders than individuals who identify as [surely simply “are”?] heterosexual” due to alleged higher rates of discrimination against them. By including the “T” for “Trans” within this category, Rehabs.com is essentially affirming a new form of body dysmorphia in a way they never would have done with anorexia in previous years.

If Barbie’s fictional body is deemed a dangerous one for female children to be encouraged to emulate, then why is the actual body of someone like Hollywood’s much-feted female-to-male transitioner Ellen Page, with her surgically sawn-off breasts, now held up as a portal toward “trans joy”? Consider also the distinctly cartoonish appearance of many of today’s drag-queen-like male-to-female transitioners. At the same time as pointing at Barbie dolls and censoriously telling young women, “Girls, you can’t possibly have a body like this,” we’re pointing delusional fully grown men toward the very same thing and saying that they can.

These selfsame campaigners have replaced one cartoon caricature of something that is at least sort of semi-achievable, in terms of a girl being relatively thin, clean-skinned and blonde, with something that is totally 100 percent unachievable instead, in terms of the actual literal physical sex-change, an outright biological impossibility. It is logically unclear why the queering of Barbie characters is deemed by such activists to be “healthy,” “natural,” and “empowering,” whereas the traditional powder-puff pink stereotypically feminine Barbie is “toxic,” “sexist,” and “dangerous.”

According to toy-industry experts, due to the lingering influence of this past summer’s blockbuster, Barbie dolls are set to have been one of the most popular present lines of Christmas 2023. It might have been less morally corrupting for moms and dads to gift their kids an outright blow-up sex doll. At least they still have normal male or female genitalia on them, unlike Genderfuck Barbie.

Steven Tucker’s new book Hitler’s & Stalin’s Misuse of Science: When Science Fiction Was Turned Into Science Fact by the Nazis and the Soviets is out now in hardback (Pen & Sword/Frontline Books). Buy it here (U.S.), here (U.K.), or here (direct from publisher).