Barbie's Problem Is Far Beyond Skin Deep Analysis

Within Jill Filipovic’s Time Magazine article, “Barbie’s Problem Is Far Beyond Skin Deep” posted in January 2016, she discusses the diverse selection an traditional doll company is now releasing to fit into today’s society of women. The context of this article is discrimination towards the physical image of a women, to an audience of well educated, middle class women from various cultures and races. Filipovic’s exigence is her own personal childhood memory she had when her father used to “walk[ed] barefoot in the basement across a sea of sharp, skinny naked limbs and equally sharp, pointed naked breasts.” The use of appeals detailed into Filipovic’s article is recommended for the PopMatters’ Persuasiveness Prize. She clarifies the claim she

The author soon states in the first sentence the “extreme makeover” that was not imagined to transpire from the previous decades of the same aspect. In her words, she continues to state the multiple versions being released, but will still be called the original name. “There’s a short one, a tall one, and one whose curves aren’t only in her chest” (Filipovic par. 2). This then elaborates a breaking barrier of appearances that fits the body image of modern society of womankind. Also, the market pressures are mentioned because the “societal ones” finally forced the multi-million company, Mattel, to construct the figurine to look like the ideal American woman. Declaring this as a feminist victory, Filipovic mentions that parents may appreciate the “creative fun of playing with dolls”, but they don’t want the memorandum that this is figurine is something younger girls should aim to be. The rational fact that a child should not be objectified by a malleable doll for the reason that she’s just an appealing face. As the writer goes on, she validates that this conclusion that the company Patient Zero for two generations, blatantly isolated “girl’s toys” from the “boy’s toys” (Filipovic par. 3). Leaving the progressing younger girls thinking that they can’t be a superhero, but pushed to be a princess or homemaker. Furthermore, tension rises as the Filipovic remarks a suggested toy from the toy store Toys R Us recommends a Dyson Ball vacuum cleaner as a toy for girls’ ages to 5 through 7. Lastly, Filipovic proves her claim that “girls are trapped in the pink box-or minimized in dialogue-their interests are reigned in, their physical and psychological development stymied” (par. 5). This particularizes the limitations that physique girls that they don’t have the criteria to sustain. But soon Filipovic changes her controversial statement to give credibility that “the world is changing for the better and Barbie is trying