I’ve been away for about a week, but I am back and it seems like the Sarah Palin madness continues. While I have seen a lot of Palin stuff that makes me cringe (like the RNC claiming Democrats are acting like a old boys network for saying Palin is bad for women and today’s totally biased article on her in the Washington Post), these new Palin action figures take the cake for the most disgusting thing I have seen yet. Obviously, some genius decided that the best way to capitalize on a woman candidate for vice president was not to talk about issues or celebrate an accomplishment, but to create a doll and incredibly offensive, sex stereotyped outfits for her that reduce her to nothing more than a sexual fantasy. This is even worse than the Barbie that said she was bad at math. As you can see in the pictures below, you can get “superhero” Palin, “school girl” Palin, and, if you are boring, normal executive Palin.
Do you like the way that “superhero” and “school girl” Palin can barely keep their vaginas or their midriffs covered? I think that’s special!
Of course, male political action figures (the same company that made Palin figures made a bunch of awful stuff) turned into offensive characterictures or sex objects are barely even discussed, while these Palin action figures seem to be getting major media coverage. I have to say, that offends me. Why is it that people might think women action figures, no matter how demeaning are funny or cool? I think a big part of this is that the people who make these dolls and the media who hypes them seem to think that women are stupid enough to buy any kind of doll and put it in any kind of skanky outfit. I imagine these dolls are made for adults, but I can only imagine little girls playing with these dolls and thinking that they can run for vice president AND dress like a ho! What does it say that we can only see a woman running for vice president in such “girly” roles? Why is it so hard to depict her as a woman? What does it say that “sexy” Palin dolls are available, but you could only buy Hillary Clinton nutcrackers?
If you can only buy these toys, it seems women candidates can only be babes or ball busters. God forbid, they simply be competent or professional. Where’s the fun in that? How can you sell those figures? Also, it seems implied that you can’t buy male dolls like this because they are seen as professional and serious. They are expected to be tough and to be more concerned with their work than outfits, so there’s not really the point in making dolls. Where’s the fun in changing a man’s suit or making him a nutcracker? It’s just ridiculous that our cultural expectations about male and female candidates allow toys to be created that turn women into sexual objects or bitches or things to be played with, while men are never degraded in such a way.
Why are we laughing at these instead of being horrified? I’m no fan of Sarah Palin, but I have to say, I’m upset that she cannot run for office without being characterized in this way. Can’t we look at her as a candidate and talk about her stances on issues without being distracted by action figures or teen pregnancies? The country is falling apart, women are still facing enormous discrimination and all we can do is turn female candidates into silly dolls and play with them. We have a long way to go if female candidates are seen as toys, not leaders that can actually change the way the country is run.
(I should also note, I am a giant nerd who likes action figures, but I am all about action figures for strong feminists (Buffy, Hermoine, Kate from Lost, if only I could get Tina Fey figure…) that sit on my desk and make me feel good about strong women. So, I am not against toys, I am just against toys that turn women into jokes when they should be taken seriously!)
