The latest in Barbie-mania has hit the Australian airwaves. Now we have not only the Barbie house, the Barbie horse and the Barbie car, but also the Barbie song.
Since Danish group Aqua released the single "Barbie girl" in August, it has sold hundreds of thousands of copies worldwide. Last week it hit No 2 on the national singles' charts.
This particular Barbie product, however, does not have the support of Barbie's parent company, Mattel. The company says it is "concerned" that the song's lyrics characterise young women as sex objects: "I'm a Barbie girl/ In a Barbie world/ Life in plastic/ It's fantastic/ You can brush my hair/ Undress me anywhere."
Mattel can hardly claim innocence. Spokesperson Sean Fitzgerald has even admitted that some people accuse Barbie of setting narrow, artificial standards and promoting low self-esteem and eating disorders amongst young women. Mattel, of course, denies these accusations.
While Mattel's response is predictably cynical, the stated aim of the song is equally disturbing. Aqua's recording company included a disclaimer on the record that the song is not endorsed by Mattel and is an "up-beat, positive, lyrical comment".
But "Barbie girl" is more about selling records than making a social comment. This also explains Mattel's indignation: another company has found a way of grabbing a share of the huge profits generated by the plastic princess.
It was reported in the September 9 West Australian that in the US it is the song on the radio most requested by young women: as one disc jockey put it, "The little girls are jumping up and down for it".
We can only assume that the so-called social comment consists either of making fun of Barbie or of turning Barbie into a positive, sexual image of women.
Making Barbie look silly, however, is neither difficult nor a particularly deep social comment, and the supposed irony is hard to pick when you first hear the song. Mattel shouldn't worry; the song actually helps strengthen Barbie-mania, unrealistic stereotypes and the objectification and degradation of women.
It is impossible to turn such a widely marketed, powerful symbol like Barbie into a positive thing. The reality is that women's sexuality is grossly distorted by the inherent sexism in capitalism, which allows only two sexual roles for women: "whore" or "good girl". "Barbie girl" does little to pose a positive alternative.
Nevertheless, the fact that the record company tried to sell "Barbie girl" as a "social comment" indicates that it thinks there is a bit of extra cash to be made from progressive consciousness in the population.
In the same vein, Mattel's recent production of a "handicapped Barbie" was touted as a step forward in the acceptance of people with disabilities. However, taking a doll with virtually no waist, absurdly long legs, huge pointy breasts and feet constructed to fit only into high-heeled shoes, and putting her in a wheelchair is not much of a step forward for anyone.
It is a tribute to the past gains of the women's movement that corporations feel they have to pay some lip service to feminist consciousness. But the fact that Barbie still exists in any form underlines the need for the women's movement to fight further to eradicate institutionalised sexism and enable women, not profit-hungry companies or misguided bands, to determine their own appearance and sexuality.