The “Barbie: I Can Be…” series of dolls is an admirable project if you look at its mission statement alone: “Barbie® I Can Be…™ dolls and accessories empower girls to play out different roles and “try on” fabulous careers.”

from Mattel.com

Awesome, right?  Who wouldn’t be behind diversifying the career pool in girls’ minds in their crucial development stages? Awesome.

The only problem with the Barbie® I Can Be dolls, it turns out, is Barbie herself.

It’s been well-documented that Barbie is an unrealistic portrayal of a woman’s body, that she can foster insecurity in young girls, and that she represents a dangerously narrow beauty ideal. True, Barbie has embarked on careers ranging from astronaut to “rock star” to computer engineer (and to babysitter and “newborn baby doctor,” in this most recent “I Can Be” series), but the fact remains that it is the aggressively “idealistic” Barbie doll itself that is in need of revamping.

The website for the News Anchor Barbie states that it is “perfect for girls aged 3 and up.” As I said before, girls in adolescence (not to mention toddlers, as Barbie is apparently targeting) are at a crucial point in their development, both physically and mentally. These girls could be affected for far longer than their allotted playtime if constantly faced with Barbie’s warped standard of beauty. Taken a step further, these girls could find Barbie to represent an impossibility, careers and all (making this 2005 Onion satire more of a reality).

If Barbie truly wanted to have a toy that emulates the spirit of the “I Can Be” concept, it would produce a doll that has roots in reality. If girls are going to tell themselves that they Can Be a doctor or a rock star or a journalist, they have to believe it first.