The Diversity Within Bratz Dolls Solely Exists as a Marketing Scheme

Assignment Outline:

write an opinion piece about a popular culture artefact / text / phenomenon that you love, hate or feel is of topical interest thematically linked to the course.

I have included images of the first Bratz doll line and some of their most recognisable/popular lines below for reference.

Bratz are a line of fashion dolls created by the toy company MGA in 2001. Bratz came into the scene as a competitor to Barbie, who had a monopoly over the fashion doll market. Bratz had positioned themselves in the market as being different within the fashion doll market, especially compared to their main competitors, Barbie.

Bratz stood out from their Eurocentric counterparts. This being something that they were praised for. Bratz dolls exist as an object of self-projection. Bratz saw that there was not a mainstream market, with United States manufacturers stating that the “'multi-ethnicity, multicultural' quality [of the dolls] was paramount to the brand” (Parry & South China Morning Post, 2003). This highlights their social use-value, formed by the failure to create dolls that reflected society’s diversity, allowing for the rapid rise in popularity of Bratz dolls. While I can acknowledge that I liked this as a child, I liked having a doll that shares my first name and looked (somewhat) similar to me. However, looking at it now with a more critical lens, I can see the flaws within this so-called representation, especially when it comes to all of the characters, especially with the character of Sasha, pictured below.

My blatant dismissal of the representation seen within Bratz dolls has a source. This being the shallow stereotyping alongside MGA’s failure to create complex and dynamic characters. This seen through their ethnic characters been given generalised ethnic features which belong to a larger cultural group, rather than a specific one, such as China or Spain. This is most notably seen through the description of Jade as, “half East Asian [and] half white”, with Yasmin as “Hispanic” and Sasha as “black” (Bratz Fan Wiki, 2011a) (Bratz Fan Wiki, 2011c) (Bratz Fan Wiki, 2011b).

My main critique of Bratz dolls and their efforts at diversity is mostly at their explicit use of stereotypes. They are seen clearly within the characters of Jade and Sasha. Jade is described as being good at science and maths. Sasha, in particular, not only for her ethnicity being labelled as black but also for describing her as loving “hip hop” and “urban fashion” (Bratz, 2001). This in combination with the repeated statements from senior members on MGA’s team declaring that their dolls “do [not] … belong to a particular race” (Parry & South China Morning Post, 2003). This alongside statements such as this “we have little girls in South Africa who like Sasha is South African, girls in Samoa who thinks she is Samoan and girls in the United States who think she is from Harlem” (Parry & South China Morning Post, 2003). This unique position in which Bratz claim they have, this being change makers and progressive in their approach to fashion dolls, falls flat because of this. Not building characters off of any specific cultural context, predominantly non-white characters highlights the true intention of MGA and their designers. They only cared about making a profit rather than genuinely caring about what they were making. Suppose the only thing they care about in regard to diversity is skin colour. In that case, they are failing to address the real need for representation of people who are not Caucasian, thin cis white women within the fashion doll market.

The most significant contradiction of their pure intentions of diversity is seen in their dolls’ initial release in East Asia. Bratz decided to exclude Sasha from their release and replace her with a Caucasian red-haired character named Meygan. This all being under the reasoning that “Market research has shown black dolls are not popular. [Bratz/MGA] couldn't market this doll here” this later proved to be false, as they said in a statement that they had not done market research on this (Parry & South China Morning Post, 2003). This clashes with the messaging of celebrating diversity which the brand claimed. It further reinforces my point that their diversity marketing scheme was only a tool to profit.

The claims of diversity and uniqueness are stripped away the moment these dolls became a commodity. While for many, these dolls exist as failed reflections of the diversifying nature of American society with their release in the early 2000s and in the year 2021. However, due to the very nature of them being commodities, this authentic reflection of the everyday girl, this being one who loves fashion, keeps up with trends and fits within the ideal body type, exists solely to make a profit. Their passion for fashion encourages mass consumerism within young children, focusing on trendy outfits and accessories. The specific kind of diversity showcased within Bratz dolls directs how particular groups of people should behave, dress, and be.

It is also critical to note that the success of these dolls could not exist without the highly Eurocentric market of fashion dolls. Bratz claim of diversity is solely based on the skin colour of the dolls. There are no physical markers of ethnic diversity within any of the four dolls. These dolls do not seek to challenge the Eurocentric system in which they exist in, rather they are moulded off of European beauty standards, with different skin pigmentations. Bratz as a form of popular culture, exists to reinforce current systems of oppression by satisfying the desire for dolls that are not white. Rather than questioning the system which allowed the market to be dominated by fair skinned dolls in the first place.

The (continued) love of Bratz dolls is a result of the desire to feel valued and important, to feel as if we matter within our current system. Even after Bratz dolls had stopped being manufactured, this being in the late 2000s, we still see a large community still talking about, collecting and selling Bratz dolls. This is seen clearly through the recreation and reimagining of Bratz dolls. The creation of dolls by collectors from marginalised groups, such as the queer community, disabled communities and non-white communities, is seen as a reinvention of the model Bratz manufactured for profit. Bratz communities have stuck with the messaging of Bratz, this being praise of self-expression and individuality. And have allowed this to be showcased through the photographs shared of their dolls.

My big question is: is this a reclamation of identity and removal of the commodity from the hands of the capitalist, or is this just a further illusion of freedom created by corporations?

References

Bratz. (2001, August 23). BratzPack.com - Sasha. Internet Archive Wayback Machine. https://web.archive.org/web/20010823151640/http://www.bratzpack.com:80/productinfo/sasha.html

Bratz Fan Wiki. (2011a). Jade. Bratz Wiki. https://bratz.fandom.com/wiki/Jade

Bratz Fan Wiki. (2011b). Sasha. Bratz Wiki. https://bratz.fandom.com/wiki/Sasha

Bratz Fan Wiki. (2011c). Yasmin. Bratz Wiki. https://bratz.fandom.com/wiki/Yasmin

Parry, H., & South China Morning Post. (2003, January 12). The Bratz debut without black Sasha but racism is denied. South China Morning Post; South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/article/403221/bratz-debut-without-black-sasha-racism-denied