The battle between Barbie and Bratz began with the dolls and has now spilled over to animation. All Barbie images courtesy of Mattel Inc., all Bratz images © MGA Entertainment Inc.

American animation has long been a medium for the transmission of cultural values. Since the decline of the theatrical short and the rise of network (and later, cable) television most of the animated transmissions found their mark in two demographics: Children and “tweens” (an audience niche describing children roughly 7-13). True, an occasional cartoon show does break through to adult audiences, but adult mores seem to derive more from live-action dramas and sitcoms. The effects of animated violence on children has gained far more press than any other artifact, but some of the most crucial cultural values disseminated to juvenile audiences are those relating to gender roles. More than at any time in our history, televised content is relaying messages about gender norms (most likely, because there is a multiplicity of outlets; cable and satellite broadcasting has ensured more than 50 times the number of channels available since 1965).

Along with information about gender norms, televised entertainment also relays information about societal expectations. In our present culture, many of these relate to aggressive, active consumerism. What happens when mainstream animation attaches this baggage to its primary purpose of entertainment? Before we examine two specific examples, it would be fair to say that not every animated feature or televised series transmits values with the same amount of strength. In addition, the range of expression for gender-related behaviors, especially in female characters, has never been greater. I wish to avoid generalizations about American animation while pointing out that some concepts and series do make highly specific statements regarding gender and capitalism, and that these statements appear to be purposeful.

It may seem much longer, but Barbie has only been with us since 1959. An enterprising couple named Ruth and Eliot Handler created the plaything, a curious mixture of a German figurine called “Lili” and Mrs. Handler’s dream of a more sophisticated doll for her daughter Barbara. Barbie was arguably the first doll created to provide a guide to fashion and lifestyle rather than for nurturance. As the doll’s evolution progressed, Barbie morphed into a blonde California beauty with Beverly Hills taste to match, sauntering a high-heeled path through glamorous clothes, dream houses and sporty pink cars. In the gender-equal 1980s, this paragon of plastic pulchritude expanded her talents, the better to pursue high-powered, lucrative careers.

Graceful winged horses, enchanting princesses and romance abound in Barbie’s upcoming video, Barbie and The Magic of Pegasus.

After 45 lucrative years, however, Barbie finally met her match. An increasingly diverse population now represented America — young females wanted dolls that reflected their own looks, tastes and attitudes. Feminist critics of Barbie noted that her dimensions, translated to a human female of proportional height, would make Pamela Anderson seem like Olive Oyl in comparison. Add to that her luxurious lifestyle and Ph.D.-level intellect, and one wonders for whom Barbie is role modeling. There are many darling little girls out there, but how many of them (excluding your own daughters) are… perfect?

Thus, in 2001, MGA Entertainment stole Barbie’s thunder by introducing the Bratz line of dolls. The Bratz, who recall the offspring of Angelina Jolie and a stray shipment of PVC, combine a wide range of ethnicities and an all-consuming “passion for fashion.” The Bratz dolls wear duds described by MGA as “totally dangerous, totally ferocious, and totally funkadelic.” These words appear to be well chosen. There is an unsettling, incipient sexuality suggested in the appearance of the Bratz, whose very name suggests misbehavior. Some parents remain a bit uneasy about the dolls.