Mattel has gained attention recently within the autistic community. This is because they released an autistic Barbie doll as part of their Fashionistas line. But all this attention seems to be split between good and bad.
On one hand, people are praising Mattel for creating a doll that autistic people can recognize themselves in. Some autistic content creators were given this doll along with related accessories. Those recipients seemed pretty happy to have gotten this doll.
On the other hand, some people are complaining about that the doll just gives one “look” to autism, noting that the doll uses ear defenders and an AAC device. So these critics are saying that the doll is a stereotype.
Here are two comments:
Irisa Leverette (Social media handle @DariusKingofStimming), who has an autistic adult son named Darius, who has gone viral for his stimming, voiced her opinions on the doll, explaining why people’s negative opinions on the doll don’t matter.
“She (this doll) does not represent the whole spectrum, and it’s okay, I think, because you cannot make a doll or a Barbie that (represents) the entire spectrum, but you have to give it to Mattel, it’s a step forward.”
Even Cam Hanranhan (social media handle @tinklesherpants), a kid with autism, had her own view on the doll.
“Barbie’s motto is ‘You can be anything’. It also means, you can be autistic. That’s nothing to be ashamed of, and this Barbie really shows that,” Cam said this in a video of her getting the doll.
As for how people are negatively seeing the doll, Cam has her own thoughts on that as well. When her mom told her what some people were saying, she said, “The thing to remember is that one person can never represent anyone, autism or not. It’s just nice to be talked about.”
As for me, I also think this is a step forward from typical Barbie disability representation, which (with the exception of a Downs Syndrome doll), has been dolls in wheelchairs. Even if Autistic Barbie just represents one kind of autistic person, it’s good to have a Barbie that at least represents invisible disabilities. Also, this situation is not new. Other forms of good autistic representation, especially media, can still have autism representation problems. In the animated Arthur series, one episode, “When Carl Met George,”, a now outdated term for autism is used to describe Carl’s condition, despite being an acceptable term when the episode initially aired.
Likewise, Sesame Street partnered with controversial organization Autism Speaks using their autistic character Julia, despite Julia being a good representation of autism. And one of Shaun Murphy’s outbursts on “The Good Doctor” became a meme for how outrageous the scene was, since people believed that was not the correct way to portray an autistic meltdown.
No matter how much effort is put into good representation, some people will still pick any representation apart, thinking it just doesn’t reflect them. I think that what they need to understand is that everyone’s experiences can different.
I was reminded of a recent Reddit thread where an autistic person reacted to someone’s review of the British book “Something Different About Dad,” in which a neurotypical person claimed the dad in the book was a bad stereotype of autism, and the other person explained why their stance on the book was incorrect, and why some of the experiences in the book can be relatable to those with autism.
Even if some people don’t find the autistic Barbie to reflect their experiences, I think this is a real step in the right direction for representation and inclusion. But let’s keep it up. We also more options for those on the spectrum, especially in toys.