"Little girls do not have breasts because they shouldn't be thinking about these sorts of things"

Oh really? So when I sprouted breasts at the age of nine I immediately transformed into a sexual being? Thanks Faux News.

P.S. The guy in the black blazer has the most obnoxious laugh I've ever heard.

Seriously? I can't tell you how many little girls I've spent time with (myself included) who did indeed play act breastfeeding. As far as I know, it's a perfectly normal part of playing "house". But I do remember thinking that there was something naughty about it, and for that reason I had a lot of questions that I didn't feel comfortable asking my parents. A doll like this would go a long way helping a child (boy or girl) to articulate their questions about breastfeeding.

The congressman said it: G.I.Joe is "AN AMERICAN ICON", more important than a breastfeeding doll. I don't know about you all, but that really made me cringe.

Also, to the guy who was grossed out by the breastfeeding 3 year old - 3 year olds in the developing world breastfeed for far longer than that, because IT'S GOOD FOR THEM, not because it's "dwarf porn". How ablist/classist/xenophobic is that?

I don't know if I'm more upset at the men for being assholes, or the woman for being such a bad representation of our gender. *sigh*

Um, it's fucking gross that they are even making breastfeeding dolls for LITTLE GIRLS. What the FUCK?

Come on, didn't you all know that "breasts serve 3 purposes," one being enticing a man to sleep with them, the second being to feed the baby that results from that encounter?

Wow. Says the woman with the dress cut down to her naval. Which of the three purposes are her breasts serving while on the show?

I haven't watched Fox News in awhile, I'm boycotting: but wow its even worse then I remembered. The opening introduction says it all, first they welcome the woman, "who's so sexy that sexism is now called Patty M Brownism", a congressman who's so smart, and a comedian who if "hilarity were my big toe I'd scream like a girl every time I'm banged him".

Back to the boycott...

I don't know. I'm very pro breast feeding, but something about this doll seems in poor taste to me. It strikes a chord deep within me that says "No. Just...no."

What does it say about the people at Fox that THEY'RE the ones thinking up these things?

I work at Target as a stocker and the toy section is my favorite place to work. I noticed a figure of a fairy riding a horse and holding a baby. When I first saw it, I thought she was breastfeeding. I was shocked but I liked the idea of promoting something so natural. But on closer examination, I realized she was just holding the baby.

So, to review:

It's okay for kids to want to mimic adults performing activities such as personal grooming, feeding, food preparation, household chores and child care. They do this whether you want them to or not.

It's okay for girls to play with dolls.

It's okay for girls to play with dolls that mimic wetting (and even soiling) diapers.

It's okay for girls to play with dolls and 'feed' them pretend formula from realistic bottles.

It's okay for kids to play doctor and be curious about their bodies, because that's healthy exploration.

It's okay for kids to masturbate (ask your pediatrician--totally normal!) for the same reason.

But OMG, let a kid pretend to breastfeed, and suddenly that is compared to alcoholism and child endangerment and is SICK and WRONG and MUST BE STOPPED and it squicks people out and makes the news.

Why is that, exactly?

Quote from the first article linked: "Parents have said that the idea of breast-feeding is too grown-up for young children,"

So if the child has a younger sibling that is still being nursed, the mother should not be in the same room while feeding the younger child? How many kids have seen their moms breastfeed their younger siblings? It's not something that they are kept in the dark about.

I gagged when the guy compared breastfeeding to "dwarf porn."

Oh, FFS. Kids love to imitate their parents. It happens that my daughter mostly knows bottlefeeding, so that's what she imitates. A kid who mostly knows breastfeeding (whether self or sibling) is going to imitate that. I think this doll is silly because it's basically charging more money for something kids already have the, erm, equipment for, but anyone who thinks it's gross or sexual or whatever needs to get over themselves.

The thing is that the general purpose of dolls and the way we market them toward girls is a means by which we teach little girls that they are meant to be mothers (and we teach boys to be generally absent from this activity). This does not mean that dolls should not exist, but when we do have dolls that wet their pants, breastfeed, cry, etc...and girls are the only ones learning to deal with this behavior, we are diservicing our girls from the start (and our boys, for that matter). What I find disturbing about this whole thing is just another signal that we assign gender roles instead of letting kids figure things out and use their imaginations. It is not uncommon for boys to mimic breastfeeding, though it is uncommon for them to continue when they're told how wrong that is for "boys" to do so. Breastfeeding is not gross; children mimicking breastfeeding is not gross; continuing to market dolls towards girls is what is highly disturbing to me. And this doll seems to be another way that we are teaching little girls that they should like mothering and that they will necessarily grow up to be mothers instead of giving real options in life that may or may not include being mothers.

I also find it disturbingly HILARIOUS that the antithesis to GI Joe is apparently a breastfeeding doll. Um...while GI Joe is supposedly "saving America," what are their wives at home doing???? (in the paradigm of men going off to war and women staying at home...)

So do we bomb Spain, the Fox News studios, or both?

Follow-up question: You mean the Fox News studios have not been bombed into rubble yet?

I was 8 when my youngest sister was born, and I remember breastfeeding my new doll at Christmas like my mom was breastfeeding her. Except instead of pushing my doll's face against my shirt, I put her underneath to press her against my chest - just like my mom covered my sister up with a blanket when she needed to breastfeed in public.
As much as I played with dolls, I think my wanting to have kids someday (though not biologically) is more related to being one of four kids, and actually enjoying (most) of the kids I babysat. Still, I definitely aspire to be more than being a mother - like being an awesome teacher, and maybe even someday trying to pursue my dream of writing the best-selling novel that will pay for my student loans...

Can anyone tell me how this would make girls want to have babies more than any other baby doll? It's all a parenting role!

While it's important not to sexualize the act of breastfeeding itself, you can't separate sex from the chain of events that led to the baby.

In real life, anyone can bottle feed or change a diaper or do all of the other stuff kids play at with dolls. But the only people who breast feed are sexually mature women who have had sex.

And I think that's what's potentially uncomfortable about watching a little girl with a baby fake suckling at her chest.

I don't think it's reason to ban the toy or anything, but I think it explains the potential discomfort that some have with that image.

"Little girls do not have breasts because they shouldn't be thinking about these sorts of things"

I must've been a very fucked up kid because I used to make Barbie and Ken have sex when I was seven...

If breasts weren't seen as a sex toys by society, this doll wouldn't be an issue...at all.

Fox news never ceases to piss me off.

I hope they have dolls like this when I have kids, because im definitly getting one instead of the bottle-fed baby dolls.

I have to say I'm a little bit torn on this one. (hear me out, please) From the standpoint that breasts are supposed to sustain life and not inherently be sexual, I completely agree, and back that up. But I can also kind of see where the complainers are going with this doll kind of enticing, or indoctrinating girls to want children at a younger age. I know, I know, why don't we just pull all baby dolls right?

That's not what I mean though; I just think that the breast feeding bit is going a bit far. To me, it looks like the makers of it, men, or a man, from what I understand, are again indoctrinating little girls. "Grow up and have children," "grow up and clean the house" (not that ANY of these are bad choices mind you). But I would love to start seeing science kits, outdoorsy things, drum sets, and other non-traditional items being marketed to girls as well. Enough with the pink flowery stuff, and diva dolls.

My mom (a nanny) told me one time that she asked her boss if she was going to breastfeed her baby that was on the way and her boss said, "oh no those are for my husband."

Maybe if it ever became acceptable, in this society, for boys to play with dolls, I think one thing boys might learn from this doll is that breasts are not just sexual objects.

Maybe it's more of a case they (in reference to those who sexualize and want to sexualize breasts) are afraid of their perfect fantasies being turned into something natural in the sense of motherhood or something "awww, isn't that just wonderful!" rather than "Ohmy monkeys! BOOBS! Must touch!". As soon as it switches in the definition of "natural" it becomes disgusting.

As someone else had said. Half of the claims said by Fox wouldn't be something going through my mind, so what is on their's that they think these things?

why do we give dolls to girls?

that's what bothers me about this. as a child, I wasn't particularly interested in dolls at all -- I know children play as adults, but why are they learning that that is their main role?

I really think we should stop the practice of routinely assuming that girls would want to play with dolls.

I played with Barbies (totally problematic, but for other reasons) because I enjoyed making stories with them.

Let's allow little girls to be imaginative and not just give them dolls because that's what little girls should like.

I get the critique on one level (and one level alone), little girls shouldn't be thinking about their roles as mothers yet. I think that we routinely assume that little girls will be good caretakers and will eventually be mothers. let's leave them alone, or at least fight stereotypes of what they are capable of.

Yeah, like some other commenters, I mainly dislike the idea of the doll because I really hate how much toys instill gender roles (like "mothering" and breast-feeding) at such a young age. I mean, look at the thing. It's pink. I know "lots of dolls are just like this one," etc., I just ... don't like dolls. I'd be much happier if my daughter entertained herself with books or maybe animal toys. It's like you can't even GET AWAY from the theme of pregnancy in little girls' toys.

On the other hand, the Fox News clip was indeed hilariously stupid and breast-phobic. It plays into the usual religious conservative logic that attempts to turn every healthy, normal bodily function (like sex, masturbation/pleasure, breast-feeding - and especially functions related to WOMEN'S bodies) into something shameful, abnormal, and alien.

In some sense, I find it hilarious to hear conservatives railing against a breast-feeding doll because THEY are the biggest champions of strict gender roles - and forced birth (compulsory motherhood) for all women, young and old.

This doll doesn't bother me at all, aside from the crass capitalism that is.

I can understand why it seems frustrating that dolls in general are pushed onto girls, but sometimes a girl wants a doll. She should have it, just the same as if a boy wanted one. My daughter had a bear, a dog, a giraffe, etc. and decided she needed a baby, too. Before I had a chance to get it for her, she was rocking her kitty and fox - and breastfeeding them. And we don't have TV and I never take her to a toy section (mainly to save myself a headache), so she couldn't have gotten the idea of a baby doll anywhere but from her own imagination.

As for the biology, she says she's "feeding them from her nipple" because she "won't get boobies until I'm a big girl."

This doll doesn't bother me at all, aside from the crass capitalism that is.

I can understand why it seems frustrating that dolls in general are pushed onto girls, but sometimes a girl wants a doll. She should have it, just the same as if a boy wanted one. My daughter had a bear, a dog, a giraffe, etc. and decided she needed a baby, too. Before I had a chance to get it for her, she was rocking her kitty and fox - and breastfeeding them. And we don't have TV and I never take her to a toy section (mainly to save myself a headache), so she couldn't have gotten the idea of a baby doll anywhere but from her own imagination.

As for the biology, she says she's "feeding them from her nipple" because she "won't get boobies until I'm a big girl."

I think it's disgusting that products like these are even made for little girls.
I think it just reinforces the stereotype that girls (when they're older) are to have babies--their job should be "mom". I may be wrong, but that's my thought to this.

I mean, when I was a little girl, I played with my brother's GI Joes and toy guns because I didn't like the barbies (I used to cut all their hair off). And I never pretended to breastfeed my toys; because my toys were always stuffed animals and dinosaurs. Also, when I was a kid, I made a promise (at age...5 or 6 I believe) that I would never have kids, and (at age 21, now) I'm still keeping to that promise :)

So...to think that toys like this are being made for young girls--along with video games for girls that are dedicated to designing clothes or making barbie pretty with make-up, or cooking, etc... to me, it may be good for breastfeeding popularity, but it also reinforces the old stereotype of women and motherhood.

Um, was anyone else ridiculously offended by that one guys comments about a breast-feeding doll being what comes about after America abandons its obsession with G.I. Joe? WTF? Militarize much?

Also, as offended as I was by the reaction to the doll, I must admit I'm a little wierded out. I can see where this could be a good toy for some kids, but part of me just has a visceral reaction against it -- maybe it's the same sort of reaction I have to the dolls that wet themselves (I think they're kinda gross).

I play-acted nursing dolls when I was a kid and I feel like that came from my own natural curiosity about breast-feeding. This toy actually feels to me like it's trying to elicit that desire in girls in the same way that other gender-specific toys do.

The doll has its good points and bad points, I think, and I don't think I would rush out and buy it for my child (if I had a child anyway) but the reaction to it in the video and the article is absolutely ridiculous.

Why do we have to politicise everything that little children do? Or sexualise them? I have such wonderful memories of having a baby doll of my own, and I loved that doll cause my Mum gave it to me for Christmas. My little sister had a baby doll too. Mine had wool hair, (rubber cabbage-patch doll) and my sister's was a realistic baby with a cloth body. We both tended those dolls lovingly, and my Mum had just had our little brother Scotty. My sister and I would play with the babies and pretend to breastfeed, just like Mum was breastfeeding her little baby. And we both grew up to be dyed-in-the-wool feminists, just as our mother is a feminist.

We were drenched in the wonder of childbirth and life when we were little because my mother and our much older big sisters were going through that stage of their lives. Damning that or taking that away from a little girl is taking away a choice and that's so wrong. Even if they never want children themselves, or want to grow up to be a person that is not femme in the slightest, there is never anything wrong with growing up with an appreciation of how life begins, and how wonderful motherhood can be.

I know I would have loved this toy as a child. I see more to be worried about in the way adults are freaking out about this doll, on either side of the divide (the FauxNews dudes and the women here who are rallying against this 'indoctrination' of motherhood).

The last thing we need to do is cut motherhood out of our lives. The first thing we need to do is to learn now normal and wonderful motherhood is and to teach this to our children - of either sex. If a child learns the value of life, and the hard work and commitment involved in that, then hopefully they won't be so ready to disregard other lives, either in violence or in policy.

I "breast-fed" my dolls when I was little, and I turned out okay.

While I don't really like things that teach girls from a young age that they were meant to be mommies, I'm down with emphasizing the idea that breasts do not have to be sexualized the majority of the time, especially when you are five.

I would be more upset that this is a gendered toy, but you can't expect to make that big step right now. This may still be a "girly" toy, but it is a baby-step (no pun intended) in the right direction.

I don't agree that dolls for little girls is indoctrinating motherhood. Buying only dolls for your daughter and only trucks for your son is indoctrinating. Dolls should be available to all children, as should a variety of toys. Let them decide whether or not they want to play with them. I agree with Napalm Nacey, dolls (like pets) can help children learn the value of life and help them to learn to act with kindness and empathy, values that should be "indoctrinated" in children.

Ugh! Watching that video made me squirm. I hate Faux News and I hate the way they covered it, but it felt wrong. It felt completely creepy! Totally NOT for this product.

When it comes to public breastfeeding, here’s my view: if your child is crying, please do what you can. Bottle, breast, or binky, I think it shows manners for mothers to pay attention to their babies’ cries, which means it’s not rude at all to attend to their needs whichever way is best.

BTW, this doll isn’t only for play breastfeeding. Girls can burp the doll, change it, or do any other pretend mommy activities. I like how it doesn’t present a “sanitized” version of motherhood and includes all the normal things you have to do for a baby.

I think it'd be a good start. Same with 'boys' toys. They need to show girls doing it too.

I don't think this doll is inherently problematic, but I agree with other commenters who say that it would definitely be a step forward for a toy like this to be marketed towards little girls and little boys. The same applies to any baby doll, really. Do away with the pink packaging and commercials featuring solely little girls and no little boys and you could actually have some progressive toys on your hands.

And to add to some of the fond memories that people are sharing about how they used to play with baby dolls, in kindergarten and 1st grade my then-best friend and I used to adore our baby dolls. Mine was named Christie and hers was named Angel, and our favorite game to play was to pretend that we were rock stars and that whenever we had a concert we would take our babies with and they got to sit backstage and cheer us on while we rocked out onstage.

I'm glad that the only woman in this segment who is also bashing this baby doll doesn't have the sense to look at her outfit and see how "provocative" her own outfit is. I'm sure if she were breastfeeding at that time all she would have to do is pull away one piece of cloth and it'd be right there for baby to enjoy. So congrats FoxNews, once again you've proven to me that you have the audacity to judge others.

I am a bit shocked that some people are against a breastfeeding doll. I get the whole "I don't like dolls at all" argument, which is fine. And in that case, I totally agree that it should not be assumed all little girls like to play with dolls. But I don't necessarily agree that a breastfeeding doll is creepy. It is a doll that promotes one of the most natural acts between mother and child. So I guess I just don't get what the hoopla is about. If we have dolls that promote bottle feeding, then shouldn't we have one for breastfeeding, too?

Although I do disgree with the "this is crap" comment someone made earlier in regards to dolls. From my own childhood, I loved dolls. And just because my preference growing up gave in to the stereotype of a woman as a maternal being, it didn't make it crap or any less valuable than those girls who chose GI Joe (which we can argue has a whole other set of stereotypes associated with it, only this time aimed towards males). I always wanted to be a mom and I was always aware of my body and that it would, someday, be able to create life. I am sure I was not the only little girl to ever feel that way. This did not prompt me to want to run out and have sex at age 7, as Fox claims will happen. I actually waited until I was in college to have sex, so there goes that myth.

Which brings me to the following: We are all for sex education and teaching children and teens age-appropriate material on sexuality, etc. Research has shown that this has prevented teen pregnancy and the spread of disease, more so than abstinence only education. Then why do we assume that a breastfeeding doll will lead to increased sexual activity and awareness? Wouldn't the opposite hold true?

DeafBrownTrash wrote:

"HEY LOOK! All girls and women should aspire to become child-bearing mothers and have kids someday! Here, take this doll and practice to breast-feed because someday you WILL become a mother, too!"

As a child (and still as a woman), I always resented the notion that all females ARE child-making machines, that we all should aspire to have children someday, that we should stay home and give birth.

That's not at all the point of the doll. The doll does not tell girls they should become child-bearing mothers and have kids someday. The doll does not tell girls to stay home and give birth.

All the doll does, it seems to us, is tell girls that breastfeeding babies is cute and cool. Or, "coot" and "kewel". We think that's more likely what the doll would tell girls, at least if it could talk, because it's mouth would be full.

However, if anyone can find a link to a doll that literally does tell girls to "stay home and give birth" (and actually in detail show how to do it, we've seen all kids of Barbies but never "Lamaze Barbie") or how to conceive babies and not personally give birth ("Surrogate Mother Barbie") or farm out breastfeeding chores to a hired third party ("Wet Nurse For Hire Barbie") please do post a link, we'd be more concerned and might support some protest against them.

Well, we'd probably not support a protest of "Lamaze Barbie". That would be "kewel", like this "La Leche Baby" doll is, to us, anyway.