Donna WoodBurgmann, a New Jersey mom, took her daughter to a local Toys 'R' Us and the little girl got excited about a baby doll dressed in blue called the You & Me Mommy Change My Diaper Doll. So Mom bought the doll for her daughter, which apprently wets its diaper and all. Then horror of horrors, when the daughter took the diaper off of the doll, the mother cannot believe her eyes. Is that a … could that possibly be a … a … penis?! Why yes, yes it is. You see__, the doll is anatomically correct__ and since little boys for the most part I am told have penises, the doll has a penis.
Well, Burgmann is not pleased__, posts a picture of this doll on to Facebook__ and the internet almost breaks–all over a doll that mimics nature. Let's take a look at the picture shall, we?
Read more ¿Qué más?: 10 Mistakes you WILL make as a mom, guaranteed
Burgmann wrote, "When she went to change his diaper, this was the surprise … Why?? These r little girls that don't need to know the anatomy."
I'm going to be perfectly honest here: When I first saw the picture, I found it jarring. Not because I think there is anything wrong with it, but because it is 2014 and this is the first time EVER in my lifetime that I have seen a doll for kids that does not have implied genitalia. Let's face it, when undressed, Barbie and Ken are packin' the same equipment down there, which is pretty much nothing.
I don't blame Burgmann for being surprised that the doll she bought for her daughter came with an actual penis, but I also don't think there is anything wrong with it. And I respectfully disagree with her about little girls not needing to know about anatomy. Yes, they do. Teaching children about anatomy is not the same thing as sexualizing them or taking them to go see an R-rated movie with all kinds of sexually inappropriate content.
I don't really want my daughters to know what sticking up your middle finger at someone when you are angry means because they are very young and I don't think it's appropriate to get into the language and all, but that doesn't mean I'm going to pretend like middle fingers don't exist.
Anyway, that's my take on the whole thing, but I have two daughters that are 3 and 5 years old and they both know what a penis is and what it is called and what a vagina is and what it is called, although the oldest can't say it right so she calls it her "china"–no disrespect intended to the nation by the same name.
While everyone seems to be freaking out that the baby doll in question has a penis, what I'm wondering is whether the female version of the doll is anatomically correct as well or if it looks like Barbie and Ken down there. I'm not the biggest fan of Barbie or Ken or their implied genitalia, it's all so unrealistic. I find that sort of unrealistic ideal much more damaging in the long run than showing what a baby's body really looks like.
Image via Donna Wood Burgmann/Facebook
