Boycott! Girlcott!
It’s almost an unintentional caricature of a much larger state of affairs: a pair of red and blue Rock’em Sock’em robots throwing wild, stylized punches until one knocks the head off the other.
It’s a game, folks, a toy, not a representation of red states vs. blue states, conservatives vs. liberals. But why aren’t pro-life groups boycotting Rock’em Sock’em robots? Or Barbie dolls? Or Fisher-Price baby things? Or a host of other toys?
All those toys are made by Mattel, Inc., which also produces the American Girl dolls, currently the target of a boycott by respect life forces.
For background, some evangelical Christians—and Catholic pro-lifers including the Chicago-based Pro-Life Action League—have slammed the heretofore squeaky clean American Girl dolls because the firm, through its corporate philanthropy, has supported an unconnected group, Girls, Inc. That organization, formerly called the Girls’ Clubs of America, states on its Web site support for abortion rights.
Hence the noisy boycott and recent picketing at the American Girl Place in Chicago.
Which may be the wrong thing for all the right reasons.
Certainly the church doesn’t like abortion. No, that’s not nearly strong enough: the church is unbendingly opposed to abortion and Catholics spend a great deal of time, energy and money challenging the procedure, legal since 1973. To link American Girl dolls, whose products otherwise project a wholesome image, with abortion support—however tangentially—angers pro-lifers.
That’s easily understandable. What’s harder to get is the apparent ignorance about Corporate America.
Boycotts can be an effective way to publicize a perceived wrongdoing. But when such actions don’t seem to have been thought through, the process can appear misguided. That won’t help.
If the protestors are truly offended by American Girl’s corporate giving, Barbie should be a worthwhile target. Or Fisher-Price’s Little People. Or even those Rock’em Sock’em robots. I mean, go for the headquarters.
The problem, obviously, is much larger, and those inside and outside the church should understand that there is virtually no major corporation whose philanthropic support can’t be traced back at some level to a group with conflicting values. In this case, it’s abortion rights. However, boycotts which cast too wide a net can lose respect.
This is also where the corporate world gets fuzzy: Mattel also has a business relationship with Clear Channel Entertainment to promote a nationwide show featuring the preternaturally developed Barbie doll. At the same time, Clear Channel has an enviable recent history of chasing porn off the airwaves, firing DJs for nasty stunts and even icing Howard Stern last year. Conflictual, huh?
That’s the problem, and sometimes the church is in the middle. One Wisconsin Catholic church canceled an American Girl event after the boycott began (See story, Page 4).
For the record, American Girl dolls have stumbled before. Last year, the firm produced a doll with a story line that was offensive to many Hispanics, especially in Chicago’s Pilsen area. The doll, Marisol Luna, was said to have moved from that neighborhood because of crime and poverty to “safer” Des Plaines. But Pilsen residents, proud of their heritage and efforts to build community, saw the story as a slap in the face.
OK, so marketing gurus don’t always have their finger on the pulse. Yes, life must be defended, but boycotts sometimes raise more questions than they solve problems.
Help us out here: The Catholic New World is looking for your resolutions. The end of the year is coming and we want to know what you think about the future. Let us know what your hopes and dreams are for the coming year. You can e-mail me, or write Resolutions, The Catholic New World, 640 N. LaSalle St., #390, Chicago, IL 60610.
Tom Sheridan
Editor and General Manager
