Homeless Doll Doesn't Need a Home

People on each coast have been blogging about the new homeless American Girl doll. New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser was the first to write about Gwen. In her column, she says:

For $95 -- more than your average homeless person would dream of spending on a rather mediocre baby substitute -- Gwen Thompson can be yours. A mixed message if ever there was one.

In San Francisco, Amy Graff asks:

Is Mattel presenting an important social issue to children by manufacturing a doll who faces real, present day challenges? Or is the company comodifying and prettifying the issue by slapping on a Barbie Band Aid? And how can you charge nearly $100 for a doll that's supposed to promote compassion for homeless people?

I am going to take a stab at this from the Midwest. If you are raising children in New York or San Francisco, it is required in your parenting to explain why some people are sitting on the ground and you aren’t. I make this point because Gwen probably isn’t your only exposure to homelessness. In Minnesota, this is somewhat different. Even though 2,726 children age 17 and younger experienced homelessness with their parents in Minnesota in 2006, we don’t have the problems that many cities do.

Even if our children saw as much despair as children do in other cities, toys probably aren’t the best way to learn about current social problems. This makes me wonder why every single American Girl doll EXCEPT for Gwen and her upper middle class friend Chrissa (who is girl of the year 2009), are HISTORICAL figures?

Why does this matter? All the other dolls have historically accurate happy endings. Think of the propaganda for their 1854 doll.

Kirsten Larson must leave all she’s ever known to come with her family to the New World. They settle on the Minnesota frontier, where people don’t speak her language or understand her traditions. Yet in time, Kirsten discovers the richness of her new land—and the true meaning of home.

We all know that if you are a Larson in Minnesota, things have probably worked out for you. (Can’t wait to read the comments I get for that one).

The issue that I have with Gwen is that her story has a happy ending that doesn’t truly reflect today’s homeless population. When you read about Gwen you learn that her father walked out on her and her mom. The mother and daughter lose their house, spend time living in the car, and bed down at a homeless shelter. But they eventually get their lives back together and move into an apartment.

On page 113 of the Chrissa book, Gwen's mom says, "I'd park so that we'd wake up near a wayside rest area or a restaurant--somewhere where we could use the sink for washing up--and then I'd go to work and pretend that life was just as it had always been...I was too ashamed to ask for help. Finally, when all seemed lost, we found help through the caring staff at Sunrise House. Without Sunrise House, I don't know where we'd be today."

After you read that to your child, they might ask, “What if Sunrise House is filled?” Do you explain that everyone doesn’t get their lives back together and move into an apartment? Do you say that all homelessness will go away in 2010? That homelessness is a "limited edition" like the Gwen doll, which is only slated to be available for a few more months?

If we read our children bedtime stories about homeless people who quickly get jobs and apartments at this particular economic moment; it’s both a story of triumph, and possibly a fairy tale. The American Girl Company begs to differ and issued this statement: "Our singular goal with these stories is to help girls find their inner star by becoming kind, compassionate, and loving people who make a positive and meaningful difference in the world around them."

That is easily done. If your child is old enough for a Gwen doll, he/she can go to Sharing and Caring Hands in Minneapolis. That’s a really good place to be a kind, compassionate, loving person who could make a positive and meaningful difference. And while you’re there, they could probably use $95.

ONE OF MY BEST FRIENDS IS REPUBLICAN

In 2003, Michael Moore was booed for attacking President Bush at the Oscars. It wasn’t one of his finest moments, but he wasn’t a member of Congress calling the President a liar to his face during a joint session.

Even though former Strom Thurmond page and current South Carolina Representative, Joe Wilson, has apologized, his behavior reflects a growing concern I have about the Republican party.

Earlier this week, the President was supposed to address my children, but our Republican governor disapproved.

Now before you accuse me of being partisan, one of my best friends is a Republican. He assures me that his party’s concern wasn’t about politics.

I had to think about that. On November 14, 1988, C-SPAN broadcast President Ronald Reagan’s address to junior high students throughout the nation. Reagan stated:

“But America's world leadership goes well beyond the tide toward democracy. These days, whenever I see foreign leaders, they tell me about their plans for reducing taxes and other economic reforms that they're using, copying what we have done here in our country. I wonder if they realize that this vision of economic freedom -- the freedom to work, to create and produce, to own and use property without the interference of the state -- was central to the American Revolution when the American colonists rebelled against a whole web of economic restrictions, taxes, and barriers to free trade. The message at the Boston Tea Party…was America's original tax revolt. And it was the fruits of our labor -- belonged to us, and not to the state. And that truth is fundamental to both liberty and prosperity.”

No one accused Reagan of “spewing propaganda.” I remember; I was in college and many of my friends and I didn’t care for Reagan—not that I am partisan of course. One of my best friends--even back then-- was a Republican.

Reagan claimed:

“Our Founding Fathers were the descendants of the Pilgrims -- men and women who came to America seeking freedom of worship -- who prospered here and offered a prayer of thanksgiving, something we've continued to do each year, and so that we'll do it again on Thursday of next week.”

Of course no one accused him of being a racist, even though he omitted that silly part about what the Pilgrims did to the Native Americans.

When President Ronald Reagan addressed the school’s children, he was treated with the deference he deserved because he was the President of the United States. Similar to President Obama, he encouraged children to stay in school, but he wasn’t accused of being an ideologue.

President Obama, I hope when you speak in the Twin Cities tomorrow you receive the respect you deserve.

To quote Reagan’s protest-free school address, "Hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue.'' And before you accuse me of being partisan, just remember, one of my BEST friends is a Republican.

Facebook Fighting

A funny thing happened on the way to my Facebook page.

The other day, I went on Facebook. If you are my employer, it’s a rare event. If you aren’t, I could be charged rent.

I love to post newspaper articles and YouTube clips so that I can engage all of the interesting people I know that live around the world. But something has happened that I find concerning, and I’d like your input.

People who have never met, some of whom I’m embarrassed to say I have never met, are fighting with each other on my page.

I take full responsibility. On April 21, 2009, Claire Suddath wrote a great piece for Time Magazine, “How Not to Be Hated on Facebook: 10 More Rules.” I broke rule # 3.

Rule #3 is, “Don’t friend someone you don’t actually know.” Now I know what you’re thinking, how lonely are you? Imaginary Facebook friends and you blog?

My sponsor tells me that the first step is admitting that you have a problem. So here we go.

My name is Duch and I have a few “unkown” Facebook friends. (I hope somewhere someone is saying, “Hi Duch.)

Back to my story. Last weekend I posted a note on my page that generated 46 comments in 2 days. 46 comments? If you are writing a complete stranger at 11pm on my Facebook page, I have some thoughts:

1. Disrobe in front of your romantic partner—remember what we used to do at 11pm before Facebook came on the scene?
2. If you don’t have a romantic partner you have two choices; a) ask yourself if you should get off Facebook to find one, or b) if you have to stay on Facebook, pimp yourself on someone else's page
3. If you insist on fighting with people on my page, why don’t you ask them who they are? Maybe your swine flu comment seemed ill informed because you are fighting with a hospital chief of staff. Maybe you shouldn’t “explain” Jewish identity to the chief diversity officer at a prestigious university. They get it, you don’t—stop fighting on my page.
4. Did it even occur to you that you are making me look bad? Do you know how many PRIVATE e-mails I have gotten asking me, “Who the hell is that on your page?”
5. Finally, if you wouldn’t say it at my dinner table, don’t say it on my page. Oops, you really don’t know what my meal-time expectations are, because we haven’t met. So maybe we’re not friends. Hmm, so maybe you should get off my page.