Posted on 10/15/2005 4:57:42 PM PDT by ermmt
Dear sirs and madams -
As I look at my daughters' collections of a total of 4 AG dolls, Bitty Baby, Coconut, Licorice and many, many clothes and accessories, I now feel sorrow instead of joy.
Toys that were meant to enhance their femininity and girlhood are now shrouded with the despicable choice of an organization American Girl has aligned itself with.
My daughters monthly have gone to AG Club meetings at a Christian book store. Lots of her homeschooled friends begin studying periods of history through the AG books.
I never expected nor found all that the company does to meet up with all of my personal convictions or beliefs. Yet, it seems that you should realize that much of your consumer base is at least moderately conservative and would be absolutely offended with your support of an organization that promotes abortion and lesbianism as wonderfully normal life choices. I am quite positive that there are many organizations that provide help and support to girls without beliefs that are truly deviant from mainstream America.
You owe an apology to your customers and a change in your charity. Along with that, you may wish to eliminate the poor marketing folks who thought that supporting Girls Inc. was a good idea and get some people in that will continue the honorable ideals previously promoted.
Kristen XXXXXX Mom to three real American girls - Aleesha, Amanda and Anneliese
Let's keep up the pressure.
The girls and boys clubs have done a lot of good over they years. I think this attack is misplaced.
They're going to look at this and say "HUH? - She's unhappy, but I have no idea with what!"
What organization did they support?
AND, this is Mattel, NOT the original Pleasant Company.
The attack is not misplaced. Who cares what these organizations did in the past; it's only what they will do in the future that matters. They have been taken over by Gramcian leftists who are subverting them to leftist ends.
What you say is true, but I cannot agree that past good deeds ever excuse current assent to evil.
My friend sent this one:
Feminists Don't Buy Dolls
American girl dolls,
I just learned that your company subsidizes abortion and lesbianism.
My wife has purchased two of your overpriced dolls for our daughter. (Kit and someone else.) We are pro-life. Never again. Good luck marketing your dolls to feminists who have aborted their daughters.
Yours Truly,
XXXXXXXXXXXX
What organization did they support?
Girls Inc. They support sexualizing young girls and encouraging lesbianism and abortion rights for minor girls. Some of the profits Mattel makes from their "American Girl" line of dolls goes to fund this organization. There have been several threads about this in the last few weeks on Free Republic.
Ah... OK - I see.
And I scanned the other thread. Whatever the sin was seems a little too vague to me, but whatever you guys think. It's not my kind of issue.
I believe you misunderstood - this isn't aimed at the Boys Club or Girls Club, but rather at a company that sells upscale dolls called "American Girls". Mattel recently purchased the company and are now openly supporting a "charity" that supports abortion and various leftist-type causes.
I urge everyone to consider the midset behind the statements on the Girls, Inc website at (http://www.girlsinc.org/ic/page.php?id=4.3.4)
What necessitates that an organization that claims it is dedicated to the development of youth to make "advocacy statements" that it would like youth to "develop positive sexual identities" and to "function comfortably as responsible sexual beings".
Since when are young girls "sexual beings", except that some busybodies want to sexualize them? And to what end, especially when only a few years ago this topic was a private matter of parents?
Indeed, the age of the young girls on the homepage is far too young for them to be making "responsible decisions about sexuality, pregnancy and parenthood", as their advocacy statement goes on to state.
On their topic of HIV/AIDS, where they say "We also recognize that girls and young women who are sexually active are at high risk for HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases." Since when are **girls** to be sexually active and a "high risk"? And since when are the male age peers of these girls going to have the full blown HIV/AIDs and other STDs to give to these girls? Not many 12 year old boys are HIV positive. But some 30 year old men are.
I would suggest that parents need to keep their children as far away from Girls, Inc. as possible.
It's not misplaced at all. Several related articles have been posted about American Girl/GirlsInc over the past few days. Did you read up on them or check out the girlsinc website?
Whatever "good" was done by Girls Club in the past has now been overtaken by a group of radical leaders who promote everything most conservatives abhor: abortion, early sexual experiences, lesbianism, etc. The fact that American Girl caters to girls from 9-13, and actually younger via their Bitty Baby line, makes their association with girlsinc even more difficult to understand.
check this out:
http://www.girlsinc.org/ic/content/lesbianbisexualgirls.pdf
and this:
http://www.girlsinc.org/ic/content/GirlsandSexualHealth.pdf
The part about infant sexuality is disgusting.
"I believe you misunderstood - this isn't aimed at the Boys Club or Girls Club, but rather at a company that sells upscale dolls called "American Girls". Mattel recently purchased the company and are now openly supporting a "charity" that supports abortion and various leftist-type causes."
That Charity, Girls Inc. used to be called the Girls clubs of America.
SO, I decided to check out this Girls, Inc. Not too hard to find, at girlsinc.org. Not too hard to find their objectionable stands, just a few clicks, it's hardly hidden at all. Here are the parts that we all will likely object to, taken from the "issues" page of their website:
Sexuality
Girls Incorporated encourages all girls to develop positive sexual identities and to function comfortably as responsible sexual beings. We recognize that the family is the primary source of information about sex and we help girls and young women communicate with their families about sexuality.
To make responsible decisions about sexuality, pregnancy and parenthood, girls need and have a right to sensitive, truthful sexuality education; convenient access to safe, effective methods of contraception and protection from disease; and referral to comprehensive information, counseling, clinical and other services that support their responsible decisions. We recognize that any sizable group of girls includes those who face issues related to their sexual orientation or that of a family member and who face discrimination based on this sexual orientation. Girls have a right to positive, supportive environments and linkages to community resources for dealing with issues of sexual orientation.
Reproductive Freedom
Girls Incorporated affirms that girls and young women should make responsible decisions about sexuality, pregnancy and parenthood.
We recognize the right of all women to choose whether, when, and under what circumstances to bear children. Reproductive freedom and responsibility are essential to other rights and opportunities, including pursuit of education, employment, financial security and a stable and fulfilling family life. Restrictions of reproductive choice are especially burdensome for young women and poor women. Girls Incorporated supports a woman’s freedom of choice, a constitutional right established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 in Roe vs. Wade.
So they are indeed apologists for homosexuality and boosters of abortion. What a shame for the girls whose lives they would influence. Keep up the pressure on Mattel. Those dolls are darn expensive, and even one penny going to these abortion mongers is a disgrace.
And no, this is not the Boys & Girls Clubs.
I sure hope someone saved that page because it no longer exists. Which means that more than one bigshot at AG and girlsinc is sweatin' bulletc. heh
They are advertising a bracelet, much like the popular plastic ones sold to support Breast Cancer research and such, but their advertisement is very vague and any Mom who has been buying these dolls for years would probably not think twice about something they are supporting. I certainly would not have expected them to be aiming their advertising at 10 year old girls yet supporting lesbianism and abortion.
It is kind of a cheap shot in my opinion to advertise in such a sneaky way.
There was a longer thread just yesterday discussing this issue - that may be why this one was a little less detailed.
"Girls Inc. has empowered girls for over 141 years, first as Girls Clubs of America and since 1990 as Girls Incorporated. In centers across the country, generations of girls have learned their strengths, explored their worlds, prepared for productive, interesting lives, and offered each other the support necessary in dealing with the challenges of growing up."
http://www.girlsinc.org/ic/intro.php
OK
Yeah, and that was written by the President of the organization who is in MAJOR CYA mode.
the girls club have been on the feminist side of most debates for decades. In spite of this they do a lot of good. They have sponsorship from litterally hundreds of corpoations from Bath and Body Works, Time Warner, Paramount, ABC, CBS and many more.
Are we going to boycott them all? or just this doll company?
Well, we can't boycott everyone or we won't be able to buy anything anywhere! But we can sure let a company know that a particular product being marketed to raise funds for a particular group is a bad judgment call!! American Girl has already modified their web page, perhaps in response to the feedback, and the "I Can" band is not displayed as prominantly. The really sad thing about Girls Inc. is they cater to low-income girls, and instead of empowering them to break out of poverty it appears they are encouraging them to get pregnant, kill their babies and then see where they are with life. And that doesn't really help a woman progress.
Already boycotting the corporations mentioned in your complaint post.
BTTT!
There are a lot more corporate sponsors... many do a lot more to help Girls Inc than American Girl does. Do we really want to divide the whole economy in two?
"Microsoft Announces $100 Million Gift to Boys & Girls Clubs of America"
http://www.charitywire.com/charity26/00950.html
"The partnership, which included a donation of $2.5 million by Major League Baseball, resulted in more than $16 million in direct and indirect support for Boys & Girls Clubs of America."
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/official_info/community/bgca.jsp
"US SECRET SERVICE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF AMERICA"
http://www.secretservice.gov/partner_bagc.shtml
"The J.M. Smucker Company Announces Boys & Girls Clubs of America as Official Charity for Smucker's Stars On Ice"
http://www.charitywire.com/charity26/03285.html
Picking on a toy company for supporting Girls Clubs/Girls inc. is just going to look petty. If we really want a cultural war we should go after the government and fortune 50 since they almost all support the Boys and Girls clubs. But we should be prepared for every conservative company to be subject to retaliation.
They want our dollars they can think twice before they determine that it's good business to degrade society.
Since neither I nor anyone else knows what Attorney General (or whatever)
dolls are.. or cares.. your sorrow is yours alone. Roll in it.
Please note that toys do not make policy or vote.
Thank you.
We now return you to serious adult programming.
It's funny how many organizations get their info from Free Republic. From the NYTimes via SFGate.com:
Conservatives turn on dollmaker that had been their darling
American Girl is helping group that backs legal abortion
David Crary, New York Times
Saturday, October 15, 2005
Samantha Small gazed at American Girl dolls for sale in N...
* Printable Version
* Email This Article
New York -- American Girl, manufacturer of a highly popular line of dolls and children's books, has become the target of conservative activists threatening a boycott unless the toy maker cuts off contributions to a youth organization that supports abortion rights and acceptance of lesbians.
The protest is directed at an ongoing American Girl campaign in which proceeds from sales of a special "I Can" wristband help support educational and empowerment programs of Girls Inc., a national nonprofit organization that describes its mission as "inspiring girls to be strong, smart and bold."
American Girl, whose often patriotic products have long had a loyal following among conservatives, issued a statement Friday defending its support of Girls Inc. and assailing the protest.
"We are profoundly disappointed that certain groups have chosen to misconstrue American Girl's purely altruistic efforts and turn them into a broader political statement on issues that we, as a corporation, have no position," the statement said.
The Mississippi-based American Family Association, in a campaign started Wednesday, is urging its members to demand that American Girl halt support for Girls Inc., which it called "a pro-abortion, pro-lesbian advocacy group."
"Let American Girl know they are making a terrible mistake," said a statement by Don Wildmon, chairman of the American Family Association, which says it has more than 2.2 million members.
The Pro-Life Action League, a Chicago-based anti-abortion group, also is asking supporters to contact American Girl to express dismay. Executive director Ann Scheidler, said the organization might call for a boycott of American Girl's products and organize picketing at its stores in Chicago and New York if the company does not sever ties with Girls Inc.
American Girl, a subsidiary of Mattel Inc., said the "I Can" initiative supported three specific Girls Inc. programs: building girls' skills in science and math, developing leadership skills and encouraging athletic skills and team spirit.
"All of these aims are appropriate to our 7- to 12-year-old American Girl fans," the company said. "The American Girl brand exemplifies the values of wholesomeness and responsibility that we would expect any organization to commend."
Girls Inc., which traces its roots to a center founded in Waterbury, Conn., in 1864, serves about 800,000 girls a year, many of them black or Latino and most from low-income families.
The "advocacy" page on its Web site lists some of the positions that roused conservative ire -- for example, a clear endorsement of the 1973 Roe vs. Wade court decision establishing a woman's right to abortion.
Girls Inc. also supports a girl's right to have access to contraception and pledges support for girls dealing with issues of sexual orientation.
Joyce Roche, president of Girls Inc., said the New York-based organization had never before been targeted by a protest campaign.
"We were taken aback," she said in a telephone interview Friday. "Our programs are well respected. We're all about helping girls see possibilities and dream big dreams."
Girls Inc. takes positions on public policy issues if it believes women's rights and opportunities are at stake, Roche said. "Our philosophy is that women should have the right to make decisions about themselves," she said.
One of the protest coordinators, American Family Association special projects director Randy Sharp, said the campaign is noteworthy because American Girl's products have long been favored by conservatives. Its dolls include a series from eras of American history -- such as Felicity, from the Revolutionary War, or Addy, who escapes from slavery during the Civil War.
"American Girl has won the trust of millions of conservative families," Sharp said. "Now, we find they're teaming up with Girls Inc., which supports the very things we oppose. It's very troubling."
I could be wrong, and I hope someone will correct me if I am, but Girls, Inc. is NOT the same as Girls (and Boys) Clubs of America.
Totally different entities.
Regards,
No thank you.
Christmas holidays are coming, it would be a great idea to find alternative sources of gifts for our daughters.
I'm not suggesting you don't speak out about your principles.
I am talkng about effective tactics. If most major corporations in the U.S. sponsor the Girls Clubs and you start a boycott that only hits a toy company that makes relatively conservative dolls you are just asking to make things worse rather than better.
What she said!
The complaints have already brought a response from the company.
We don't need to support companies that degrade our society.
Hopefully you are rignt. I will happily admit I was wrong if that is the case.
But some of the chapters have names like this
"Boys & Girls Club/Girls Inc. of Pueblo County & Lower Arkansas Valley
Pueblo CO, 81004-2643
Telephone: 719.564.0055
Web Site(s):
http://www.bgc-gi.org"
I should amend my statement: I don't think Girls, Inc. is affiliated with Girls Clubs of America ANYMORE. IIRC, they split in the early 90s.
I think the official name is now Boys/Girls Clubs of America.
Regards,
I always thought these dolls were overpriced. Glad I never bought them. Kids never play with all the other dolls they have.
Interesting. I just went to the Girls Club of America site, and in their "who are we" section, they say the club started out as Girls, Inc., but that the name changed in 1990. No mention as to why.
Just trying to make sure the complaints are aimed at the correct target....
Regards,
You are missing the point. AG markets itself as wholesome, age appropriate products for girls. The parents have been paying a lot (too much, really) for the image, and for the convenience of knowing their girls can participate in this company's products without having to worry that there will be anything unseemly on its website or in its books, etc. Parents trusted this company with their daughters.
Picking on a toy company that markets exclusively to little girls? Excuse me. They market baby dolls. To little girls who will grow up one day and do what? Abort future customers because that will be more responsible and empowering.
God does work in mysterious ways.
You realize it's not the Girl's Club that is the only issue. Girls Inc, is a different entity. American Girl's by their support of Girls Inc, encourages girls to read and study up on things that are quite frankly beyond their years. Plus parents need to introduce these topics, not an agenda driven organization that literally infiltrates themselves through dolls.
Among young women ages 12–17, 88% said “how well it
protects against HIV/AIDS and other STDs” was “very”
or “somewhat” important when choosing a method of
birth control or protection. Among the same group, 84%
said “what my partner wants to use” was important.
In a 1999 survey of young women between the ages of 15
and 17, over half of young women who have had intercourse
have never been tested for an STD (54%) or HIV or AIDS
(61%).12
Due to the vulnerability of the cervix during puberty, young
women are more susceptible to STDs than young men. Because
females are less likely to have detectable symptoms
of STDs, and are less likely to be diagnosed early, they are
more likely to experience long-term complications of STDs.1,10
Among high-risk populations, STD rates are especially high.
In a four year California study of incarcerated juveniles ages
13 to 18, between 38% and 55% of young women tested
positive for an STD each year.14
Nearly one in five (19%) young women ages 12–17 considers
oral sex to be “safe sex.” Additionally, 60% believe condoms
are “somewhat” or “very effective” in protecting against HIV.11
Human papillomavirus (HPV) — a group of more than 100
viruses — is likely the most common STD in young, sexually
active people.5 Women with HPV are at particular risk because
certain types of the disease are causally related to cervical
cancer.9
While young women between the ages of 15 and 19 made up
just 4% of the U.S. population in 2001, they represented 19%
of reported cases of gonorrhea and 32% of reported cases of
chlamydia. Both chlamydia and gonorrhea are especially
prevalent among young Black women.6 (See Figures 4-6.)
In 2001, over 200,000 young women between the ages of 15
and 19 had chlamydia; nearly 70,000 had gonorrhea; and
about 142 had syphilis.9 In that same year, an estimated 1,873
young women between the ages of 13 and 19 had AIDS.4
More from their website aimed at young girls:
Girls Inc. reached more than 900,000 girls in 2000 through affiliates, our website, and educational products,
including action kits, and posters. An additional 2 million girls heard or read the Girls Inc. strong, smart, and
bold message and the Girls Inc. Girls’ Bill of Rights through the Girls’ Rights Campaign. Guided by our vision
of empowered girls and an equitable society, Girls Inc. is committed to reaching millions more girls. Of the girls
the organization serves, 70 percent are girls of color; 75 percent come from families earning $25,000 annually or
less; and 37 percent live with two parents.
Girls Inc. develops research-based informal education programs that encourage girls to take risks and master
physical, intellectual and emotional challenges. Major programs address math and science education, pregnancy
and drug abuse prevention, leadership, media literacy, economic literacy, adolescent health, violence prevention
and sports participation.
hmmmm, sounds an awful lot like planned parenthood's agenda of making sure the non-white and poor people are targeted.
And their link to Girls and Lesbian, Bisexual, and Questioning Identities (Resources for Girls) - note this is aimed towards the girls includes among many references:
Reed, Rita. (1997). Growing up gay: The sorrows and joys of gay and lesbian adolescence. New York:
W.W. Norton. ISBN 0-393-31659-9. $19.95.
This photographic biography of two young people is a sensitive portrayal of the struggles of adolescence amplified
by the awakening realization that these teens are following a different path than most of the kids in their age
group. The author/photographer is a member of the Star Tribune staff in Minneapolis. Her photographs illustrate
the text, which is made up of the words spoken by Amy and Jamie themselves. This technique makes a real
connection between the reader and the girls.
"You realize it's not the Girl's Club that is the only issue. Girls Inc, is a different entity. American Girl's by their support of Girls Inc, encourages girls to read and study up on things that are quite frankly beyond their years."
I found this.
"The first club was opened there--for boys only--and soon other communities in the region decided that such places would be good for their boys. By the early 20th century the clubs started to affiliate themselves with each other, and in 1931 they became Boys Clubs of America. In 1956, the group was chartered by Congress, and the charter was updated--after an agreement was reached with Girls Clubs of America, which changed its name to Girls, Inc.--to reflect the organization's name change to Boys & Girls Clubs of America in 1990."
So we are talking about boycotting a toy company for a supporting a charity chartered by congress that is also supported by pretty much eveyr major corpoation. Girl's inc.'s CEO is also Managing Director, Citigroup Global Markets Inc. thats giving a lot more support than Amerian Girl.
But again i am not debating the right to do it... just saying that alothough I wish y'all luck, i think it is unwise. If you want to go after Girls Inc you should pick one of their biggest supporters - like Coca Cola or Microsoft.
As someone else has pointed out, the problem/boycott isn't so much to pick on Girls Inc., per say, but the specific contribution from American Girl to this group. It isn't an appropriate charity for a line of products that is for sale in some Christian book stores - consumers of AG products have an expectation that the company is going to maintain some specific ideals. I don't expect a company marketing carbonated products with all sorts of unhealthy aspects (Coke) to have these same ideals. Additionally, this is the first out-in-the-open, you-can-participate-too charitable thing that American Girl has done (that I'm aware of, at least). The company needs to be aware that, if it wants to maintain it's current customer base, it needs to be sensitive to the beliefs held by those consumers.
"It isn't an appropriate charity for a line of products that is for sale in some Christian book stores - consumers of AG products have an expectation that the company is going to maintain some specific ideals."
Hmmm Well you know that is a good point. I can certainly see Christian books stores not wanting to sell a product if part of the proceeds go to pro-choice groups.
Maybe I was a bit hasty and I over-generalized. I can also see how people who like to shop at Christian bookstores could then follow. Yep I think I was hasty. Thanks for reasoning with me.
I just posted a comment about Girls Inc sounding like Planned Barrenhood over here.
I had lost track of the other thread, thanks. Here's a nifty little website to help you find previous pages of websites
http://www.waybackmachine.org/
The side bar about "sexual learning and sexual expression in the womb" is a bit over the top, but the content of the main text is just the facts -- and conveniently leaves out more titillating info like the fact that ultrasound technology has enabled viewing of male fetuses having erections.
Read the link. PUKE!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.