ASM Toy Fair 2016 Gallery

Lady Gaga's Foundation, Mattel's Monster High Team to Empower Teens (Exclusive) - Hollywood Reporter

But what about the days of individual fingers from ToyBiz's Marvel Legends? I know of some that STILL view Hasbro's articulation inferior to that :p

My point still remains: Mattel is probably not including those particular POA to keep their cost down/profit per item up.

I never said it was a "good job", but it is a significant IMPROVEMENT over how they've traditionally handled such lines in the past.

But again, any improvement they make is usually mitigated by some other bonehead action (like the excessive packing of Batman in current cases, and lack of villains, IMO)

I'm no seeing the issue personally. Promoting a a diverse look and positive message among a line of horror dolls is something that should be welcomed, not derided.

It's clearly a political language; empowering, acceptance. " a world that offers eternal love, not judement at those who are brave enough to be themselves"- we all know what this is implied. I also don't understand how you can encourage individuality and at the same time have to accpet everyone/everything and not be allowed to criticize?! Anyway, Lady GaGa isn't what I'd like to call a positive children role model.

I'm not really even sure what you're trying to say. I think you're attempting to push a negative view onto this simply because it changes the status quo and looks to teach kids to embrace themselves and other for who they are. Maybe you don't like the celebrity involved, and that's fine.

Acceptance of others is a very good message to send and teach. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but most of Mattel's dolls are not overly positive images in general. Diversifying the look, promoting a positive message message through a popular line of dolls is an odd thing to get worked up over.

Okay, on one hand, I don't see the big deal. Lady Gaga is the daughter of a mobster after all, so she is technically related to a monster.

On the other hand, yeah, this sounds just like some marketing ploy. However, children are so overly sensitive due to the internet today, so if there is something that can help them have a much better outlook on their lives, I'm okay with it.

1. Silver Surfer is the only Toy Biz Legend I have and the finger articulation is stupid. His hands don't look right when you bend his fingers at all, so it makes sense for it to be lost. Plus, finger articulation sucks when the joints go loose.

2. Surfer doesn't have ratcheted knee, shoulder, and elbow joints, so they are growing looser each day.

3. Mattel IS keeping their profits up by being cheap. Sure, Hasbro does stupid **** too. However, I have never seen a company as dysfunctional as Mattel in my life. They blatantly ignore their customers and believe they know what the customer wants. They don't care about customer service, especially when it comes to Matty Collector. They also want people to go all in on their products rather than having a choice.

The fact is, Mattel is not doing anything to show us they can be better. If they can't give us double jointed knees and elbows, or ankle rockers, how about some god damn interchangeable hands?


Oh really? And who would you say is one?

Gaga is a talented actress and singer who actually respects those around her and the medium she is in. She wants people to be who they are and not what society wants them to be. That is far more than those worthless, selfish, ugly, slut lowlifes who get top news headlines every day like the Kardashians.

Changing the status quo is political! Lat's stop playing innocent, we all know this have a deeper meaning then not bully kids based on their looks. I think mattel dolls(barbie) were fine, yes they could expend "I can be barbie" line. Not all toys have to educational, I don't see this silly argument for boy toys. Do you really mean it that we should accept everyone? Are you going to accept people on the other side who disagree with you on fundamental issues?

This is not helping kids, this is propaganda.

How do you know? They just revealed this what, yesterday?

You still haven't told me who you think is a good role model though.

Lady Gaga IMHO, is awesome.

I know because I can READ between the lines. It isn't relevant who will be better the Lady GaGa, the FACT is she doesn't fit to be children role model.

And neither do 99% of sports stars, most movie stars, most singers, television personalities, etc. A parent should always be the one to set an example of a good role model. If a parent is relying solely on a children's toy and who promotes it to be the role model, then they have failed as a parent.

Teaching acceptance is a very good message, and actually having a children's toy line spread that message is pretty refreshing.

But the thing is parents shouldn't buy their children a toy that promotes non educational massage. You didn't answer my question; Are you going to accept people on the other side who disagree with you on fundamental issues? In fact, you didn't contradict my claim that it's a political propaganda. You see now what mattel DID? They're horrible.

What is the other side of the issue? The other side of the issue is to not accept people for how they are, to criticize them for their appearance and shun them for being different. Am I going to accept arguments for people who want to promote bullying and belittling those who are different? No, no I am not. Is that the type of "role model" you want to promote to kids?

And if parents shouldn't buy their kids toys that don't offer an educational message, you just eliminated 99.9999% of the items we cover here.

Are you saying that people who disagree with you are necessarily bullying?! So basically your loophole is that we should accept everyone except people who doesn't accept everyone, which mean we shouldn't accpet everyone.

There is a great difference between a toy who have no educational value to a toy who promote a certain massage

I never said people who disagree with me are bullying. I said promotion of bullying is not acceptable. The opposite of promoting acceptance is to promote non-acceptance. Acceptance of someone for being "different" doesn't equal accepting those who bully. And bullying doesn't equal different. The message that's being embraced by Mattel with this is that not all people need to be the same or need to be pigeon holed into a "type" to be accepted. It's a message I happen to agree with personally.

And let me turn your words on you. So the only acceptable educational value to promote, is a message you agree with? Hence, if you don't agree with the message being promoted, it's now propaganda as opposed to simply promoting a positive message?

And maybe I'm missing your general approach here. Is it that individuality shouldn't be embraced, that being different from your peers is something that is not ok? Is it that any attempt to diversify and bring attention and acceptance to those outside the norm is a bad thing? Is it that people who are overweight, come from a different background, those with non-traditional family dynamics are people who should be criticized instead of being understood and accepted?

Well I assumed that, because you didn't give me a straight and clear massage if you are going to accept people on the other side who disagree with you on fundamental issues! You know POLITICAl, MORAL issues etc. Not accepting someone doesn't mean bullying, you know like in your loophole that says we should accept EVERYONE but not everyone.

No, the only acceptable educational value to promote isn't to agree with me. Refer to the content instead of me. We already agree this massage is beyond your simple don't bully kids based on their looks, but stuff like gender identity and sexual orientation. I do think that people shouldn't be bullied at all, but I do believe I have the right to judge people based on their ideology and not accept their ideas. This argument isn't about our political views (which are clearly different), but on the FACT that mattel crossed line and now we have politics in toys, thanks to them. This why I am against this thing, even if this propaganda was from my political side.

And now I see where you're coming from. I have plenty of people in my life, friends and family, where we share opposite viewpoints on issues. You were looking for a loophole to shift the discussion. Where as my core belief is that this is an ok thing to promote; that others are different and they shouldn't be shunned solely for that.

I don't agree that this is as political as you're making it out to be, but that's you're viewpoint. As of now, you stated your case, I stated mine. I have nothing further to contribute to this discussion.

Wow... so, yeah... um... DC Universe Classics, amiright guys?

I agree with Joe... I can't see how anyone could see this as a bad thing. If spreading acceptance of others and a message of not judging others because they are different than you is a "political" thing, than you know what, so be it. It's still a positive thing.

You're reacting as though someone or some organization has something unsavery to gain from spreading a message of acceptance of others. I'm... honestly not seeing anything like that.

Also, I won't get deep into it, as I could easily cross over into a disscussion of religious beliefs, but I believe that you can accept others for who they are without agreeing with them on something. Acceptance of someone means you respect them. You can respect someone while also having different opinions and beliefs than theirs.

I am so confused now. Louise, you said that Mattel should not be doing this because it is Lady Gaga. I disagree with you. You said she isn't a good role model to kids, but you never told me who you think is.

I do not see any propaganda in this ordeal. Gaga is there to tell kids it is okay to be who they want to be, not what society tells them. What is so hard to understand about that?

BTW, how do you feel then about the PSAs that came at the end of every GI Joe, Thundercats, and He-Man episode back in the 80s? THey were pretty political by your definition.

They can create the base of the next generation of voters. I wish that what you said about respect was true, but this is not the case. Because the moment you saying you disagree then you're racist, intolerante etc. If my opposition is political, then your support is political as well. This is my last note on this, but I will say I decided officially to boycott Mattel, they're cynical and put more effort on the advertisement then their products.

I think mattel shouldn't do that because of the propaganda itself, Lady GaGa is just an "extra". Lady GaGa music videos includes sexual content, her work isn't made for kids.

The 80's cartoons only promote toy selling, I'm ok with that.

Permit me to interject: :D

It's important to distinguish between 'tolerance' and 'acceptance.' Political correctness in popular culture tends deliberately to blur that distinction, resulting in a warm, fuzzy, glib message of 'universal acceptance,' failing to acknowledge our duty as individuals in a free society to think critically and form our own unique values and opinions, necessarily rejecting some in favor of others.

Too many people are like walking receptacles, accepting any little bit of spoon-fed political correctness or propaganda, like apps to a cell phone. Healthy societies encourage critical thought.

That is NOT the same as being intolerant! Everybody should have the right to go about their daily lives free of bullying. Permit me to rephrase Joe's statement above: "you can be tolerant of others without agreeing with them on something."

Paraphrasing Louise's point, if there is something you find unacceptable in popular culture, let the market speak: take your money elsewhere. :)

It is propaganda; what is Lady Gaga's banner? So we know what to expect when we see them hit shelves. The truth is Mattel is crossing that line. No where in the history of the world has society changed the status quo until this last few years in the department of "equal" (special) rights for organizations that pump insane amount of money for their cause. Some blue states deem it right that kindergarten children be put through "acceptance" programs before they are even able to understand sexEd.

Children of this generation are the most experimented on with social issues that didn't even exist and the results of it are yet to be seen. What I do know is that testosterone is under attack.

I... I... I... what?... This statement literally makes no sense to me... Are you trying to say that, if I disagree with someone on something... that I'm judging them based on their skin color
or their gender, etc...?

My... my head hurts...