I am posting this after being bombarded this week from media about women and body/image issues. From Tyra, friends, and fellow bloggers, I have heard light skinned vs dark-skinned, skinny vs fat, straight hair vs curly/kinky hair. AHHHH!!!
I am usually one to shy way from the belief that the "media" controls our view of ourselves and others. I hate the whole light-skinned/dark-skinned thing. I applaud beauty in all ethnic, shades, hair varieties.
Secure in my beliefs, I was all set to sing, We Are The World and join hands in harmony when I run across this picture.
What in ‘tarnation’ is going on here? Was SSC not sexy enough? Did people mistake her for a light-skinned Rastafarian? Were those socks a subliminal terrorist code?
I am truly at a loss for words. SMH.
5 thoughts on “Did Strawberry Shortcake REALLY Need A Makeover?”
There’s something inherently wrong with this from the beginning. The fact that they are even trying to make Strawberry Shortcake sexy is ridiculous. She was a rag doll. A prissy Raggedy Ann, if you will. She was never intended to be sexy. She was supposed to be goofy and aloof looking. Yet another image to try to make our little girls feel insecure about their own looks. Thanks alot, media.
I like the “prissy” Raggedy Ann comment. Who knew Strawberry Shortcake was elitist?
This just makes me sad 🙁 because I was a huge Strawberry Shortcake fan as a child. No, she did not need a make-over and there was nothing wrong with her hair before. The new hair and clothing was not necessary and actually take away from her original charm in my opinion. The old look seemed more cute and innocent while the new look seems more mature.
Totally agree Pretty Lady. Why can’t girls just be innocent as long as possible?
as long as they didn’t put her in a bikini, i’m happy! 🙂