January 9th, 2025 (Thursday)
CONTENT WARNINGS FOR BIGOTRY, HOMOPHOBIA, AND SLURS.
Happy New Year!
Has anyone ever told you that people are constantly looking for a reason to be offended nowadays? Well, that sentiment is fucking bullshit. People have been getting upset over little things since the beginning of time. Let's go back to 1993, when a toy company made a doll that was a little too gender non-conforming.
Put down your SNES controller and don't let your baby brother pull out the tape from your In Utero cassette; this is the story of Earring Magic Ken.
Three things I'd like to say before I start:
- Please don't witch hunt nor contact anybody I mention in this entry, people can change over thirty years.
- The shitty beliefs and opinions from random people are here for context and historical purposes only. I do not condone them.
- All of my Barbie knowledge outside of Earring Magic Ken comes from Ted Nivison and Kurtis Conner's videos on the animated Barbie movies. I don't know shit about Barbie.
In 1992, Mattel released several Earring Magic Barbie dolls. Each one had earrings, a belt they could wear charms on, and a pleather dress with mesh sleeves.
It was announced in February 1993 that Earring Magic Ken would be available in April for $11 USD ($24.10 in 2024). According to a Mattel spokeswoman, Lisa McKendall, EMK's design was prompted by advice from young girls. She told Dan Savage from the Chicago Reader:
"Ken and Barbie both reflect mainstream society, reflect what little girls see in their world...What they see their dads, brothers, and uncles wearing, they want Ken to wear."
EMK sported two-toned blonde hair, a silver necklace with a hoop pendant, a purple pleather vest with a matching mesh top, and black pants with magenta stitching. The New York Times quoted Lisa saying:
People began accusing EMK of being gay within two weeks of his announcement. He wore purple and many thought EMK's pendant resembled a cock ring. Another Mattel spokeswoman, Donna Gibbs, explained that EMK most likely wore purple so he could match Barbie. EMK's target demographic was little girls, whose favourite colours are traditionally pink and purple.
When Dan Savage asked Lisa if EMK's pendant was meant to look like a cock ring, she responded with:
Dan elaborated in his article that cock rings were initially worn by leathermen on the shoulders of their jackets; left for tops, right for bottoms. This eventually expanded to "younger gay-boy-activist types," "dykes [who] didn't want to miss out on any of the sex-positive accessorizing," and rave attendees. They'd be used as zipper pulls, bracelets, and keyrings, but most often as pendants. He believed EMK's design came from LGBT culture slowly integrating into mainstream society, rather than children seeing their dads "running around with cock rings dangling from chains around their necks."
Lisa maintained that EMK wasn't gay, saying it was "an impression that adults put on toys that children don't." Unfortunately, this impression caught on to children. One teacher confronted the San Francisco Examiner after one of their articles unintentionally convinced her students EMK was gay. Her letter, which they published on November 4th, reads:
The message my students received was that all people who wear lavender clothing and an earring and have great hair are gay. Although most adult readers realize that this was a tongue-in-cheek story, the three boys in the back probably won't be wearing their earrings for a while. Many of the girls will stay away from purple clothing, if only to avoid the label of being different from others.
Finally, those quiet children in the class will grow up with the notion that it's OK to judge a book by its cover.
I know I'm not alone in teaching that stereotyping is wrong and that labeling individuals can foster prejudice. I hope the next time you first consider the repercussions on your impressionable audience."
Mattel's insistence didn't persuade the public, with many still convinced that EMK was canonically gay. One woman ranted about him in a letter to the editor for the News and Messenger on August 27th. She wrote:
It is time for Christians to get angry. It is time for Christians to get involved, and, it is time for Christians to speak out.
Homosexuality is not an alternative lifestyle. It is an abomination to God and a choice made by sin-sickened men and women. It is immoral and it is unacceptable. If you don't believe that God is against this act, just read Genesis 19—and see what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah.
I urge each one of you who is a concerned Christian and who would like to voice your opposition to this newest product of sick minds to write to Mattel Inc...Let them know that you are concerned about our future generations. Let them know that you will not idly stand by while they slowly destroy the innocence of our children.
May we daily be prayful about the depths of sickness that this country is sinking. Our country was founded on the truths of God's word and upon goodness and morality. Let us take a step as Christians to take America back."
Another Christian woman responded to the letter above on September 6th. She explained that EMK was part of a set and had matching clothes with Barbie, hence his outfit, and men who wear "an earring or two and some strange outfits" are not automatically gay.
The Daily Journal published a similar angry letter on November 12th. It reads:
When our leaders in Washington support abortion and gay rights, then claim to be a member of God's church, heaven help our country. We are going into some hard and troubled times. Even our religious leaders in Johnson County did not insist on prayer in our graduation ceremonies in high schools. Where were they?
All of God's 'true' people should be praying harder than ever for our children.
I will not be buying any Mattel toys for anyone this year. How about you?"
Outrage aside, EMK was also the ass of many jokes. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Being nicknamed "Cock Ring Ken," "Coming Out Ken," "Gay Ken," and "Queer Ken."
- A Roanoke Times reporter writing a fanfiction(?) where EMK leaves Barbie for the author's OC whom he met at a church picnic.*
- A Bradenton Herald reporter writing a fanfiction(?) where Barbie leaves EMK for "Mr. Macho" (whoever the fuck that is).*
- An article by the Times Recorder titled Let's Give Christmas A Politically Correct Label reading: "All gifts for children must be gender-neutral or teach children politically correct ideals. For example, G.I. Joe and Barbie and not acceptable. However, the recently released Gay Ken doll is OK."**
- An absurd number of G.I. Joe jokes.
- From the Chevy Chase Show: "The Mattel Corporation has introduced a new addition to its Barbie line: the Earring Magic Ken doll. Despite the doll's purple vest, necklace, and frosted hair; Mattel insists the doll is not gay. Earring Ken could not be reached for comment, however, witnesses do report seeing him at Camp Hamilton posing for photos with G.I. Joe."
- From the Daily American Republic: "That reminds me. Whatever happened to GI Joe? 'Don't ask; don't tell.' Him too? You think maybe he and Ken...?"
- From the Philadelphia Daily News: "...until President Clinton completes his military maneuver so G.I. Joe can come out too, Coming Out Ken has got a companion in Glitter Beach Ken, who's been out and about for a while now."
- From the Tampa Bay Times: "First, let me say that I feel for the new Kens because I know that late at night, when no one's in the store, the G.I. Joes climb out of their boxes and taunt the new Kens. Maybe even rough them up a little."
*I know these are meant to be jokes, but they still weird me out.
**EMK was discontinued by the time this article was out.
I need to emphasize that being LGBT in 1993 was not widely accepted by Americans. According to a New York Times/CBS News survey with 1,154 adult participants:
- 50% thought passing laws to protect gay rights was unnecessary.
- 44% viewed homosexuality as a choice.
- 43% didn't support openly gay people serving in the military.
- 43% believed gay relationships between consenting adults should be illegal.
The New York Times spoke with a young man who said "we should let gay people be...People should be allowed to do their jobs, in the military or anywhere." However, he winced when he was asked if that included schoolteachers and said "there are exceptions...Schoolteacher is one."
A Gallup survey from 1992 had similar results. Of the 1,002 adult participants:
- 74% thought gay people should have equal job opportunities, but less than half thought they should be elementary and high school teachers (41% and 47% respectively).
- 57% didn't see homosexuality as an "acceptable alternative lifestyle."
- 44% believed gay relationships between consenting adults should be illegal.
The possibility of the United States lifting their ban against openly gay people serving in the military was a hot topic in 1993. When the Los Angeles Times surveyed 2,346 military personnel across the country:
- 81% predicted openly gay members facing physical violence from other members.
- 74% disapproved of letting openly gay people serve.
- 19% served alongside somebody they suspected of being gay.
- 10% of potential military careerists said they'd leave if gay people were permitted to serve.
Surveyees were asked what their two main reasons were for excluding gay people from the military. The top five answers were:
- Sharing facilities with them (68%)
- Homosexuality being "immoral" (40%)
- Fear of spreading AIDS (28%)
- Religious views (21%)
- Unreliable in combat (15%)
The Clinton Administration's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy would be introduced later that year and enforced from 1994 to 2011.
24 states still had anti-sodomy (anal and oral sex) laws in 1993. D.C. repealed theirs on April 6th of that year, but it didn't become legal nationwide until 2003 after Lawrence v. Texas. Some states never repealed their laws, meaning sodomy could become illegal again in twelve states if Lawrence v. Texas is ever overturned.
Lastly, I found a few unrelated opinion pieces full of homophobia while I was looking for EMK articles. On May 8th, one man criticized the Macon Telegraph for endorsing "prostitution, sodomy, adultery, and pornography" after releasing an article (presumably) about sexual harassment or assault in the Navy. He included in his letter:
And what exactly is a bisexual? If that behavior isn't a 'choice,' I don't know what is. Who really believes that Heather Has Two Mommies or Daddy Has A Roommate is not recruiting material for the [1-2%] of citizens who are homosexual and are rapidly dying because of their behavior? What's next, anatomically correct Gay Ken and Lesbian Barbie dolls to get kids ready earlier?
A society without laws or restrictions on its 'freedoms' will slide into anarchy. The Macon Telegraph must either approve of all the 'lewd, drunken' and immoral (but not illegal) actions of Navy officers or renounce your previous 'consenting adults' opinion...and reaffirm military personnel's protections under Article 31 (UCMJ) or denounce the 5th amendment. Which will it be?"
A prayer ad(?) was placed between the columns of that letter. I don't know if that was on purpose.
In another letter to the editor from the Miami Herald on April 12th, a man believed gay rights weren't civil rights because "the struggle of gays is based on obtaining public approval of their behavior" rather than "who they are physically." His letter ended with:
Not only that, homosexuality goes against basic common sense. The physical functions of the sexual organs are designed to create offspring, which can occur only via heterosexual intercourse. To obtain public approval of their behavior, gays must nullify centuries of religious belief about the foundations of morality, and the principles of elementary biology.
People constantly talk of the religious community's intolerance of homosexuals. For thousands of year, adultery has been equally prohibited. and I don't see adulterers demanded acceptance and 'equal rights.'
The gay movement is not about equal rights, it is about public approval of gays' behavior. All homosexuals in America already have and will retain equal rights provided they keep their mouths shut. If we don't know about their sex lives, there is no problem. When we apply for a job, we don't have to broadcast what we like to do in the sack. Why should gays?"
TLDR: Being LGBT in 1993 fucking sucked.
Regardless of controversy, EMK found a fanbase Mattel never expected: gay men.
By August, the Wall Street Journal claimed that San Francisco retailers raised their EMK doll prices from $11 to $17-$24 ($37.12-$52.40 in 2024). One toy store in Chicago had a waiting list for them. Donna appeared to take EMK's newfound popularity well, saying Mattel was "pleased that gay men are finding something to enjoy in [their] products as well."
A San Francisco toy store manager told the Modesto Bee that EMK was selling to the point where their main location in New York City ran out of stock. Again, they were mostly bought by gay men instead of young girls or their parents.
Greg Gajus, a gay rights activist, said to the Cincinnati Post that he found EMK "kind of amusing" and saw him as an opportunity to sell merchandise to gay Barbie collectors. Just like Dan Savage, he also saw EMK as proof of LGBT culture integrating into mainstream society. Lisa denied gay men being the target audience for EMK, describing him as a "wholesome product designed for little girls." She had no issue with them enjoying him, but it wasn't Mattel's intent.
One Knight-Ridder News Service article featured two men with differing opinions on EMK. One described him as "a campy, funny thing to have" and displayed him on the mantle. The other saw EMK as an attempt by straight people wanting to mimick gay fashion. He disagreed with calling EMK a "gay doll," as it reinforced dangerous stereotypes.
John Stubbins, a former San Francisco teacher who'd been diagnosed with AIDS, had three Ken dolls sitting in an I Love Lucy ashtray in his living room. He told the San Francisco Examiner:
John died on June 21st, 1994 at 44 years old.
EMK didn't have nationwide success, though. The Richmond Times Dispatch spoke with two toy store managers in Richmond, Virginia that sold a combined total of sixteen dolls. The Anchorage Daily News claimed EMK dolls sold poorly in Alaska as well.
Frank DeCaro from NewsDay thanked Mattel for creating EMK in his 1993 retrospective by writing:
EMK ceased production by September due to Mattel changing 98% of their toy line every year. Scott Diel from the Huffington Post allegedly saw "hundreds of frosty-haired twelve-inch boxed homosexuals gazing out into the aisle" of an Estonian department store in 1994, but suspected they were unsold products from North America being sent to Eastern Europe.
It's 2025 now. Earring Magic Ken has since become an obscurity who infrequently resurfaces through YouTube videos, Tumblr reblogs, EBay listings, and rewatches of the live-action Barbie movie.
It fascinates me how much everybody hated this plastic humanoid figure for wearing unusual clothes, questionable jewelry, and a traditionally feminine colour. I can see something like this happening again at some point, albeit with people ranting on podcasts and social media instead of newspaper articles. People still assume you're LGBT if you don't conform to gender roles or do stuff that's associated with the opposite sex. Certain articles and letters reminded me of how intolerant I used to be and how much internalized homophobia I still have.
I have no other coherent final thoughts about this entry. Stay tuned for an eventual entry about Tinky Winky. See ya.
P.S: My dad thinks Earring Magic Ken looks like Billy Idol.