Having issues with the autistic Barbie and the execution of her is fine.
Having issues that she is distinctly visually coded to be a higher support needs autistic women is not.
The tools and disability aids she is shown using are real tools and aids that real people need and use daily. They’re not some fake stereotype. They’re real people. People that now could feel unwanted by their very own community. Incorrectly feel that they’re less worthy of being properly represented in media and toys.
It’s fine to hope she’s not the only autistic Barbie doll they will make. She likely isn’t! The Fashionistas brand has precedent for reusing disability traits on multiple dolls. It’s what the modern version of the line was founded on. Simpler fashions to save budget for higher inclusivity and diversity in doll molds and props.
And Mattel as a brand has precedent for being able to represent lower support need autistic frankly fantastically well with their character Twyla Boogeyman in monster highs 3rd generation!
I’d heavily recommend her dolls and debut episode with heaps of love to any lower support needs autistic people who’s looking for great representation in a doll line. I’d also recommend her to introverts who are looking for something that represents introversion as a concept positively without Demonising it or treating it like a flaw to overcome!
I love her as a character. I feel more seen by her than any other character in fiction!
But she too is a limited representation of autism as a disorder as a whole. Because she’s so specifically lower support needs! Her stimming is non obtrusive bracelet fiddling and hand flapping, she can communicate her needs easily with minimal preparation, she only needs her noise cancelling headphones in situations of excessive noise like parties or concerts instead of always, her meltdowns are her shutting down over lashing out.
That is not the case for everyone. That is not the case for a lot of people! None of that is a flaw with her character, she’s made to represent a specific experience set. And she does that experience set really well!
The Autistic Barbie is the opposite. She is specifically a higher support needs woman. She represents a collection of the experiences from that specific experience set.
The actual execution of how well that is done is perfectly fine to debate and discuss. But acting like her having those traits at all is “bad rep” feels really gross to me and reeks of internalised ableism. Especially when real people have them.
Erasing her tablet and ear defenders does not make her “better” rep. Disability aid visibility and normalisation is an important, frankly under discussed part of representation.
Her being high support needs is not a negotiable part of her.
