New Dolls on the Block

By William Lee Adams Thursday, Mar. 19, 2009

CONTROVERSIAL: Toymakers argue their dolls normalize disability, but some parents say they pigeonhole kids. What do YOU think?

Emily Keegin

Ever since Barbie and her reality-defying curves stepped into the playhouse, parents have complained that dolls promote an unattainable image of beauty. It's a particularly piquant point for Lexington, South Carolina mother Mary Ann Perry, whose 23-year-old daughter Valerie lives with Down Syndrome. "Dolls represent real people in the imagination of a young person," Perry says. "I don't want Valerie to think she has to be conventionally beautiful to be loved."

So when Valerie asked for a doll at Christmas, her mother bypassed buxom Barbie and purchased Elizabeth (retail price: $175) from S.C.-based retailer Downi Creations. Featuring 13 physical characteristics of Down Syndrome, including almond-shaped eyes, low-set ears, a horizontal crease in her palms and a slightly protruding tongue. Elizabeth, says Perry, is "different but beautiful at the same time." (See pictures of Barbie's 50 years.)

She's also one of a new breed of dolls targeted at special-needs kids. Parents in the U.S. and Europe are snapping up Down Syndrome dolls, blind babies, paraplegic dolls in wheelchairs and dolls wearing scarves as if undergoing chemotherapy for cancer.

"There's a therapeutic impact," says Helga Parks, who sells more than 2,000 Down Syndrome and Chemo Friends a year through her online Helga's European Specialty Toys. Parks believes her products boost a child's self-esteem by normalizing their condition, and foster understanding among peers: "They take away the fear and sense of alienation for both parties."


While toy sales have been hit by the downturn, special-needs dolls are doing well. Sales at Downi Creations remained steady in 2008, while Kids Like Me, a U.K. retailer, sold 25% more dolls last year than in 2007. Among its hottest items are the Disability Set — which comes with two dolls, a guide dog, dark glasses and leg braces; and Tilley, who uses an electric wheelchair. "She's jazzy, she's modern, she's now," says company director Emmanuel Blackman.


Or is she? Special-needs dolls, and Down Syndrome dolls in particular, have come in for criticism from parents who believe they pigeonhole their children and rely on stereotypes. "It's a scary image for a lot of families," says Sheila Hebein, the executive director of the Chicago-based National Association for Down Syndrome. "They're highlighting differences that do not exist in all of our children. Certainly most do not have their tongues hanging out." In fact, she says, many work hard in therapy to improve muscle tone so they can better control their mouths. (Dollmaker Parks offers a nonprotruding option.)


Annette Hames, a British psychologist and an expert on how children conceive disability, says that anyone, special needs or not, would struggle to identify with these "odd-looking" dolls. Besides, she says, "Down Syndrome isn't about what you look like. It's about what you can and cannot do."


Despite such criticism, dollmakers remain unfazed. Peter Laudin, owner of the New York-based Pattycake Doll Company, says offended parents bring their own prejudices to the dolls, perhaps because of their personal difficulty accepting a child's situation. "Nothing we respond with satisfies their hurt," he says. But for kids who receive the dolls, that's beside the point. "Children love all dolls unconditionally whether it's special needs or not," Laudin says. Retailers hope adults share that openness, too.

TWO MAGIC QUESTIONS TO HIRING?

Steve Wunderlink gives us TREMENDOUS INSIGHT into the reality of what we are REALLY looking for when hiring...how we choose WHO WE HIRE, and maybe most importantly, he gives us food for thought...on who WE ARE!

He breaks down hiring into JUST TWO QUESTIONS...(based on experience and skill)...read on to figure out just WHERE YOU FIT IN.....and WHAT THOSE QUESTIONS ARE!

And as always, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Hiring

from http://themoralbusiness.blogspot.com/2009/03/hiring-part-one.html

by Steve Wunderlink

The nervous twenty-something sat down at a chair I offered him in the break room of the factory where I was hiring. Within a few seconds of meeting him I had a pretty good idea of whether I was going to hire him or not. Some had resumes and ties, some had torn jeans and a ratty shirt, but most had a scared look on their faces.

I set them at ease with an offer of something to drink before we sat down and began the interview. After doing hundreds of interviews and hiring dozens of new employees into the company I got pretty good at getting to know people quickly. Let me give you a few quick observations about hiring for jobs.

Resumes are for pinheads. Any good manager can tell more from a handshake and a look in the eye then they could ever from a resume. Only in the MOST technical of jobs do you even need to know any kind of proficiency in tech stuff. You can ALWAYS teach someone to fix and maintain but you can RARELY teach guts, brains, perseverance and interpersonal skills. I know a lot of idiots with great resumes and there “ain’t no fix for stupid.”

Never trust educational background. With less than 50% of our high school graduates knowing how to read and most universities teaching you political views instead of calculus; I would never trust education. Most people learn to take tests. “Will this be on the exam?” And they forget as soon as the last paper is handed in. How much education and where you got it isn’t important. My degrees are more a testament to my perseverance and patience than they are to my knowledge.

Be prejudiced. Hire based on certain prejudices. I am NOT talking about skin color or gender, which makes no difference. I am talking about hiring the RIGHT people for the RIGHT job, whoever that may be. I have felt pressures from every front to hire people who were not right for the job but they were “right” for some other reason. I was asked to hire a person because their family worked in the company, because they came from a certain school, because I needed more minorities in my departments, because they had seniority, and even because they just needed a break. Resist the pressure against hiring the RIGHT person for the RIGHT job, be prejudiced.

Get under their skin. So many interviews I have been in, on both sides of the table, never get under the skin at what the person is really like. How do you get to know a person in that short of time? They walk in. Are they late, RIGHT on time, or early? You see how they are dressed. Are they OVER dressed, appropriate, or UNDER dressed? You shake their hand. Is it strong and confident, wimpy fish-like, crushing, or Monkish where they wipe after they shake?

You look them in the eyes. Are they scared, averted, piercing and deep, or bloodshot? You offer them a drink. Do they graciously accept and thank you, decline and thank you, offer to pay, or have their own and pull out a JB from their pocket. You sit down with them. Do they slouch, sit at attention, cross arms and legs, lean towards you or lean away from you?

You haven’t said a word yet but you probably know whether you are going to hire them based on the first few minutes of meeting them. I am now ready for the interview. Sometimes they surprise me and wipe out my first impressions but usually I have only two questions for them ...

I am now ready for the interview. Sometimes they surprise me and wipe out my first impressions but usually I have only two questions for them...

When I was interviewed and trained to DO interviews I was given a book of questions to ask or choose from. I started with the book and the interview took over and hour and I would dutifully write down their answers so I could consult it later and remember why I hired them in the first place ... how stupid is that.

Here are some stupid questions to ask in an interview:
- Are you a self starter?
- Do you consider yourself a people person?
- Are you a leader?
- Are you a Green Bay Packers fan?
- Do you have a problem with overtime?
- Did you get good grades in school?

All of these questions will get only one response. They are basically an intelligence test and not interview questions. If ANY ONE answers "no" to these questions don't hire them. These are leading questions and don't get under the skin of the person.

Here are some good questions:
- Define integrity.
- What is on your bookshelf right now?
- Who needs you?
- Tell me about a time when you got in over your head and what you did about it.
- What is the greatest event in your life so far?

When I was a rookie I had the first set of questions and wondered why I really didn't know my new employee. When I became a little seasoned I evolved to the second set of questions and enjoyed the people I worked with. After hundreds of interviews I broke even those questions down into just two. Two questions told me what I needed to know about the person beyond the non-verbal's described in the last column. Two questions to get below the surface:
- What do you expect from me, your boss?
- What can I expect from you, my employee?

Confused? Not really, you can find out a lot about a person from those two questions. See if you can tell which I would hire based on the following answers.

What do you expect from me, your boss?
- A paycheck
- A chance to prove myself
- Two weeks paid vacation
- A company car
- Experience, guidance, and knowledge

What can I expect from you, my employee?
- My best, everyday
- Eight hours, minus breaks of course
- My support of you, to make YOU look good
- Loyalty
- The extra mile
- 40 hours a week, with time and a half for more

Which would you hire? Maybe the more important question is: Which are you?

Steve Wunderlink
themoralbusiness.blogspot.com

Bill would require Oregon universities to interview at least one minority football coach candidate

Rachel Bachman wrote this article for the Oregonian, (at www.oregonlive.com), and I have to admit...I think she hit the nail on the head with this one.

Since this is a blog - I can safely tell you (hopefully without losing you to boredom) that this morning on my way to work I pondered JUST THIS QUESTION...What then, if affirmative action isn't "fair" to qualified minority applicants....then what is the alternative?

And I thought, "How about a LAW that companies must INTERVIEW minority applicants?!" I was Oh, So Proud.....until....

Alas, I don't have an original idea, but it is HOPEFUL, is it not, that Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, drafted JUST THAT measure at the behest of constituent Sam Sachs, a former college football player and minority-rights activist.

I LIKE IT. WHAT DO YOU THINK?


Bill would require Oregon universities to interview at least one minority football coach candidate

by Rachel Bachman, The Oregonian

www.oregonlive.com, rachelbachman@news.oregonian.com

The Oregon Legislature plans to introduce a bill this week that would require universities to interview at least one minority candidate before hiring a head football coach. If it passes, Oregon would become the first state with such a law.
House Bill 3118 is patterned after the NFL's Rooney Rule, which helped transform the league's head coaching ranks after being implemented in 2003.

Oregon's bill aims to diversify hiring in major college football, where seven of 120 head coaches are minorities.

Richard Lapchick, founder and director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics In Sport at University of Central Florida, said the bill could push the NCAA to drop its resistance to enacting a similar rule.

"I think it's very significant and very welcome by people who have been fighting for this for a long time," Lapchick said.

Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, drafted the measure at the behest of constituent Sam Sachs, a former college football player and minority-rights activist.
"It seems to me it only makes sense," Greenlick said. "Because (the Rooney Rule) has had an effect and because I don't think minority coaches have been given a fair shake in Oregon, certainly in football."

Oregon's bill would cover the six state universities with football teams: Oregon, Oregon State, Portland State, Eastern Oregon, Western Oregon and Southern Oregon.
The bill contains an exception for a school "bound by contract to promote a member of the institution's current coaching staff." Call it the Oregon Out: In December, the Ducks promised their head coaching job to offensive coordinator Chip Kelly when Mike Bellotti becomes the school's athletic director.

The bill grew out of Sachs' frustration over the speedy hire of Jerry Glanville in 2007 as Portland State's football coach. Sachs said he has nothing against Glanville but decried the lack of a more inclusive search for such a prominent job.

Ironically, Portland State hired one of the nation's first African American head football coaches: Ron Stratten in 1972. But since he resigned after the 1974 season, most of the state's head football coaches have been white. Neither Oregon nor Oregon State has had a minority head football coach.

Rob Cashell, athletic director at Eastern Oregon, said the bill might help his department.

"I think if qualified minorities knew that they were going to have a possibility to interview, they might take a closer look at schools such as ours -- that Oregon has this law and there's an opportunity there. It might strengthen the pool of candidates."

Sachs, who has a black studies degree from Portland State and teaches about diversity at the Oregon State Police Academy, lobbied administrators and wrote letters to the editor about the need to open head-coach searches. But the former fullback at Western Oregon didn't get much traction.

Sachs said he thought about suing to push the issue. But, he said, "I'm not black and I'm not a coach."

So Sachs approached legislators about writing a bill, using his 2005 experience as an intern in Oregon Sen. Avel Gordly's office.

If passed, the measure could slow down and open up football head-coaching searches, which are often quick and secretive. Sachs said he got friendly receptions, though no endorsements, in meetings with OSU athletic director Bob De Carolis and UO athletic director Pat Kilkenny.

"I've been very surprised and pleased," Sachs said, "at how most people I have reached out to, whether it be athletic directors that I've talked to, or coaches, or legislators, they already seem to mentally be there. And they think, 'Yeah, this is a no-brainer. Of course.' So to me, that's encouraging, and it just reinforces my belief in people."

Unlike the Rooney Rule, which levies fines for teams that don't comply, Oregon's bill includes no penalties.

The ranks of minority coaches in the NBA and men's college basketball, sports with high numbers of African American athletes, have increased to the point where race is rarely discussed in hiring.

The NFL's minority hiring lagged until the 2003 adoption of the rule named for Dan Rooney, owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers and chairman of the league's diversity committee.

Three years later, seven of the league's 32 head coaches were minorities -- 22 percent. In 2007 and 2009, African American head coaches led teams to Super Bowl victories.

Advocacy groups have decried the lack of similar progress in college football, where about 47 percent of players are African American but six percent of the coaches are. In January the New Jersey Legislature introduced a bill urging the NCAA to adopt the Rooney Rule. Oregon's bill would take that a step further and make it state law.
Greenlick said the bill has a good chance of passing.

"I don't see what should stop it," he said. "I mean, who's going to come in and oppose it? All you're asking them to do is when you're hiring a new coach and you're doing interviews, interview at least one minority candidate."

-- Rachel Bachman; rachelbachman@news.oregonian.com