Horsman's Controversial New Arrival Dolls

Li'l Ruthie and Li'l David by Horsman, 1975

My blog post of August 7, 2011, included four doll controversies with image and/or information links to three of the controversial dolls mentioned.  I promised to share additional information about Horsman's 1975 dolls, New Arrival Li'l David and Li'l Ruthie in a subsequent post.  This is that post. 

I purchased this pair of dolls during the 1990s, shortly after I began collecting, in response to a dolls-for-sale ad placed in Collectors United.  I telephoned the elderly (based on the feebleness of her voice), former owner to inquire about their availability.  She was surprised that I had no prior knowledge of  Li'l David and Li'l Ruthie.  She explained to me that they were the first anatomically correct dolls manufactured by Horsman for the play market.  I agreed to purchase the dolls, sight unseen, based on her description of the dolls and the history she provided.

Because of the correctness of their anatomy (and it is very correct), Horsman knew that some parents might be opposed to their children being so informed through doll play.   

The top flap of Li'l Ruthie's box reads:

READ MESSAGE BELOW*
PHYSICALLY CORRECT GIRL DOLL
New Arrival Li'l Ruthie

(Li'l David's box flap reads the same with the exception that "GIRL" is replaced by "BOY."

The asterisk leads the reader to the warning Horsman included on the lower front of the box to no doubt  eliminate any parental backlash the dolls may have created.  The warning reads:

*This doll has true-to-life features which differentiates little girls from little boys.  For those who feel they do not want their children to be aware of this difference we do not recommend this doll.

This was a clever move by Horsman, one of America's oldest doll companies, having begun operation in the US in 1865.  Horsman is one of the earliest American manufacturers of black dolls (Black Baby Bumps, 1911, being one of their early black-doll products).

More About Li'l David and Li'l Ruthie

Li'l David and Li'l Ruthie  are 13-1/2in (34.29cm) dolls with a one-piece, stuffed-vinyl body.  They have panted hair and painted brown eyes.  With the exception of their different anatomy and outfits, the dolls are identical. 

Li'l David wears a blue and white gingham shirt and diaper that has a front button closure. 

Li'l Ruthie's dress is pink and white gingham.  She has a matching bonnet.  Her diaper also has a front button closure.   Each doll has a pacifier, rattle, and bathing sponge.

An added extra for the little owner is a punch-out birth certificate on the back of each doll's box.

Li'l David and Li'l Ruthie were designed by Irene Szor, who designed dolls for Horsman from 1957 through 1986. 

dbg

Blog Jog Day 2011

Welcome to Blog Jog Day! Please take a minute to enjoy my site, which is devoted to Black-doll collecting and my frequent musings about all genres of vintage-to-modern Black dolls.  I have also authored three Black-doll reference books.  Information about my books is located under the Books tab.  

After browsing here and reading today's blog in its entirety, click over to Chelle Cordero, Author, at http://chellecordero.blogspot.com/  to see what that blog has to offer!

Lost in the links? You can always go back to the main Blog Jog Day Blog at http://blogjogday.blogspot.com/ and find a new link from which to jog.

Four Doll Facts:

• Made from a variety of materials, dolls with realistic and sometimes not-so-realistic features, are inanimate representations of humans.
• When mass produced as a counterpart to white dolls, Black dolls are usually created in fewer quantities.
• Doll lovers and culturally-conscious parents desire non-stereotypical dark-skinned dolls with ethnically correct features for their collections and for their children, respectively.
• When created as described under the second bulleted fact, Black dolls, do sell.

Four Doll Controversies:

• To be featured in a future post, Li'l David and Li'l Ruthie  (Horsman, 1975), anatomically correct dolls, came with a message to parents on the outside of the box, which read:   "This doll has true-to-life features which differentiates little girls from little boys.  For those who feel they do not want their children to be aware of these differences, we do not recommend this doll."  
• Snacktime Cabbage Patch Kids, (Mattel, 1995).  Designed to "chew" plastic food that entered the doll's mouth and exited its backpack, the Snacktime Kids were removed from the market after several reported cases of children getting their hair and fingers caught in the doll's chewing mechanism, which did not have an off  switch.  
• Happy Family Midge and Baby (Mattel, 2002), a.k.a. "Pregnant Midge," mistaken as an expectant Barbie alarmed parents whose protests forced the doll's removal from store shelves.  The doll was actually Barbie's married friend Midge and did later re-enter the market. 
• New to the US market, Bebe Gloton, a.k.a. the breastfeeding doll, by Berjuan is making waves in the US from the United Kingdom.   This toy includes a "fake breast" halter to be worn by the child, and a mechanical infant that mimics the act of breastfeeding when it latches onto the halter.  Emotions and opinions are mixed.  Some view Bebe Gloton as an innocent toy while others argue against the ability for little ones to imagine themselves lactating mothers using the halter and the suckling infant doll. 

If you have found this post informative, please become a follower/reader of my blog by subscribing via email or by clicking the "Join this Site" link on the lower right-hand side of  the main page.  If you know others who are as enthused about Black dolls or dolls in general, please share the link to my blog with them. 

Thank you for jogging by my site!

Happy, informative Blog Jog Day!

dbg