Baby Glutton

I think the trend toward hyper-realism in dolls started in the 1970s with the introduction of Kenner's "Baby Alive" doll which ate, drank, and wet its diapers.

The latest evolution of the trend is Baby Glutton, the breastfeeding doll. According to "Your child wears a colorful bra-like halter-top featuring flowers over the nipple area. When the doll is lifted to the flowers, it makes a suckling motion and sound." A little too realistic, perhaps?

More links: (maker of the doll),
(Thanks, Bob!)


Posted on Tue Aug 04, 2009


Oh, ew! I find the thought of breastfeeding for real scary enough - why would anyone want to pretend?
Posted by kat  on  Tue Aug 04, 2009  at  10:19 PM
Um...having done it twice, I can promise, breastfeeding is not "scary". Jocelynn started "breasting" her babies after Anicah was born. Eric thought it was gross...I thought it was quite smart that she realized that it was actually a form of nourishment *instead* of a bottle. I think the idea that you actually hook the baby up to a 'nursing bra' is weirder than a pretend breast feeding baby. Most little girls I know breastfed their babies at some point...most just carried babies around under their shirts.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  12:37 AM
So, we're preparing little children for underage pregnancies so they can start breast feeding at less then 10?

Maybe a little too far there
Posted by Derek  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  06:00 AM
Are you serious??
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  06:29 AM
I find this a sound idea, much better than all those dolls that come with a bottle.Teaching and encouraging the natural way to feed can't be bad.
Posted by eovti  in  Sandefjord, Norway  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  07:39 AM
:grrr: What are the consequences for any adult male who sits and stares at a little girl using one of these toys?
Posted by KDP  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  07:54 AM
Is there really a controversy about this? When I was a kid we bought plastic machine guns and shot at each other.
Posted by Charles  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  08:30 AM
Are people really that uncomfortable with a completely natural, non-sexual act?
Posted by Kristen55  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  09:12 AM
Sounds like a good idea to me. Teach kids how to take care of babies well before there's a chance of them actually having a real one. Even better if they make it truly realistic: have the doll start fussing and crying every few hours day and night and not shut up until it is "nursed". Then the kids not only learn how to take care of a baby, but also how much fun it really is. . .
Posted by Accipiter  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  09:48 AM
I know bees like flowers but babies?
Posted by Joel B1  in  Hobart, Tasmania  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  04:53 PM
Breast-feeding is entirely natural, but so is making babies. So how about a Ken and Barbie "Makin' Babies" Doll kit?

Ken would have to be "fully priapic" and Barbie would have to look flushed and ... 😉
Posted by Joel B1  in  Hobart, Tasmania  on  Wed Aug 05, 2009  at  09:33 PM
@Kristen55 "Are people really that uncomfortable with a completely natural, non-sexual act?"

Well, the problem is that breasts are sexualised in modern Western Cultures so getting them out in public is tricky.

There would be no problem if human females regurgitated food to feed infants as do several other species.

No probs... :shut:
Posted by Joel B1  in  Hobart, Tasmania  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  01:52 AM
@JoelB1"There would be no problem if human females regurgitated food to feed infants as do several other species."

hehehe. I'm sure humans would find a way to make vomit sexy.
Posted by pinkgummiworms  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  08:02 AM
Joel mostly has it right...breasts have been sexualized, but with the huge numbers of formula feeders (and I have no problem with that...nourishing a baby is nourishing a baby regardless) many people have *never* been exposed to breastfeeders. If your children never saw mom breastfeeding siblings, they probably NEVER tried to breastfeed their own "babies". I know that my mother breastfed myself & my siblings (not all at once, lol), but I don't remember it. I babysat for a breastfed baby...but I was giving her expressed milk in a bottle.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  08:17 AM
Unless medical conditions restrict you, I really think breastfeeding is the best way to go. Even if you pump it, natural beats out some mix prepared in a factory.
Posted by Brian  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  11:08 AM
Bleh. I don't really see the need. But I don't see the need for regular baby dolls with bottles, either, or dolls who need their diapers changed, either. Why do little girls need to be taught the "natural way to feed"? Can't they learn that when they're older? Why do they need to be trained to be mothers when they're still years away from that?

If a little girl wants to play with a baby doll, that's fine. I'm just uncomfortable with the "baby dolls = training girls for their inevitable future motherhood while they're still children" concept.
Posted by Sakano  in  Ohio  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  12:02 PM
I don't think babies are "training" little girls. My oldest was holding & "rocking" objects before I ever gave her a baby doll. She used her stuffed animals mostly. But also other non-cuddly objects. At a certain age, she was aware that certain things I did for her were she did it for her babies. She would bring me 'crying' babies and tell me to love them, hug them, etc. She was observing and experiencing things herself...that she turned around and did to her own toys. Heck, if she starts yelling at her babies too much...I know that *I* have been yelling too much! Mimicry is very common in any similar relationship.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  02:35 PM
Hm, that's a good point. I guess what makes me a bit uncomfortable is the motive behind making a doll like this. If a kid wants to mimic a parent, and pretends to breastfeed, that's one thing. But a lot of people are saying that this is a good way to teach girls about the natural way to feed babies, and I don't feel that's something that's really all that important for them to learn about at that age. Buying a doll like this for your kid seems to have a bit of a loaded motive. (Unless you buy it because they're already mimicking and you think they might have more fun with a doll like this.) You know what I'm saying? Maybe I'm not making any sense. 😛
Posted by Sakano  in  Ohio  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  02:44 PM
I think you're assumption that people would give this to their child to "teach" breastfeeding is what is not making sense - or relevent. I bet most parents buy Babydoll X b/c it is cute, or in their price range...then their child opens it & it contains a bottle. So the child uses the bottle until they see mommy breastfeeding for the first time. Then *they* try to breastfeed the baby, too. I have NEVER seen a babydoll advertised as a breasfeeding babydoll before this., if a parent walks into a store & sees there are 2 seperate options, bottlefed baby vs. breastfed they have 1 more decision to make. Is the baby cute? In our price range? Does it take breast or bottle? Jocelynn breastfed her babies without the use of anything...just by holding her baby under her shirt. Now that I know Jocelynn mimicked me...I might be more inclined to purchase a breastfeeding baby for Anicah if I was to have another baby that she would be exposed to. Although...depending on cost, I may not even consider it. Fisher Price & Cabbage Patch babies are fine...bottle or otherwise.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  04:59 PM
The entire concept of breast feeding is reprehensible to most God-fearing people. It's an incestuous relationship between mother and baby, a naughty nipple that manifests later life addiction to smoking, drinking and even homosexuality. Trollop Monica Lewinsky's long breastfeeding....over 3 years...led her addiction all the way to the White House! Mothers should pump the milk out. Hugh Hefner's sexualization of the breast has poisoned the world against an act of nature long before Playboy. How can a mother ever explain to her youngster why daddy is still breastfeeding? She can't and the kid grows up perverted. Our morality has gone down the tubes along with the economy. Nevertheless, I would still rather be in America than Afghanistan. Dr. Bruce Spencer
Posted by Bruce Spencer  on  Thu Aug 06, 2009  at  08:05 PM
Funny, I thought I'd be banned from Hoax, but if we're talking breast-feeding...

My dentist breastfeed her kids until they were 6yo. To be honest it kinda distracted me from the pain of several procedures. 😊
Posted by Joel B1  in  Hobart, Tasmania  on  Fri Aug 07, 2009  at  04:34 AM
At least amongst the people I know, "realistic" baby dolls are given to kids around the time they get a new sibling, in an attempt to deflect sibling jealousy: Mommy is getting a new baby, and you are getting a "baby" too - this also is the time when questions about baby care come up naturally.
Posted by Anaglyph  on  Fri Aug 07, 2009  at  06:16 AM
Jocelynn had a few baby dolls from the time she was 2 or so...and Anicah was born when she was about 3.5. But I *did* make an effort to get all her babies together to make sure all the parts were there & would be ready to play with. I let her "practice" holding a baby with her baby dolls.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Fri Aug 07, 2009  at  08:45 AM
I'm not touching this one. I'd have to be a real boob to want to stay abreast of the discussion on this one. You guys have milked this one dry. I see some of your points, and I know it's a lot to get off one's chest, I really don't want to cleave my way thru this one. Have fun
Posted by Hairy Houdini  on  Fri Aug 07, 2009  at  11:28 AM
Kenner made "Baby Alive", so now Spain makes "Baby Glutton", it is just tit-for-tat. As for an american version, I'm sure the decency groups will nip it in the bud.
Posted by Fred  on  Mon Aug 10, 2009  at  12:05 PM
@Bruce: Seriously? I don't think there's a single thing in your comment that I can agree with. I am a Christian, a "God-fearing person" as you put it, and the idea of breastfeeding is in no way reprehensible to me or to any other Christian I know. I just don't happen to want to watch someone doing it, nor did I want to do it in public myself when my daughter was a baby.
Posted by Crafty Dragon  in  Montana  on  Thu Aug 13, 2009  at  10:57 PM
It's an interesting idea, but I place it in the same league as the doll with realistic ... um ... shall we say it stayed hyper-realistic when the little girl took off the nappy(and it was a male doll too) as just too realistic. If the girls are happy nursing stuffed toys, why give them a doll that's programmed to want nursing? I suppose it's just up to the parents. BTW, Bruce, who commented above, have you ever heard of Richard Dawkins? I'm a Christian, and I'm very glad he isn't reading the comments here. Do you have any idea what comments like that do to people? They make them think 'Oh. Christians think THAT?!! No way can they be right then.' It estranges people. And I personally can't help wonder what you're doctor of. Medicine? No. You'd know that breastfeeding makes medical sense. And no way is it Theology, that's for sure. Sorry to be so rude, but I really hate stuff like that.
Posted by Isaac  on  Wed Sep 02, 2009  at  07:59 AM
it's kind of ridiculous, don't you think so?? I think that way.
Posted by Ameda Ultra  on  Thu Dec 24, 2009  at  07:55 AM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.