Eco House Dollhouse Brainwashes Teaches Kids About Sustainable Living

1. Ali S.
   January 21st, 2009 at 2:32 am

   I suppose walls are an option that some folks don't want. Free air conditioning!

2. Justin
   January 21st, 2009 at 3:08 am

   There is nothing sinister about teaching kids that recycling and renewable energy is a good thing.

3. Evilbeagle
   January 21st, 2009 at 3:19 am

   Toys with an agenda, no matter what it is, bother me.

4. Moodindigo
   January 21st, 2009 at 3:45 am

   Try and find a toy without an agenda (okay, the Rubiks cube). If they're not confirming gender roles they're trying to sell more toys. Living like this is going to be a reality for a lot of kids soon. I think it's a good idea.

5. Evilbeagle
   January 21st, 2009 at 3:57 am

   This is one of many thousands of reasons that I don't have kids, Moondingo.

6. Dan Smith
   January 21st, 2009 at 6:22 am

   seem healthy but somewhat contrived

   i mean, who's got a windmill on their house

7. Evilbeagle
   January 21st, 2009 at 6:55 am

   Contrived about sums this one up, Dan Smith.

8. Jason
   January 21st, 2009 at 8:31 am

   Wouldn't you need two kids to make it truly sustainable?

9. Gus
   January 21st, 2009 at 9:19 am

   It's nice to see an idea out of the ordinary, and that too one that introduces alternatives to the so far norm. The issue is to give food for thought, not to invent one toy that actually teaches children how to visualise the ideal house!! Besides, a plain brick house would not be as interesting for a kid and I know cause I have three.
   Whoever sees this as brainwash is retarded.

10. sw
    January 21st, 2009 at 10:32 am

    It's cute. I'd just worried about being bullied by the kid to install a wind turbine on my roof.

11. Gauldar
    January 21st, 2009 at 10:48 am

    Problem solved. Need a home cooling solution? Don't build walls!

12. Gauldar
    January 21st, 2009 at 12:14 pm

    Gus,

    I agree, it's not brainwashing, but it's not really much of anything either other then a doll house. I am reminded of the movie 'Big' with Tom Hanks. There is the part where they are in a board meeting, and they guy playing the jerk character introduces a robot which chances into an office building in order to teach kids about the business world. IMHO, same deal goes here.

13. Evilbeagle
    January 21st, 2009 at 1:06 pm

    I think most kids would be happier to get the building blocks and make their own house anyway. I know I would have been.

14. Scooter
    January 21st, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    Looks more like a motorcycle than a bike. If it was truly a "green" product should it not be made out of 100% recycled items. Wait... is that correct grammar?

15. andiscandis
    January 21st, 2009 at 4:02 pm

    I think it's nifty and I want one.

16. lumpi
    January 21st, 2009 at 5:10 pm

    Yea, don't teach those kids RADICAL ideas about recycling and... wind wheels?

    Seriously, why does reason have to be an "agenda" now?

    It's about time those right-wing nuts loose their power of twisting every phrase that was used to accuse them of propaganda and use it on harmless crap like toy houses with a recycling container...

17. niladmirari
    January 21st, 2009 at 5:35 pm

    It is interesting to me how "grid-centric" we as a society have become. Not all that long ago, you were responsible for gathering all of the energy you intended to consume. If you didn't get enough firewood, you went cold. Just that simple. Now it is "brainwashing" to teach kids about being self sufficient? How backwards is that? It is good that you don't have kids Evilbeagle, they would just end being mindless little consumers like mommy/daddy. How exactly are building blocks an "agenda-less" toy? They teach kids how to build things (agenda), balance (agenda), maybe some geometry (agenda), and even symmetry (agenda). Hey, that sounds like architecture (agenda). You're right, keep 'em dumb. They're easier to manage that way.

18. astrodex
    January 21st, 2009 at 5:54 pm

    I'm not sure how this is an agenda. It is simply an alternative to a Barbie Dreamhouse laden with extravagances. Except for the wind turbine and the lack of car it very much resembles the house my children live in. As for the lack of walls, there are plenty of similar dollhouses out there that aren't "sustainable.' It makes it easier to reach in and play.

    They have plants in their yard!? Dirty, freakin' hippies!

19. ted
    January 21st, 2009 at 9:38 pm

    Not that much brainwashing, is it? Maybe if one parent was a pregnant, transgendered man, I might suspect an agenda.

    When I was a kid, I got to read books about potential colonies on the moon and farming on the ocean floor. Why not give kids a pipe dream? At least, this dream's a little more realistic.

20. Evilbeagle
    January 22nd, 2009 at 4:05 am

    I guess I should explain the point I am making with the agenda here, since already, people are pinning me as being a right wing conservative when I don't even believe in party affiliations, nor do I live in the USA anymore.

    First of all, I went to the web site but was distracted pretty quickly. However, one parent pointed out in the comment section that if you yourself cannot afford to live "green", then the kid is going to be confused and get the wrong message. I don't know or care how true that is, simply because I don't have, nor do I want ankle biters, but I can understand the concern.

    There's also the idea that the whole message would be lost on a kid anyway, considering most kids have imaginations and turn doll houses into whatever they want them to be, thus my comment on building blocks. Those allow for more creativity. Maybe it's just me, but when I was a little girl, I used my doll house for storage and nothing more. I preferred building stuff and knocking it down with my Lego blocks and other blocks. A lot of little kids get a great toy and prefer to play with the box in came in. Not saying that justifies never buying your kid a toy, but a toy with a green agenda at the age kids are playing with dollhouses is either going to turn them into little eco bastards nagging their parents for a windmill, or be completely lost on them.

    No one wants to be harrassed by their snot nosed kid, nor should they, to install solar panels, and after all that rambling, that's why I think this is a "toy with an agenda", more so than the average toy.

21. Evilbeagle
    January 22nd, 2009 at 4:19 am

    Just adding to my last paragraph, that the reason this is more of an agenda driven toy than the average is because it is rather contrived. It's goes beyond pink for girls and blue for boys and strikes me as more of a plush fish toy with a kitten face ala the PETArds.

22. ted
    January 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 am

    You're reading too much into it, EB.

23. Evilbeagle
    January 22nd, 2009 at 7:42 am

    Possibly, but this is obviously someone created for the parents, not the kids.

24. Rocky Rook
    January 22nd, 2009 at 11:11 am

    What is that toy's carbon footprint?

25. ted
    January 23rd, 2009 at 7:51 am

    I know what you mena, EB, but I disagree. When my aunt and uncle gave me a Civil War set to play with, they weren't endorsing war.

26. Evilbeagle
    January 23rd, 2009 at 9:56 am

    ted, I get the point, but at least Civil War stuff is history. That's different.

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT