I am a feminist who usually considers Barbie to be a pretty good role model. Sure, she has proportions that in real life would not allow her tiny neck to hold up her enormous head, or accommodate full sized organs – but aren’t we in favor of representing unique body shapes? I know that her permanently tip-toed, child-size-three feet and fragile thinness would, in reality, only allow her to walk on all fours.

Side note: In the past when my children insisted we play with her, I would have Barbie walk on all fours and make her head droop down sideways because you have to follow the rules of physics, people! My kids don’t ask to play with Barbie any more.

But come on! We should be proud that despite Barbie’s severe physical limitations, the woman has held 78 careers in her lifetime, probably due to that giant oversized brain she must be holding in her giant oversized head. Past occupations include oncologist, fire fighter, paratrooper, street rapper, and football coach.

Barbie, in spite of having breasts so freakishly large for her disproportionate frame that it is a wonder anyone looks at her face, never mind her accomplishments, has bucked stereotypes and succeeded in male-dominated fields. All the while, Barbie has never compromised her meticulous make up routine or attention to her extensive, if questionably professional, wardrobe.

Hasn’t Barbie done enough for feminism already?

Well, it turns out she is still at it. Recently, Barbie’s turn as a computer engineer has hit the news. This may be a poor choice for Barbie, considering her wrists are so tiny only 1 in 19 people suffering from Anorexia ever reach that level of fragility, so early-onset carpal tunnel syndrome seems inevitable.

Nonetheless, she begins the book Barbie: I Can be a Computer Engineer by saying to her little sister Skipper: “I am designing a game that shows kids how computers work.” That is so cool!

While she turns out to be a designer, not an engineer, as the book promises, I am thrilled to see a woman like Barbie take on the task of simplifying the complex inner workings of computers so it is easy for children to understand. But there is one problem: no one has simplified the complex inner workings of computers so it is easy for Barbie to understand.

Barbie has no idea how to detect or remove a computer virus, is unable to reboot her computer, and uses a pink necklace flash drive to back up her work (and unknowingly transmit viruses), because the story takes place in 1991 and version control and offline backup have yet to be invented in My Little Pony Land.

Look, I don’t begrudge Barbie her pink (although I worry about the resale value of Barbie’s mansion with those pink and purple cabinets in the kitchen), and I don’t even begrudge her ineptitude in the world of technology – but I am shocked and confused that she took on computer engineering without actually taking on computer engineering. Wasn’t it enough for you to be the UNICEF summit diplomat? Did you have to have a book titled “I can be a computer engineer” when it is very clear to everyone, especially your friends Steven and Brian, who had to bail you out by page three, that you most certainly can NOT?

I am not a woman from the world of tech, but I have a husband and friends (even girl ones!) who are. And I have been to enough tech conferences where attendees say things like: “You don’t look like a woman in tech” or “You must be in marketing”, later heading in packs to strip clubs after dinner. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that the rocket science industry is an old boys club and there are some seriously brilliant, articulate women swimming upstream in a Madmen kind of world.

Why Barbie, why? Why do you have to add insult to injury to these women who actually can be computer engineers? You were a popular aerobics instructor for 25 years even though your limbs are not wide enough to actually accommodate muscle. Why not stay with that instead of telling the story of how you can giggle and hair flip your way into pretending you’re a computer engineer? It is insulting; it is inaccurate; and it is exploiting a field where women are working hard, every day, to be taken seriously and compensated fairly.

Come on Barbie, I try to defend you – but you are making it so difficult.

Here’s my version of the book (original on the left, mine on the right):

Can you spot the differences?