>>6513747Because mathematical average and actual 'average' are not the same thing and the creator is a fuckin idiot for going about it the way he did.
Ok so the thing about women, and humans in general, is we have body shapes based on our bone structure and genetic predisposition to accumulate fat and muscle in certain areas. Lammily's creator disregarded all that and instead just took statistics, ran them through his computer, shooped a Barbie to fit those statistical averages, and called it a day. Thus, Lammily looks like a fucking dwarf nude. She looks like someone took Barbie's torso, melted it somewhat, and put Skipper's limbs and head back on it. It doesn't look good nude and has to be very carefully dressed to not go full Quasimodo. Which is unfortunate because obviously the idea behind it was good, as Mattel is making a fucking killing.
Look at this chart, and look at the Fashionista line right now. Almost all women, despite how fat/slim they are, fit somewhere on this chart unless they are seriously malformed. And so do the Fashionistas. Tall Barbie is a lean column, Petite and Regular are somewhere between column and hourglass, and Curvy is a pear. All their proportions fit and make sense (barring the cartoon heads and small feet that all dolls seem to have). They even share some measurements between them, like Curvy and Regular having similar busts. You could see these proportions as being a regular human on a street and not think it weird, but if you saw Lammily you'd probably think she had some kind of major birth defect.
Plus Mattel did a good job of not only making the different body types but making many skin/hair/face sculpt combos available for reasonable prices. Honestly other than some wonky paint apps and fashion choices, the only issue anyone seems to have with these new girls is the lack of articulation, which seems like its Mattel's next step.
