I was just as excited as the next person when Barbie was released in theaters. I was drawn in by the excessive amounts of pink (can you ever really have too much pink?) and the absolutely stunning Margot Robbie. But as I'm sure that many of you can guess, I was drawn in most by the reviews.
|
"It effortlessly showcases strong, fearless female characters who break stereotypes and defy expectations. The messages of self-acceptance, confidence, and the power of dreaming big resonate deeply, instilling a sense of empowerment within the audience." -Sanad Abunwar, from Google Reviews |
|
"The film doesn't shy away from tackling meaningful themes, subtly imparting valuable life lessons about courage, resilience, and following one's passions." -Ajit Iyer, from Google Reviews |
So when I walked into the theater, I walked in expecting the groundbreaking feminist masterpiece that I was promised—something almost too radical to be put into a blockbuster movie. What I got was the most shallow, well-known feminist message I had ever heard, white women telling me it was the most beautiful movie they had ever watched, and the incredible Ryan Gosling singing "I'm Just Ken" (or, as I like to call it, the biggest self-empowerment anthem of the decade).
Honestly, it almost feels like the movie put more work into empowering Ken than they did for Barbie, and that's very ironic, isn't it? That Ken, the side character, the literal antagonist of the movie, is the most beloved and most developed character in Barbie.
Meanwhile, the message Barbie got was that women are expected to be everything all at once, at the right time, and in the right way to appease men, and if they aren't, they're treated as second-class citizens (but if they are, they're also treated as second class citizens). Yes, this is true. It may be the truest thing about womanhood. And at the same time, this message is basic, and it's nowhere near mind-blowing. It begs the question: have people been living under a rock? How is this just now coming to their attention?
It's not that the message wasn't true. It's just that, well, what's the point of making a movie with the same ideas that I've already had for my entire life? What's the point of making a movie like Barbie if it doesn't make me think? Did it really do anything special? Was it really even for women?
On top of that, Barbieland was most certainly not reflective of the real world; that is to say, it was a woman’s— but specifically a white woman’s— dream. Their definition of “diverse” meant including a couple of black women, one plus-sized white woman, and a bunch of white-passing Latina women. Barbieland was diverse for a white woman, which is to say, not diverse at all. All the casting did was contribute to the erasure of mid-sized women, brown women, black women with kinky (not curly) hair, and Asian women, among others. Even more upsetting was that the movie sold itself to be empowering to both genders, but it focused more on Ken’s gender journey and Barbie’s personal character development than feminism at all. Oh, and in terms of diversity? The Kens just happened to have way more. I ask again:
Was the Barbie movie really even for women?
My answer: kinda.
Honestly, it almost feels like the movie put more work into empowering Ken than they did for Barbie, and that's very ironic, isn't it? That Ken, the side character, the literal antagonist of the movie, is the most beloved and most developed character in Barbie.
Meanwhile, the message Barbie got was that women are expected to be everything all at once, at the right time, and in the right way to appease men, and if they aren't, they're treated as second-class citizens (but if they are, they're also treated as second class citizens). Yes, this is true. It may be the truest thing about womanhood. And at the same time, this message is basic, and it's nowhere near mind-blowing. It begs the question: have people been living under a rock? How is this just now coming to their attention?
It's not that the message wasn't true. It's just that, well, what's the point of making a movie with the same ideas that I've already had for my entire life? What's the point of making a movie like Barbie if it doesn't make me think? Did it really do anything special? Was it really even for women?
On top of that, Barbieland was most certainly not reflective of the real world; that is to say, it was a woman’s— but specifically a white woman’s— dream. Their definition of “diverse” meant including a couple of black women, one plus-sized white woman, and a bunch of white-passing Latina women. Barbieland was diverse for a white woman, which is to say, not diverse at all. All the casting did was contribute to the erasure of mid-sized women, brown women, black women with kinky (not curly) hair, and Asian women, among others. Even more upsetting was that the movie sold itself to be empowering to both genders, but it focused more on Ken’s gender journey and Barbie’s personal character development than feminism at all. Oh, and in terms of diversity? The Kens just happened to have way more. I ask again:
Was the Barbie movie really even for women?
My answer: kinda.
|
|
|
While it failed at starting a conversation of substance, it did bring to light some flaws in our society. Namely, the fact that this movie is even critically acclaimed in the first place. If society is really in the place that we think it is, everyone should find this movie cliche and played out— but we don’t. Instead, people were moved to tears, questioning their views of the world and, in one Twitter user’s case, their relationships with their mothers. Barbie should have passed as a children’s movie teaching children about the importance of equality (and equity, which it also failed to do); instead, people loved it and started a conversation about it, even if said conversation was, admittedly, short.
And that’s where substance comes into play. Sasha (the moody teen) could have told Barbie that her brand reinforced cultural erasure and the idea that women should always be smiling, polite, and docile. Instead, she aggressively and incorrectly uses the word “fascist” to describe Barbie, and she herself embodies the “temperamental Latina” stereotype. Even the fact that she’s played by a half Jewish, half Puerto Rican actress is evidence of Hollywood’s long-standing Eurocentric standards, yet the movie gives no time to that fact. She’s being raised by a single mother, but they’re both perfectly financially stable and healthy while living in LA of all places. And yet again, the movie gives no time to that.
It seems that the Barbie movie itself was an idealistic and stereotypical portrayal of women’s issues, where the characters don’t have any “real people problems,” such as money or transportation. It paints you a picture: look at this strong Latina mother single-handedly raising her moody (for a perfectly good reason, though!) teenage daughter who hates her even though she’s trying her best and works for a huge, successful company run by inept (totally inept! Can you see how inept they are?) white men. She ends up meeting her favorite doll who’s depressed because she, herself, is depressed and projecting it onto the doll. She gives the doll a pep talk which snaps her out of said depression (don’t question how she pushed past her own depression to become a group therapist. That’s not important to the plot). The other dolls, who are turned into bottle girls by the (supposedly) stupid, insecure blonde man who has just discovered patriarchy, are saved by the depressed, strong, independent, single Latina mother. Then, they all use their sex appeal to defeat the stupid boys and win back the matriarchy. The insecure blonde man learns that he should have his own sense of identity outside of pleasing a woman, Barbie never even bases her self-worth on the approval of a man (okay…), and when she becomes human, her biggest challenge is her gynecologist appointment, because what better way is there to end a movie about “feminism” than to reduce Barbie to her newly acquired vagina?
And that’s where substance comes into play. Sasha (the moody teen) could have told Barbie that her brand reinforced cultural erasure and the idea that women should always be smiling, polite, and docile. Instead, she aggressively and incorrectly uses the word “fascist” to describe Barbie, and she herself embodies the “temperamental Latina” stereotype. Even the fact that she’s played by a half Jewish, half Puerto Rican actress is evidence of Hollywood’s long-standing Eurocentric standards, yet the movie gives no time to that fact. She’s being raised by a single mother, but they’re both perfectly financially stable and healthy while living in LA of all places. And yet again, the movie gives no time to that.
It seems that the Barbie movie itself was an idealistic and stereotypical portrayal of women’s issues, where the characters don’t have any “real people problems,” such as money or transportation. It paints you a picture: look at this strong Latina mother single-handedly raising her moody (for a perfectly good reason, though!) teenage daughter who hates her even though she’s trying her best and works for a huge, successful company run by inept (totally inept! Can you see how inept they are?) white men. She ends up meeting her favorite doll who’s depressed because she, herself, is depressed and projecting it onto the doll. She gives the doll a pep talk which snaps her out of said depression (don’t question how she pushed past her own depression to become a group therapist. That’s not important to the plot). The other dolls, who are turned into bottle girls by the (supposedly) stupid, insecure blonde man who has just discovered patriarchy, are saved by the depressed, strong, independent, single Latina mother. Then, they all use their sex appeal to defeat the stupid boys and win back the matriarchy. The insecure blonde man learns that he should have his own sense of identity outside of pleasing a woman, Barbie never even bases her self-worth on the approval of a man (okay…), and when she becomes human, her biggest challenge is her gynecologist appointment, because what better way is there to end a movie about “feminism” than to reduce Barbie to her newly acquired vagina?
|
Just to recap, the Barbie movie:
|
|
- Provides a more thoughtful analysis of how insecurity affects men than how it affects women
- Demonstrates that when men are upset, they do something about it, and when women are upset, they lie on the ground and cry about it
- Shows that women rejecting men can be detrimental… to women (okay, that one is true)
The truth is that women’s issues are more far-reaching than “society’s expectations of women are contradictory, unfair, and impossible to achieve,” although that’s an important starting point with any conversation about women’s role in society. Women’s issues are impacted by a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, physical appearance, cultural standards, individual body image, their perceptions of themselves because of unreasonable expectations set by others, racism, classism, skin tone, hair texture, language barriers, immigration status, the number of children they have, elderly or disabled parents, having brothers, having fathers, not having fathers, slut-shaming, and irrepressible thoughts of death.
And yes, Barbie did do some good. It educated those who didn’t know anything about feminism and why it’s important, demonstrated that you shouldn’t sacrifice your personal style for anyone (personally, I’ll take a combat boot over a Birkenstock OR a pink pump), and thoroughly explained that, like basically every form of oppression, the oppressed are not the only individuals who are negatively affected by oppression. However, when it comes down to it, those messages could have been communicated more eloquently, and the entire movie could have had a more thoroughly considered, culturally aware message for viewers. Barbie had a good theoretical basis and high expectations to live up to; unfortunately, it fell just short enough of the mark to not be considered a true feminist movie.
Trinity Jones
