Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Brian Moore's avatar

Saw the movie last night, I (humbly) think you are missing the deeper message in the movie, which (at least from my perspective) is actually a critique precisely of that "brand of modern feminism."

"I emphasize that this is not what the filmmaker believes. Rather, it’s a nod toward what the film maker might believe about real world gender relations. "

I think that you're right, that's not what the filmmaker believes, but rather than a "nod toward," is actually a satire/critique of what the filmmaker thinks other people think about real world gender relations. When you actually walk through the movie, all the statements that characters make that fit that "brand of modern feminism" are actually undermined by the events in the story. Sure, at no point does a thinly veiled stand-in for the director break the fourth wall and make that critique of "obviously Barbie isn't a fascist, who would think that?" but the film implicitly does it in a way that can't possibly be an accident. If I were posting this on Marginal Revolution, I might use the term "Straussian."

Even the long speech the real-world mom - about the demands on women - gives to Barbie is full of items that are not "things imposed on women by men" and even though the shallow context of the scene makes it seem like it might be - it's more of an intra-woman debate.

At the end of the movie, it very much stands up for the conservative idea that, contra that "brand of modern feminism", that there are actual real-world differences (but certainly that they don't lock anyone into anything) between men and women (what is the first thing the director shows the character that is an "non-human idea" doing when she actually becomes a real human?), that ideas and aspirations and themes in movies, toys or media should not replace the real world practical dreams and needs of real humans, and the by-far most strongly implied message: that the human parental impulse (theoretically rejected in the opening 2001-parody, and implicitly by Mattel's/everyone's revulsion of "Midge") is actually vastly more meaningful than anything else in the movie? After all, who are the people and relationships who actually matter in this movie? The real world mom and her daughter. Barbie and Ken and their feelings and relationships don't actually matter, they're just ideas - they only matter how they reflect into the real world (explicitly outlined by the mom's thoughts directly affecting idea-Barbie)

What is the most important, climactic scene in the movie, where the director really DOES insert a stand-in for their voice? A mother/God/Geppetto literally breathes life into the clay of (giving birth to) their non-human created idea, giving them true human/woman life - and with the explicitly listed-by-the-camera necessary traits of: exhalation, heartbeat, attachments to friends/family, acceptance of the need to grapple with mundane reality and.... visits to the gynecologist's office.

I'm not a member of that "brand of modern feminism" - or social conservatism. But I have eyes, and I can see where the movie lands.

Expand full comment
Torin McCabe's avatar

I really liked the movie because it captures a more fundamental truth than Feminism vs. Patriarchy. It displayed how women tend to want a nice environment that validates them as they are and how men want a competitive environment where they can win through self improvement. I think these are valid and important gender differences that a mature culture has to consider versus the somewhat shallow ideologies of Feminism vs. Patriarchy

Expand full comment
16 more comments...

Cookie Policy

We use necessary cookies to make our site work. With your consent, we also set performance and functionality cookies that help us make improvements by measuring traffic on our site and we process respective personal data. You can withdraw your consent at any time. For more detailed information about the cookies, your personal data and your rights, please see our privacy policy.