Herstory - Issue 3: Barbie

 

After conquering Barbenheimer, and seeing other people’s thoughts and interpretations of both films, it seems abundantly clear to me that misogyny is still very much rife. A revelation, I know. Although Oppenheimer deals with the ethics and morals of nuclear warfare, it seems that Barbie is the more polarising of the two. So this weeks upload will be a little different, we will not only be looking at the herstory of Barbie, we will be looking at her story and our story as women in the world today. 

On the 9th of March 1959, Barbie, full name Barbara Millicent Roberts was born. Well, sort of. The doll was introduced by toy company Mattel, owned by Ruth Handler and her husband Elliott. To the horror of many parents, Barbie was modelled off the lewd German Bild Lilli dolls, that were common gag gifts for men. Like most women in 1959, Barbie was very much hated, with a lot of critics claiming she had ‘too much of a figure’. The general consensus was that Barbie was far too risqué for young girls, understandably so, she was based off of a popular adult doll after all. Despite the critiques, the popularity of the doll skyrocketed, with consumers demanding more characters to be added to the Barbieverse. Barbie’s friend Midge was introduced in 1963, her sister Skipper was introduced in 1964, but Barbie’s most famous accessory of all was introduced in 1961: Ken. 

Barbie has had nearly 200 different careers. Some, but not all of them, include; fashion designer (1960), astronaut (1965), surgeon (1973), vet (1985), and even Naval Petty Officer in 1991. Ken on the other hand has had incredibly interesting career opportunities like; Ken in a suit! Ken in a striped suit! And we can’t forget about bendable Ken - you can bend his limbs! In a time before women could even open their own bank account, Barbie was showing young girls that yes, they can have interesting and important careers, a dream house, a dream car, a Ken. Whatever your thoughts, she was quite revolutionary for her time. 

Which brings us to the present and the release of the Barbie movie. Both times watching, I thoroughly enjoyed it. There were touching moments and lessons about womanhood and patriarchy and it highlighted injustices by flipping gender roles all while being a visually pleasing watch. Of course, it doesn’t go without its critiques. Personally I found it to be very much ‘entry-level’ feminism, a lot of the topics touched on were things us girls were thinking about years ago, so I wouldn’t say there was anything radical or groundbreaking. That’s not to say there isn’t a need for novice feminism, as there will always be younger audiences or simply audiences who want to listen and learn. What baffles me most is that the film has been met with a barrage of abuse from men claiming it is ‘anti-men’. I find this response quite bizarre, as many would agree, the film is more than forgiving and rather tame. 

Piers Morgan claimed it was an attack on all men and Ben Shapiro felt so hurt that he uploaded not one, but two 45+ minute response videos, recording himself buying Barbie dolls and setting them on fire in a bin. But why? I’ve seen it twice now and have yet to figure out what all the fuss is about. It primarily focusses on the realities of womanhood and the struggles that come with it. It also touches on the problems with toxic masculinity and when men are constantly in competition with one another, they can never really enjoy life and the importance of building their own identity in order to live authentically. Barbie literally encourages Ken to find his own selfhood in order to be happy. The Barbies are self-conatained, they have their own careers, their own houses, their own happiness and their own friendships and only treat the Kens with respect. There isn’t a shred of misandry in this film. The Barbies just want to be left alone. 

Truthfully, what I think is actually offending these men is that the film doesn’t have men at centre stage, and when it does, it doesn’t show them in their ideal light. Greta Gerwig did an amazing job at highlighting the latent emotion that comes with toxic masculinity. The Kens are needy, insecure, overly competitive and sensitive, all traits that directly threaten the power of patriarchy. I believe if men were presented as more ruthless, violent or emotionless in the film, there wouldn’t be as much backlash, because at least violent people have power. Gerwig portrays men as vulnerable, Barbie encourages Ken to find his own happiness without her, emotions and sensitivity are not viewed as negative traits in men and this film encourages men to relinquish their toxic masculinity. That’s what men are disgusted by, the idea that they too can be emotional, and that directly undermines the foundations of patriarchy. 

Sitting in the cinema watching bubblegum pink, sparkle and glitter dance across the screen made me feel like a little girl again. There were moments in which the feeling of shared heartache from other women and girls was tangible. This film means a lot to a lot of different people. Although it definitely could have gone further and I felt it held back at times, making for some slightly lukewarm feminism, it validated the shared experience of being a woman. It presented the joy, the softness, the pain and the suffering of womanhood. And that is anti-man? That isn’t anti anybody. These offended men have either not bothered to try to understand it or are so blinded by ignorance that they have intentionally misinterpreted it to fit their ‘all feminists hate men’ agenda. This film was an opportunity for men to extend some empathy and understand what the reality is for women and girls and it could have been one step closer to equality. But, as the saying goes, ‘When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.’