The Barbie Movie - misandry of just a bit of fun?

[Barleymower]

For me one of the main reasons (apart from liking skirts) I wear skirts is I'm totally bored with the clothing options for men.


2. Am I becoming bitter and angry just because society takes the attitude it does to male skirt wearing?

I became bored with stereotypical male garb back during childhood. (During the 1960s, when females still largely wore skirts/dresses). Never became angry/bitter about the lack of options, though.

I'm more angry with myself. What exactly am I afraid of? I really don't care what people think of me. I know for instance that 90% of people are not thinking about me. They are thinking about themselves. Some people are quietly thinking "good on you". The bigots can get knotted, I spoken to a few and they aren't worth it.

[moonshadow]

I know for instance that 90% of people are not thinking about me. They are thinking about themselves. Some people are quietly thinking "good on you". The bigots can get knotted, I spoken to a few and they aren't worth it.

Bullseye!

Nobody is ever going to directly give you "permission" to wear the clothes you want. You already have permission, so why would they? I've seen so many post on this website where men moan and complain that "waaaaahhhh..... women have all these choices and men don't have any!!!!! boo-hoo!". You kidding me??? There is no law stopping any man from wearing whatever the hell he wants! Do you all think that if you cross over to the women's section a bolt of lighting is going to strike you down? Do you think the FBI "fashion police" will come out in full swat mode and haul you away for the rest of our life?

I can assure the membership here that I myself am NOT above the law and I wear what I want! And I'm just some nobody from the Appalachian mountains... if I can do it, anyone can.

What, are we worried about a little giggling and heckling? What... all that masculinity that we like to pretend we have, and we cower down over a little teasing?? It gets me, I've seen so many post on here where we like to beat our chest, oh how manly we are, we want the most masculine looks, God forbid we express even the slightest bit of femininity, yet there are some among us that are afraid to be seen in public in a KILT... for God's sake sometime we act like a bunch of pansies....

Maybe the Barbie movie is on to something?? *shrugs*.... Why would they make a movie about men? Seems all most men do is rant about other people they fear and hide in the corner with other men complaining about everything.... Can you imagine the fallout if they put Ken in a skirt?? Oh man... Tucker Carson would sit on that testicle tanner for a MONTH, wringing his hands in constant anxiety about what's becoming of the masculine gender! Oh the HUMANITY! God save us all!

Jesus....

[Paula Proctor]

Why would they make a movie about men? Haha good one. The majority of movies are about men. In fact they are so much about men that the Bechdel test was invented.
Currently there are films or series that have transgender people in them without making a big deal of it. There are films and series with gay couples without making a big deal of it. It would be nice to see some characters on screen who are men in skirts, just being men in skirts, no big deal. Actually I think David in Schitts Creek wore a skirt but over the top of trousers But until it's in the wider consciousness to a greater extent it may take a while to happen.
Keep wearing skirts, that's the only way it will become normalised. I saw a guy in a skirt in town last week. And another guy in a skirt on the uni campus where I work. Its happening out there. Plus I see my husband in a skirt quite a lot. Haha. It's annoying. His legs are so much nicer than mine in a skirt.

[STEVIE]

Women have been defined in relation to men, not on their own merits. But then, 'truth' has historically been defined through the male lens.

Hi Paula
Welcome to the cafe and another woman's perspective is always a good thing.
Being a somewhat older dude, Cindy was the doll of my generation but strangely I was an Action Man fan as a kid.
Dolls of any form never rated highly for me then and movies even less so now.
I have quoted those two sentences because they intrigue me and I'd like to suggest you expand it in a thread of your own.
To use the optical metaphors, would you say that men's focus has been lost while women's has sharpened?
The angst around men wearing skirts being a greasy blob on the lens.
As for history and truth, perhaps the time has come for us to make our own.
Not as men or women, but all people in full and equal partnership.
Heavy going at 06.15 GMT!
Now I have to choose a work appropriate dress.
Steve.

[Paula Proctor]

I've been thinking about "truth" and definitions of the truth for the last couple of days in order to respond to your question Stevie.
Is there an objective truth? Hmmmm, maybe at some fundamental level. But what we see and who we are, can they ever be objective? History is written by the victors so they say. And in that main, that has been men. I would take from this that the truth of society is also written by men. Men are the starting point and women are then defined in relation to men. Medicine being a prime example. Heart attacks were missed in women because they experience them differently to men. Autism was thought be predominantly present in boys because girls experience it differently and this wasn't recognised. Drugs were developed with the male body in mind.
Skirts were for men, and then men didn't want them anymore so they gave them to women, so to speak.
The playing field is definitely levelling out. There are so many different ways of seeing the world that are now being acknowledged.
in relation to skirts, the truth of them can be changed, just as it was for trousers. The objective truth of a skirt is that it is a garment that covers the lower half of the body, and is free hanging. The interpreted truth is that they are "for women". Why? It's a piece of cloth. That truth can be changed. It can be changed by men wearing them. Keep wearing skirts and eventually people will change their minds.
As for Barbie, as a kid I had Sindy dolls. I loved dolls. I didn't have a Ken doll, or Sindy equivalent. Because of this, and because I still followed the well trodden path of most girls' play narratives of happily ever afters and relationships, my Sindy dolls were lesbians. This was in the early 80s. Make of that what you will.
If you look at Barbies now, they come in all different shapes. Ken dolls don't. they have a Ken in a wheelchair, but all the Kens I looked at are thin and muscled. Is that fair. No it isn't!

[Brad]

Chill out people. Its a movie. Thats all. I saw it and found it entertaining.

[Ray]

It’s not my thing so I’ll give it a miss. I’m off to see Oppenheimer instead on Saturday

[denimini]

Barbie fever has reached outback Australia. I was in a paint shop in Broken Hill yesterday and a lady came in wearing bright pink track pants and pink nail polish saying she was going to some Barbie event. I did comment on her pink pants and she never drew attention to my drab mini skirt and grey long socks, perhaps I missed an opportunity to wear a pink tutu and get away with it.
I haven't seen the movie but from radio interviews it sounds like a bit of harmless fun. If it comes on free TV I would watch it, although I don't own any pink garments at all.
Shein do stock one on my favourite minis in pink now:
https://au.shein.com/SHEIN-ICON-Flap-Po ... mallCode=1

[Ozdelights]

Well - we have been away for the last couple of weeks and last weekend my 3 grandchildren we were visiting wanted to go to the Barbie movie so as a good grandfather I took them. Take it as a bit of harmless fun for kids. Some parts could be interpreted as 'shock horror' typical but overall I took it as progress. To me it showed the typical hyper Barbie and then hyper masculinity but then again as per the T shirt "I'm Kenough" it does point to acceptance of where we fit and treating others fairly. But in all fairness it was fantasy for kid to have some fun and I felt the ending was more about compromise than polar opposites or oppression.
It's not starting a war and there are far greater concerns in our world.

[Stu]

Well - we have been away for the last couple of weeks and last weekend my 3 grandchildren we were visiting wanted to go to the Barbie movie so as a good grandfather I took them. Take it as a bit of harmless fun for kids. Some parts could be interpreted as 'shock horror' typical but overall I took it as progress. To me it showed the typical hyper Barbie and then hyper masculinity but then again as per the T shirt "I'm Kenough" it does point to acceptance of where we fit and treating others fairly. But in all fairness it was fantasy for kid to have some fun and I felt the ending was more about compromise than polar opposites or oppression.
It's not starting a war and there are far greater concerns in our world.

Make no mistake - this is emphatically not just a bit of fun. Its core purpose is the indoctrination of children, encouraging them to internalise a particular political ideology.

[rode_kater]

Make no mistake - this is emphatically not just a bit of fun. Its core purpose is the indoctrination of children, encouraging them to internalise a particular political ideology.

Honestly, this feels like a pessimistic take. If you want you can look for and find political indoctrination in everything. That neighbour who just planted a new tree in their garden? They're indoctrinating the kids of the neighbourhood to plant more trees, right? Pick any children's program ever made, you can find a political ideology in there if you want to. I'm sure you can find political ideologies in TellyTubbies, Voltron, Winnie the Pooh, He-man, Playschool, Sesame Street, if you look for them.

I prefer the more optimistic take: the makers wanted to make a fun movie and any perceived "political ideology" is an imagined interpretation of whatever the makers of the movie thought would bring in the most money, found by people who look for political indoctrination in everything.

[Stu]

I'm sure you can find political ideologies in TellyTubbies, Voltron, Winnie the Pooh, He-man, Playschool, Sesame Street, if you look for them.

I've seen some of these - and they absolutely don't talk about "the patriarchy". That whole idea comes straight out of feminist victim theory.

The idea is to smuggle in the indoctrination via a brand name popular with all children and to market it as "fun". But they are still getting the message through.

[Myopic Bookworm]

Make no mistake - this is emphatically not just a bit of fun. Its core purpose is the indoctrination of children, encouraging them to internalise a particular political ideology.

That is the most miserable piece of bitterness I've read for a while.

Like my late grandmother, I really don't like those bright shades of pink, but I would have rushed to see the Barbie movie already if I hadn't been away from home. The core purpose of the film is certainly not indoctrination of children (which means "education of children in a way I disapprove of"). Its purpose (other than making money, of course) is to satirize social attitudes. I haven't seen the film yet, but I've seen some of the reviews, and the people who have come out strongly against the film are, almost without exception, people whose attitudes I do not share, and whose opinions in many cases I do not value.

The reason for the ideology of female victimhood is simple: women have been victimized. If you can't accept that, then you're not living in the real world. Men have suffered from the patriarchal system as well, but in a more diffuse and indirect way. We may now have got to the point where feminism is sufficiently advanced in redressing the balance that a more measured approach to sexual equality can be considered (see Caitlin Moran discussed elsewhere), but the patriarchy is real: I have been to a British boys' public school, an Oxbridge college, and a Church of England parish church, so I've seen it in action.

[Stu]

The reason for the ideology of female victimhood is simple: women have been victimized. If you can't accept that, then you're not living in the real world.

That's complete nonsense. Women are now, and have been for some time, the most pampered major demographic in the history of humankind.

We may now have got to the point where feminism is sufficiently advanced in redressing the balance that a more measured approach to sexual equality can be considered (see Caitlin Moran discussed elsewhere), but the patriarchy is real: I have been to a British boys' public school, an Oxbridge college, and a Church of England parish church, so I've seen it in action.

There is no such thing as the "patriarchy". The whole notion of it was born out of a hatred of men by a particular brand of feminism that has now become mainstream. Women and girls have all the rights of men - and then some. If the patriarchy did exist, it must be doing a terrible job. It lets men be the largest majority of people living on the streets. It lets females dominate schooling so boys underperform compared to their female counterparts at every level of education. This supposed "patriarchy" is also responsible for the oppression of women for years according to feminism, however feminism fail to see that now, in the modern era, they are the majority. This is why we see things like ‘manspreading’, ‘mansplaining’ etc. Women in the west are no longer oppressed, and so they seek oppression where none exists and interpret female advantage as some kind of oppression. Boys are taught from day one that they are dirty and disgusting (slugs and snails etc) and are inclined to bad behaviour, while girls are clean and immaculate in every way. Even some feminists are now calling out the "patriarchy" BS - people like Professor Christina Hoff Sommers (who calls herself an equity feminist has done so several times in her writing: https://www.bookbrowse.com/reviews/ind ... ainst-Boys while former radical feminist and now staunch antifeminist, Professor Janice Fiamengo, exposes the hypocrisies of feminism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GvWxeVXV7E

We need to stop poisoning children's minds with this hate cult.

[crfriend]

Yes, there is some abuse of men by women but it rarely extends to pursuing them in the street or beating them black and blue - or raping or killing them. If you have figures to support the ridiculous assertion that female abuse of men is equivalent to this let's see them.

Abuse of men by women is (1) rampant and (2) grossly under-reported. The legal system is also heavily tilted towards the feminist objective of completely suppressing men. I am living proof of this. My ex- tried to get me killed by the cops (not having the guts to try it herself), committed several crimes in the act of same, and put me through a year of Hell trying to clear my name -- in spite of a directed verdict of "Not Guilty" in a bench trial.

So, this is very much a 2-way street even though popular culture absolutely insists that women are always the victims. They. Are. Not.