The summer of 2023 was an exciting time for cinema with the much-awaited Barbie movie coming. I had already booked tickets for me and my friends, showing up to the cinema in the most obnoxious pink I could find. Amidst the hype and promising reviews, I entered the cinema with high hopes, eager to immerse myself in a world where Barbie’s iconic legacy would be reimagined. As the credits rolled and I stepped out of the cinema, something felt amiss. Though the movie was entertaining, it wasn't quite the iconic feminist movie I was told or hoped it was.
The movie starts with a bit of the history moving to a cast with an array of representation with plus size, race and disability reps but these characters did not nearly get enough lines or screen time they deserved. There was also the lack of south Asian representation. I hoped I would see a barbie in a pretty pink saari but never did. The representation felt more like completing a checklist rather than integral parts of the film with lines of substance.
Elder elaborates that, “The disabled Barbie characters are given no lines. The plus-sized Barbies have five. Even Issa Rae’s President Barbie lacks depth and exploration”
The feminist themes and commentary felt very shallow and single dimensional, lacking depth that so many people said would be present. America Ferrera’s character (Gloria) speech was an integral part of the film where she unpacked the effects patriarchy has had on women as well as its repercussions, and though everything said was very true and important I still felt that something was missing. It was feminism 101 but was lacking what so many other feminists forget about. It was missing intersectionality.
It looked at women through this one lens categorizing them as one group, actively ignoring differences that exist within it. This is a big problem because when you ignore these differences you also ignore the idea of fixing issues surrounding them. According to Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan, “An analysis of gender that ‘ignores’ race, class, nationality, and sexuality, is one that assumes a white, middle-class, heterosexual woman inclined towards motherhood as the subject of feminism…replicating the cultural masculinist error of taking the dominant for the universal” (893) Though the movie focused on patriarch, themes like racism were kind of glossed over. Nowhere in Ferrera’s speech or Barbie’s awful reality checks (feeling an “undertone of violence” in the male gaze in the real world, for instance) is there an acknowledgement that yes, the implications of being a woman in a patriarchal world are horrible but if you're a WOC this implication and struggles are much worse.
Issa Rae’s President Barbie could have been a great opportunity as well to address the specific struggles of WOC, but it makes no such attempt. Having a black president was a great idea but the movie actively ignored the reality of how much harder it would be to achieve such a position because of being a woman and black in the real world. In the movie there is no understanding by the barbies about this or about intersectionality in gender which makes representation not mean much. Seeing someone who looks like myself is good but when they don't have the same experiences because of what they look like, does the representation even mean as much. The movie focuses on what I like to term “white feminism”. Themes of feminism are talked about but only through a lens that filters out race, religion and socioeconomic status. According to Crenshaw these aspects are integral in female experience and by ignoring them, you are doing no favors to the feminist movement.
When feminism does not explicitly oppose racism, and when anti-racism does not incorporate opposition to patriarchy, race and gender politics often end up being antagonistic to each other, and both interests lose. Kimberle Williams Crenshaw
Ariana Greenblatt’s character Sasha who is Latina cries out, “Hell yes, White Savior Barbie!” (Barbie 1:17:20). With this dialogue, the movie tries to hint that it is aware of how it does not explore intersectionality because of the way a “white savior” represents and leads all of the Barbies. The satire still does not bridge the racial disconnect between the film and the audience.
I think though it was fun to watch with important aspects of feminism, it was a catch all speech which failed to catch all. Talking about only the general aspects of feminism. The Barbie movie had plenty of chances to embrace its marketing as a “feminist” movie by representing intersectional identities but only focuses on a white centric view. It tries to include more identities but fails to authentically represent their unique struggles. Thus, as a south Asian girl the movie did not really empower me as I hoped it would have.
Such a well-written article! I haven't really seen the whole Barbie movie. I didn't watch it in the cinema when it came out but I'm sure it must have been a very fun experience. To be honest, my reaction to the trailer when I watched it before the release was that it must be very superficial and a little ridiculous really. And it seems I was right. As you've pointed out it's a very white feminism- focused film which doesn't really address the reality that the sexism women face is more often than not, based on race and ethnicity too. The lack of South-Asian representation didn't occur to me because I didn't really expect there to be any. I predicted…
To be honest, my first thought after watching "Barbie" was also the same. It was more of a business movie than a feminist movie. Because they way it earned money was more successful (obviously because of good marketing) than it conveyed the messaged that was supposed to be given. The representation of intersectionality was done so much in a manner of just completing a formality that it did not touched the hearts of women belonging to other race, class, nationality and sexuality. The concept of "weird barbie" was also making things more uncomfortable for the people belonging to the diverse sexuality.
this is so well researched and written, a really interesting read. it shows how barbie essentially did the same thing the patriarchy has been accused of doing this whole time, homogenising women under one flag of "girlboss". having President Barbie and Weird Barbie does not fix the fact that all the other barbies lacked any sort of personality representation, i really liked your analysis that the plus sized barbies virtually had no dialogue. there is only so far you can get with visual markers of representation but when it remains just visual it goes into the territory of performative representation.
this was exactly my thought that barbie was ignoring the differences amongst the women themselves and categorising them all as a single group. After this course I can also finally point out that it lacked intersectionality. Moreso, the "weird barbie" concept was something in the movie that I did not like at all.
I really liked the concepts you highlighted in this article. I think I am part of the very small minority that is yet to see barbie, but I agree with your idea on lack of intersectionality. Feminism is often used as a tag word to attract audiences, and different ideas and problems that may be unrelated are all lumped together in a movie that is supposed to embody all of them. This not only negates the idea but is a step in the complete opposite direction, as it goes to a different extreme. Having for example a black president but ignoring the struggles that come with that are ignorant and not accurate representation, it is just crossing representation off a…