There isn’t any arguing that Shakira is a feminist icon. Coming into the 12 months on the heels of a really public break up from her long-term associate and the daddy of her two sons, Gerard Piqué, she managed to take a painful expertise and switch it right into a shared triumph. Her newest studio album, “Las Mujeres Ya No Lloran,” is a testomony to independence and the energy that comes with it. It is a sentiment that many, particularly girls, will have the ability to relate to. In her current Attract cowl interview printed on April 1, Shakira delves into what that energy appears like and what it means to be a lady therapeutic as we speak. However one factor that stood out from the interview was the singer’s controversial tackle one other feminist popular culture pillar: the “Barbie” film.
Shakira shares her sons “completely hated” the movie as a result of they “felt it was emasculating.” “I like popular culture when it makes an attempt to empower girls with out robbing males of their risk to be males,” the singer says.
And whereas a part of me understands that response, I can’t assist however respectfully disagree together with her. Feminism is not only a principle, it is a observe, and completely different folks observe it in a different way. Shakira not liking the “Barbie” film would not make her much less of a feminist. Nevertheless, her opinion of the movie is one shared by a vocal minority, and one I’ve heard reiterated by a whole lot of males (and right-wing politicians like Ted Cruz), lots of whom will not even see a “woman’s film.”
So, as a person who not solely totally loved “Barbie” however discovered the message to be extra refined than “males suck, girls are higher,” I needed to look at how so many individuals may misconstrue Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach’s script. For starters, the film would not painting males as bubbly and shallow characters only for the sake of emasculating them. The film portrays them as what they’re: victims. The Kens have been robbed of any actual company and alternative to be something greater than eye sweet by Barbieland’s matriarchy, a system that, conversely, locations girls in each main function all through society. Sound acquainted? It’s the actual reverse of a patriarchy and but nonetheless manages to attain the identical outcomes: oppression of the other intercourse.
Sure, a lot of the Kens’ dilemma and ensuing takeover of Barbieland sees the dumb dial turned as much as the max — taking the piss out of machismo tradition. However at its core, it is a commentary on the significance of being valued on a societal stage. At each nook, the Kens are marginalized within the society they serve. This places them at odds with the Barbies — not with girls. As a substitute, the Kens’ wrestle is supposed to parallel the wrestle girls expertise in actual life. It additionally reveals how patriarchy might be damaging for the boys it empowers.
By adopting patriarchy, the Kens rope themselves into accepting the usually inflexible standards to which males should conform to be thought of manly. Therefore, the overabundance of cowboy hats, vehicles, horses, and Mojo Dojo Casa Homes, no matter whether or not or not the person Ken has an affinity for these items. They acquire energy, sure, however they’re nonetheless denied individuality, solely this time by their very own hand.
Shakira mentions that “males have their goal too” and that “she needs her sons to really feel highly effective . . . whereas respecting girls.” However that is precisely the be aware the film ends on. For the primary time, the Kens are allowed to resolve what their function in society can be. And for the primary time, it will not be centered round supporting the Barbies’ needs or wants, however as an alternative on what they need for themselves.
However what concerning the notion that the film “emasculates” the boys? Certain, the Kens may have had extra depth than having “seaside” as a job, however I do not suppose it could have been as humorous or as efficient an allegory for the lack of company that comes with oppression. I did not discover it emasculating. However I do discover the uproar round it telling.
As an afropuertorriqueño, I do not usually profit from narrative plurality, or the existence of a mess of movies, reveals, or different media that showcase my folks in a wide range of completely different roles and views. However as a person? Completely, I do. I can activate my TV proper now and discover a film a few badass killing machine who loves canine (“John Wick”), a present a few bodily missing, uncared for little one who makes use of his wits to outsmart and outlive a number of empires (“Recreation of Thrones”), a film a few reluctant savior who inherits his mom’s magic and his father’s kingdom and makes use of each to develop into a literal fucking messiah (“Dune”), and the checklist goes on. Narrative plurality implies that there are sufficient constructive depictions of characters like us that the unfavourable depictions do not maintain as a lot weight. Or at the very least you’d suppose.
However you make one film by which the boys — or on this case the Kens — are portrayed as superficial equipment in fixed competitors for the affections of a lady and haven’t any goal apart from to service her wishes, and it undoes all the remainder of it. Maybe, in the identical vein, we must always think about the impression of the unfavourable portrayals of girls and folks of shade on display screen.
Johanna Ferreira is the content material director for POPSUGAR Juntos. With greater than 10 years of expertise, Johanna focuses on how intersectional identities are a central a part of Latine tradition. Beforehand, she spent shut to 3 years because the deputy editor at HipLatina, and he or she has freelanced for quite a few retailers together with Refinery29, Oprah journal, Attract, InStyle, and Nicely+Good. She has additionally moderated and spoken on quite a few panels on Latine identification. .