Snowflakes!!! Gutles ThinSkinned Whiney Rightists: Fox News leads a right-wing freakout over Barbie movie

[ANOTHER TRUMP FAILURE 2024]

I wish a few would kill themselves over this. Suicide is the right
solution. Maybe they can go to church and get a child raping minister to
help.

Fox News leads a right-wing freakout over Barbie movie

Did you have “Republicans freak out over the gender politics of the Barbie
movie” on your 2023 bingo card? I, for one, did not—yet here we are. The
movie hasn’t even been released yet, but Fox News is leading the charge
against it, giving a host of right-wing influencer types the space to
whine that, as one chyron predictably put it, the “Barbie movie goes
woke.”

According to one of its stars, Simu Liu, “I’m so glad that this movie
exists because I think it puts the final nail in the coffin of that very
heteronormative idea of what gender is, and what is or is not gendered.”
Writer and activist Charlotte Clymer tweeted a compelling review of the
movie, writing that it “feels like an especially potent trojan horse,
beckoning us with well-earned laughter into a larger conversation on
gender and how Barbie—the defining cultural symbol of high femme
expression—has shaped that discourse over the past six decades.” So you
can begin to see the problem from the right-wing culture warriors’ point
of view.



In the words of one Christian movie review site gleefully quoted by Fox
News, ”The new BARBIE movie forgets its core audience of families and
children while catering to nostalgic adults and pushing lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender character stories. Furthermore, the movie was
poorly made with multiple premises, losing even the most die-hard fans.”
(News flash: Nostalgic adults can be parents who make decisions about
their family’s movie-watching habits.)

The movie’s undermining of Barbie’s traditional place in the gender canon
includes the title character’s feet suddenly going flat rather than
maintaining her eternal high-heeled stance, experiencing objectification
by men for the first time as she leaves Barbie world for the real world,
and Ken becoming what Clymer describes as “something of a Jordan Peterson
guru to the other Kens.” All of these are potent critiques of gender
representation in Barbie—a brand long loathed by many feminists—and could
be the targets of right-wing ire. Indeed, Ginger Gaetz, wife of Rep. Matt
Gaetz, is trying to grow her social media profile on the basis of the
movie, despite the fact that she and Matt attended and eagerly posed for
pictures at the premiere.

“I'd recommend sticking to getting outfit inspiration and skipping the
theater,” she tweeted. That’s because “[t]he Barbie I grew up with was a
representation of limitless possibilities, embracing diverse careers and
feminine empowerment,” but “[t]he 2023 Barbie movie, unfortunately,
neglects to address any notion of faith or family, and tries to normalize
the idea that men and women can't collaborate positively (yuck).”
Additionally, there’s “[d]isappointingly low T from Ken.”

Did anyone connect Barbie to faith or family to begin with? Barbie has had
a long list of careers. She’s been a cowgirl, a wild animal trainer, a
race car driver, a bowler, a boxer, an aerobics instructor, a computer
engineer, an architect, a campaign fundraiser, a U.S. president, a fashion
trend forecaster, and a film director. She has taught subjects from yoga
to Spanish to sign language. She has occupied a number of roles in the
military. She has owned small businesses including a farmers market stall
and a fashion boutique, as well as working in almost any kind of store you
can think of. She has not, however, been a minister in any of her
incarnations—and indeed, if she had been, it would have alienated those
Christians who do not believe it is biblically appropriate for women to be
ministers. Perhaps Ginger Gaetz and her ilk imagined one of the musician
Barbies as a church musician.

And family? Barbie is not a particularly maternal figure. Barbie and Ken
are not married. They may have from time to time shared a Dreamhouse, but
that was living in sin. It may be easy for someone married to Matt Gaetz
to get confused about what “faith and family” is supposed to look like,
but while Barbie has long been a hyper-femme icon, the official narrative
about her coming from Mattel has never been that.

Gaetz either missed the thing she was supposed to be most upset about or
wasn’t quite willing to go there. Because a significant part of the right-
wing freakout centers around one single character, a doctor Barbie played
by trans actress Hari Nef. As that Christian movie review site said, the
movie “push[es] lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender character stories.”
The Federalist’s Peachy Keenan, author of “Domestic Extremist: A Practical
Guide to Winning the Culture War,” wrote at Revolver, the movie is “the
slickest, most visually appealing and therefore most insidious packaging
of feminist cliche and trans grooming” that she had ever seen, and said on
Fox News, “I found out last week, they somehow didn’t let anyone know this
with the marketing campaign, that one of Barbie’s main three sidekicks
is—surprise surprise—a man. I mean, is nothing sacred?” She added, “I
don’t really know what they were thinking, they just gave Barbie the Bud
Light treatment.”

No, the movie happened to cast Hari Nef. It’s the bigots who want to give
the movie “the Bud Light treatment” by unleashing an avalanche of hate on
any company that offers even a glancing positive representation of a trans
person.

Even without a trans actress playing a Barbie, the culture warriors of the
right probably would have had at least a minor freakout over the movie.
Ginger Gaetz laid out some of the arguments that would have been used, as
silly as they are. (Has Ken ever seemed especially “high T” to you?) After
all, it’s the slow news month of July. Teachers aren’t in the classroom to
present targets for attack. But the movie’s use of a trans actress in the
hallowed feminine role of Barbie guaranteed that the temper tantrum would
be loud and sustained. There is a right-wing project afoot to drive trans
people from public life, to make their existence unspeakable—in the sense
that it cannot be mentioned, and in the sense that the miseries inflicted
upon them would be impossible to convey in words.