There is no doubt that Shakira is a feminist icon. Entering the year after a very public breakup with her longtime partner and father of her two sons, Gerard Piqué, she managed to turn a painful experience into a shared triumph. Her latest studio album, “Las Mujeres Ya No Lloran,” is a testament to independence and the strength that comes with it. It’s a feeling that many, especially women, will be able to relate to. In her recent Allure cover interview published on April 1, Shakira explains what that strength looks like and what it means to be a healing woman today. But what stood out in the interview was the singer’s controversial take on another pillar of feminist pop culture: the movie “Barbie.”
Shakira shares that her sons “absolutely hated” the film because they “felt it was emasculating.” “I love pop culture when it tries to empower women without taking away the opportunity for men to be men,” the singer said.
And while part of me understands this reaction, I can’t help but respectfully disagree with it. Feminism is not just a theory, it is a practice, and different people practice it differently. Shakira not liking the movie “Barbie” doesn’t make her any less of a feminist. However, his opinion of the film is shared by a vocal minority, and I’ve heard many men (and right-wing politicians like Ted Cruz) reiterate it, many of whom won’t even see a “chick flick.” “.
So, as a man who not only thoroughly enjoyed “Barbie” but found the more subtle message that “men suck, women are better,” I wanted to examine how so many people could misinterpret the screenplay by Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach. For starters, the film doesn’t present men as petulant, superficial characters with the sole aim of emasculating them. The film presents them as they are: victims. The Kens have been deprived of any real agency and opportunity to be anything other than eye candy because of the matriarchy of Barbieland, a system that, conversely, places women in every major role in the society. Looks familiar? It is the exact opposite of patriarchy and yet it still achieves the same results: oppression of the opposite sex.
Yes, much of the Kens’ dilemma and subsequent Barbieland takeover sees the stupid dial turned to the maximum – ending the culture of machismo. But at its core, it’s a commentary on the importance of being valued on a societal level. Kens everywhere are marginalized in the society they serve. This puts them at odds with Barbies – not women. Instead, the Kens’ struggle is meant to parallel the struggle women experience in real life. It also shows how destructive patriarchy can be to the men it empowers.
By adopting patriarchy, the Kens force themselves to accept the often rigid criteria to which men must conform to be considered virile. Hence the overabundance of cowboy hats, trucks, horses, and Mojo Dojo Casa Houses, whether or not Ken has an affinity for those things. They gain power, yes, but they are still denied individuality, but this time by their own hand.
Shakira mentions that “men have their goals too” and that “she wants her sons to feel powerful… while respecting women.” But that’s exactly the note the film ends on. For the first time, the Kens are allowed to decide what their role in society will be. And for the first time, it won’t be focused on satisfying the Barbies’ wants or needs, but rather on what they want for themselves.
But what about the idea that the film “emasculates” men? Sure, the Kens could have had more depth than having “the beach” as a job, but I don’t think that would have been as funny or as effective an allegory for the loss of agency that comes with oppression. I didn’t find it emasculating. But I find the tumult surrounding it revealing.
As an Afropuertorriqueño, I do not often benefit from narrative plurality or the existence of a multitude of films, shows, or other media that present my people in a variety of different roles and perspectives. But as a man? Absolutely, I do. I can turn on my TV right now and find a movie about a badass killing machine who loves dogs (“John Wick”), a show about a physically neglected and neglected child who uses his intelligence to outwit and survive many empires (“Game of Thrones”), a movie about a reluctant savior who inherits his mother’s magic and his father’s kingdom and uses both to become a fucking messiah (“Dune”), and the list goes on . Narrative plurality means that there are enough positive representations of characters like us that negative representations don’t carry as much weight. Or at least you would think so.
But you’re making a film in which the men – or in this case the Kens – are portrayed as superficial accessories constantly competing for a woman’s affections and serving no purpose other than to satisfy her desires, and that undoes everything else. . Perhaps, along the same lines, we should consider the impact of negative portrayals of women and people of color on screen.
Miguel Machado is a journalist specializing in the intersection of Latinx identity and culture. He does everything from exclusive interviews with Latin music artists to opinion pieces on issues relevant to the community, personal essays related to his Latinidad, as well as think pieces and features relating to Porto Rico and Puerto Rican culture.
