• kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    While this is true, it’s also true that pendulum swings can go further in the opposite direction than equality.

    While a trite example, in the recent Barbie film, at the end when things are going back to the seemingly good way, the men in Barbieland ask if they can have a seat on the supreme court and are told no, which is then explained as Barbieland being a mirror to the real world such that as there’s increased equality in the real world then equality for men in the mirror would increase.

    Apparently the writers weren’t familiar with the fact there’s four women on the supreme court right now and a woman has been on the court since 1981 (around twice as close to the creation of Barbie than to the present day).

    Even in the context of its justifiably imbalanced equality it failed to be proportionally imbalanced.

    There’s interesting research around how the privileged underestimate the degree to which the good things that happen to them are because of privilege, but that at the same time the underprivileged overestimate how often the bad things which happen are because of bias. In theory both are ego-preserving adaptations. But it also means that either side is going to have a difficult time correctly identifying equality from their relative subjective perspectives.

    • oatscoop@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      While a trite example, in the recent Barbie film

      You mean self aware, hyperbolic satire?

      They know there have been women on the supreme court. It was a reference to second wave feminism, and inverted because that was the joke.

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        While you are welcome to your take, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and here’s the writer/director responding to that very scene:

        Li: Speaking of those video clips, let’s talk more about the ending. Can you tell me about the decision to have the Barbies and Kens reach, not a definitive solution, but kind of a détente? President Barbie, played by Issa Rae, does not allow Ken a seat on the Supreme Court. They’re still figuring things out.

        Gerwig: We’re all still figuring things out—that’s part of it. But the only thing I could ever give anyone is that they’re all still in the mess. Maybe it’s a little better for the Kens. You don’t want to tell people how to watch things, but at the end of the movie, the production design incorporates some of Ken’s fascinations into Barbie Land. Like, the perfection is not as beautiful as the thing that started blending everything together. I remember when we went to shoot the finale, when we all walked on set, we were like, This is the most beautiful it’s ever been.

    • Glitchington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      10 months ago

      It was a film about plastic dolls from a corporation trying to seem less like a big bad corporation. If you’re using the Barbie movie as evidence in an actual philosophical debate around other human beings having equal rights, you have bigger problems in life.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Philosophy is all about finding meaning in common life, why shouldn’t we use the barbie movie?

        • Glitchington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          10 months ago

          Do you like having rights? Probably. Would other people like the same rights? Absolutely. Do people who want rights deserve your ire because of a movie? Fuck no.

            • Glitchington@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              Well if your conclusion is that the pendulum could swing too far, my question would be, “Without actually letting go to find out, how do you know it’s a pendulum at all?” A movie isn’t going to give us the answer.

              Sure things could go radically far and we end up in a matriarchal society, but not even trying to provide equal rights isn’t going to prevent radical change. It will force the hand of radical change, if history tells us anything.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          10 months ago

          Because pop culture corporate feminism isn’t actual meaningful feminism, it is an entirely different beast the serves to reinforce the patriarchy.