Whether it’s Barbie or the Trump prosecutions that have brought about what feels like the a sea-change in the American zeitgeist — or the combination of them both around the same time — I’ll take it!
What we may also be witnessing is that we have a Presidential administration that displays understanding that change and transformation do not occur in a 24-hour news cycle. I would see the Barbie moment more as a catalyst of that larger conversation rather than its cause.
A hallmark of the Trump-Putin administration was the transactional nature of virtually everything. Such thinking and running after "quick hits" are often disastrous. The heavy costs are evident from mistakes such as trying to solve a 3-year pandemic cycle in a few weeks to thinking starting a war with Europe's largest country would be over in 72 hours.
We certainly have a long way to go to get beyond the addition to the 24 hour news cycle. Maybe this is a start for a conversation on that need!
Interesting. I was reading an article from NYT magazine from 4/2017 about the Zuckerberg Trump "partnership" in one gave creation to Trump & a lot of reality TV and Trump did return favor giving CNN something to fill that 24 hour news cycle that was drying up as cord-cutters were going elsewhere for news.
It certainly seems a turn in culture & politics is happening.
The big PR promised by Trump .ay be a result also of his lawyers advice being taken. At least a bit. But it feels like he is losing interest and THAT is wonderful news!
"...Increasingly, pastors are speaking out against Trump and hate..."
They are not speaking out against the hatred of women which they are firmly behind (for the most part - there are exceptions). They got what they wanted out of Trump, a SCOTUS that is putting the breaks on female freedom and autonomy. They can speak out against Trump all they want. I know who they are and their end goal.
Absolutely Suzie. The very foundation of religion is preservation of the patriarchy and the demonizing and dehumanization of Women. From the Torah and TeNACH, to the New Testatement, Quran, Haddiths, and even the Hindu Religion.
Therefore you will not see Rabbis, Priests, Preachers, Imams, mufti's and Mullahs doing anything but reinforcing the patriarchy, after all that is their bread and butter, and why so many Christian cults forbid women priests and pastros. And you will never find a female Imam, Mufti, Mullah.
William, I think it's just a bunch of religious horny males in heat. The males need an excuse to act like animals because they are animals, they don't even think like humans, anyone with a conscience who thinks like humans is weak to them, they only understand force and fear, thanks to their abusive parents and the cycle goes on and on.
i had a dear friend x 40 yrs--ardent animal activists both--she trapped, neutered & released to established colonies with known feeders...aka tnr/f...whose red i didn't see until in a casual conversation with a forest ranger she blurted "JEWS CONTROL EVERYTHING!"--
when i traveled to n fl to my double/wide across from hers in '19 witblack friend, my nazi pal made it clear that I was welcome in her home , but don't bring the you know what (sic)...& i did know to whom she was referring. we spoke on the phone prior to the election 2020... she has not spoken to me since because the money I donated to the dem Campaign should have been spent for animals. of course, she has a license to carry a weapon...& is
incidentally an immigrant from wartime austria.
the following had softening ...perception changing effects. ("catalist / cause...chicken : egg:
(catalase, by the way, is both preventative & rx for covid/variants/
Not mentioned were a few of Michael Moore's or Ken Burns' documentaries, the Dixie Chicks, the Beatles, and any number of others. Culture is surely the most effective tool in the culture wars and one of the best in advancing social and political change. But I have to ask. Do we just want a truce in the culture wars or do we have to settle for a swing in the pendulum back in a more sensible direction? Wouldn't it be great to have a paradigm shift toward a more stable and mature democracy? If we are going to engage in wishful thinking, could we possibly think about changes on a larger scale or at a more fundamental level? It will be wonderful to see Moscow Mitch fade into oblivion. But what will it take for MTG, Bobert, and some of those fanatics to be rendered powerless and totally anachronistic? What needs to change for the undercurrents of fear and superstition to be significantly lessened?
Good question, I find it hard to account for the likes of Boebert or MTG and all of the female camp followers in the Trump humping movement. Somehow these women benefit from supporting the patriarchy.
Same thing with the likes of Tim Scott, Candace Owens, Herschel Walker, etc aligning themselves with KKK and neo NAZI's.
Same with Jews, like Trump's lawyers, accountants, advisers like Steven Miller, that have no shame and aligning themselves with a man and his movement that chants "Jews will not replace us" and constantly sling around Soros name as a slur (they use it as a dog whistle for Jew)
Well, there's something to be said for what happens when plants don't get water or sunlight: they shrivel up and eventually die. Some of the fanatics may be more like cacti, but I'm betting their number is small.
I hope your observation reflects reality. I would really like to believe that the extremists will figure out that they have nothing good to offer and are too far out of the mainstream to ever take over. But the real problem may not be the zealots and fanatics. The real problem seems to be that the "Strict Father" metaphor and the patriarchy; the theory of 'original sin"; the great attraction of conspiracy theories, and abject ignorance have the same power and appeal among the population that they have had for centuries. Bad religion and bad philosophy are deeply ingrained and largely unconscious and our institutions are doing little or nothing to overcome their influence. Our naïve hope may be our best hope, ironically.
The movies these days and for quite some time like superwoman and so many more the hero's are women and fight right along with the men and usually win.
As one who played "Barbie Airplane" with my young daughter with one eye peeled on my watch, I never ever thought I'd find anything redeeming in the little perfect plastic doll, let alone a plausible source of national-level cultural/political transformation!
I'm somewhat less sanguine than Thom, only because: a) I'm a catastrophist by nature; and b) I believe the far-right GOP/MAGA plan is not to win hearts and minds so as to prevail democratically, but rather to degrade and destroy democracy and bring us into violent conflict; and I believe that fall can be precipitated by a relatively small but determined (and well-armed, if not well-trained) minority.
That said, there do seem to be positive developments, if not yet a full-blown sea change, and that has to be for the good. I think many of us were beginning to wonder whether that particular hateful worm would ever turn.
I'm not sure it has. The Trump humpers are keeping very quiet, like they are guilty of a crime, which most of them are in their dark heart, sedition!!! As Carter would have said, IF he was in on it. "I lusted after a dictatorship and am currently lusting for a dictatorship"!
BUT, Mattel has been brilliant with their diverse and encouraging Barbie brand since the movements in the sixties and seventies came along. Women mostly control household budgets, so all that was great marketing.
Turns out you can make a buck and help us advance socially at the same time. In fact, with the myriad of problems we have to tackle, isn't that the way it should be? It is critical that we continue to push for wage increases so people can AFFORD to help.
The pandemic, the climate crisis, and Trumpism have shined a light on the path that Barbie wants us to take. We all look pretty in pink!
Does anyone else see Kelly Anne Conway behind this Barbie movement - that is her picture at the head of the article, isn't it? I wonder if she's gearing up to make a run for president? Whatever happened to her, and why isn't she being held accountable for her share of the misdeeds?
Warning: here comes the Grinch. Do not proceed if you wish to retain your pink happy-face. The event horizon is still in our rear-view mirror as we are sucking into the black hole of fascism. Yesterday the "Supreme" Court affirmed racist gerrymandering in Miami. Day before, Appeals Court set requirements for multiple in-person visits and outlawed mailed Mifepristone. RaffensPurger and his ilk continue to purge, calculate elimination of drop-boxes and all that: Thom and Greg Palast and Stacey Abrams followers know the drill. Tuberville is obviously enjoying the hell out of his 15 minutes as there seems to be no obstacle to it turning into "stay tuned." Kamala Harris is still the presumptive successor, and if there's quiet in MagaMedia, it's because they are squirming with anticipatory delight that they will make a nice meal out of her maybe soon. Whew! I'd apologize but I warned y'all.
I am tired of and disgusted with the “every one knows that Harris would be a weak candidate and drag down the ticket because what if Joe dies” propaganda.
I call bullshit.
Harris is smart and tough.
She is qualified to be President.
She already has more experience than Obama did when he walked into the Oval Office.
Why the regurgitation of MAGA lies? Could it be that Harris has 2 X chromosomes and more pigment in her skin?
Well, that's odd. I was replying to Claudia, who had this bright optimistic "forecast" for (America's future?) I wondered where it came from. Are you somehow extrapolating that my unpopular perspective re: VP Harris started with that? Hadn't occurred to me. P.S. I think my post about the V.P. was pretty clear that I am in dread of the proven potency of MAGAMedia, opposite of sympathetic.
I wonder. It'll take a while to get some perspective on the Barbie whoop-de-do, but at the moment I'm perplexed by the pundits who write as though Barbie was a near-universal experience for girls of the baby boom generation. I never had or wanted a Barbie, and I don't recall any of my friends having them either. Are we being pink-washed or what?
I went to see Barbie with 5 girl friends. We are all “of an age” tho it turned out that the span of 12 years between the oldest and the youngest of us informed different reactions to the movie.
2 of us were born in the late 1950’s. I for example was 3 years old when Barbie was “born”. So of course I got a Barbie. One of the original brunette ones with the iconic black and white striped swimsuit. I still have her. Somewhere.
The other 4 friends that were born in the late 1940s and early 1950s were in their early teens when Barbie was born and much too old to play with dolls! Their daughters however, did have Barbies.
I liked the movie, thought it was campy, a bit too much full in the face with the “woke” (s/) stuff. I would have prefered a bit more subtlety.
The 4 who never played with Barbies thought the movie was “stupid”, the laughs few and far between, and the best parts were Weird Barbie and shirtless and/or dancing Kens.
Whereas I, in addition to Weird Barbie and the half naked dancing Kens liked best the opening scene and the very last line in the movie.
Go figure.
What I am thrilled about is that this movie is showing (and a huge Hit) in Saudi Arabia with virtually no censorship!!!!!
And now reading this article, though I remain skeptical, if it empowers just one girl and causes just one man to rethink his “innate” superiority/ privilege, I will take it.
Thanks for this great report. Hadn't heard that about Saudi -- that's a wonder! My biggest reservation from reading the reviews and comments from friends is that the movie's feminism seems so *straight*. Which grassroots feminism most definitely was not. I guess I'll have to go see for myself!
You put your finger right on it. The feminism did seem straight. And that really did feel off to me. Having come of age with Friedan, Steinem, de Beauvoir, Our Bodies Ourselves, Roe v Wade, etc it definitely was not straight or neat.
I plan to write a post on my SubStack space later today on this topic.
If/when you do see the movie, I would enjoy getting your take on it. You could post on my SubStack if you would like to.
Sky High: Random Musings of a Struggling Optimist.
Thanks for the lead (and the invite)! I'm seriously considering starting my own Substack, but meanwhile I've been writing _The T-Shirt Chronicles,_ a autobiographical blog organized around my ridiculous T-shirt collection. The first 10 years (1976–1985) are about my adventures in the D.C. women's community and the national Women in Print movement. See https://the-t-shirt-chronicles.com/. To start at the beginning, go to the Chronology tab in the upper right.
Back in the day if we didn't know each other, we often knew *of* each other!
Others have suggested making a quilt, or (in my case, since the best I can do with a needle and thread is repair rips and sew patches on jeans) having someone do it. I might -- but for now I just wear them. Even though I can only get through a fraction of them during T-shirt season!
You put your finger right on it. The feminism did seem straight. And that really did feel off to me. Having come of age with Friedan, Steinem, Beauvoir, etc it definitely was not straight or neat.
I had already stopped playing with dolls when the Barbie doll was introduced, but even if I were younger at that time, I would never have asked for a Barbie doll because I was a doll snob. I only collected Madam Alexander dolls. I held on to these dolls for many years but later gave them to my (at that time) boyfriend’s nieces and nephew. I wish I hadn’t given them away. I still love dolls.
"Sociological" perspective? Yes! This 72YO lesbian feminist likes that a lot and is thinking of stealing it if she breaks down and goes to the movies. (I like to have my excuses ready in advance.)
I went to see Barbie with 5 girl friends. We are all “of an age” tho it turned out that the span of 12 years between the oldest and the youngest of us informed different reactions to the movie.
2 of us were born in the late 1950’s. I for example was 3 years old when Barbie was “born”. So of course I got a Barbie. One of the original brunette ones with the iconic black and white striped swimsuit. I still have her. Somewhere.
The other 4 friends that were born in the late 1940s and early 1950s were in their early teens when Barbie was born and much too old to play with dolls! Their daughters however, did have Barbies.
I liked the movie, thought it was campy, a bit too much full in the face with the “woke” (s/) stuff. I would have prefered a bit more subtlety.
The 4 who never played with Barbies thought the movie was “stupid”, the laughs few and far between, and the best parts were Weird Barbie and shirtless and/or dancing Kens.
Whereas I, in addition to Weird Barbie and the half naked dancing Kens liked best the opening scene and the very last line in the movie.
Go figure.
What I am thrilled about is that this movie is showing (and a huge Hit) in Saudi Arabia with virtually no censorship!!!!!
And now reading this article, though I remain skeptical, if it empowers just one girl and causes just one man to rethink his “innate” superiority/ privilege, I will take it.
According to the astrological alignment of the planets, positive change is coming. There will be turmoil as the dying gasps of the old order desparately try to hold onto power. The positive changes will be coming faster in 2024.
Oh, dear, Claudia: it's sort of hilarious that the (editors behind the curtain?) plunked my doomsday post just above yours. But sort of uncanny, too, since I have life experience leading to respect for astrology. Could you share source of analysis you have reference to? A guy I used to follow had cognizable set-points for supra-personal, global turning points, like a consensus "birthdate" for America as a nation. It's been a long time, but I'd bet I could still pick a Scorpio out of a crowded room.
The drift in your piece here toward “end of hate” politics doesn’t fully grasp the other point about patriarchy. Whether with hate or love (and those fundamentalists do lots of loving, not just fake love either) women are meant to be controlled or serve the supremacy of masculine values (eg guns, anti-abortion, predator competition) so embedded in American individualism. If the positive political value is solidarity with all people, all members — as in fight for someone you don’t know—how does that translate ?. Protection for the vulnerable and power equally distributed may be where many Barbie fans draw the line. The depoliticizing of American ideals in order to avoid conflict and encourage conformity along with denial of difference and inequality is repeated in so many ways. Reagan loved “The House I Live In” a left-wing ode to the people not the nation state . This is the difficult needle to thread. How to keep the cultural win from being co-opted and disempowered (Summer of Love ends up with w everyone wearing tie dye and going back to work for the system) is the hard part.
Jessica I don't understand the first two sentences of your comment,to wit "he drift in your piece here toward “end of hate” politics doesn’t fully grasp the other point about patriarchy. Whether with hate or love (and those fundamentalists do lots of loving, not just fake love either) women are meant to be controlled or serve the supremacy of masculine values (e.g. .guns, anti-abortion, predator competition) so embedded in American individualism"
I don't know why you had to criticize Thomas excellent article by saying he "doesn't full grasp the other point about patriarchy" I read your comment and couldn't discover that point.
I guess I am incredibly stupid because I didn't get the point of your rant. Except if you have something to say, then spit it out, without using Thom as a springboard, starting out making it person (towards him) with " drift in your piece here toward “end of hate” politics doesn’t fully grasp the other point about patriarchy. " and I still didn't find the point that you were trying to make.
By the way sex is not love, and I abhor it when people use love as a synonym for sexual intercourse
Every seen happily married people, that have been married for 30,40,50 even 60 years?
That which keeps them together (and happy, that modifier is important) is genuine love.
There are other reasons to stay together, dependency, fear of the unknown, finance, children.
The need for sex dwindles with age, as the sex drive is hormone driven, and declines with age.
especially for women who have had a hysterectomy( yeh I know there are exceptions, there are exceptions to everything, except Trump humpers)
Sorry you are right. I should have expressed my admiration for Thomas’s piece first. My worry is that as I said later many of our best movement moments have been co-opted by those who reduce political issues purely to emotions. I am saying that those whose patriarchal politics we disagree with are often quite capable of embracing “love” but at the same time supporting guns, controlling g women’s bodies and so forth. By speaking of the “drift” I meant to describe the tendency in American politics toward denying some of the harsher realities by focusing on whether the people who cause them are “good” or not. Good people can do great harm when in the grip of certain religions or ideologies. Thanks for raising this issue.
Yeh, now I agree with you but please allow me to interject some of my own thoughts, considerations and opinions.
First politics is, if anything, raw emotions, and at that the Republicans have mastered the game, they expertly appeal to the lizard brain;s two response flight or fight, however they moved the needle towards fight, because of social and corporate media (both of which are owned and/or controlled by conservatives.. especially those with fascist intentions
I abhor the English word love, it means absolutely nothing, except maybe in context. Score a point in tennis "love". I love my kitty cat, I love my car, i love my children, I love my spouse, I love to go to a dinner and a date, and finally using the world love, as a stand in for sexual intercourse (which like Tina Turner sang, What's love got to do with it.
I have the same ambivalence towards the word play, a noun, a verb and an adjective.
As for love, how many hearts were broken, because some person said "i love you" after having an orgasm and then lighting a cigarette, putting on their clothes and walking out of their lives.
Ain't now way I can love my fellow man, or woman, I can like them, I can choose to lead or follow them, but love them? No way.
I've seen enough medieval movies with this or that duke, baron or whatever needing the King or Queens love, what they really meant was favor. Love is as transient as a firefly, and should never be neglected or taken for granted..
Many years ago I had a friend named Binod Agrawal who had a profound effect on me in many ways. He was from New Delhi and held a PhD in Cultural Anthropology with a concentration in Linguistics, from the University of Wisconsin, the alma mater of the brilliant C. Wright Mills.
Binod spoke about language (there were at the time, dozens of "officially" recognized languages in India, hundreds of "unofficially recognized" languages; and then there was Hindi, the Mother-tongue, the oldest) Binod pointed out that there were many different words in India for what Anthropologists call "positive regard." What we in America might call "love."
Following Mr. Farrar's stated thesis we proclaim that we love our kitty cat, love our car, love our kids, love eating, love our sexual partners, love music, etc., etc.,etc. Binod said his native tongue had different words for each of those phenomena of "positive regard."
This was an obvious give-away to him that Americans actually knew very little about love; or what we like to call love. His claim was that Indians knew vastly more about this "positive regard" (which we call love) than Americans do. This greater acquaintance with the subject is obviously expressed in their many languages. Love of one's wife has a word, love of one's dog has a word, love of one's sex-partner has a word. And on and on it goes. For we Americans living our lives submerged for the most part in the Citadel of Capitalism, speaking mostly (but not entirely) an historical amalgam of German and Latin there is only one word: love. How empty our lives are.
Is it any wonder that stories like Barbie, Bambi, Pinocchio, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, stir only vague echos of something almost above the frequency of speech; feelings suitable for only children? Do so many people remember their childhood with great fondness because it was a time in their lives when they were still open to "positive regard" in all of its possible manifestations? At least, as open to love as they were to hate?
And what about hate? What do we know about it? I have Sephardic Jews in my family, from Casablanca. I have been told more than once that I do not know how to hate or insult others. If I am angry at someone I have a word I hurl at them Jackass, dope, idiot, etc. In North Africa this would never suffice. If I were from Casablanca I would insult someone by beginning with an insult to their grandparents, their aunts, uncles, parents, siblings, children, their kitty cat, everything that person holds dear. Then I would be only warmed up. There would be much more to follow before eventually getting around to the target of my anger.
Language is created and recreated continuously, on a daily basis so we can communicate meaning to others. Is it also just possible that the language we speak also creates us? Two of the founding fathers of modern Linguistics Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf made exactly this claim. It is usually referred to as the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.
How much does one motion picture (incorporating both language and visual images) contribute to recreating us? Mr. Hartman you have tapped into a deep vein, an artery I think. How close are you to the heart?
Excellent commentary. I particularly like hearing about the Hindu language, or should I refer to it as Sanskrit.
I find it remarkable that our Germanic based language, is considered Indo-European, has lost so much. English has become a language of power and conquest, and no longer a means to effectively communicate. You can even see that in the comments on Thom's report.
We are stunted and stilted by the commercial-financial needs of the elite. The emphasis is on money, profit, commerce, legalisms, human needs, glossed over and swept into simplistic terms like love and play.
Spanish , at least, goes one better. te amo means I love you, te quiero means I want you (sexually). . You would never say to your grandmother te quiero, and if you told your wife te amo, that would mean that you love her like a sister, or mother, and she would know that everything is over and that you probably have a lover.
Anyway thanks for the education. Much appreciated.
My sister in law from Casablanca was fluent in English, French, Spanish, and two common street languages in Casablanca. One of the street languages was spoken by Sephardim, the other by Muslims. Needless to say the two groups passionately hated each other. She was a translator for the UN for a short time. I purposely left Spanish out of my comments. Thank you for your addition.
Well, this was a breath of fresh air. Thank you Thomm
What we may also be witnessing is that we have a Presidential administration that displays understanding that change and transformation do not occur in a 24-hour news cycle. I would see the Barbie moment more as a catalyst of that larger conversation rather than its cause.
A hallmark of the Trump-Putin administration was the transactional nature of virtually everything. Such thinking and running after "quick hits" are often disastrous. The heavy costs are evident from mistakes such as trying to solve a 3-year pandemic cycle in a few weeks to thinking starting a war with Europe's largest country would be over in 72 hours.
We certainly have a long way to go to get beyond the addition to the 24 hour news cycle. Maybe this is a start for a conversation on that need!
Interesting. I was reading an article from NYT magazine from 4/2017 about the Zuckerberg Trump "partnership" in one gave creation to Trump & a lot of reality TV and Trump did return favor giving CNN something to fill that 24 hour news cycle that was drying up as cord-cutters were going elsewhere for news.
It certainly seems a turn in culture & politics is happening.
The big PR promised by Trump .ay be a result also of his lawyers advice being taken. At least a bit. But it feels like he is losing interest and THAT is wonderful news!
Dang. I was autocorrect not Zuckerberg but Zucker. Jeff Zucker. Produced The Apprentice and later helped Trump when he ran CNN.
"...Increasingly, pastors are speaking out against Trump and hate..."
They are not speaking out against the hatred of women which they are firmly behind (for the most part - there are exceptions). They got what they wanted out of Trump, a SCOTUS that is putting the breaks on female freedom and autonomy. They can speak out against Trump all they want. I know who they are and their end goal.
Absolutely Suzie. The very foundation of religion is preservation of the patriarchy and the demonizing and dehumanization of Women. From the Torah and TeNACH, to the New Testatement, Quran, Haddiths, and even the Hindu Religion.
Therefore you will not see Rabbis, Priests, Preachers, Imams, mufti's and Mullahs doing anything but reinforcing the patriarchy, after all that is their bread and butter, and why so many Christian cults forbid women priests and pastros. And you will never find a female Imam, Mufti, Mullah.
William, I think it's just a bunch of religious horny males in heat. The males need an excuse to act like animals because they are animals, they don't even think like humans, anyone with a conscience who thinks like humans is weak to them, they only understand force and fear, thanks to their abusive parents and the cycle goes on and on.
you know from i n s i d e ?!! more please!
i had a dear friend x 40 yrs--ardent animal activists both--she trapped, neutered & released to established colonies with known feeders...aka tnr/f...whose red i didn't see until in a casual conversation with a forest ranger she blurted "JEWS CONTROL EVERYTHING!"--
when i traveled to n fl to my double/wide across from hers in '19 witblack friend, my nazi pal made it clear that I was welcome in her home , but don't bring the you know what (sic)...& i did know to whom she was referring. we spoke on the phone prior to the election 2020... she has not spoken to me since because the money I donated to the dem Campaign should have been spent for animals. of course, she has a license to carry a weapon...& is
incidentally an immigrant from wartime austria.
the following had softening ...perception changing effects. ("catalist / cause...chicken : egg:
(catalase, by the way, is both preventative & rx for covid/variants/
pasc)
Not mentioned were a few of Michael Moore's or Ken Burns' documentaries, the Dixie Chicks, the Beatles, and any number of others. Culture is surely the most effective tool in the culture wars and one of the best in advancing social and political change. But I have to ask. Do we just want a truce in the culture wars or do we have to settle for a swing in the pendulum back in a more sensible direction? Wouldn't it be great to have a paradigm shift toward a more stable and mature democracy? If we are going to engage in wishful thinking, could we possibly think about changes on a larger scale or at a more fundamental level? It will be wonderful to see Moscow Mitch fade into oblivion. But what will it take for MTG, Bobert, and some of those fanatics to be rendered powerless and totally anachronistic? What needs to change for the undercurrents of fear and superstition to be significantly lessened?
Good question, I find it hard to account for the likes of Boebert or MTG and all of the female camp followers in the Trump humping movement. Somehow these women benefit from supporting the patriarchy.
Same thing with the likes of Tim Scott, Candace Owens, Herschel Walker, etc aligning themselves with KKK and neo NAZI's.
Same with Jews, like Trump's lawyers, accountants, advisers like Steven Miller, that have no shame and aligning themselves with a man and his movement that chants "Jews will not replace us" and constantly sling around Soros name as a slur (they use it as a dog whistle for Jew)
Well, there's something to be said for what happens when plants don't get water or sunlight: they shrivel up and eventually die. Some of the fanatics may be more like cacti, but I'm betting their number is small.
I hope your observation reflects reality. I would really like to believe that the extremists will figure out that they have nothing good to offer and are too far out of the mainstream to ever take over. But the real problem may not be the zealots and fanatics. The real problem seems to be that the "Strict Father" metaphor and the patriarchy; the theory of 'original sin"; the great attraction of conspiracy theories, and abject ignorance have the same power and appeal among the population that they have had for centuries. Bad religion and bad philosophy are deeply ingrained and largely unconscious and our institutions are doing little or nothing to overcome their influence. Our naïve hope may be our best hope, ironically.
I hope so too, but at the same time I do realize that withering plants don't have semiautomatic rifles.
indict thrm along with tuff tommy, few other congressional feeders
...oh yeah --toss in 1 for civil war sarah for -- inciting Civil War what else
The movies these days and for quite some time like superwoman and so many more the hero's are women and fight right along with the men and usually win.
They show women as strong and as heroes.
Gives me hope.
...u'll be pleased to know then that
> 54% of medical students in this country female/or trans to female 👩⚕️🩻
As one who played "Barbie Airplane" with my young daughter with one eye peeled on my watch, I never ever thought I'd find anything redeeming in the little perfect plastic doll, let alone a plausible source of national-level cultural/political transformation!
I'm somewhat less sanguine than Thom, only because: a) I'm a catastrophist by nature; and b) I believe the far-right GOP/MAGA plan is not to win hearts and minds so as to prevail democratically, but rather to degrade and destroy democracy and bring us into violent conflict; and I believe that fall can be precipitated by a relatively small but determined (and well-armed, if not well-trained) minority.
That said, there do seem to be positive developments, if not yet a full-blown sea change, and that has to be for the good. I think many of us were beginning to wonder whether that particular hateful worm would ever turn.
I'm not sure it has. The Trump humpers are keeping very quiet, like they are guilty of a crime, which most of them are in their dark heart, sedition!!! As Carter would have said, IF he was in on it. "I lusted after a dictatorship and am currently lusting for a dictatorship"!
It is never one thing.
BUT, Mattel has been brilliant with their diverse and encouraging Barbie brand since the movements in the sixties and seventies came along. Women mostly control household budgets, so all that was great marketing.
Turns out you can make a buck and help us advance socially at the same time. In fact, with the myriad of problems we have to tackle, isn't that the way it should be? It is critical that we continue to push for wage increases so people can AFFORD to help.
The pandemic, the climate crisis, and Trumpism have shined a light on the path that Barbie wants us to take. We all look pretty in pink!
Bob Hirschbuehler
Your column is like a deep brath of fresh air. This gives me hope for a better future for our country and my children, one of whom is gay.
Does anyone else see Kelly Anne Conway behind this Barbie movement - that is her picture at the head of the article, isn't it? I wonder if she's gearing up to make a run for president? Whatever happened to her, and why isn't she being held accountable for her share of the misdeeds?
And what an odd couple she and George made! The two of them have certainly gone in different directions politically.
Warning: here comes the Grinch. Do not proceed if you wish to retain your pink happy-face. The event horizon is still in our rear-view mirror as we are sucking into the black hole of fascism. Yesterday the "Supreme" Court affirmed racist gerrymandering in Miami. Day before, Appeals Court set requirements for multiple in-person visits and outlawed mailed Mifepristone. RaffensPurger and his ilk continue to purge, calculate elimination of drop-boxes and all that: Thom and Greg Palast and Stacey Abrams followers know the drill. Tuberville is obviously enjoying the hell out of his 15 minutes as there seems to be no obstacle to it turning into "stay tuned." Kamala Harris is still the presumptive successor, and if there's quiet in MagaMedia, it's because they are squirming with anticipatory delight that they will make a nice meal out of her maybe soon. Whew! I'd apologize but I warned y'all.
I am tired of and disgusted with the “every one knows that Harris would be a weak candidate and drag down the ticket because what if Joe dies” propaganda.
I call bullshit.
Harris is smart and tough.
She is qualified to be President.
She already has more experience than Obama did when he walked into the Oval Office.
Why the regurgitation of MAGA lies? Could it be that Harris has 2 X chromosomes and more pigment in her skin?
👏👏👏‼️
No.
Did your astrologist tell you this?
Now I no longer need to take your comments seriously.
There is no scientific basis for astrology.
Its main functions seems to be to provide entertainment and a reliable opening line when meeting someone new.
Well, that's odd. I was replying to Claudia, who had this bright optimistic "forecast" for (America's future?) I wondered where it came from. Are you somehow extrapolating that my unpopular perspective re: VP Harris started with that? Hadn't occurred to me. P.S. I think my post about the V.P. was pretty clear that I am in dread of the proven potency of MAGAMedia, opposite of sympathetic.
Finally some good news. Onward!
I wonder. It'll take a while to get some perspective on the Barbie whoop-de-do, but at the moment I'm perplexed by the pundits who write as though Barbie was a near-universal experience for girls of the baby boom generation. I never had or wanted a Barbie, and I don't recall any of my friends having them either. Are we being pink-washed or what?
I went to see Barbie with 5 girl friends. We are all “of an age” tho it turned out that the span of 12 years between the oldest and the youngest of us informed different reactions to the movie.
2 of us were born in the late 1950’s. I for example was 3 years old when Barbie was “born”. So of course I got a Barbie. One of the original brunette ones with the iconic black and white striped swimsuit. I still have her. Somewhere.
The other 4 friends that were born in the late 1940s and early 1950s were in their early teens when Barbie was born and much too old to play with dolls! Their daughters however, did have Barbies.
I liked the movie, thought it was campy, a bit too much full in the face with the “woke” (s/) stuff. I would have prefered a bit more subtlety.
The 4 who never played with Barbies thought the movie was “stupid”, the laughs few and far between, and the best parts were Weird Barbie and shirtless and/or dancing Kens.
Whereas I, in addition to Weird Barbie and the half naked dancing Kens liked best the opening scene and the very last line in the movie.
Go figure.
What I am thrilled about is that this movie is showing (and a huge Hit) in Saudi Arabia with virtually no censorship!!!!!
And now reading this article, though I remain skeptical, if it empowers just one girl and causes just one man to rethink his “innate” superiority/ privilege, I will take it.
Thanks for this great report. Hadn't heard that about Saudi -- that's a wonder! My biggest reservation from reading the reviews and comments from friends is that the movie's feminism seems so *straight*. Which grassroots feminism most definitely was not. I guess I'll have to go see for myself!
Susanna,
You put your finger right on it. The feminism did seem straight. And that really did feel off to me. Having come of age with Friedan, Steinem, de Beauvoir, Our Bodies Ourselves, Roe v Wade, etc it definitely was not straight or neat.
I plan to write a post on my SubStack space later today on this topic.
If/when you do see the movie, I would enjoy getting your take on it. You could post on my SubStack if you would like to.
Sky High: Random Musings of a Struggling Optimist.
Thanks for the lead (and the invite)! I'm seriously considering starting my own Substack, but meanwhile I've been writing _The T-Shirt Chronicles,_ a autobiographical blog organized around my ridiculous T-shirt collection. The first 10 years (1976–1985) are about my adventures in the D.C. women's community and the national Women in Print movement. See https://the-t-shirt-chronicles.com/. To start at the beginning, go to the Chronology tab in the upper right.
I am reading your blog. I suspect you run in the same circles as a friend of mine.
What do you plan to do with your T-shirt collection? Ever consider making a T-shirt quilt? Or having one made?
Back in the day if we didn't know each other, we often knew *of* each other!
Others have suggested making a quilt, or (in my case, since the best I can do with a needle and thread is repair rips and sew patches on jeans) having someone do it. I might -- but for now I just wear them. Even though I can only get through a fraction of them during T-shirt season!
Susanna,
You put your finger right on it. The feminism did seem straight. And that really did feel off to me. Having come of age with Friedan, Steinem, Beauvoir, etc it definitely was not straight or neat.
I had already stopped playing with dolls when the Barbie doll was introduced, but even if I were younger at that time, I would never have asked for a Barbie doll because I was a doll snob. I only collected Madam Alexander dolls. I held on to these dolls for many years but later gave them to my (at that time) boyfriend’s nieces and nephew. I wish I hadn’t given them away. I still love dolls.
Ooohhh! I had Madame Alexander dolls too.
I gave them to my niece 20 years ago. She still has them.
I kind of want to watch the movie now from a sociological perspective, but it would look too odd for an old 6'4 300 lb man to watch Barbie alone
PS. Let us know what you think of it when you do see Barbie. Strictly for sociiological research of course!
"Sociological" perspective? Yes! This 72YO lesbian feminist likes that a lot and is thinking of stealing it if she breaks down and goes to the movies. (I like to have my excuses ready in advance.)
I hear you. Now you know how some of us little old ladies or sweet little girls feel. Welcome to our world!
I hope you do watch it on the tv when it is available for streaming. Which will probably be next week!
invite vivek
I went to see Barbie with 5 girl friends. We are all “of an age” tho it turned out that the span of 12 years between the oldest and the youngest of us informed different reactions to the movie.
2 of us were born in the late 1950’s. I for example was 3 years old when Barbie was “born”. So of course I got a Barbie. One of the original brunette ones with the iconic black and white striped swimsuit. I still have her. Somewhere.
The other 4 friends that were born in the late 1940s and early 1950s were in their early teens when Barbie was born and much too old to play with dolls! Their daughters however, did have Barbies.
I liked the movie, thought it was campy, a bit too much full in the face with the “woke” (s/) stuff. I would have prefered a bit more subtlety.
The 4 who never played with Barbies thought the movie was “stupid”, the laughs few and far between, and the best parts were Weird Barbie and shirtless and/or dancing Kens.
Whereas I, in addition to Weird Barbie and the half naked dancing Kens liked best the opening scene and the very last line in the movie.
Go figure.
What I am thrilled about is that this movie is showing (and a huge Hit) in Saudi Arabia with virtually no censorship!!!!!
And now reading this article, though I remain skeptical, if it empowers just one girl and causes just one man to rethink his “innate” superiority/ privilege, I will take it.
According to the astrological alignment of the planets, positive change is coming. There will be turmoil as the dying gasps of the old order desparately try to hold onto power. The positive changes will be coming faster in 2024.
p.s. They moved it again. My inquiry stands!
Pam Gregory on Youtube. Especially listen to the hour long talk on Pluto moving into Aquarius.
Oh, dear, Claudia: it's sort of hilarious that the (editors behind the curtain?) plunked my doomsday post just above yours. But sort of uncanny, too, since I have life experience leading to respect for astrology. Could you share source of analysis you have reference to? A guy I used to follow had cognizable set-points for supra-personal, global turning points, like a consensus "birthdate" for America as a nation. It's been a long time, but I'd bet I could still pick a Scorpio out of a crowded room.
Coincidence, since I labeled my main post last night the "doomsday" post. Today: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/upshot/poll-republicans-democrats-pessimism.html?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=gnews&utm_campaign=CDAQ8561x7SApon5ARiWqo6DzITIvb8BKg8IACoHCAowjuuKAzCWrzw&utm_content=rundown&gaa_at=g&gaa_n=AfHvTEuDJka3m80CfNz-wm3mAAwLivxDGUTRnCg9DQXbXV_3aDcgJNx44xazHhWZIdolwANsJxQ-T342fV-Ubaa5Y-BD&gaa_ts=64e14621&gaa_sig=KlqStG213-ZqDBtQOxFMw-4RlNp9JECNw7fhG71IVOZsOFqgW9lzbJ8GCaOq0e-e6amYSLvp33qfu_j9xRq1cA%3D%3D
Sad that I am not alone. Times sub-headline: "In a Recent poll, some Democrats and most Republicans Share a Sense of Doom."
Barbie has her work cut out for her, but Thom's right there's power in art.
The drift in your piece here toward “end of hate” politics doesn’t fully grasp the other point about patriarchy. Whether with hate or love (and those fundamentalists do lots of loving, not just fake love either) women are meant to be controlled or serve the supremacy of masculine values (eg guns, anti-abortion, predator competition) so embedded in American individualism. If the positive political value is solidarity with all people, all members — as in fight for someone you don’t know—how does that translate ?. Protection for the vulnerable and power equally distributed may be where many Barbie fans draw the line. The depoliticizing of American ideals in order to avoid conflict and encourage conformity along with denial of difference and inequality is repeated in so many ways. Reagan loved “The House I Live In” a left-wing ode to the people not the nation state . This is the difficult needle to thread. How to keep the cultural win from being co-opted and disempowered (Summer of Love ends up with w everyone wearing tie dye and going back to work for the system) is the hard part.
Jessica I don't understand the first two sentences of your comment,to wit "he drift in your piece here toward “end of hate” politics doesn’t fully grasp the other point about patriarchy. Whether with hate or love (and those fundamentalists do lots of loving, not just fake love either) women are meant to be controlled or serve the supremacy of masculine values (e.g. .guns, anti-abortion, predator competition) so embedded in American individualism"
I don't know why you had to criticize Thomas excellent article by saying he "doesn't full grasp the other point about patriarchy" I read your comment and couldn't discover that point.
I guess I am incredibly stupid because I didn't get the point of your rant. Except if you have something to say, then spit it out, without using Thom as a springboard, starting out making it person (towards him) with " drift in your piece here toward “end of hate” politics doesn’t fully grasp the other point about patriarchy. " and I still didn't find the point that you were trying to make.
By the way sex is not love, and I abhor it when people use love as a synonym for sexual intercourse
Every seen happily married people, that have been married for 30,40,50 even 60 years?
That which keeps them together (and happy, that modifier is important) is genuine love.
There are other reasons to stay together, dependency, fear of the unknown, finance, children.
The need for sex dwindles with age, as the sex drive is hormone driven, and declines with age.
especially for women who have had a hysterectomy( yeh I know there are exceptions, there are exceptions to everything, except Trump humpers)
Sorry you are right. I should have expressed my admiration for Thomas’s piece first. My worry is that as I said later many of our best movement moments have been co-opted by those who reduce political issues purely to emotions. I am saying that those whose patriarchal politics we disagree with are often quite capable of embracing “love” but at the same time supporting guns, controlling g women’s bodies and so forth. By speaking of the “drift” I meant to describe the tendency in American politics toward denying some of the harsher realities by focusing on whether the people who cause them are “good” or not. Good people can do great harm when in the grip of certain religions or ideologies. Thanks for raising this issue.
Yeh, now I agree with you but please allow me to interject some of my own thoughts, considerations and opinions.
First politics is, if anything, raw emotions, and at that the Republicans have mastered the game, they expertly appeal to the lizard brain;s two response flight or fight, however they moved the needle towards fight, because of social and corporate media (both of which are owned and/or controlled by conservatives.. especially those with fascist intentions
I abhor the English word love, it means absolutely nothing, except maybe in context. Score a point in tennis "love". I love my kitty cat, I love my car, i love my children, I love my spouse, I love to go to a dinner and a date, and finally using the world love, as a stand in for sexual intercourse (which like Tina Turner sang, What's love got to do with it.
I have the same ambivalence towards the word play, a noun, a verb and an adjective.
As for love, how many hearts were broken, because some person said "i love you" after having an orgasm and then lighting a cigarette, putting on their clothes and walking out of their lives.
Ain't now way I can love my fellow man, or woman, I can like them, I can choose to lead or follow them, but love them? No way.
I've seen enough medieval movies with this or that duke, baron or whatever needing the King or Queens love, what they really meant was favor. Love is as transient as a firefly, and should never be neglected or taken for granted..
Many years ago I had a friend named Binod Agrawal who had a profound effect on me in many ways. He was from New Delhi and held a PhD in Cultural Anthropology with a concentration in Linguistics, from the University of Wisconsin, the alma mater of the brilliant C. Wright Mills.
Binod spoke about language (there were at the time, dozens of "officially" recognized languages in India, hundreds of "unofficially recognized" languages; and then there was Hindi, the Mother-tongue, the oldest) Binod pointed out that there were many different words in India for what Anthropologists call "positive regard." What we in America might call "love."
Following Mr. Farrar's stated thesis we proclaim that we love our kitty cat, love our car, love our kids, love eating, love our sexual partners, love music, etc., etc.,etc. Binod said his native tongue had different words for each of those phenomena of "positive regard."
This was an obvious give-away to him that Americans actually knew very little about love; or what we like to call love. His claim was that Indians knew vastly more about this "positive regard" (which we call love) than Americans do. This greater acquaintance with the subject is obviously expressed in their many languages. Love of one's wife has a word, love of one's dog has a word, love of one's sex-partner has a word. And on and on it goes. For we Americans living our lives submerged for the most part in the Citadel of Capitalism, speaking mostly (but not entirely) an historical amalgam of German and Latin there is only one word: love. How empty our lives are.
Is it any wonder that stories like Barbie, Bambi, Pinocchio, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, stir only vague echos of something almost above the frequency of speech; feelings suitable for only children? Do so many people remember their childhood with great fondness because it was a time in their lives when they were still open to "positive regard" in all of its possible manifestations? At least, as open to love as they were to hate?
And what about hate? What do we know about it? I have Sephardic Jews in my family, from Casablanca. I have been told more than once that I do not know how to hate or insult others. If I am angry at someone I have a word I hurl at them Jackass, dope, idiot, etc. In North Africa this would never suffice. If I were from Casablanca I would insult someone by beginning with an insult to their grandparents, their aunts, uncles, parents, siblings, children, their kitty cat, everything that person holds dear. Then I would be only warmed up. There would be much more to follow before eventually getting around to the target of my anger.
Language is created and recreated continuously, on a daily basis so we can communicate meaning to others. Is it also just possible that the language we speak also creates us? Two of the founding fathers of modern Linguistics Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf made exactly this claim. It is usually referred to as the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.
How much does one motion picture (incorporating both language and visual images) contribute to recreating us? Mr. Hartman you have tapped into a deep vein, an artery I think. How close are you to the heart?
Excellent commentary. I particularly like hearing about the Hindu language, or should I refer to it as Sanskrit.
I find it remarkable that our Germanic based language, is considered Indo-European, has lost so much. English has become a language of power and conquest, and no longer a means to effectively communicate. You can even see that in the comments on Thom's report.
We are stunted and stilted by the commercial-financial needs of the elite. The emphasis is on money, profit, commerce, legalisms, human needs, glossed over and swept into simplistic terms like love and play.
Spanish , at least, goes one better. te amo means I love you, te quiero means I want you (sexually). . You would never say to your grandmother te quiero, and if you told your wife te amo, that would mean that you love her like a sister, or mother, and she would know that everything is over and that you probably have a lover.
Anyway thanks for the education. Much appreciated.
My sister in law from Casablanca was fluent in English, French, Spanish, and two common street languages in Casablanca. One of the street languages was spoken by Sephardim, the other by Muslims. Needless to say the two groups passionately hated each other. She was a translator for the UN for a short time. I purposely left Spanish out of my comments. Thank you for your addition.
GFD
...oh, & jessica, to clarify: are you equating religion and ideology? Is one or the other mandatory for being a good person?
...a good tree bears good fruit....a bad tree >>cannot<< ...(ever) bear
good fruit....hack them down & toss into the judicial 🔥 ❗️
...the pendulum will >> not << swing back... only downwards and back-and-forth . It is we who must escape
The maelstrom .... without an aggressive push, we will all fall into the pit