Barbie 2 Should Be About the Gender Binary. It Practically Writes Itself.

Gerwig knocked it out of the park, but may I humbly suggest another inning?

Mother Jones; SSPL/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

As a trans guy I feel an affinity to Ken. No body hair? No male genitalia? Parted hair? Fashionable outfits? And the undying belief that women are wonderful? Sign me up!

So, I donned my best Beach look (this wasn’t hard: I already own a matching, patterned swim-trunk, button down combo) and showed up ready for two hours of Ryan Gosling as an unproblematic sidekick and a rare male icon.

Before I go any further, I must make something very clear. Unlike some other men, I do not need a movie about dolls to affirm my masculinity.

So, when Greta Gerwig had other ideas about Ken, I (mostly) rolled with the punches. Part way through the movie, I turned to my partner—donned in their best Nonbinary Barbie fit—my jaw wide and half gasped, “Ken is the villain?”

They looked at me confused, “You didn’t know?”

It turns out I had been living in a little bit of a delusional Mojo Dojo Casa House. Gerwig undoubtedly knocked Ken’s arcresentful-lover-boy-sidekick to sneering incel to sad-boy-obsessed-with-horses—out of the park.

Having given up on Ken, I wondered if Barbie might surprise me in another way, a la: “This Barbie got top surgery and now goes by Aiden.” Because I promise plenty of trans people played with barbies and I can’t be the only one who cut their Barbie’s hair and renamed them Ben. Right?

I really do not want to be another man complaining about not being represented in the Barbie movie. But, from a purely marketing perspective, I must say there is missed trans potential that Gerwig and Mattel can still capitalize on. Because we know that it is all about the money.

Don’t get me wrong, there was a standout LGBTQ cast—Hari Nef, Kate McKinnon, Alexandra Shipp, Scott Evans, and Ncuti Gatwa—and plenty of queer Easter Eggs, including cock-ring-wearing Earring Magic Ken’s appearance. (The movie cut the cock ring, but the nod was still there.) While I wish they had been brave enough to make the representation explicit, it didn’t stop critics from claiming the movie was “full of transsexual, and transgender, and homosexuality.”  Whatever that means.

Mother Jones; Heilke Heller/ullstein bild/Getty

It may have been too much to fit into one movie, but if plastic dolls and Gerwig can break down the patriarchy, the gender binary is a natural next step. With blowout box office sales, I would be surprised if there were not conversations about a Barbie 2. And the setup is all there. May I direct you to arguably the best line of the movie, delivered by Robbie while gliding down Venice Beach in neon roller skates: “I don’t have a vagina, and he doesn’t have a penis. We don’t have genitals.” The trans internet exploded with quips like “Tell me you’re trans without telling me you’re trans.” Some even got emotional when they saw themselves reflected in the Allan character who fell outside of the Ken/Barbie binary.

It speaks to Barbie’s opportunity to complicate the connection between gender and sex. As Robbie explains, “She’s a plastic doll. She doesn’t have organs. If she doesn’t have organs, she doesn’t have reproductive organs.” Our lead Barbie goes on to ask and answer, “If she doesn’t have reproductive organs, would she even feel sexual desire? No, I don’t think she could.” While some are lauding Robbie for saying this means Barbie is asexual, it is important to note sexuality has nothing to do with anatomy and reproductive organs are not needed for sexual desire. Barbie may be asexual, but its not because of what’s in her pants.

The logic that Barbie’s gender may be determined by any biological sex is also silly. When Robbie’s Barbie turns into human Barbara, it’s suggested she gets her very own vulva, but that is new and chosen—not predetermined. 

Even Ken points out the fallacy that gender is really set or standard. “To be honest, when I found out the patriarchy wasn’t just about horses,” he cries, “I lost interest.” He couldn’t care less about beer, guitars, fur coats, or manliness. He is just an immature horse girl figuring his shit out. 

We already know that Mattel is not opposed to playing with gender, having launched a “Gender Neutral Doll” in 2019, or to uplifting trans people, having made a Laverne Cox barbie doll in 2022. As long as it’s profitable, of course. So it’s time to step up. Let Hari Nef have as many lines as she wants. Let Elliot Page wander into Barbie land and see what happens. JVN can queer eye some Kens and introduce them to the term nonbinary.

Ben Shapiro’s head may explode, and he will look silly filming a three-hour video on a movie about dolls. And that is always a plus.

LET’S TALK ABOUT OPTIMISM FOR A CHANGE

Democracy and journalism are in crisis mode—and have been for a while. So how about doing something different?

Mother Jones did. We just merged with the Center for Investigative Reporting, bringing the radio show Reveal, the documentary film team CIR Studios, and Mother Jones together as one bigger, bolder investigative journalism nonprofit.

And this is the first time we’re asking you to support the new organization we’re building. In “Less Dreading, More Doing,” we lay it all out for you: why we merged, how we’re stronger together, why we’re optimistic about the work ahead, and why we need to raise the First $500,000 in online donations by June 22.

It won’t be easy. There are many exciting new things to share with you, but spoiler: Wiggle room in our budget is not among them. We can’t afford missing these goals. We need this to be a big one. Falling flat would be utterly devastating right now.

A First $500,000 donation of $500, $50, or $5 would mean the world to us—a signal that you believe in the power of independent investigative reporting like we do. And whether you can pitch in or not, we have a free Strengthen Journalism sticker for you so you can help us spread the word and make the most of this huge moment.

payment methods

LET’S TALK ABOUT OPTIMISM FOR A CHANGE

Democracy and journalism are in crisis mode—and have been for a while. So how about doing something different?

Mother Jones did. We just merged with the Center for Investigative Reporting, bringing the radio show Reveal, the documentary film team CIR Studios, and Mother Jones together as one bigger, bolder investigative journalism nonprofit.

And this is the first time we’re asking you to support the new organization we’re building. In “Less Dreading, More Doing,” we lay it all out for you: why we merged, how we’re stronger together, why we’re optimistic about the work ahead, and why we need to raise the First $500,000 in online donations by June 22.

It won’t be easy. There are many exciting new things to share with you, but spoiler: Wiggle room in our budget is not among them. We can’t afford missing these goals. We need this to be a big one. Falling flat would be utterly devastating right now.

A First $500,000 donation of $500, $50, or $5 would mean the world to us—a signal that you believe in the power of independent investigative reporting like we do. And whether you can pitch in or not, we have a free Strengthen Journalism sticker for you so you can help us spread the word and make the most of this huge moment.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate