‘Barbie’ Seems to Have Destroyed Ben Shapiro

The right-wing motormouth was triggered by a movie where female characters actually have inner lives not focused on pleasing men.

[OCS: And there it is, the whole feminist theme of the movie, “female characters actually have inner lives not focused on pleasing men.”]

I don’t know the guy in real life, but that’s fine; I don’t think we’d get along. But I was a little concerned about his mental state after Shapiro (a 39-year-old man) on Saturday released a 43-minute long video purporting to “destroy” the new hit film, Barbie.

[OCS: A creepy reference to “mental health” belies that Shapiro is a religiously-observant, happily-married father of four, including a nine-year-old girl, who cares deeply about traditional morality and sexual roles as he delivers his fast-paced social commentary. If anything, it was his literal job as a commentator to review a movie that turned entertainment into feminist indoctrination.]

Not to be sexist but: he didn’t look good. He looked tired, agitated, darty-eyed—even… destroyed.

[OCS: Who are you fooling? You are a sexist engaging in an ad hominem attack on an individual with the audacity to point out that the emperor is not wearing clothes. The movie is what it is, a feminist diatribe against the patriarchy.]

When he described the blockbuster film thusly: “It’s as though you were going to make Toy Story except the toys are all evil, they’re all bad, and you’re supposed to hate them and you’re supposed to burn them.” I thought: Ben, are you OK? Show me where the doll hurt you.

[OCS: If anything, the perversion lies with the film’s creators and those woke, gay-friendly Disney executives who greenlighted the movie.]

I had never seen Ben Shapiro speak for more than a few seconds before I watched his Barbie review and was shocked at how accurate all Ben Shapiro impressions are. He speaks like an auctioneer unsuccessfully trying to argue his way into a club with a bouncer, and listening to his voice elicits the feeling of standing in line behind a person ranting over nothing and wasting everybody’s time.

[OCS: Notice that the reviewer is commenting on Shapiro in a classic “pounce” theme and not commenting on the movie's content and malign influence on little girls.]

But I soldiered on, a martyr for the cause (writing a thing I agreed to write before I realized how annoying the process would be).

[OCS: What “cause” might that be? The progressive communist democrats? The woke? The LGBTQ+ community? Because it certainly does not appear to be the cause of journalism or even honest commentary.]

However, self-editing is not one of Shapiro’s fortes. The man cannot, under any circumstances, shut the fuck up, and in the process, tells us a lot more about himself than he does about Barbie.

[OCS: Of course, the goal of the withering criticism, labeling, and pejorative name-calling is to get you to self-censor and “shut the fuck up.”]

I don’t think Shapiro “got” what Barbieland was supposed to be, which tells me that he doesn’t know very much about how girls play—a shame, since he has two daughters.

The film’s director, Greta Gerwig, didn’t pull it out of her ass; every woman in the theater seemed to “get” that the mores of Barbieland were a reflection of the way that kids engage with Barbie dolls—minus the Barbie-on-Barbie scissoring many of us did (which I imagine Mattel wouldn’t go for in a movie).

[OCS: What’s to get? A movie infused not-so-subtle anti-patriarchy pro-feminist separatism of the sexes social commentary into a movie marketed at children – and their voting-age mothers. This is not entertainment and certainly not education; it is the indoctrination of young children into the warped worldview of progressive communist democrats. And how clever of the article’s author to reference young children’s lesbian-like play with Barbie dolls. ]

“Shapiro ridicules the ‘wokeness’ of having Issa Rae (a black woman! Like Kamala! Absurd!) play the president, as well as the existence of an all-female Supreme Court in Barbieland.”

[OCS: The feminist dream is role reversal where they hold the levers of power over government and, by extension, men.]

He actually starts his review by holding a rather phallic toy atomic bomb (to represent the other new film of the moment, Oppenheimer), and a Barbie doll in the other. Shapiro tosses the Barbie over his shoulder towards a trash can, but he misses the shot. Then, a jump cut shows the Barbie doll in the trash can, about to be set alight by Ben’s manly match.

[OCS: Leave it to an author who describes her focus at The Daily Beast as "the intersection of politics, gender, society" and areas where "politics, womanhood, and feminism" touch” to introduce phallic symbology. The one question the feminists never seem to answer is why do they hold out the patriarchy as the “gold standard” and want to replace it with the matriarchy instead of concentrating on living fulfilled lives – whatever that might look like. I am still waiting to see a feminist who is not angry at life.]

But Ben’s biggest Barbie bugaboo seems to be the film’s best sequence—when Barbie, living under the patriarchy that has taken over Barbieland (in the Danish version of the film, brilliantly called “Kenmark”), attempts to retake power by tricking men into thinking their annoying, paternalistic behavior is necessary.

[OCS: I rest my case! Suppose you can find humor and entertainment for little girls in an angry film where all the Ken’s appear to be gay, including obvious gay jokes. In that case, you are one sick puppy – or a middle-aged, college-educated, wine-sipping potential voter lectured by a class warrior trying to cobble together votes for a vegetable.]

<Read the review in full and in context at the Daily Yeast>