I feel like I could write a whole essay right now on the Barbie movie and the fact that the original star was going to be Any Schumer but she quit because it wasn’t “feminist enough”, and how the internet reacted to this information. There’s just a lot of missing the point going on in that story. First of all, Amy quit because she couldn’t envision a way for feminism to include stereotypical feminine interests like pink and shopping and bikinis basically.
From what she’s said about it, she felt it would be more progressive to make Barbie an inventor or a scientist. The thing about (at least modern) feminism though is that its goal isn’t to make every woman a scientist or a doctor, its goal is for everyone to be treated equally regardless of their gender identity or their interests. Liking girly shit is just as valid as challenging stereotypes as a woman.
@lemontart That's what's always bothered me about the push behind "women in STEM". Having more women in STEM isn't the issue, the issue is forcing women who DON'T want to be in STEM into STEM, while simultaneously crapping on all the women who go into higher education for non-STEM degrees. Do we really care about women when we say that only some careers are important, even if some women don't want to go into those careers?
@chevalier26 right, we should be normalizing STEM as a choice for girls but we also need to be careful to teach them that you don’t have to choose a certain path to be worthwhile. You can be a makeup artist if you want to and that’s not a less liberated choice if it’s what you want.
@lemontart Exactly. The rhetoric that "humanities degrees are useless" doesn't help either. Although that equally harms men and women.