Andrew Tate and Barbie are mirror images of the same warped view of human sexuality

In the culture wars, there are no noncombatants, only acolytes and heretics. Or so it seems absorbing the discourse around Greta Gerwig’s hit film "Barbie." It’s either an empowering feminist allegory, smashing the patriarchy, or an insidious piece of pink-washed consumerist propaganda attacking masculinity. The reality is that it’s neither: It’s a meandering, heavy-handed movie about a toy, with some funny moments and gorgeous production design.

The one criticism of the film that resonates is the utterly nasty ending, in which Barbie, after experiencing the sexist hellscape of the “real world,” returns Barbie Land to the status quo of the Kens having no rights and being mere accessories. In Barbie Land, there is no love or partnership, merely power. It’s confusing why people are whining about a cash grab by Mattel promulgating these sentiments when they’re de rigueur for most cultural institutions.

What is maddening is some conservatives falling for the bizzaro version of these ideas Andrew Tate spouts. In an exhausting three-hour interview with Candace Owens, Tate expounds on his innocence by pointing out he’s being accused of human trafficking by using the “boyfriend model,” which, according to him, isn’t real. I suppose the U.K. grooming gang scandal is also a matrix attack on some innocent Top Gs.

Guilt or innocence aside, Tate’s true sin is his fundamental belief in third-wave feminism – but reversed. Tate’s worldview is Barbie Land turned on its head. Through this postmodern prism, sexuality and male/female dynamics exist in a zero-sum game, with power as the only currency. In Tate Land, society’s ills can be blamed on women seizing power, and the only solution is for men to take back dominance by, I suppose, driving Bugattis shirtless in Romania and f***ing OnlyFans girls. It’s a critique Kimberlé Crenshaw would have instinctively understood when she put forward her theories in the 1980s.

Top G(rifter)

DANIEL MIHAILESCU via Getty Images

Crenshaw’s theories, including intersectionality and critical race theory, might be some of the most insidious and loathsome pieces of jargon produced in the 20th century, reducing every human interaction to privilege and oppression, discrimination, and exploitation. And these theories have expanded modern wokism to include all interactions between men and women. It’s a testament to their ubiquity that many on the right have internalized her critique and agree with grifters like Tate or 4chan edge lord turned real girl Pearl Davis when they preach it.

Fortunately, this view of the world through domination is bull***t. Dating and marriage aren’t about power and control; they’re about love, commitment, and subsuming your ego into something greater than yourself. Healthy relationships strive not for dominance, but instead to build a life together and support each other. The right would be wise to remember the enemy of your enemy is rarely your friend. An unmarried pornographer who chases Instagram models is no more the paradigm of masculinity than a Barbie doll is the ideal of womanhood. They’re both just cringe.