TW: Mentions of sexual assault.
This article includes spoilers regarding the film Moxie.
Directed by famous comedian and actress Amy Poehler, Moxie (2021) is a comedy-drama film focused on ‘riot grrrl’ feminism at an American high school. The main character, Vivian, is inspired by her rebel mother, Lisa, and starts a feminist revolution at her school, calling out misogynistic antagonist Mitchell, who sexually assaults women. Despite its well-meaning message and seemingly innocent intentions, the film is really nothing new to this generation’s audience, and because of its representation, does more harm than good. Moxie is not the fresh, fierce feminist movie that Poehler intended for it to be.
In the words of Poehler’s on-screen character Lisa when reflecting on her revolution: ‘We weren’t intersectional enough’. And that is exactly the issue—the film itself is not intersectional enough, or at all. To define it in simple terms, intersectionality is when one’s gender, race, sexuality, disabilities, socioeconomic status, and other social constructions, well, intersect. All of these factors impact our experiences in life, making them individual to us. Intersectionality is crucial to feminism, and this is missed in Moxie. It’s essentially a white woman story: directed by a white woman, featuring a white woman, with only the side characters being people of color.
When reviewing films, especially those featuring progressive feminists, representation is the largest aspect to be considered. Not only does Moxie not have enough intersectional representation, but it also pushes stereotypes on women of color. The main character, the ‘star’ of the feminist movement in this film, is Vivian, a white woman who does not experience the hardships that her friends of color do. It simply cannot be an accurate portrayal of feminism if the protagonist is white, and especially when her actions and frustrations cause ripples of harm to the other characters of color.
Vivian’s best friend, Claudia, is the only female Asian representation in this movie and is portrayed as the submissive, timid girl who studies hard and obeys her Chinese immigrant mother. Is there no other way East Asians can be represented? Must we always be submissive, smart, and shy women who never take a stand in anything? Because of her need to obey authority, Claudia actually attempts to silence the feminist group’s voices and makes it clear that she does not want to be involved. Having this as our only representation is hurtful and continues to catalyze the ‘submissive, smart, and shy’ narrative for East Asian women.
Perhaps a larger issue with the film is the fact that it pushes the ‘angry black woman’ or the ‘strong black woman’ stereotype onto Lucy Hernandez, an Afro-Latina character. Yes, it is beneficial that Lucy is portrayed as strong and independent, but it wrongfully preserves these stereotypes and further enforces these expectations and adultification onto young black women. They should not have to bear the ramifications of white women’s behavior—they are mere children that should not be expected to hold up these unrealistic standards. Furthermore, Lucy has absolutely no character development whilst Vivian and even Claudia do, which again accentuates the fact that this is a black character written by a white woman.
Another issue with the lack of intersectionality in this film is that there is no Muslim, South East Asian, or Middle Eastern representation at all. Now, we may not expect all of these to be featured, but there are literally only three races featured in this film: white, East Asian, and black. The discrimination that Muslim women face, especially in America, is definitely something to be highlighted in a feminist film, and Southeast Asians are just generally underrepresented in media. If Moxie truly wanted to uplift marginalized voices, they should have considered the representation of their characters. And whilst transgender and disabled characters are also featured in this film, they are not emphasized as much as they should’ve been. Josie Totah, who plays transgender woman C.J., is included in only some of the conversation, but not nearly enough of it. Meg, who is disabled and in a wheelchair, does not partake in the conversation at all: she is a member of the movement, but not as pivotal of a member as Lucy or Claudia is. To make the movie truly intersectional and feminist, everyone’s voice must be included, meaning that everyone must be represented accordingly.
One of the largest indicators that this film is white-centric and poorly written is Vivian’s ‘rebel’ breakdown scene. When Claudia gets suspended for registering Moxie as a school club, Vivian comes to see her. They get into an argument, with Vivian accusing her of not trying to be included. Claudia reacts, saying that it is Vivian’s white privilege that allows her to have the ability to participate in the movement: “Do you know what my mom sacrificed to get to this country? What she had to do to make it so that I could go to college? I don’t have the freedom to take the risks that you do.” Claudia is right—Vivian’s white privilege and security she enjoys give her the freedom that Claudia and every other woman of color in America cannot have. After this scene, Vivian never reflects on how her white privilege impacts those around her, and it is not discussed further in the film.
Instead of exploring her white privilege, the movie instead portrays her having a breakdown over her actions, lashing out at everyone. Vivian’s boyfriend Seth, her mother and her boyfriend John are at dinner together when Vivian starts screaming at everyone, calling John an anti-feminist for having an American flag on his car. This is surely questionable but definitely not directly anti-feminist. Seth rightfully tells her to calm down, and she accuses him of making him her ‘property’, ending her unnecessary rant by saying ‘f*ck the patriarchy’. The topics she mentions are surely worth discussing, but the execution in this scene is, to put it kindly, not the greatest. Vivian then falls into an argument with her mother, who says she isn’t ‘strong enough’ to keep the movement going; the movement shouldn’t have been about her in the first place. Vivian simply uses everyone as her punching bag for the frustrations she feels about the patriarchy—frustration that should not be directed at her.
The selective feminism and overall writing of the film also contribute to its downfall. In Moxie, Vivian only starts to say something when she is voted ‘Most Obedient’ on the school’s rankings of women (yes, it’s highly misogynistic) and when Lucy vents her own frustrations. This entire time, Lucy is being harassed by Mitchell, a straight white male, but Vivian only cares when it happens to her, not to other women. Lucy is only there to inspire Vivian, which is extremely backward and not the way a feminist film should be written.
At a party in the film, Kaitlynn Price, a female character who is also part of the movement, tries to make a ‘feminist’ point by saying that in a deck of cards, the king is worth more than the queen. Kaitlynn, there are real issues in the world and this is not one of them. She goes on to question this, saying that the queen is inherently better because she ‘can have children’. The ability to have children isn’t what makes someone better; remember, feminism is about equity and equality, not placing one gender above another. It should not even be a defining characteristic of a woman in the first place.
Moxie is a decent introduction to feminism, but does this generation really need a reintroduction? There was nothing particularly different about this film—in fact, it continued to push the stereotypical narratives of women of color and diminish their voices to amplify the white woman’s own. It is acceptable and tame, and that is exactly the issue: it doesn’t really push boundaries of any sort. It is merely a reiteration of what’s already been said, but through a white woman’s eyes.