To push back, Lucy is the character that gives Charlie Brown the director gig. I don’t think it passes the bechdel test but my reading of the whole thing is an expression of the felt alienation of growing up in capitalist America. The little girls in the story act as a sort of Greek choruses for the feelings of insecurity and inadequacy that are brought on by the “commercialism” (re: Capitalism) ruining Christmas. Lucy also has a great moment at her therapy stand where, after collecting payment and celebrating it, she begins to try and diagnose Charlie Brown, implying that alone will be helpful. The whole exchange does a great job of mirroring the transactional and alienating feeling of therapy under capitalism. And the punchline at the end is that Lucy, a child, wants real estate for Christmas! Hilarious!
None of this is to say Charles Schulz wasn’t a misogynist, he probably was, 1965 was definitely a misogynistic time. I just feel it’s an oversimplification to call Charlie Brown Christmas misogynistic. There’s a reason that it had an unbroken string of Christmas airings for 5 decades. Something about it resonates with people. Again, there’s undeniably deeply flawed gender politics suffusing the whole thing, but it is an artifact of the past and so that’s part of the story of it.
I guess I’m writing all this because I don’t always feel the positives outweigh the negatives when appreciating historical media. I feel very strongly that the artistic value of A Charlie Brown Christmas vastly outweighs whatever ambient misogyny is embedded within it.
The choice to make many of the most critical comments come from little girls is surely gender coded in a problematic way, and yet it also reads as very realistic. Little kids can be very mean! Especially to each other. If memory serves the male characters are also very unkind to Charlie Brown.
The pacing, the music, the humor, The way it captures the American ennui that is the background radiation of so many American lives. Certainly flawed, but beautiful in a way I really love. If that’s a bad take than you can keep your good ones.
I just feel it’s an oversimplification to call Charlie Brown Christmas misogynistic
But also
The choice to make many of the most critical comments come from little girls...
there’s undeniably deeply flawed gender politics suffusing the whole thing
Look, you can like things and also critique them. It is very clearly a misogynistic piece as you have suggested. It can make good points and connect with people and still be deeply flawed. Some may see the piece as redeemable. That's fine. I don't. I find it's portrayal of girls to be more harmful than it's milquetoast message of Christmas commercialisation that can be found in dozens of other pieces of art.
All of the girls bar none are huge assholes for literally no reason and are all obsessed with either looks, money, or boys. I googled and apparently Charles Schultz had some deeply unhappy marriages which explains it I think