StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I haven't seen this yet, but I still don't understand why this movie is singled out as feminist propaganda over other very popular action movies with strong female leads. Why exactly is Aliens not feminist propaganda, again, according to these idiots? Or even Terminator 2 , with Sarah Connor kicking ass throughout the movie?

I don't know what's going through the heads of the films' detractors, but I would guess it comes down to their being not only a capable major female character, but one who's a powerful leader, plus the film's plot being about an evil man's female sex slaves trying to escape to a female utopia. And some other stuff. Of course, that's only a part of the film, and Max is every bit as much the hero as Furiosa, perhaps moreso.

I also wonder if the composition of the fanbase is part of it. The old films featured Mel Gibson, and I imagine pretty much anyone who's still a Gibson fan at this point is probably a hard core bigoted conservative, the kind who lashes out at feminists as readily as Jews.

Also, did anyone else find it kind of amusing that Tom Hardy, who played Bane in The Dark Knight Rises, spent about half the film wearing a metal face mask? I wonder if that was a deliberate gag about his role as Bane.

The Romulan Republic wrote: I also wonder if the composition of the fanbase is part of it. The old films featured Mel Gibson, and I imagine pretty much anyone who's still a Gibson fan at this point is probably a hard core bigoted conservative, the kind who lashes out at feminists as readily as Jews.

You can be a fan of his older movies without approving of his present stances. What an actor does on screen doesn't necessarily tie into their real life.

Fair enough, but I think its still a valid point that the association with Mel Gibson unfortunately increases the likelihood of finding backwards assholes among the fanbase.

The movie presented men and women as being equally important and equally competent. That IS the feminist message.

Admittedly, they do have Spoiler And yes, the male and female characters are pretty much on par in terms of competence. However, I would say the film presents the female characters as, on average more sane/more compassionate.

I wonder about that though, as the women clan notes that
Spoiler This is the Mad Max world, so I know you have to be tough, but that's rather ruthless of them, and rather explains why they never increased in numbers all the years they were on their own. Also makes you wonder about the future of the male citizens in that community.

The Romulan Republic wrote:Admittedly, they do have Spoiler

a woman end up as ruler, with the implication that this will lead to a better society. However, I don't take that as anti-man because Furiosa was by far the most qualified person to lead in the film, more than any of the other men or women. In other words, she succeeds because she's the only person badass enough to who still has a conscience and isn't a habitual loner, not because she's a woman.

And yes, the male and female characters are pretty much on par in terms of competence. However, I would say the film presents the female characters as, on average more sane/more compassionate.

I could be wrong, but my understanding was that most, if not all, of the gang members were the big bad's kids from his "breeding harem" that he had - or was that just the 1 big guy on the respirator?

I may have missed the bit about killing any man who approaches. But yes, that's nasty and ruthless.

As for the point biostem just raised, I don't know.

Regardless, its a fine film overall and nothing I say should be taken as discouraging people from going to see it.

And Furiosa is part of a small group of bad ass female action heroes with some decent character development that includes Lt. Ripley, Sarah Connor, and Buffy Summers, and aside from the fact that she sadly only has one film to her name, is pretty much the equal of any of them.

I still think Ripley is more like the ultimate feminist hero, in that she shows extraordinary courage when many of the men don't, and also... she fights giant penis monsters who rape you. (Also let's not forget to mourn for Vasquez, another bad-ass warrior woman who kicks ass, until she suicide bombs an alien.)

Of course the reality is that I doubt any of these film directors are thinking too much about these issues. They just want to tell a cool story with great action scenes and good characters.

Interestingly, I believe I read in a book on screenwriting that Ripley was originally supposed to be a male character. I'll see if I can did up that source/quote.

I believe Ripley et al were written without genders in mind, meaning they could just cast the best actors.

Interesting.

Maybe the thing I was thinking of was just describing Ripley as a typically male role being played by a woman. I'll have to look it up if I can find the book in question.

Anyway, what you described is the best way to do it, I think, unless there's something about your character's story or the themes of the work that requires the character to be a particular gender (like, say Buffy, who really couldn't be a remotely similar character if she were male). And even then, I suppose you could cast a man as a woman or vice versa, though it might not be entirely convincing.

For Alien, all the roles were written as last name only, so that their role on the ship was the only thing that mattered, and anyone could audition for the role. Ripley could have just as easily been a man, but she was cast female, and they made history with the character.

Channel72 wrote:Of course the reality is that I doubt any of these film directors are thinking too much about these issues. They just want to tell a cool story with great action scenes and good characters.

And that is what movies are supposed to be like. In fact, that is what all art is supposed to be like. Even if for some strange ideologically charged reason you want to send a message through your work (which you really should not ever want to do) the best way to do it is to just make it good and let the story do it for you instead of explicitly pushing it.

Imperial Overlord wrote:

Joun_Lord wrote: Since when are they murderers? Fedora wearing neckbeards with antiquated and downright sickening views of women sure but I've never heard of any MRAs to be actual killers.

Elliot Rodgers in Santa Barbara and the Ecole Polytechnique Massacre in Montreal by Mark Lepine are two I can name off the top of my head.

Eliot Rodger explicitly rejected MRA philosophy and actually frequented an Anti-MRA website. He was upset with women due to his continuous failure with them, and then rejected their advice and went on a homicidal rampage.

He was a nutjob, not and MRA.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill ... ot-rodger/

FaxModem1 wrote:For Alien, all the roles were written as last name only, so that their role on the ship was the only thing that mattered, and anyone could audition for the role. Ripley could have just as easily been a man, but she was cast female, and they made history with the character.

Plus, Sigourney Weaver wasn't the major star she is today. She was literally just a random actress to a 1970s audience - so they had no clue she would ultimately be the last survivor and hero. (I think an early version of the script actually had her get killed in the escaped pod as part of some kind of twist ending.)

Of course, the real hero of the Alien franchise is Jones the Cat, who stood his ground against the Alien and hissed at it.

cmdrjones wrote:
Eliot Rodger explicitly rejected MRA philosophy and actually frequented an Anti-MRA website. He was upset with women due to his continuous failure with them, and then rejected their advice and went on a homicidal rampage.

He was a nutjob, not and MRA.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill ... ot-rodger/

You mean the article that contains this gem:

He writes that he discovered PUAHate.com — the anti-pick-up-artist site — in the Spring of 2013 and that many people there “shared [his] hatred of women [but] would be too cowardly to act on it” and that the site “confirmed his theories about how wicked and degenerate women really are.”

Which little subgroup of online misogynists he belonged to isn't important anymore than whether or not a White Supremist is a Nazi or KKK member. He was clearly one of them and found validation of his world views among them.

Purple wrote:

Channel72 wrote:Of course the reality is that I doubt any of these film directors are thinking too much about these issues. They just want to tell a cool story with great action scenes and good characters.

And that is what movies are supposed to be like. In fact, that is what all art is supposed to be like. Even if for some strange ideologically charged reason you want to send a message through your work (which you really should not ever want to do) the best way to do it is to just make it good and let the story do it for you instead of explicitly pushing it.

I don't think there's any possible consensus on what art is "supposed" to be like. Personally, I don't necessarily mind if a movie has some kind of overt agenda or message, as long as it remains entertaining. In particular, pretty much any documentary these days is going to have a pretty overt message - yet many times documentaries can be entertaining and thought provoking if done correctly. A lot of movies also convey a message by simply highlighting some dysfunctional aspect of society, like racism, in order to demonstrate some of the disastrous effects (e.g. pretty much any Spike Lee movie, American History X, etc.) I don't really mind that either - I enjoy many of those types of movies. I'm more likely to get irritated with the movie if the message is really superficial or lame - like Jurassic Park's naive message of "don't mess with nature... or whatever". Still, those types of movies can be very enjoyable in spite of that.

Channel72 wrote:I haven't seen this yet, but I still don't understand why this movie is singled out as feminist propaganda over other very popular action movies with strong female leads. Why exactly is Aliens not feminist propaganda, again, according to these idiots? Or even Terminator 2 , with Sarah Connor kicking ass throughout the movie?

Channel72 wrote:I haven't seen this yet, but I still don't understand why this movie is singled out as feminist propaganda over other very popular action movies with strong female leads. Why exactly is Aliens not feminist propaganda, again, according to these idiots? Or even Terminator 2 , with Sarah Connor kicking ass throughout the movie?

Because Aliens is not a redo of a 1970s film called "Duke of Death vs the Xenomorphs" which features a wildly popular cultural hero taking a back seat to a gunned up female pilot on a rampage to save a little girl. IN other words, Aliens is NOT a bait and switch.

Some MRA's might still claim that ALiens and Terminator 2 are feminist propaganda, but I would NOT (despite supporting some MRA ideas, despite not being one) for several reasons #1 Ripley is a PLAUSIBLE feminine heroine. She fights to save a daughter figure and uses her experience with the Xenomorphs to survive. The only part that bothered me was her superhuman shoes that kept a ton of alien queen from ripping her leg off before it finally go spaced.

#2 Sarah Connor is likewise Plausible... she trained for years to become the badass she was and was still obviously NO match for either the T-101 OR the T-1000. She accomplished what she did vs the guards/cops/psychologist, but it was still necessary for the T-101s strength and John Connors pluck, (and the black scientists incredible moral conversion and self sacrifice) to win the day.

Imperial Overlord wrote:

cmdrjones wrote:
Eliot Rodger explicitly rejected MRA philosophy and actually frequented an Anti-MRA website. He was upset with women due to his continuous failure with them, and then rejected their advice and went on a homicidal rampage.

He was a nutjob, not and MRA.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill ... ot-rodger/

You mean the article that contains this gem:

He writes that he discovered PUAHate.com — the anti-pick-up-artist site — in the Spring of 2013 and that many people there “shared [his] hatred of women [but] would be too cowardly to act on it” and that the site “confirmed his theories about how wicked and degenerate women really are.”

Which little subgroup of online misogynists he belonged to isn't important anymore than whether or not a White Supremist is a Nazi or KKK member. He was clearly one of them and found validation of his world views among them.

You Do realize that would be like going a Zionist website and noting they hate Communists; so therefore since the Nazis hate Communists too, that Zionists = Nazis?

He was a delusional moron. He hated PUAs AND women. PUAs by definition want to be around and appreciate women!! They may not respect them, and they may use tactics to get them in bed that you and I find objectionable, but PUAs =/= PUA haters.

Well, Imperial Overlord was talking about MRAs, so trying to argue with him vis a vis PUA/PUA hate is a non-starter.

Additionally, PUAs also hate women. They just hate women in different ways. They view them as things to be used, and with contempt.

It is all toxic misogyny that has its roots in our fucked up misogynistic culture and as a backlash against feminism. There is little point in differentiating them except for academic discussions and semantic apologism.

cmdrjones wrote:Some MRA's might still claim that ALiens and Terminator 2 are feminist propaganda, but I would NOT (despite supporting some MRA ideas, despite not being one)

Okay. So, honestly I really have very little interest in researching any "MRA ideas" (I can't even say the words "Men's Rights" without rolling my eyes...) So can you summarize some of their ideas that you think are good?

I mean, I'm a white male living in the US, and I've never once really felt concerned for my rights - at least not in relation to women. (I am concerned a bit about my rights regarding NSA stuff and certain privacy issues, but that's non-gender related...) Essentially, white skin + penis + heterosexuality = immediate advantage. I'm never afraid some guy is going to "judge me" at a job interview, or that the police are going to be suspicious of me, or that I'll get sexually harassed by my boss, or that I'll make less money for any reason other than my skillset, or whatever. Women and minorities, however, do have to worry about those things quite a bit still, although for women in particular their success rate seems to vary depending on their field. (It seems women are making good progress in the medical field - with a lot of women MDs coming out of the top medical schools, but women are still doing horribly in the tech field, because of all sorts of cultural biases and whatnot, which is really sad because one of the most brilliant programmers I know is a woman). So... um, why exactly do I need some "group" looking out for my rights as a (white) male?

Speaking as someone studding in a tech field, although admittedly in Europe, and who has contact with a lot of people working in the field I can say that at least from what I know the lack of women here is not due to discrimination but lack of interest. IT just isn't something that appeals to a lot of women for some reason. My university maybe has 10-20% of its students being female and I can tell you for sure it's not due to discrimination (or else we would not have like 50% of the teachers being female). Girls simply don't seem to apply as much for an education or job in IT.