Apparently there’s a movie in theaters now by the name of The Hunger Games – it’s sort of obscure, so you may not have heard of it. Despite the title, it does not have anything to do with food. No, apparently it has something to do with young people fighting to the death on TV, or something.
Over on the Fox News website, Dr. Keith Ablow – described as “a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team” – is shocked to discover that this film contains:
1) Attractive young people
2) Violence
This deadly combination alarms Dr. Ablow, who warns:
The Hunger Games … adds to the toxic psychological forces it identifies, rather than reducing them. …
It is an entertainment product of complete fiction and great potency, given its intense level of fantasy and violence. As such, it only conveys young people closer to “expressing” in a virtual format their powerful and primitive instincts (potentially kindling their desire to truly express such instincts) while conveying them further from their daily realities and a little further still from their real selves.
And apparently the film fails utterly in inculcating hostility towards the Kardashian family.
Almost no one will emerge from a theater swearing off shows like the Keeping Up With the Kardashians, or Jersey Shore because they are produced by adults happy enough to make a buck off of stupefying teenagers.
As I am sure you are all aware, inculcating hostility towards the Kardashians is the aim of all great art, as Aristotle explained so many centuries ago:
A tragedy is the imitation of an action that is serious, and also, as having magnitude, complete in … with incidents arousing pity and terror, with which to accomplish its purgation of these emotions. Those Kardashian girls are such stuck up bitches — “ooh i got a big ass, everybody look at me!” And don’t even get me started on Snooki.
Hey, can I get a goddamn gyro here?
That quote is, of course, from Aristotle’s famous treatise “Ho-etics.”
In addition to not inculcating hatred towards the Kardashians, Dr. Ablow warns us, The Hunger Games will make its viewers
more likely to come out of theaters having shed some measure of the healthy psychological defenses (which are, luckily, partly reinforced by socialization) that keep them at a distance from their violent impulses. …
Other than entertaining millions and millions of teenagers and making millions and millions of dollars, the net result of The Hunger Games is likely to be:
1) Females will be further distanced from their traditional feminine characteristics that … suggested they were not being real “girls” if they were extremely physically violent.
2) Young teens and many pre-teens will be awakened to the fact that they are capable of extreme violence, given the right set of circumstances.
3) A few psychologically vulnerable teens—who would have come to no good anyhow—may be inspired to replicate the film’s violence.
So I’m guessing that’s a big “thumbs down” from Dr. Ablow.
Given that the mainstream media is but a tool in the hand of our gynocentric matriarchal overlordsladies, I’m not quite sure how this article slipped through. But we’re lucky it did.
Over on What Men Are Saying About Women, where I found big chunks of Ablow’s essay quoted without any explanation of where they were from, our good friend Christian J. explains that:
This movie is straight out of the slut-feminists’ arsenal of the “You Go Grrrllll” mantras. They have promoted violent women and will continue to do so (think Valerie Solanas). Slut-feminists justify this action under their delusional and blatantly false claim that women should be able to protect themselves as they are constantly attacked and physically abused on a daily basis, everywhere they go..
Where they get that from is ofcourse by generating their own falsified and doctored statistics which they have done for too long to remember.
If anyone suggests you go see The Hunger Games, they are probably a slut feminist. You should run far away from them in case they decide to punch you.
Go watch old episodes of The A-Team instead, a show which is totally not violent in any way.
Antz is the MRM attack dog for sure.
Fourth happiest day of my life! Obamacare takes a knockout punch! Justices invoke equal protection arguments — the same ones that I pointed out to the boob brigade! Feminist discrimination and bigotry is coming to an end! Supreme court considers men human! VAWA is next! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 🙂
Cry me a river, build a bridge, and get over it!
Antz, seriously, I post as you better than you post as you. Just leave it to me.
For example, your latest post says “HAHAHA FOR THE SUFFERING OF WOMEN AND THE POOR NO I’M NOT A BIGOT, YOU’RE ALL THE BIGOTS.”
See? Mine was way better and more accurate.
Lady Zombie, agreed, but I think many ladies back then faked fainting spells, probably because many men valued women who were fragile little flowers.
Ever watch old movies? I love them, but roll my eyes when I see women acting like children, being emotionally weak, and sometimes crying like a baby. So glad we have stronger female characters nowadays.
@lauralot
If Obamacare was gender-neutral, I would not have any problem with it. However, under Obamacare, health care is a right for women, and a privilege for men. Not cool. Flush it down, along with its maker.
Uh. Does planet Z [Ant] have some sort of pipeline to the SCOTUS that CNN doesn’t have? Also, why is he writing headlines in the comment section?
Zarat, I’m a Feminist and I’m hoping Obamacare gets struck down by the SCOTUS. I think it’s unconstitutional for the government to force us to buy a product. Obamacare would eventually cause insurance companies go belly-up causing the government to take over the health care industry. Then it will be Uncle Sam who says who gets what treatments. I’m not fine with that. Just my opinion.
“A few psychologically vulnerable teens — who would have come to no good anyhow — may be inspired to replicate the film’s violence.”
This passage in particular had me fighting back the urge to scream “Go fuck yourself a hundred times over Dr. Ablow!” out loud in my living room. I was a psychologically vulnerable teen, am now a slightly-less-but-still-somewhat psychologically vulnerable adult, and not only was/am I not doomed to some tumultuous, “no good” downfall, but I know the difference between fiction and reality enough to not even feel the slightest urge to go all “Natural Born Killers” on anyone’s ass. Or “Hunger Games”, or “Lord of the Flies” (unless of course in the unlikely event that I wound up in the exact situation as Piggy and Ralph and co.), or whatever kids these days are watching/reading.
Oh man, Antz, congratulations! All your hard work including totally doing stuff that influenced the Supreme Court in some way has really paid off. And now you can feel completely justified in viewing this as your big personal triumph over everyone who comments here, who generally have no affiliation with the health care statute, no affiliation with any one particular political party, and many of whom aren’t from the US. WTG, Antz. This is clearly something that you should feel really good about, and not just because you have nothing else to be proud of in any way.
Allow me to translate your latest post, Antz: I HATE WOMEN AND ALSO THE PRESIDENT SHOULD BE KILLED.
Yep, not at all a bigot.
Apparently the health-care overhaul is being challenged because of the mandate that all people need to have healthcare of some sort. source
According to AntZ, this means that its being challanged because the healthcare bill only covers women, but all the male politicians and lawyericians but challange it on something unrelated because of the vast feminist regime.
Oh, damn, I forgot to mention the part where he doesn’t understand healthcare at all.
Antz, dude, the Court hasnt’ decided the case yet. They wrapped up public arguments on the case. Now they will go and think about it and discuss it themselves. They’re expected to decide in June. Also, none of what they talked about had anything to do with the imaginary issues you raised.
I’m not quite sure you’re the constitutional expert you think you are.
I’m not sure he’s an expert on anything, actually.
lololol
Seriously, Antsy, where are you even getting your information?
Er, the decision hasn’t been announced yet. Also, the court is hearing two cases together, one which goes after the entire bill, and one that only attacks the individual mandates. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-health-care-hearings-conclude/2012/03/28/gIQALpFIhS_story.html
Considering the long standing virulent hatred of the US left for the individual mandates, I don’t see why a severing and striking of just the mandate would be considered a right wing victory at all.
Also, I’m seeing no reports of the equal protection clause being utilized in the judges questions.
Obamacare is being challenged because everyone needs to have “qualified” health care.
“Qualified” health care is defined by a series of explicitly feminist institutions, that will determine what is covered, and what is not. They are all to be run by “women’s experts”. What do you think that means? What do you think these fair, balanced, unbiased “women’s experts” are going to demand should be covered? When it becomes too expensive, what will they decide should NOT be covered? Equal protection, all the way:
Making me buy a product that only benefits you = feminist bigotry
Sort of like … family courts and criminal courts, after VAWA put “women’s experts” in charge of the Judical branch. That is next. Say “adieu” to your favorite little pet, because we will flush that down next.
Angwy? Cwy a wiver, bwild a bwidge, and get ower it 🙂
Terrific translation. I name you NewAntz. Or BetterAntz, as you wish.
At least not in the sense of your utterly bullshit sex discrimination shit.
Translation: I’M GOING TO DEFLECT THE FACT THAT I DIDN’T UNDERSTAND HOW THE COURT WORKED BY PUTTING RANDOM Ws IN A SENTENCE. ALSO, I HATE WOMEN AND I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND HEALTHCARE OR VAWA.
Okay, wow, your last comment is so very wrong about so very much of the law and legal terms, I don’t even know where to start.
OOOOoooooh.
VAWA, cry me a wiver, I get it!
As for all that other stuff, it doesn’t make any sense on Planet Earth.
This may be why MRAs avoid all forms of activism that don’t involve harassing individual people or whining on the internet — because they have absolutely no idea how the government (or the world in general) actually works.