So the other night I watched Lucy, a highly entertaining movie with an incredibly silly premise: Scarlett Johansson develops superpowers after a drug enables her to use more than the standard 10% of her brain. (Yes, I know, and the film’s director knows, that the idea we use only 10% of our brains is a myth. And that being super smart wouldn’t give you power over the laws of physics.)
Anyway, after watching the film I took a peek at the IMDb message boards to see if anyone had a way to explain one particularly baffling plot point. Someone did. But I also encountered this charming fellow, who started two separate topics in order to express his extreme displeasure that the main character was … a woman:
Bear in mind that this is a science fiction film. In it, Lucy does many things that would be impossible for any human being to do, regardless of gender: she [SPOILER ALERT] causes a dozen men to collapse on the ground with a wave of her hand; she learns a language by overhearing three conversations on the street; she travels through time and meets the original prehistoric Lucy; she grows an extra hand just for the hell of it; and, oh yeah, she turns herself into a tiny computer with a USB plug.
Movie heroes and superheroes, most of them male, do impossible things in action movies all of the time. But somehow I never see any of these guys complaining that Superman can fly or lift cars off the ground or turn an entire lake into ice with his breath.
Even those movie heroes who don’t have superpowers regularly do things that would be impossible for any real human being to do. I mean, have you seen the Crank movies? Or, I dunno, Rambo? Or any of the other gazillion action movies out there with male stars?
Somehow Mr. Comment-Here — and all the other guys who put forward this complaint — have no trouble suspending their disbelief when it comes to male characters doing impossible things. But the idea that a mere “girl” could win a fight with a guy — something that isn’t impossible in real life — breaks their brains.
When another commenter responded to Mr. Comment-Here with a snarky putdown, he offered this odd retort
Looking back through Comment-Here’s previous contributions to the IMDb message boards, I discovered another, er, injustice he seems to care about a lot. In the forum devoted to the 1997 version of Lolita, he wrote:
Evidently the Men’s Rights movement is leaking. .
samantha | March 2, 2015 at 12:05 am
Easy. Male is the default. And if men have anything less than everything, that is misandry. Because if women get anything, anything at all, it takes away from their whole, no matter how infinite whatever resource women are getting is, and thus is inherently sexist against men.
Men are supposed to be strong and brave, and we wimmens are meant to be the prize for that behavior. Either that, or they are supposed to be able to cajole or physically force us to bow to their whims.
That is their ideal, that is the narrative they’ve grown up on, and to challenge that terrifies them to no end, because they know they couldn’t handle being on the receiving end of what women have to deal with.
Because being a woman is the ultimate insult.
@Ellesar – FYI, Doris Day is still alive! Yes, she is, and she is 92 and STILL SINGING!!!!! I kid you not, the woman is amazing. I heard some of her newest stuff about a year or so ago and she sounded terrific. As a singer myself, I can only hope that I sound half as good if I get to be her age!
I would just like to remind everyone that science fiction was invented by a woman. Mary Shelley. The whole genre was misandry from the start so why start objecting to women in the genre now?
@Paradoxicalintention – Really? Well, I have a little bitty surprise for the guyz. I ain’t NO manz prize. And I am honored to be a member of the female gender. I would not be a man for all the money in the world. I find being a woman challenging, creative, dynamic and multi-dimensional. I find few men as interesting as the women I know.
Male is the default? You can see it in language. And I think that women should grab all the life and all the gusto that we can. How many times have women eaten a little salad when out on a date, while the guy eats a steak with all the sides and trimmings? For the love of god, we are not even supposed to EAT!!!!!!! GAH!!!!!
Maybe all the women should have a meeting and take back our world…Oooooh, would that not make them shake in their shorts!
@samantha I read an article one time that was titled, “Women can do masculine, but men can’t do feminine”. The author looked at how many women there were at men’s sporting events, vs. men at women’s events, as well as a few other examples of women comfortably existing in “male” spaces, with men refusing to go within ten feet of “female” spaces (chick flicks, the fabric store, etc.). So in his argument, to be inclusive, you really have to err on the side of catering to men, because women can deal with it.
And of course, there was not a crumb of critical examination of the culture that produces this disparity. It was all chalked up to gendered “hard-wiring”. Biotroofs and all that.
It was pretty bizarre to see it that plainly and unabashedly claimed.
Alright, I have one question. Why are these guys so obsessed with having sex with young girls?
“But no one moans about Bruce Willis, Tom Cruise, Jason Statham et al being able to do feats of strength on par with Hercules!”
I think roughly half the Internet is dedicated to such conversations. But, yea. Gender never comes into the equation.
Leisha Young said: “Alright, I have one question. Why are these guys so obsessed with having sex with young girls?”
Because they’re terrified and repelled by the idea of female power. Adult women at least have the power of adulthood; girls have less experience, knowledge, money and confidence. They’re female, but they’re not women. That’s the ideal for these toads.
You know how they say pedophiles are attracted to children because they’re threatened by adult women? It’s that, with an extra helping of politics.
(Plus since the internet they’re all encouraging each other; try this article, if you’ve got a strong stomach for child abuse and horrible creeps: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/21/technology/21pedo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0. There’s a whole subculture of people telling each other that wanting to rape children makes them an oppressed minority.)
(Sorry about the quote marks, I forgot how to do blockquote.}
There’s certainly going to be valid reasons to criticise the film, but this guy is just ridiculous.
Often when people criticise sci-fi or fantasy films for not being realistic or for being historically inaccurate they’re really arguing from the point of personal preference/prejudice rather than actual realism. “Women are victimised by ghosts all the time, no way they’d be ghostbusters!” “There were no black people in medieval europe! Just let me enjoy my dragonriding wizards without your PC rubbish” etc
And that last bit makes him sound personally offended he can’t have sex with children, like it’s some double standard that deprives him of rights. Creepy.
I’m reminded of people complaining about the warrior nuns in Shogun 2: Total War. When people complain about stuff like that it’s quite frankly pathetic and annoying.
Speaking of that kind of thing… I highly recommend these articles. They are very good.
http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2013/05/we-have-always-fought-challenging-the-women-cattle-and-slaves-narrative-by-kameron-hurley/
https://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/psa-your-default-narrative-settings-are-not-apolitical/
Oh, and hiyas everybody. This is my first time posting here.
@LaurelG, that is a thing of beauty. You’ve pretty much covered all the bases.
Just wanted to say that when Mr.Estraven and I first moved to a house with a spare bedroom, a friend unexpectedly wanted to stay the night, so I called Mr. E and asked him to stop at a linens store on his way home and bring bedding (we had just outfitted the room with a bed but had no sheets etc.). So he did, but this simple act amazed several of my friends who said their husbands would never do it for fear of being thought gay! Apparently linen stores are strictly female and gay male territory. Who knew?
^So, I assume that no (straight) men sleep with sheets on their bed? Man, no wonder why they’re so obsessed with sleeping with women! I would be too, if doing that would let me sleep on something other than a depressing scratchy bare mattress.
Oh, that’s precious.
A world populated by dwarves, elves, and horned giants that’s beset by rifts between the spirit world and the physical world that are pouring out demons and spirits…and CHICKS CAN’T LONGSOWRD!!1! is their complaint.
Totally legit.
[Thanks to those who recommended Dragon Age, by the way. I picked it up when it was on sale on the PS Store and (after a brutal couple of weeks) I spent a scandalous portion of yesterday playing while the husband napped and ice coated the mid-Atlantic.]
@LaurelG Great list!
I love the evo-psych contradictions…
1. Men’s “natural” behavior (sleeping around, mating with 13 year olds) is good and shouldn’t be messed with. Women’s “natural” behavior (hypergamy) is bad and needs to change.
2. On the other hand, women need to be taught, tricked, led, shamed, and bullied into their “natural” behavior (being dominated, serving men, being a virgin). Use force if necessary.
3. Men are the logical gender. Because emotions don’t come naturally to them, their emotions are more meaningful and precious and noble and lofty and real than women’s. Only men are capable of love. Whereas…
4. …Women are the emotional gender. Because of that, their logic is silly and inconsequential.
5. The gender dynamics of the savannah resembled 1950s America.
6. Stone Age men desired skinny 17-year-old blondes.
7. Evolutionarily, women are prudish and not that interested in sex. So they need to be wrapped head to toe in chadors, burned as witches, mercilessly slut-shamed, and tightly controlled.
8. Evolutionarily, men are horny and incapable of controlling themselves. So women need to be wrapped head to toe in chadors, burned as witches, mercilessly slut-shamed, and tightly controlled.
9. Civilization was built exclusively by men. Everyone bow before its awesomeness! But it has absolutely no power to override biology.
10. Men have an imperative to create genetic diversity by spreading their seed far and wide. But don’t you ladies try the same thing. When women do that, it’s bad.
The lists can all be summed up as:
FEMALES BAD!
MEN GOOD!
DUHHAARRHHH!
@Buttercup Q. Skullpants:
It seems like this gets trotted out, no matter what you put inside the parentheses. So you get things like:
– Men’s “natural” behavior is to not talk much. Women’s “natural” behavior is to talk a lot. So women, let your man retire to his man-cave in peace, no matter what, because he doesn’t want to talk. It doesn’t matter that you do want to talk.
– Men’s “natural” behavior is to have no emotional intelligence of any kind. Women’s “natural” behavior is to be emotional all over the place all the time. So women, don’t be offended when your man fails to provide emotional support for you, or gets angry at you because he can’t fix it, and what do you expect him to do. Leave him alone and let him do his thing.
– Men are “naturally” drawn to demonstrate their value through work outside the home. Women are “naturally” drawn to stay home and raise babies. It doesn’t matter, women, if you say that you really, truly, honestly want to maintain a “real” career after having kids, you’re just not in touch with what you really want. You are obligated to work very hard at convincing yourself you want to give up all non-mother-centric aspirations. What? You think your husband could stay home? Don’t be silly. Don’t you know he is hard wired to have a “real” job? And also, don’t make him change diapers; he thinks it’s really gross.
– Men’s “natural” behavior is to be blunt (some would say rude) when communicating. Women’s “natural” behavior is to be super duper sensitive about everything. So women, stop being so sensitive about your husband being rude; it’s just who he is.
etc. etc. etc.
The Mars/Venus dichotomy always ends up with, “Women, you need to change or at least get used to it,” and “Men—sheesh, ladies, amirite? Just try not to be fazed by how upset she gets and keep on with your bad self.”
And much more concisely ninja’d by proxieme. 😀
@zoon echon logon,
I couldn’t find the tumblr I originally saw such a list on, but it’s been re-blogged here:
http://fiery-femme.tumblr.com/post/83772745208/11-signs-youre-a-mens-rights-activist
This MRAsshat clearly doesn’t understand what Age of Consent laws actually mean.
It *is* technically illegal for anyone under the age of consent to have sex, even with someone of the same age… although there is some leeway in the UK for consensual sex between minors who are similar in age, if I remember rightly.
But the law is mostly just a tool in determining the outcome of court cases – there has to be a prosecution first. Where Romeo & Juliet laws apply, it’s pretty rare as far as I know.
Where’s our resident UK lawyer? Alan! Can you elaborate on this? 🙂
Totally understand this guy. I can’t get into any movie unless the protagonist is a 30 year old white, straight, cis man who shares at least 2 of my 4 initials. Also, he needs to have a chocolate addiction and a deep hatred for seafood. Oh, and if he ever wears a button down shirt at home, I can’t watch the damn thing.
Wasn’t one of the MGTOW “super-effective strategies to put uppity wimmenz in their place” to go on IMDB and give “chick flicks” low ratings and bad reviews?
The IMDB is full of charmers like this. You should have seen the boards for Battlestar Galactica (the remake) during its run. Or any boards for BSG. Katee Sackhoff copped so much disgusting vitriol from sexist fanboys simply for playing a part (Starbuck) which had been a male in the original series. Even the original Starbuck, Dirk Benedict (who’d previously appeared in a promo vid with Sackhoff when the show first launched) wrote an essay decrying how making Starbuck a woman was emblematic of feminism ruining manhood, or something. Too bad for the whiners that Katee was brilliant in the role, and arguably her Starbuck is now the definitive one.
“All the girls are belong to MEEEEEEEE! Because grown men > boys!”
Hooboy, I think this is that guy from the AVFMorons conference. The one with the “Free Humbert Humbert” (sorry, I forget the actual guy’s name) sign. The one who thinks it’s “natural” for underage girls to want to sleep with older men, and that those men are justified in becoming their sexual “mentors”.
‘Scuse me while I go throw up my breakfast.
It’s a stupid film, and would still be stupid if a man was the main character. Nothing could save it from being utterly idiotic.
@LaurelG,
http://media.giphy.com/media/122eu1lNe6psNq/giphy.gif
Wrapping my head around this:
Women shouldn’t be able to see themselves portrayed as heroins because we’re so weak and it is OK for men to rape us when we’re children.
Women can’t have action movies about them because that’s not fair to men.
The law shouldn’t prevent men from raping underage girls because that is unfair to men.
I want to see this guy in the ring with a female Jiu Jitsu competitors.