So you may have heard vague rumors that there’s a new Mad Max film coming out. You also may have heard that it stars Charlize Theron as a shaven-headed postapocalyptical badass named Furiosa alongside Tom Hardy as Mr. Max.
Well, the manly men of the Manospshere are having none of it. On the always terrible Return of Kings, the most-trafficked blog in the Manosphere, Youtube bloviator Aaron Clarey issues a clarion call to his fellow right-thinking men, urging them to
Not only REFUSE to see the movie, but spread the word to as many men as possible. … Because if [men] sheepishly attend and Fury Road is a blockbuster, then you, me, and all the other men (and real women) in the world will never be able to see a real action movie ever again that doesn’t contain some damn political lecture or moray about feminism, SJW-ing, and socialism.
Er, “moray?”
As Clarey sees it, the central flaw in this film that he hasn’t seen is, well, it’s going to be starring Charlize Theron as a shaven-headed postapocalyptical badass named Furiosa. And that’s just not right, because everyone knows that women are just too damn womeny to be postapocalyptical badasses.
Even worse: in one of the trailers for the film “Charlize Theron’s character barked orders to Mad Max. Nobody barks orders to Mad Max.”
Clarey also reports, with a kind of growing horror, that none other than Eve Ensler, of Vagina Monologues fame, was brought in to consult on the film. (And trust me, Clarey’s discomfort with Ensler has nothing to do with her issues with intersectionality.)
Sure, Clarey acknowledges, Fury Road — at least on the surface — “looks like that action guy flick we’ve desperately been waiting for where it is one man with principles, standing against many with none.” But, he warns, despite not having actually seen even a minute of the actual film, nothing could be further from the truth!
[L]et us be clear. … This is the Trojan Horse feminists and Hollywood leftists will use to (vainly) insist on the trope women are equal to men in all things, including physique, strength, and logic. And this is the subterfuge they will use to blur the lines between masculinity and femininity, further ruining women for men, and men for women.
Lines between masculinity and femininity blurring! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes. The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!
Clarey worries that
men in America and around the world are going to be duped by explosions, fire tornadoes, and desert raiders into seeing what is guaranteed to be nothing more than feminist propaganda, while at the same time being insulted AND tricked into viewing a piece of American culture ruined and rewritten right in front of their very eyes.
You might think that someone this worried about the legacy of the original Mad Max might have noticed somewhere along the way that Mad Max is not actually a “piece of American culture” at all. It was an Australian film, filmed in Australia, directed by an Australian, and starring an American citizen who’d been living in Australia since the age of twelve.
I’m guessing that the director of Fury Road might have a somewhat more nuanced understanding of the original Mad Max than someone who doesn’t even know what country the movie was made in, especially given that the director of Fury Road, the director of the original Mad Max, the director of The Road Warrior and the director of Beyond Thunderdome are actually all the very same person.
But over on Return of Kings the fellas are as furious about Furiosa as Clarey is. In the top comment to Clarey’s piece, with several dozen upvotes, someone calling himself “truth” complains that the evil feminists who run Hollywood are ignoring the immutable truths of gender.
Hollywood is a garbage propoganda machine which spews out this feminist drivel filth into the minds of today’s young audience. Even though science has told us and proven, that men are physically stronger than women, it is nonetheless discarded by the forces driving this feminist nonsense.
There is a sick agenda at play here, and it only continues to get worse over time. First this, and now the upcoming “Terminator Genisys” which shows Sarah Connor in a more heroic and superior position to that of Kyle Reese, really makes me wonder how much further down the toilet society is going to go down, in it’s ridiculous attempts to try and reverse the traditional gender and biological roles.
Because “traditional” and “biological” roles always seem to be the exact same thing to these guys.
It is clear that the brainwashing of the masses will continue to go on with the promotion of these absurd movies in conjunction with the whole “girl power” themes that are present in these films. Furthermore, factor in the indoctrination of the liberal schooling and educational system, there is no doubt, that masculinity will be attacked from all sides in attempt to make the female gender more superior. …
I guess from the damage that I am seeing on a daily basis being inflicted by the feminist movement, there is really no turning back. Men will continue to opt out of society and by rejecting to watch these kind of movies, can help to further cement this narrative. And if ever, should the manginas and white knights reach that epiphany when they realise they are not perceived as a credible voice in this feminist driven gynocentric matriarchy that we live in, then even they will opt out of society.
Huh. And, let me guess, once the men all “opt out of society,” it’ll collapse in a giant heap and desperate women will turn to men for help? No wonder these guys are so angry about Fury Road; it challenges their favorite apocalyptic fantasy. Call it Mad Max: I Told You Bitches You’d Come Crawling Back to Me.
Women and feminists in general have without a doubt, proven that they are dysfunctional by nature and cannot be trusted with anything. And this movie helps to prove it.
FWIW, dude, the movie was directed by a man. It was written by men. And even though it’s got a lot more women in it than your typical action movie, most of the named actors in it are male. But apparently, to guys like Clarey and “truth,” it only takes a few drops of female blood to contaminate an entire action film.
Always maintain your masculinity.
And once again it’s the guys who think of themselves as the most macho who are the ones most anxious about their masculinity.
Truth is also horrified by one of the posters he’s seen for the film:
Even though the movie is called “Mad Max”, the poster clearly centres around Charlize Theron, while Tom Hardy looks like some ordinary guy in the background.
A woman’s face … in front of a man’s face! Can masculinity survive this terrible assault?
Slashfund complains that in the poster it “looks like he is wearing a muzzle like her bitch.”
Well, not really. Anyone who’s seen the original Max Max and its first two sequels may remember that a lot of the characters wore weird headgear and creepy masks; this was intended to make them look scary and, you know, postapocalyptic. Max’s new mask is no different.
Clark Kent whines
Where I can’t stand these female characters in kickass movies is when it is so damn obvious that they are forcing the female character in just to appeal to the blue-pill masses. The whole point of Mad Max is that he is the most hardened self-respecting man in the post-apocalyptic world. He lived through the decline, and thus carries all the grief of having been strong enough to see what the world has become.
To turn Mad Max upside down and make it into a feminist flick is horribly telling of our times. Rather than creating new films to depict the world from a women’s perspective, we take the great myths of men and boys and rewrite them to make women happy.
What? Mad Max is a “great myth of men and boys” now? It’s a movie made in 1979, not a tale told around the campfire by our ancient ancestors. And don’t any of you Return of Kingers remember Beyond Thunderdome, the second Mad Max sequel, released six years after the original? You know, the one co-starring Tina Turner, stomping around like a badass as the ruthless ruler of Bartertown?
Like it or not, fellas, but badass women are part of Mad Max canon.
MajorStyles, for his part, suggests that the film may be part of a sinister plot to con men into liking women with (gasp!) short hair — a major Manosphere bugaboo.
And what’s the end game of all this horse shit? That Alpha men will start finding bald, androgyonous women with anger issues attractive? Yeah, when pigs fly…
Again, another fail on the part of Team Feminism. As it has been noted many times, they do not get to order men what to be attracted to. Erections cannot be legislated. Only a man of supreme thirst would find this angynous thing attractive.
And the women who choose to impersonate Theron’s look in this movie will always be relagated to the same position – bridesmaid, cat lady, or beta male abuser.
TS77RP1, meanwhile, wants his fellow men to think of the children. And what he thinks about the children — specifically, those of the female persuasion — is genuinely horrifying.
Seriously: if you’re having a decent day so far, or, hell, a crappy one — basically, if you’re a having any sort of day so far, you may want to skip the rest of this post. No joke.
.
.
Ok, if you’re still with me, here we go:
The only way back is to begin punishing ambition in our daughters and in all female children. They need to be physically and psychologically disciplined to be servile and deferential and they unfortunately need to have it beaten into them that they should NEVER trust their own judgement and always seek guidance and permission of their male headships.
Please tell me this monster doesn’t have a daughter.
My daughter would be turned out with nothing but a shirt on her back if she so much as looked at a college website or played with her brother’s educational toys.
Aw, fuck.
She would be belted to the point of being unable to sit if she exhibited confidence in decision making.
Fucking hell. A proud abuser.
I don’t want my wife to step foot out of the house unless her every dime and minute spent can be accounted for and executed in conjuncture with my approval. My daughter will exude obedience and timidity for whoever her future husband is and it’s imperative that all Christian Men demand nothing less within their own homes. Playtime for feminazis and the left is over. This is our world and our heritage to protect. Let the cultural war begin!
No words.
In a followup comment, he assures one skeptic that his wife and daughter are indeed real.
I do in fact implement this in my own home and practice what I preach vehemently. I have a daughter and sons and they are being raised to know that they are unequivocally different and 100% not equal. My wife is from a highly devout family and she was cowed long ago into obedience by her powerful, alpha father. I kinda won the life lottery >:^)
I can only hope that he’s bullshitting in an attempt to impress the Return of Kings regulars.
But impress them he does, winning upvotes and an awestruck comment by englishbob:
Wow! Its like you have a mini Saudi Arabia right in your home!
Apparently hatred of women trumps hatred of Muslims on Return of Kings.
I have no idea if Mad Max: Fury Road is actually going to be a good film. But I hope it does well, very well, if for no other reason than to spite these assholes.
If watching a movie is a threat to your masculinity, then your masculinity is a 7 year old girl named Susan.
Policy of Madness, no one is evading. You question has absolutely nothing to do with the comments I’ve made thus far. I do believe that you are using big words and faux intellectualism to disguise the fact that you are trying to move me towards a topic unrelated to my commentaries. Just sayin’.
Al, answer the dang question. You said that you didn’t want politics to degrade an art form; Policy of Madness is asking why the status quo in that art form is not political.
Critical analysis of film, literature and folklore has been a hobby of mine for most of my life. I was on a team that won first place in a film festival. How many awards have you won for films you helped create? (My daughter acted in it. It was a hoot.) I’d do it again in a second. We were also extras in a shitty horror film, just for the giggles. I’ve been a judge at another film fest. I might do it again this year.
I bet you’d have to Google a list of directors to tell me who your favorites are and why. Do you even know who Sam Peckinpah is Mr. Masuline Cinema? Do you know why Hitchcock was such an innovator? Can you tell me who Kurosawa is or name on of his films without Googleing? Can you explain the imagery in Kubrick films?
Did you know that masculine and feminine trends in film are not what you think they are by any stretch of the imagination? Clearly you do not. You do not know what the words you are using mean.
Sit your ignorant ass down.
I would disagree, but I won’t argue. Indulge me: answer it anyway, even though it’s off-topic. I’m deliberately not using big words at you … unless the word “political” is too many syllables for you, in which case there’s nothing I can do for you.
You’ve now evaded the question three times, and I am asking a fourth time for you to give me an an answer. Maybe you don’t have an answer. Maybe you haven’t thought this through. You know, in a philosophical debate, “I need to put some more thought into that,” is always an honorable answer.
I hate that the film has become politicized as it was probably one of the maybe two films at the most I might attend in a year. Guess I’ve graduated from the 18 to 36 coveted demographic as most film previews don’t move me. Rather read a book. The Fury Road trailers, however, piqued my interest immediately. I was really looking foward to it until rumblings of feminist undertones were being spread. I brushed that off at first like it’s the typical rants of weirdo misogynist types you’ll find online. After reading that the director received consultation from a feminist, however, and reading that this same consultant is calling it a feminist film, I’m gonna pass on this one.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Gamergater, MRA, misogynist etc.. Just a regular dude who occasionally might check out a film to pass the time. So to hear about, read about, and verify there’s a feminist agenda with this film was admittedly disappointing. I will say, it’s kinda bizarre how people live vicariously through films. As a neutral observer of the gender wars, it’s comical and entertaining to see feminists seek a weird validation with a movie like Mad Max while the online bro world plans on boycotting as they hilariously moan about the feminists ruining everything. Meanwhile the rest of us in the real world……….just kidding as I don’t want to come off condescending. Go see the movie, have fun.
@ Lea
“You enjoyed ‘Roshomon'”
“That’s not how I remember it”
Best Simpsons line ever.
Did you know when stupid people try to write like they think smart people do, it shows.
Also, you misspelled “verisimilitude”.
If you think the only thing that makes a movie about a post apocalyptic future where killers stalk the roads screaming “I am the Nightrider!” etc. is that a woman is a badass in it, you’re a fucking dipshit.
…and I probably loved Mad Max before you were born. So, my icky girl cooties have been all over your macho films for decades, fake film buff boy.
AlFromBayShore–Again, you’re using words improperly. I don’t know what you think it means, but “aesthetic” means the following: “concerned with beauty or the appreciation of beauty.
“the pictures give great aesthetic pleasure”
giving or designed to give pleasure through beauty; of pleasing appearance.
synonyms: artistic, tasteful, in good taste; More
noun
noun: aesthetic; plural noun: aesthetics; noun: esthetic; plural noun: esthetics
1.
a set of principles underlying and guiding the work of a particular artist or artistic movement.
“the Cubist aesthetic””
PS Women might see “gender roles” and “norms” differently than men some of the time, but that doesn’t mean we don’t understand. You don’t need to lecture us on what they are or how we “should” understand them. In fact, walk away, little one.
[quote]and I probably loved Mad Max before you were born. So, my icky girl cooties have been all over your macho films for decades, fake film buff boy.[/quote]
As did I. I fell in love with Thunderdome in roughly 1984 and watched it so many times I could recite along with Tina Turner.
So, I was trying to come up with a username that evoked more old trolls and in-jokes than Al’s, and now I’m tempted to rename myself Scented Fucking Hard Chairs. Hmm.
Policy, I haven’t evaded “jack”. I made a comment about clumsy insertions of feminine identity into films where masculine identity is central to such films. I also said that gender differences do manifest as aesthetic preferences. This is a fact. Clumsy insertions often result from attempts to prioritize ideology and politics over aesthetics. This is not always the case but rare is the occasion when artforms deliberately subordinated to politics and ideology succeed. Alice Walker successfully did this in her adaptation of Boccacio in “The Color Purple”. People remember that story. As a contrast, few read Jean Anouilh’s adaptation of that story by Sophocles. That’s all I can say right now because I am restricting myself to the content of my commentary.
@AlFromBayShore
Your teal dear here was to deflect the comments to a conversation none of us were having before; and then you took about three people’s statements, corrections and examples and stated:
When you were stating that guys have guy movies, girls have girls movies and ne’er the two shall meet because females and males are different and cooties are gross.
You made this baiting statement obviously to make it so we would reply “similarly” to social conservatives. But, you know, there were no such replies. And the fact that you posted the response so quick leads me to believe you didn’t even read or consider what we wrote and you just had this response prewritten after a certain number of posts responded considering that no one was being as bad as you allude to.
So, what has played out here is you stating something, we responding to it with relative level headedness, and you suddenly accusing us to being as bad as social conservatives even though your first post was actually social conservative in nature.
http://i.giphy.com/145kUIynUwddHa.gif
Yoooou didn’t answer why agency for one sex is political and one is not. Nor did you fully acknowledge that you’ve been consistently misusing the word aesthetics. Come at me, darlin’, I’ve done graduate level work in script analysis and have been watching and analyzing film since the 80s.
Oh wow, looks like we’ve got a live one. *fetches popcorn* In all seriousness, though, I find it infinitely telling that AIfromwherever goes from trying to be ‘reasonable’ (well women just shouldn’t be in masculine movies, dontcha know), to attacking us for our ‘ideology’, to dodging PoM’s questions.
And while we’re talking face SciFi and Fantasy ladies, I adore Lady Eboshi, Agent Scully, Motoko Kusanagi, Ripley (yes she’s been mentioned before, but she’s so awesome I can’t not mention her), Uhura, and the Biologist from the Southern Reach book trilogy, and that’s just the extremely short list.
I hope nobody clues that guy in on this obscure film series called Alien. In one installment, the lead even has a shaved head (gasp!), and she kicks a lot of ass. She even takes over a bunch of manly marines in part 2!
Oh, I’m tempted now, too. I could be Vile Penguin Whore Drinking Vitamin Water.
Testing for great justice.
Banana Jackie, it’s true. You guys are upset at an ROK article where the author is pensive about a “guy film” that may have a clumsy insertion of a female characterization that is sourced by a political agenda. He’s right in his feelings. This is about preference for a particular film genre. Could you imagine Jackson Latcherie supplanting the females in Steel Magnolias as the source of M’Lynn’s solace. I’d see that as outrageous. A corrupting influence in the film akin to casting Diana Ross as Dorothy in “The Wiz” over Stephanie Mills. Aesthetics are about personal preference and, whether you like it or not, those preferences are also guided by gender differences. This is the reason why few men read Austen but will read Richard Wright or Jack London. Just sayin’.
Alan,
I’ve just started to go through my list of films I need to see this summer. I’ve never seen a Fellini film. I never watched Kung Fu movies that didn’t have Bruce Lee in them and I have not seen those in years. I want to rewatch The Good the Bad and the Ugly too just to see if it is as good as I remember from childhood. My Netflix list is full of exploitation and cheap castle horror films right now, though. I have to tear through some of those first. Good times. 🙂
I fondly remember the summer Hubby and I watched Nosferatu, Freaks, Whatever Happened to Baby Jane, Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe and Dr. Strangelove in my first apartment. It was the best thing about that summer. I love that film can transport you like that. A good film pulls you out of your life for a while and puts you in another where you are merely an observer. It’s like a hiatus from drudgery that poor people can afford. What a wonderful thing.
You also said this:
So, to quote PoM:
Answer the question. Or at least don’t pretend to fail to see how a direct response to your own words is relevent.
Again, I ask you: why is the “active men, women as prizes” framework not a political message? The “content” of your “commentary” is that inserting women as active agents constitutes politics. Why is inserting men as active agents not?
It’s not like it’s uncommon for male characters to be shoehorned into the “active agent” role in supremely awkward and clumsy ways. Why does that not constitute politic messaging? Why is it only political messaging when the active agents are women?
Note that I don’t think there’s anything awkward or clumsy about the Theron character – as others have pointed out, the Mad Max franchise has been full of badass women from word one. You dismiss Theron’s character as political messaging without having even seen the movie, but, say, the Gyro Captain was A-OK and not political in the slightest.
The more times you slither away from answering this question, the more certain I am that you don’t have an answer. Again, admitting that you need to put more thought into this is always an acceptable response.
OMG, Alan. I think it does. 😀
Next question: Why are women in “men’s movies” inserted artificially and to be eradicated? Is the opposite also true? Should men never be in “women’s movies?” Where is the line drawn? Is “Stuff you like” instantly “man stuff” and “Stuff you don’t like” “woman stuff?” Why do we need such firm and fast lines drawn? You can like whatever stuff you want, so can I. Try to get over this “Boy stuff/girl stuff” nonsense. It’s infantile and foolish. Bottom line: Women get to be at the table. Period.
*sigh* I see this troll is of the spew-a-bunch-of-crap-and-then-pretend-they-only-said-something-extremely-specific variety.