Antifeminist douchenozzles regularly mock feminists for caring about so-called “first world problems” like “manspreading” and rape and systematic gender discrimination. Unlike those trivia-obsessed feminists, those who’ve taken the Red Pill only concern themselves with momentous questions, like the age of a certain fictional spy dude’s onscreen paramour.
On the Red Pill subreddit, the regulars are up in arms over the news that in the upcoming James Bond film Spectre, the main “Bond Girl” will be a woman more or less Bond’s own age, rather than half of it: current Bond Boy Daniel Craig, 47, will be playing opposite 50-year-old hag lady Monica Bellucci.
I know, right?
In a post with 145 upvotes and 178 comments so far, Bea_OProblem reports sadly that Bond — James Bond — will be “paired with [a] post-wall woman,” the hideous uggo Belluci.
Movie executives have got the memo that pandering to alimony laden post-wall consumers is a lucrative cash cow. In this distinctly blue pill universe, the mysterious and suave international spy wants no one other than a 51 year old woman. Because apparently a mature woman is more alluring than a dozen young pert sluts.
Apparently Bea was so horrified by the news that he added a year to Belucci’s age; Google says she’s 50.
Adding insult to injury, Craig told Esquire magazine that he hopes his Bond won’t be “as sexist and misogynistic” as his predecessors in the role. “The world has changed,” he said.
Red Pillers are not taking the news well. After taking a glance at the picture above, one Red Piller reacted as though he’d seen the dead come to life:
Some thought that Bellucci, only three years Craig’s senior, looked less like his love interest than his mom.
![tillybb 9 points 1 day ago Funny how Daniel looks objectively loads better/healthier/younger when its women who use makeup & spend their days from puberty till the grave trying to look as good as possible. permalinksaveparentreportgive gold [–]Epicureanist 4 points 1 day ago Smoke and mirrors. Castles made of sand. That's all they are. permalinksaveparentreportgive gold [–]nemaxofredpill 5 points 21 hours ago Damn. I thought she looked good until you put her next to Daniel Craig. She looks old enough to be his mom. permalinksaveparentreportgive gold [–]redundanteater 3 points 1 day ago Bond might fuck her in order to get something more valuable (e.g. microfilm, launch codes, introduction to others, plausible cover, etc.), but she can't be a love interest.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/morebond.png?resize=456%2C482&ssl=1)
Others railed at the manginas who enabled this horrible thing to happen:
To be sure, a few brave souls acknowledged that Ms. Bellucci might not be the ugliest old lady they’d ever seen, but they were still having none of it.
In the real world, for what it’s worth, Daniel Craig is married to 45-year-old actress Rachel Weisz. Because, in the real world, not all men are obsessed with “bedding” women young enough to be their daughters.
Many of the assembled Red Pillers tried to convince their comrades that they personally Would Not Bang Ms. Bellucci, except perhaps in conditions of poor lighting.
![cover20 6 points 1 day ago I have lots of respect for her, OK. But that doesn't mean I would want to fuck her. One doesn't fuck a woman out of respect for her, any more than a woman fucks a man because he supplicates to her. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive gold [–]McLarenX 2 points 1 day ago Of course. But if I had grapefruit balls and she was laying there naked in front of me in dim enough lighting, id hit it.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/grapefruit.png?resize=523%2C214&ssl=1)
Regardless of their personal answer to the WB question, almost all agreed that this was pretty much the end of the world.
I don’t know about you, but Mila Kunis as Rambo sounds kind of awesome to me.
3. Secretaries. PAs/admins/secretaries used to be high status jobs, when working as an assistant to someone meant you were being groomed to take over their work. I forget the exact timeline, but now obviously these jobs are considered two different career tracks. I can remember decades ago women debating the wisdom of taking an admin job in a tech/architecture/engineering firm just to get into the business–some people recommended it, while others pointed out that once you’re on the admin track, no matter what kind of office and no matter how good you are at STEM work, you’ll never get off it. I suspect that taking an admin job to get into a career you want might work for men, but not for women.
4. Teaching. Schools, all grades, used to be men teaching men–but once women started teaching it became a low-status occupation.
5. Humanities. Women were never suited for the high-level thought involved in studying humanities, arts and classics…until women started doing it; now these disciplines are considered wimpy and girly and easy compared to hard sciences. You can even see this effect within the sciences themselves, in the inverse correlation between the percentage of women in a scientific discipline and its status and perceived difficulty.
Is it? I know that David Morrell, who wrote the Rambo books that the movies are based on, named his character on impulse after a variety of apples his wife brought home from the supermarket one day.
That’s not to say that you’re wrong, of course…Rambo is an actual surname as well, and may have its origins there.
Also, there was an actor in the ’80s named Dack Rambo, who existed before the Stallone movies came out. Damned if I can remember where I saw him (on some forgettable TV series, probably), but I do remember that name.
I do love how the antifeminist types always accuse anyone who criticizes certain aspects of art of “not being real fans”, i.e. “the types who don’t watch Bond movies anyway”.
Surely they realize that the people who chose to put Bellucci in this Bond movie are the same people who make Bond movies, right?
It seems like men are manly menning themselves out of a lot of careers. Not even every kind of STEM is masculine enough anymore. “Easy” sciences like biology are for women now. Physics is the truly manly science. I’ve seen this line of thinking in comment sections and forums many times. It’s a dynamic that’s a very prominent part of Big Bang Theory which is funny because outraged white male nerds like to complain that it’s “nerd minstrelry” and doesn’t represent that at all. But apparently the writers have nailed it with that bit of manly STEMlogic assholishness.
Speaking as a physicist, I fucking love Big Bang Theory and so does every other physicist I know. Who are these weirdos who claim that it’s not representive?
That’s an interesting perspective, that manly manning can end up reducing opportunities for men. On the other hand, one place that leads is to lots of places in sub-Saharan Africa where the only proper work for manly men is paid employment, and when that’s not available the manly men sit under a tree and drink homemade beer while the women do everything else to keep everyone alive. So technically that attitude does reduce opportunities for men, but practically it seems to lead to women doing all the work.
I’d like to like Big Bang Theory (not a physicist, but from Silicon Valley so all my friends were like that), but it’s a drag that the women in it are so one-dimensional.
@EJ (TOO)
I’m not a physicist either, but Sheldon is so obviously an autistic caricature that it’s painful to watch. And a good chunk of the “comedy” seems to come from “oh that’s Sheldon, being non-neurotypical (not that we’d admit it, because then we might have to treat him with some tiny inch of compassion) and WEIRD, ha ha.”
Dude, they said that George Miller “Doesn’t understand” Mad Max. Even though he invented Mad Max. The only thing they “Realise” (behold, the most sarcastic quotation marks in human history) is “GIRLS BAD MEN GOOD.”
@guest, #andiexist:
Both fair points and as I’m neither female nor on the spectrum, I’m the wrong person to field them.
To narrow my point then: I feel that Big Bang Theory accurately represents the behaviour, feelings and frustrations of many scientists, and does so in a way which is sympathetic and relatable. Based on discussions with other science folks about it, I do not feel that I am alone in this opinion either. As such, I feel it’s unfair to accuse it of being nerd minstrelry.
Long time reader, first time posting just to say that I’m a physicist and I can’t stand TBBT.
Don’t get me wrong, some jokes are nice and fun but most of what’s scripted seems to .make fun of rather have fun with the guys. I’m all for make fun of myself now and then but as for being a punch bag , I pass.
The constant abuse of Sheldon’s antics for cheap gag lines meanwhile inserting fake laughs at ‘I’m not insane, my mother had me tested’ has also put me on the edge ,andiexist explained it perfectly why.
And, finally,the characters are so unidimensional! I hate it!You can easily see the girls as walking tropes but in reality all of them are. I know I shouldn’t expect much character growth in comedies, but really? SpoilersThe best moment , to me at least, was when Howard abdicate his relationships with his imaginary girlfriends in favour of a real one.
Call me greedy but I want more.
I tried to get back to it when they created Amy and Bernadette started being more present, but after a while I gave up.
Oh no! What are they going to do now that he’s a mangina and white knight?!!! I honestly think she’s way more attractive than him, which I know is beside the point, I just don’t see what these red pill turds are seeing. The character James Bond has never been the least bit appealing to me. What makes them think a beautiful 25 year old starlet would be his match?
Speaking as a chemist, I hate the Big Bang Theory and doubt that there has ever been a moment on the show that would strike me as sympathetic or relatable, and most of my scientist friends agree. (Most of the people I know IRL who like that show are non-scientists.) I think it is precisely nerd minstrelry.
Also aggressively unfunny.
20years2day: Welcome! Have a welcome package.
On the subject of Big Bang Theory: I tried watching it when it first came out, because I liked the idea of a sitcom about science instead of marriage, but it’s so fucking ableist I just couldn’t get past a few episodes. I’m with Andi and 20Years; whether or not it’s nerd minstrelry, it’s definitely autism minstrelry.
(Probably doesn’t help that I have to put up with my sister and her “But it has [ableist slurs for autistic people] in it! [slurs] like you! You should love it!” -_-)
Re: the comments about Idris Elba, I’d certainly be willing to buy Elba as Bond though the “too street” comments were made by someone saying they’d like Adrian Lester, so I’m not sure that it was racism.
I hesitate to go into things regarding age because I admit that I don’t have mainstream beliefs compared to either this board or outside this board (albeit in completely different directions). However, I will say this, generally speaking, while I’m somewhat of an ageist anything that applies to women and attractiveness also applies to men (and for the same reasons: Effects of gravity and cumulative stress of life, the later of which ages you).
I’m not defending BBT, but the term nerd minstrelry rubs me the wrong way. Because the people who use it, use it in a way to equate the show’s portrayal of nerds with racism. It’s part of that subset of white male nerds who act like nerd is an systematically oppressed class mostly in order to cultivate that persecution complex that allows them to get away with being racist and sexist and keeping people who aren’t them out of nerd spaces.
I don’t have a source for this, but the way I heard it, secretaries were a job women took over in the Civil War when there were labor shortages, similar to the way women took over manufacturing during WWII.
Sorry, you’re right.
@WWTH
Yeah, I usually stay away from the term myself for the same reasons (hence “Whether or not”), although I do feel comfortable calling it “Autism minstrelry” since it is equivalent.
To get back to the whether Bond should reflect the Bond of the original books: Many people working on the films and post-Fleming book series have given a nod to James Bond being not a single person but a code name for all 007 agents.
The irony of people who name their movement after the metaphor for choice in the Matrix movies turning up their noses at the actress who played Persephone in those movies would make my eyes roll so hard people could hear them in the next room if it weren’t for my experience that MRAs wouldn’t understand irony, even when it bites them in the butt. Personally, I’m glad Monica Bellucci is in this film. As I wrote last December, she’s someone who should have been in a Bond film already. It’s about time she finally appears in one.
As for female choices for Indiana Jones, I wrote about a rumor MTV floated four years ago about Jennifer Lawrence being the next to play the role. Too bad that’s not likely to happen. I’d bet on Chris Pratt instead.
I think Natalie Dormer would be a great female Indiana Jones.
@ Noadi
The ‘James Bond is a Codename’ theory, thus explaining why he looks different from film to fil (and opening the way for a female Bond) took a bit of a hit in Skyfall as you can see the grave of Bond’s parents.
So we’re left with the only alternative possibility; he’s a Time Lord.
skjosh sez this:
In the real, real world, sk–may I call you sk? I feel like I know you–Bond girl Ursula Andress is 79 years old. She has a 35-year-old son with well-known actor Harry Hamlin, who is 15 years her junior.