Argh! Welcome. Please don’t regret it. This deserves my time and reply. I am somewhat overextended in this thread at the moment. I don’t want to ignore, but I don’t think I am able to do it justice just right now.
Please extend me your forbearance. I will try to circle back with at least a couple of links, but forgive me if I don’t do it well or immediately. I’m not dodging or ignoring.
I referenced specific scenes from two well known movies to highlight media where women are treated like objects, where bad boys get the girl and your response?
“I haven’t seen that movie. I don’t know those guys. I am skeptical to the extent that both exist.”
I even told you the song name where the boys ask if Sandy “put up a fight” . I described the end credit scene with Judd Nelson, fist in the air, crosses the football field. I love both of those movies but they normalize and reward bad behavior. You even point out additional bad behavior and problematic aspects of both movies. My point is that there are constant, subtle points in our culture that, while they don’t create bad behavior necessarily, do tell a story. That story is that treating women like objects, behaving badly, even committing sexual assault is normal and will be rewarded. The boy will get the girl in the end, even if he assaults her. Boys will be boys. You don’t see it, and I don’t think I can convince you.
Do you think bullies think of themselves as bullies? Because they don’t. They think of themselves as “strong” and “successful” and “competitive”. If they are kids, they think of themselves as just being cool and having a little fun. When they taunt the weak and unpopular, they aren’t conscious that they’re getting off on feeling powerful. Picking on others is just a harmless sport to them. Telling it like it is. Boys being boys.
This delusional thought process facilitates almost all misbehavior; no one sees themselves as the “bad guy” even when their actions are objectively wrong.
As for rape culture, you made it evident that you’ve been raised in it when as soon you argued Carroll couldn’t have been raped because she isn’t Trump’s type. This idea is straight out of the handbook for rape deniers. Not only is it absurd to say this about a former pageant winner, but it conforms to the backwards notion that “undesirable” woman can’t be raped, especially by high status men. Instead of looking at valid evidence, this notion causes people to discount and belittle victims who don’t measure up to some cockamamie beauty standard. “She made the whole thing up because she wishes a guy like him would want to her,” is the path this leads people down.
But if a woman is too attractive? Too sexually appealing? Then you have people thinking “She was asking for it when she put on that dress.”
Because it’s topical. Wherein, JP builds straw(wo)men faster than he can knock them down:
I’m sorry for the confusion. The intended context was that I have not scene a movie or known a guy that has led me to believe there is such a thing as rape culture.
Yes, but you have left a hell of an explanatory gap. You haven’t explained what those things mean.
Bender’s character, and his fist in the air have some very very specific connotations and meanings in my view. The character is the archetypal trickster, used in literature and mythology and a mainstay of storytelling since stories were told. He also (deliberately in my view) a Miltonesque antihero like Satan in Paradise Lost. He is a tempter and a promethean bringer of knowledge, and he has deliberately taken on the role of the villain in order to accomplish a greater good.
What do you think the fist in the air means? He fucked Claire? I think that’s an incredibly poor read. His fist in the air demonstrates triumph. He has succeeded in breaking down the walls that separate his fellow detainees who are imprisoned inside their labels by the oppressive “good” of society. You did hear the essay being read right before he put his fist in the air, right?
That is what he is celebrating.
The film is a recapitulation of Milton and borrows heavily from its themes.
[/quote]
I love both of those movies but they normalize and reward bad behavior. You even point out additional bad behavior and problematic aspects of both movies. My point is that there are constant, subtle points in our culture that, while they don’t create bad behavior necessarily, do tell a story. That story is that treating women like objects, behaving badly, even committing sexual assault is normal and will be rewarded. The boy will get the girl in the end, even if he assaults her. Boys will be boys. You don’t see it, and I don’t think I can convince you.
[/QUOTE]
I consider that an incredibly unnuanced understanding of these films. You are seeing them only through one lens.
Let’s get very specific, so we can think exactly about the message being sent by certain scenes, and their context within the movie as a whole.
Do you want to talk about Bender’s sexual assault on Claire? It’s not a trap. I think it is the most obvious example of what I think you are trying to describe, and the hardest to explain away or excuse, which is why I brought it up.
I think there are actually a lot of things going on there in that scene. I think there is a lot of truth to the idea that it is sending a very poor message. I would like to hear what you think about that scene, and what it means, and exactly what message it sends.
Why did he do it? What was his intent? His expectation?
I think it was a very poor and indefensible choice to do that scene that way, but is the purpose and message of the scene to say “hey look, it’s ok to assault women.” Or, is their something else primarily going on?
I think the former definitely spilled over (which is why I say it is poor and indefensible) but I don’t think that was the intent of the filmmaker.
I think it was primarily intended to show something else, and fulfills a different role.
Have you thought about that? Would you like to take a guess?
Or, do you think it pretty much begins and ends with “it’s ok to sexually assault.”
??? I’m not getting you. What’s dangerous?
Birth control didn’t let women control their reproductive functions allowing them to redefine their roles in society, and forcing society to adapt?
IIRC, This is presented as a pretty strong net positive to society as a whole.
Raven:
As for the scene Grease you refer to during “Summer loving.”
Who asks “did she put up a fight?” What kind of character is he? Is he admirable and to be emulated? How is he responded to? During the actual moment he says it, what is physical stature towards our hero, Danny?
This is not being portrayed as an appropriate or admirable question to ask. Exactly the opposite.
Lots of interesting things going on in that song and scene. It is very very well done from a narrative, and character establishing viewpoint.
Do you remember the line where Danny says “I saved her life. She nearly drowned!” Sandy’s next line is “He showed off, splashing around.” This is directly pertinent to our earlier discussion about the roles boys are being taught, to see themselves as an escort and protector, a valiant knight. Sandy’s line illustrates the ridiculousness and self-importance of boys being saddled with this notion, and as I have previously described is suggestive of the reasons why they are indoctrinated thusly.
Raven:
To tag on to trend of my last post in case it was not clear what I was referring to when I was talking about the ridiculous thing of boys being indoctrinated to be protectors.
They are told to be protectors of women from drowning, ninjas, kidnappers, assaulters, runaway trains, bears, wayward UFOs and all kinds of varieties of threats that real and imagined that may or may not threaten actual adolescent, and for which the adolescent girls are more cognizant of and better equipped to deal with more often than not.
The purpose of the indoctrination is of course not to turn 15 year old boys into actual knights and protectors.
They are the biggest threat.
Telling them they are protectors mitigates that, lets them see themselves in another role. It’s primary purpose is as a reminder to stop them from being a threat.
This indoctrination is the opposite of rape culture.
It’s absolutely fascinating when you dive into these stereotypical roles and look at how they function and what they are doing.
Not that you are advocating such a them, but I am not sure if it is a good thing to remove that role.
If we don’t teach 13-14-15 year old boys that their job is to be the protector of women (and when we fail to get the message across) what do they often become instead?
Men?
As i said, I don’t think I can convince you that bad behavior is rewarded in media. You don’t see it. I’ve tried to point out some examples, and frankly I’m tired of trying to make what seems to me to be a fairly obvious point.
Perhaps it would have helped if your examples illustrated your point and backed up what you are saying.
If your point was simply “media rewards bad behavior,”. I certainly would have agreed, but that wasn’t what you actually said, was it? It was more about how culture indoctrinated boys to teach them to treat women badly as illustrated through the movies, and that this demonstrates that there is a rape culture.
Which is, you know slightly different.
I would have enjoyed engaging with you on this topic, do I am sorry to see you go.
If you honestly believe that that was all he said in the 6+ minute clip, including the quoted text I provided, then I have one question and one comment:
A) Why did it take him so long to say it? Why didn’t he just say what you said above and be done with it?
2) Our world views are so different that I don’t think we stand a very good chance of being able to have a satisfying conversation if, ‘Contraception is good for women and society’, was all you heard him say.
Clearly there is more.
It would sincerely help if you were being more specific and forthright from the get go.
I don’t know what you are finding pernicious, here. What is false or dangerous and damaging?
Is it that the sins uncovered by MeToo might have their origin in the sexual revolution?
Is it that he says you can’t separate sex from emotion or power?
What?
Quite all right. I can see that you are being busy.
It’s not that I don’t see that there’s some merit in what you are saying re: Scandinavia, only that fleshing it out a bit may make it clear if there are misconceptions or not. As an example: Sweden took in more refugees, per capita of our population, than any other EU nation in 2015 - 153K - that meant that our population grew with 1.5 per cent in three months. We were told that this was the end of the country by the (far) right opposition and neighboring countries.
Well, we’re still here. As in the US, the economy is really strong, unemployment is low, wages are up and since our currency is kinda weak the export industry is booming*. However, we really suck at getting those 153K integrated and finding them work. There’s a popular saying here: We have the highest educated fast food workers and taxi drivers in the world.
*Traveling abroad sucks though and some imported stuff is expensive.
But that’s immigration. And the topic of this thread is gender. I’m perfectly fine waiting.
Back to the subject of this thread: Baring in mind the length of time between the reported incident and the time it was finally reported, what would convince you that Trump most probably raped this woman?
I am glad to hear you guys haven’t sunk into the ocean yet.
Here is the Wikipedia page about the study and criticism of it:
Hypotheticals are hard. Convincing evidence, obviously. That could be in many forms. Best would be security footage of them going into a dressing room together, and her coming it later, upset. A police report? Forensic evidence like an orange hair or semen residue. All kinds of things. Many pages ago I posted a set of criteria that I use to judge the merits of accusations (not just of sexual assault.). Merits mean how seriously I take them. That should go far to answering your question.
I would like to think that I refrain from either believing or disbelieving except in the case of overwhelmingly compelling evidence. Belief implies faith, maybe wishful thinking, and those shouldn’t apply here.
I believe I mentioned taking into mind the difference between the time of the reported incidence and the time of its reveal, but all of your suggestions ignore this.
edited to add: Wishful thinking? Are you actually suggesting that some of us wish she had been raped just to put the screws to Trump?
This would appear to conflict with your earlier assertions that you believe Carroll is lying.