Sorry to come back to this, but honestly, your response sounds like something you remembered from a Womyn’s Studies class. It’s certainly not descriptive of the movies themselves.
For one, Reese kills nobody, not even the terminator. It’s Sarah, not Reese, who kills the villain. Reese does buy Sarah time, by blowing himself up. But Sarah is certainly not Kyle’s “reward”: he’s dead.
Jack saves Rose, but he doesn’t kill anyone: he does it by finding her a make-shift raft. He then romantically professes his love, while freezing to death, before sinking to the bottom of the ocean. Rose is not his “reward”: he’s dead.
Wesley kills no one, except perhaps the Sicilian (who arguably kills himself). He doesn’t even kill the villain. He is lucky enough not to die. And he does ride off into the sunset, with his true love. But why is he the one who is “rewarded”? Isn’t Buttercup every bit as “rewarded” as he is?
OK, you’ve stated it emphatically. How do you demonstrate it?
I mean, here in America, there are issues of inequality which overwhelmingly affect women more, and issues of inequality which overwhelmingly affect men more. If feminism was about inequality, feminist media would talk about equally about the two topic sets. If feminism as a movement valued women more, it would talk primarily about issues that affected women, even when there were much-worse directly comparable issues which primarily affected men. Under my theory, we could do a quick survey of feminist media and see calls for action on the workplace death, crime, and arrest rates of men exceeding those of microaggressions against middle-class women and minorities, because getting hit in the face with a cinderblock is a bigger deal than being called a credit to your people.
This doesn’t mean that feminism is evil, of course. But claiming that feminism is all about equality makes about as little sense as claiming the Jewish Anti-Defamation League is.
And, of course, there are many individual feminists who do support actual equality and tell the microaggression-feminists they’re Doing Feminism Wrong, but I believe that they’re pretty firmly in the minority, just like the feminists who frequently speak in support of killing all men. And since the latter is a great demonstration of why you can’t judge a huge movement by individual examples, I can’t take away from the former many conclusions about feminism as a movement. But I can Google for feminist news aggregators and blogs, and count how often the issues in which men are holding the royal flush of misery poker are discussed prominently and with calls to action, and how many the issues are ignored, downplayed, or conflated with other issues entirely. And that quick survey does not support the assertion that feminism, as a movement, is primarily concerned about equality (if we assume that the web presence of feminism is representative of feminism as a whole.)
Every man for himself is the natural fallback position of instinct. This is horrible for women and children (& the sick and old) because they’re weak, slow and fragile and as such much more likely to perish in extreme situations (as I’m sure can be documented from general statistics). We have culture (chivalric) to counter this. But culture remains even at the best of times a thin sliver of paint on top of our primitive animal nature, in extreme situations likely to be quickly forgotten unless strenuously taught over many years.
We celebrate this aspect of Titanic because it was an example where culture won over selfish instinct. I don’t really understand (various conspiracy theories aside) why many feminists are so quick to lash out at this. Perhaps because it bears witness to the fact that women are physical inferiour to men. But that’s a fact of nature and do they really think they’re better off in a society without even the cultural ideal of (stronger) men risking own safety to aid (weaker) women and children is to be preferred?
Because what happened in the Titanic was an exception, not the rule. And painting something that was an exception as something that was common is disingenuous and dangerous.
I don’t believe it’s generally assumed to be the rule. As I said, it’s celebrated this much precisely because it’s an example where culture won over baser instincts. If it was the rule it wouldn’t have raised this much notice and praise. And one of the reasons feminists in general are sometimes loathed is that there is a particular obnoxious segment of feminists which insists on shitting all over the memory of precisely those individuals which in fact did sacrifice themselves.
And because I can’t help myself, I’m going to refer back to shirtgate: This was something a whole bunch of feminists decided was worth a lot of time and effort on their part. For a quick review:
The episode is petty in and of itself, except for what it reveals about feminism:
[ul]
[li]Man lands probe on comet: not important.[/li][li]Man wears wrong shirt: FREAKOUT.[/li][/ul]
And as an example of feminist hypocrisy, there’s this.
Anyway, for anyone who’s still reading, what is feminism about? What is it trying to achieve?
Criticism is not “freakout”. A decent guy wore a shirt that some found offensive, was criticized for it, and made what seemed to me to be a heartfelt apology. Good for him - the episode speaks well of him. Everyone makes mistakes.
It is about advocating that women be treated equally and fairly by law, society, culture, and individuals.
Feminism isn’t about anything since it doesn’t exists as a single movement with a singular defined goal. If you have two people calling themselves feminists you have three opinions on completely central issues. Case in point, here you have different feminists simultanously arguing for and against legalisation of prostitution: Sex Workers From Around the World Tell Hollywood to Mind Its Own Business. Although I have to say, that when you’re reduced to resorting to such things as calling out “gender apartheid” you have lost any argument per default.
You started a previous thread on this topic. Numerous dopers, myself included, replied to it, gave various different questions, offered their views, etc.
Then you turn around, ignore all what was said in that thread, and started threads such as this one. You don’t seem to care about the opinions of others that do not agree with your preconceived notions, and tend to ignore multiple answers.
How dare those women comment on a guy’s shirt instead of commenting on the movie “Titanic” like LinusK. Clearly, they aren’t interested in reality and equality!
If a Tumblr account had to achieve some limited level of sentience and begin reblogging all its posts here, why couldn’t it have been one devoted to cute animal photos? Everybody likes cute animal photos.
Possibly, but I don’t find slutwalks offensive. If you do, I’m open to listening to why.
I take it then that you agree that ‘shirtgate’ was not a FREAKOUT?
Not watching a video right now.
For examples: advocating for equal pay, against domestic violence, for reproductive rights (e.g. the right to full control over one’s own body), against catcalling and sexual harassment, for education of women in places in which it is much harder, against genital mutilation, against victim-blaming for rapes, against slut-shaming, for electing women to political offices in which there is a disparity, promoting women’s advancement in fields with few women at the top, and many more.
And the point of the sacrifice is not to save Sarah, per se, but her son and, eventually, humanity. Your point fails.
Rose is not the reward, anyway. It is the honor of doing something for Rose with her memory of him, (and possibly her narrative of his actions), that provides his reward. (Just as being the flag bearer in a battle, (meaning one does not actually have a weapon with which to defend oneself), is an honor bestowed on a man, (as in Glory or the movie version of Red Badge of Courage).
I am not even sure why you included The Princess Bride in your examples. Your first statement correctly noted that he risked his life. In the end, he rides off with his prize. The issue is less pronounced in the movie, but in the book, there is nearly a chapter devoted to the fact that she grows into the most beautiful woman in the world. Even in the movie, he is a servant who claims a woman who has been effectively raised to the level of princess.
Not to mention that each of your examples are fantasies–fiction.
Nope; that’s fallacious. It’s like people who complain because the ACLU doesn’t take up many 2nd Amendment cases. It doesn’t mean that the ACLU doesn’t defend the 2nd Amendment. They don’t need to, as there are other groups doing that far more energetically.
Feminist groups do address issues which affect men. They don’t do so “equally” because those issues themselves are fewer and smaller in scope and effect. You might as well demand that the EPA deal with discarded cigarette butts equally with their attention to oil spills. It doesn’t mean the EPA is “okay” with discarded cigarette butts.
Can you name a “much worse” issue that primarily affects men? And can you really demonstrate that feminist groups never address men’s issues at all? It was claimed, upthread, that feminist groups ignore male-on-male rape in prison: this turned out to be a completely untrue claim.
You’re engaging in “mote in your neighbor’s eye” thinking.
There are serious issues which primarily affects women, and there are issues which primarily affects men. What is fallacious, is to claim that women overall have it worse (let alone that womens’ problems loom over mens problems, like oil spill compared to a discarded cigarette butt).
ehh. Suicide victims. Workplace fatalities. Homicide victims. False rape accusations. Early death. Cut off from children. Combat deaths. Sentence inequality. Prostate cancer. Homelessness.
The point is that the same movement demands both that right to control the shirts men wear, and the right of women to wear whatever they want, in public - including nothing at all. To me, that’s a double-standard. What do you think?
Honestly, I paid little attention to it when it happened - although I was aware of it, because I read the news, and see the headlines. Whether it was a freakout is, I guess, a matter of opinion. The fact he felt the need to beg forgiveness indicates either there was a lot of hostile attention thrown his way, or he’s a very sensitive person.
I suspect the former.
There’s a lot there, so I’ll take them one at a time.
1.) Equal pay. This has already been discussed, so I’ll limit my comments.
(a) The 77% gap (or whatever it is) is a myth. When you control for things like years of experience and number of hours worked, the difference shrinks to approximately 5%.
(b) The fact that there is a difference does not automatically mean discrimination. Jews, gays, and Asian-Americans all make more than average. If you think a difference in pay automatically means discrimination, you must think they’re beneficiaries of discrimination. I don’t think that. Do you?
2.) Domestic violence. I’ve argued at length that actual perpetration of violence is approximately equal between the sexes. The idea that it’s mostly men doing it is not based on fact: it’s a stereotype. While I’m against ALL domestic violence, the solution lies not in assuming men are perpetrators, but in looking at all the factors that play into it, and starting from there.
3.) I’m pro-abortion. I’m against Republicans who are trying to limit abortion options for poor women, or requiring 24-hour waiting periods, or sonograms, or other ridiculous irrational attempts to make it more difficult than it already is. I will give you this one: maintaining the right and ability of women to obtain safe legal abortions is a legitimate feminist issue, and there are - in fact - real actual political forces trying to do what they can to take it away.
4.) Cat-calling and sexual harassment. I have mixed feelings about this one. I’m pro-people being able to walk anywhere, without being harassed. Having said that, I suspect feminists have both misrepresented the problem, and tried to use it to paint men generally as harassers. I suspect it’s less than 1% of the male population that’s doing any actual harassing, and the message needs to be directed at them, not at men in general. Taking it one step further, some feminists seem to think harassment includes looking at a woman, or saying “hi”. I think that’s ridiculous.
5.) “for education of women in places in which it is much harder”: I’m not sure what you mean by that. You’ll have to clarify.
6.) Genital mutilation: Any thinking person is against genital mutilation.
7.) Slut-shaming: That’s kind of vague. I could try to respond, but I’d prefer if you elaborated.
8.) Victim-blaming in rapes: This one needs a little unpacking. A while ago, I accidentally left my car unlocked, while I ran into a corner-store. When I came back, my laptop was gone. What I took away from that is to make sure I lock my car every single fucking time, no matter what. Was I victim-blaming? Maybe. But I was still doing what I could to make sure it didn’t happen again. I’m anti-rape (duh) and anti-crime in general (also duh). But i still think it makes sense to take precautions. We can come back to this one, if you want. I think there is more to say, but I don’t want to get into it, unless you or someone is interested.
9.) Electing women into political offices: Women make up 50.8% of the US population, as of 2014. They could, if they wanted, elect women for every political office in the country. My own opinion is that people should vote for whoever they want, regardless of gender. I will probably be voting for Hillary in 2015. (Maybe Bernie first, and then Hillary.) Either way, like I said, I don’t think it’s the gender of the candidate that’s important.
10.) Promoting women’s advancement in fields with few women at the top: generally speaking, I think promotions should go to the best person for the job, regardless of gender.
Anyway, we agree on at least abortion and genital mutilation.
I disagree that women should be promoted or elected, just for being women.
And I think the feminist push for “equal pay” is based on a misrepresentation of what’s actually going on - a misrepresentation that’s in many cases perpetuated by feminists.
And I think that what some people call the “Duluth model” of domestic violence (man hits woman) is not only wrong, but is actively harmful, especially to children. Feminists are often among those most deeply invested in perpetuating it.