I remember reading in a British film mag once that Woody Allen was the proof to the lie that "Yanks don't do irony."
As far as I can tell (and because Comrade Jeff and Sister Sarkeesian informed me) the Bechdel test is a joke from a comic book.
Applying it to one of the more famous not-quite-feminist film auteurs of the 20th century is, imho, even funnier.
Jessica Price wrote:
Chapter 7: Physical Escalation and Sex: "OK, you've made it this far. You are with a beautiful woman whose company you truly enjoy. You desire her. She longs to be desired. It's time to harness all that passion." Skip down a few sections and then we get to picking people up and putting them on your lap. Doesn't sound like he's advocating "picking up" strangers to me.
They're not functionally the same. They should be, but they're not, as anyone who's ever had to deal with an aggressor can tell you. Some of them will continue until you shout loud enough to draw attention.
And some sexual assaulters take your polite decline, lurk in the back of the alley and, given the opportunity, get you on the way home. If someone puts in a " Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" it's pretty disingenuous to say that they're promoting sexual assault.
And how does a suitor usually get the suitee to explicitly reverse a denial of consent without becoming a rapist? Usually by continued persuasion. Which is what, according to my reading, is what's being advocated here.
Yes, because that whole "Important Note on Resistance" where he says "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" isn't included in the text, not anywhere before the advice on kissing, fondling and sex. Nope, not there at all.
Jessica Price wrote:
Well, it's definitely not assault if it's not objected to. I've watched the drinking classes interact and flirt with strangers for year now. I've seen them touch each other and place each other on their laps and sometimes it results in slapped faces and sometimes it results in sexual congress. I'm not saying sexual assaulters don't do these things, but, no, I don't think these things by themselves are inherently sexual assault.
"If I say politely and quietly, please leave me alone, that is it. Full stop."
"If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says 'STOP,' or 'GET AWAY FROM ME,' or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line:
These are functionally the same. Is it creepy that Mr. Bad Dating Advice is now planning on how to get you to relax and get in the mood? Yes. Is it advocating sexual assault? No. "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry."
Jessica Price wrote:
"And for that matter, a lot of the stuff in the "Sex" section is questionable. Just because someone consents to sex doesn't mean they can't revoke that consent. If someone tells you to stop, it doesn't matter if they're naked. You stop. If you're forcing someone's hand onto your genitals, and they're resisting and telling you no, you are assaulting them, even if they were okay with making out with you.
Nothing in that section even hints at claiming that once your potential partner is naked they can't revoke consent.
Okay, that one with Gena Rowlands probably passes, then.
Hannah and Her Sisters, as I recall, has scenes with Dianne Wiest trying to get Mia Farrow to lend her money. Of course, my favorite scene of hers is when she's duking it out with Carrie Fisher over Sam Waterston.
EDIT: Scene ends too soon, alas.
I call bullshiznit.
Most of the choiciest bits seem to come from this page.
The stuff about always be touching her is for when you're out on a date with a woman. The stuff about whipping out your penis and placing her hand on it is for when you've gotten to third base with a woman and are making the turn towards home.
There's tons of issues one could take with statements like "You're the man, it's your job to lead," and the dating style it advocates might not be to everybody's taste, but this isn't promoting sexual assault.
You know, I tried following the links to find the actual sources of the quotes and I couldn't find much.
'Cuz, you know, sometimes context matters:
“Pull out your c**k and put her hand on it. Remember, she is letting you do this because you have established yourself as a LEADER. Don’t ask for permission, GRAB HER HAND, and put it right on your d**k.”
Is this supposed to be at the bar? On the subway station? On the couch once you've gotten her home?
How would it be possible to believe the part I bolded and write the part you bolded?
So, read the first third of Ehrenreich, and, I must say, choosing this from Sister Margatroid's list of books on Feminism is totally cheating. This is, as Norman Mailer quipped above, just old socialism. I'll have to delve deeper, I guess.
But I chuckled when she speculated that working people continue, perversely, to smoke because "work is what you do for others; smoking is what you do for yourself. I don't know why the antismoking crusaders have never grasped the element of defiant self-nurturance that makes the habit so endearing to its victims--as if, in the American workplace, the only thing people have to call their own is the tumors they are nourishing and the spare moments they devote to feeding them."
I also liked it when she blamed her potty mouth on being married to a Teamster organizer. See, mods, it's not my fault. It's f#$#in' cultural.
Well, I did my best.
In addition, I got a new Paizo girlfriend through Private Messages about Machiavelli and Muddy Waters, so, as far as I'm concerned, this is the best thread ever!
I got the impression that they were talking about old-timers, possibly even dead people. I couldn't find an actual copy of the article on-line and, for whatever reason, all the sites that I clicked to from the original Guardian article didn't ever spell out who they were talking about.
I'd repeat, though, that OHWFA! supports the discussion of hawt female sciene-fiction writers and editors of yore.
Soon-Yi, Mia Farrow, Diane Keaton, Louise Lasser...
On the one hand, we've got evidence that at least one film critic in Australia "gets" Woody Allen, and on the other we have a blanket statement that nobody in Australia "gets" him.
Anyway, as Judy Davis said in Husbands and Wives when told by her would-be suitor that they were attending a performance of Mozart's Don Giovanni, "Don Juan de Doodlebug? They should've cut his f~%#ing dick off!"
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Oh yeah, I was reminded in another thread, in a roundabout way:
So, we had this rally in Boston over the past weekend, blah blah blah, and afterwards we went to a bar in Kenmore Square and me and the comrades were shootin' the shiznit, discussing heavy-duty Marxist stuff and the topic got around to some of the more memorable debates on the Sectarian Left around the woman question. Anyway, it was getting hawt and heavy and I went to interject some levity by pulling out the "Intellectuals are like the Mafia" line.
"Well," I remarked, "It's like Woody Allen said..."
"Oh, yeah," a comrade derisively snorted* "The great feminist Woody Allen..."
Before I could stop myself, I shattered the beer bottle against the table and yelled "Wtf you gonna say about Woody Allen, huh?!?" [Overturns table] "Smart-ass [redacted], what are you gonna say, now, [redacted]?!?"
This was the same comrade, Lord Dice, who was all "Eeew, Django was racist..." Marx save me from the comrades who choose their art based on the artist's politics.
Also, it should be pointed out that Ripley wins the day by her superior stevedoring abilities--which, I think, is just as gender-role bashing as Vasquez's superior soldiering abilities.
But yeah, Ripley is the hero because, um, it's her series.
Maybe there's some pent-up rage against Angelina Jolie that I'm unaware of, but I don't see how Ruth Fowler, Julian Vigo or my socialist-feminist female's comrade railing against what they perceive as class privilege has anything to do with the pattern that you're describing.
Do I think people are horrible for liking images of scantily clad women, or suggestive posing or outfits, or for thinking anyone is HAWT? (Thanks, comrade Doodle, I'm never going to be able to spell that any other way!:P) I don't, honestly. I recognize that as the human condition, and, in a lot of cases, a good thing.
All of our elected offices in OHWFA! are already filled but there are many open positions on the OHDFA! Executive Board, Ms. Pippi.
Most important of all, in my limited understanding, "mansplaining" is when a male condescendingly explains something to a female.
I don't think Adamantine Dragon is a woman.
On "Sexual Advertising":
OHWFA! recommends that all young lads should take their cue from this rock parable:
You know that chick that used to dance a lot?
I must not go into many chainmail bikini threads; I haven't seen that.
Doodlebug, just read Picnic on Paradise and you'll see it done right. (But, sadly out of print.)
[Throws down pencil in frustration while contemplating all the books he wants to read and his inevitable mortality]
You know what? Screw this! I'm just going to re-read all those Greyhawk books by Rose Estes...
Erik Mona wrote:
Thank you for the recommendation, everything I have ever read by Howard has been delightful, even when marred by racist and anti-gay attitudes. And let's face it, "Vale of the Lost Women" was hawt.
I should say, to the whole thread, that I hereby admit that I unjustly maligned Howard with a cheap shot in my original post.
I don't think Howard was a thorough-going reactionary (and it wouldn't affect my appreciation of his writing, even if I did) and wouldn't rate him any worse than, say, ERB, or, say, Hemingway.
But I still think if you added up all of Conan's chicks, more of them lean towards shrieking, helpless damsels in distress rather than willful, independent (or, at least, until Conan comes around) pirate queens.
Dicey the House Goblin wrote:
Aaargh!!!! I'll get you yet, Dicey!
Actually though, you'll like this:
Went to go pick up my car which means that although I now have access to a vehicle, I now have even less money (frickin' fallin' apart '97 Towncar!--What? No, sorry, baby, I was just kidding). The dudes at the place kept smiling more than often, which was weird, because they're not a particularly friendly bunch. I paid the bill, got my keys and walked out to the lot. The first thing I noticed was that they had given the Doodlemobile a complimentary cleaning, which, I am afraid, she badly needed.
And then I noticed, on a piece of paper, placed on the passenger seat
about 3 grams of weed!!!!
Now I really have got something to do. See you cats later!
[bubble bubble bubble]
PS: Belit was hawt!!
Yeah, I remember really liking it.
I only attended my first gaming convention two winters ago, and I remember thinking, "I wonder if it's going to be like Bimbos."
Friend Set may be interested in learning that I got my copy at the soon-to-be-moving bookstore around the corner from his house.
And with that, I really must go do something else today...
It's not Herc-rolling if I advertise it as objectification of corpulent beardos, is it?
One more book recommendation before I try to find other things to do today without any money or access to a vehicle...
I've been masochistically re-reading some TSR fiction from yesteryear that reminds me of my happy childhood poring over AD&D modules in the back of my parents' station wagon while being dragged to skeet shooting tournaments throughout the American Northeast and I was reminded of a novel that I've mentioned before.
The write-up should give an indication of its on-topicness to this thread, but it neglects to mention the protagonist's sidekick and her contemptuous feminist commentary on our wonderful subculture.
I haven't read it in 20 years, so I can't actually vouch for it, but I remember enjoying it immensely and I daresay it was my first introduction to ideas about women's liberation.