avery of the dead's picture
avery of the dead from Kentucky is reading Cipher Sisters October 2, 2013 - 2:26pm

From this thing I just saw:

I want every version of a woman and a man to be possible. I want women and men to be able to be full-time parents or full-time working people or any combination of the two. I want both to be able to do whatever they want sexually without being called names. I want them to be allowed to be weak and strong and happy and sad -- human, basically. The fallacy in Hollywood is that if you’re making a "feminist" story, the woman kicks ass and wins. That’s not feminist, that’s macho. A movie about a weak, vulnerable woman can be feminist if it shows a real person that we can empathize with."  - Natalie Portman

Now - in relation to writing.  DISCUSS!  Agree or disagree?

 

 

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 2, 2013 - 2:56pm

Meh. It's not true that people don't question the 'strength' of male characters. If you actually analyze the 'facts' of a story, you can distinguish between 'strong' and 'weak' characters, both male and female, both in terms of depiction and action or traits. Asking the question about a male character isn't a meme the way it is for female characters, but it's there. The issue is not that people only think 'kickass' women are 'strong', the issue is that the type of analyses she's thinking about are superficial and would be for male characters as well.

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig October 2, 2013 - 4:03pm

I agree with her. Often times we see female characters called "strong" when they are physically strong, without any necessity for depth. I think that it's fine to have physically strong, kick ass women, lots of women in real life work jobs that require this of them, lots of women identify with physical strength-- HOWEVER -- Stay at home moms, nurses, teachers, women working in cubicles, etc. can be feminist characters as well. You don't have to know how to shoot a pistol or do kung fu to be feminist, and a woman who can use her brains or her heart to get through tough situations is strong as well.

I do agree with JYH that these characters exist for men, too, but I think male actors have a bit more choice in what roles they would like to play (well, I know they do, because they've done studies to show that the ratios of men to women in film are completely off the wall and in no way representative of real life), and when a man plays an action hero, we don't pretend that action hero has depth just because he is physically strong, we recognize it for what it is...

Dave's picture
Dave from a city near you is reading constantly October 2, 2013 - 4:10pm

In reference to the qoute, what is feminism?

is it being weak or strong, full time employee or full time parent, etc?

i guess I have my head so far up my own ass I forget people cant regard others as individuals, and respect their individual lives.

Richard's picture
Richard from St. Louis is reading various anthologies October 2, 2013 - 7:31pm

IN RELATION TO WRITING, she said. :-) i will think and post tomorrow.

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 3, 2013 - 5:56am

She is right that it would be good to humanize characters and leave aside Rand style political preaching in fiction, but "feminist" seems like a meaningless word. So many varied groups claim it means so many things it might as well be "marklar."

avery of the dead's picture
avery of the dead from Kentucky is reading Cipher Sisters October 3, 2013 - 6:52am

but "feminist" seems like a meaningless word.

You know what?  I'm not going to take the bait on that one.  I already censored myself once today for having an overly emotional response, so I'm going to give you that one for FREE!

 

As to the quote, in relation to writing...

Let's think about strong female characters in books.  I guess we can say Katniss Everdeen, but she's that archetype that is being discussed.  She literally kicks ass.  Not that she isn't also well rounded, but I'm just saying.  Women that don't kill/knock people around. 

The first book I'll put out is Memoirs of a Geisha.  The women in that book do not do any sort of martial art.  They are very well written and fully realized women, each one unique and strong (and weak) in their own ways. Despite the main character pining for a man the whole time.  ...but she is pining for a man the whole time.  hm.

Office Girl, by Joe Meno.  The female lead is your basic hipster girl, however, she does not pine for the man the entire time.  In fact SPOILER ALERTS!!!!!!!!!!!!  She ends up leaving him in the end of it.  Is she strong?  Or is she very weak/lost?  Well I could argue both sides there, and that's what makes her a good character.  If you have a character with no weakness, then they aren't real people. 

Franny, from my beloved Franny and Zooey.  Strong and weak for the same reasons - she's throwing everything away.

Ummmmm...White Oleander.  Astrid is just a young girl when she is tossed into the foster care system in CA, but she proves to be, even in her most depressing and ill-advised moments, one of the strongest females I've read. 

Stpehen King's Lisey.  She was a good strong female. 

 

I'm trying to come to some great conclusion.  But I don't have one.  I don't have anything profound to say.  I guess in writing what I admire is a female character that shows strength through her weaknesses.  Because we all have them, but how we act in spite of them is what defines the sort of strength I think Portman was talking about. 

I'm rambling. 

Richard's picture
Richard from St. Louis is reading various anthologies October 3, 2013 - 7:58am

i understand what natalie is saying, and i think for the most part she is right.

there are definitely a lot of strong women in literature that don't physically kick ass. they aren't always the victim OR the slut OR the warrior. i see a lot more well-rounded female characters in literary fiction. genre fiction tends to write less strong women, but there are examples.

i'm editing an anthology of short stories by women for Black Lawrence Press (The Lineup: 25 Provocative Women Writers) and those are some excellent examples of women writing strong women:

1. Amelia Gray – “Go For it and Raise Hell” at Knee-Jerk
2. Lindsay Hunter – “The Fence” in Daddy’s
3. xTx – “She Subjected the Sun” in Normally Special
4. Ethel Rohan – “Lifelike” in Cut Through the Bone
5. Tina May Hall – “Skinny Girls’ Constitution & Bylaws” in The Physics of Imaginary Objects
6. Holly Goddard Jones – “Parts” in Girl Trouble
7. Roxane Gay – “Strange Gods” in Black Warrior Review
8. Monica Drake – “See You Later, Fry-o-later” at Spork Press
9. Amber Sparks “The Ghosts Eat More Air” in Shut Up / Look Pretty
10. Gina Frangello – “Waves” in Slut Lullabies
11. Laura van den Berg – “Where We Must Be” in What The World Will Look Like When All the Water Leaves Us
12. Jac Jemc – “Twins, or Ambivilance” in Another Chicago Magazine
13. Shannon Cain – “This Is How It Starts” in The Necessity of Certain Behaviors
14. Kim Chinquee – “Shot Girls” in Mississippi Review
15. Mary Miller – “Pearl” in Big World
16. Kathy Fish – “Blooms” in Together We Can Bury It
17. Paula Bomer – “A Galloping Infection” in Baby and Other Stories
18. Karen Brown – “Stillborn” in Little Sinners and Other Stories
19. Jessica Hollander – “Like Falling Down and Laughing” in The Cincinnati Review
20. Stacey Levine – “The World of Barry," in The Girl with Brown Fur
21. Janet Mitchell – “The Creepy Girl Story” in The Creepy Girl and Other Stories
22. Amina Gautier – “Push” in At-risk
23. Elizabeth Ellen – “Winter Haven, Florida, 1984” in Fast Machine
24. Claire Vaye Watkins – “Rondine al Nido” in Battleborn
25. Nina McConigley – “Pomp and Circumstances” in Cowboys and East Indians

So Lindsay Hunter's collections, DADDY's and DON'T KISS ME are good examples. Flawed characters, but strong women. Holly Goddard Jones's collection, GIRL TROUBLE. May Miller's BIG WORLD. I'd even say Gillian Flynn's GONE GIRL is a strong woman that isn't physical.

In genre, I think Megan Abbott is probably doing good work, can't remember her storylines right now. There ARE less women in horror/fantasy/SF/crime in general, than men. Hilary Davidson? Christa Faust? Anne Rice? Chelsea Cain? Cheryl Strayed? I think our own Rebecca writes some strong women. Some of my literary fiction isn't terrible, I have a story "Garage Sales" with a female protagonist, she is empowered to fight for her son, and the right to be happy, to be her own person. But my "Victimized" and "Transmogrify" women, while strong, do tend to rely on violence to solve their problems. I'm working on it!

Thoughts?

avery of the dead's picture
avery of the dead from Kentucky is reading Cipher Sisters October 3, 2013 - 8:09am

genre fiction tends to write less strong women

For sure agree with that.  You see woman as accessories more often in genre fiction. 

 

Possibly unrelated, but it just came to mind...

Books and Booze did an interview with Christa Faust recently where she talked about the archetype of the femme fatale and what that meant.  How she was a villain.  She said (and I'm totes paraphrasing right now) that it all comes from men being afraid of the sexual side of women, which is why more often than not the weapon of choice for the FF is her sexuality.  She comes in and tempts the main character and undoes him with nothing but her pussy, or the promise of it, at least.  I thought all that was pretty interesting.

She also gave me something to consider about male characters.  Because she said that a woman forced into prostitution due to circumstance isn't necessarily that different from a man forced into, say, street fighting/boxing/whatever it is men do.  Because they are both using their bodies to earn money.  It was something I hadn't considered and I really appreciated that extra perspective. 

 

 

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 3, 2013 - 8:20am

My first comment was more a response to the HuffPo-post than the isolated quote, and the HuffPo-post was a response to the full Portman interview elsewhere (from what I remember). But whose view is she calling 'fallacious'? Is she talking about critics or directors or fans or what? It doesn't say.

To the quote alone, I guess I agree that all types of male and female characters should be considered valid and that not only 'macho' women should be considered to be strong.

I somewhat agree that 'feminism/feminist' is by now pretty well variegated so that its use could sometimes create confusion which a more detailed description would avoid. It's like if you walk up to somebody and say "I'm a conservative," expect them to know your stance on everything and then get annoyed when they think it means nothing more than pro-gun-pro-military politics. The way to avoid that misunderstanding is to be able to explain your positions clearly, to know what 'feminist/conservative' means before throwing it out there, and to perhaps go ahead and say all that stuff instead of using an inadequate or potentially confusing label.

manda lynn's picture
manda lynn from Ohio is reading Of Love and Other Demons (again) October 3, 2013 - 10:13am

I'm a feminist (but not a conservative). I like shoes and dick and make-up and Johnny Knoxville but I'm still a feminist. 

feminist got to be such a dirty word, that's so sad. What's it mean? Value me as an average human as much as you would value another average human that has a penis. That seems really basic, doesn't it? It's so fucking not. 

i spent like a year staring at the ceiling and realizing that I had to stop saying shit like "stop being a girl" or "grow some balls" because seriously, that's just knee-jerk everyday inequality in language. And okay, maybe it's not a big deal, maybe it is - but I'm trying to fix my own head, I can't fix everyone else's head.

 

 

 

 

 

Gordon Highland's picture
Gordon Highland from Kansas City is reading Secondhand Souls by Christopher Moore October 3, 2013 - 10:30am

It's a much bigger problem on screen than on pages. Films are much more of a collective effort, though, and everything from the casting to rewrites to test audiences plays a part in shaping those characters. Return on investment is such a huge factor, they're giving you what they think the audience wants, which is warped by such preconceptions.

Writers in general struggle with writing people they don't understand, whether it's men writing women or vice-versa, or occupations or philosophies. On an isolated level, story by story, I don't generally take issue with a character either playing into or against stereotypes, because all those different types of people exist. But big-picture, yeah, the tendencies are troubling. Other writers try to create genderless characters, or they overcompensate with testosteroned women and sensitive men. Look at how many black female judges you see presiding over courtroom scenes. I think a good deal of it is also a result of vicarious writing. Like how in romantic comedies, the female lead always has some creative dream-job while their elusive love interest works with his hands. In the male-written version of that movie, he'd be a video-game tester and she'd be an insatiable liquor-store owner.

Richard's picture
Richard from St. Louis is reading various anthologies October 3, 2013 - 10:56am

i spent like a year staring at the ceiling and realizing that I had to stop saying shit like "stop being a girl" or "grow some balls" because seriously, that's just knee-jerk everyday inequality in language.

Or, attributed to Betty White: “Why do people say "grow some balls"? Balls are weak and sensitive. If you wanna be tough, grow a vagina. Those things can take a pounding.”

L.W. Flouisa's picture
L.W. Flouisa from Tennessee is reading More Murakami October 4, 2013 - 12:59am

Evidently I'm not the only one who thinks stating grow some balls is weird. Just show women with more aspects to them, than being pretty or being in distress.

Depicting women in distress pisses me off for a multitude of reasons. So I subverted it.

MattF's picture
MattF from Tokyo is reading Borges' Collected Fictions October 4, 2013 - 1:21am

I don't fully understand her wording, but it seems to me there are plenty of strong women, the problem is the movies are never ABOUT the women.

The movies are always about the men: the men are protagonists, their actions and decisons are the focus of the movies, and women are either the goal or obstacle, essentially plot devices.

The Place Beyond the Pines is a good example that was recently discussed around here. It's about Ryan Gosling wanting to be around his baby, the mother is essentially the introduction, then the complication to his desire--but it's his story. Then it morphs into an epic story between fathers and sons, the mothers barely seem to exist. The women's jobs was to birth these babies and get out of the way so the movie could happen. They were both strong characters, it's just not about them. They were accessories.

Seeing this discussion I thought back to the last movie I saw, "Killing Them Softly", to analyse the women's roles, and I couldn't remember a single woman even appearing in the movie (but then I remembered there was one black prostitute being treated rudely, so it's okay...)

Hitchcock was a recent movie that stood out particularly because of the quality of the writing for the woman's role.

Seems to me you cannot even compare literature to film in that regard. Literature's been killing it for a long long time.

Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff October 4, 2013 - 2:27am

I agree that this marginality of real women is more a problem of the movies than literature. Maybe it's just a matter of proportion in the diversity of genders working in the industry. More likely the cinema, being a faster medium of quite immediate fruition, is more prone to comfort-ended manipulation. Take the recent BEE rant about the Gay Man as Magical Elf, for instance. It's more or less what Portman says about women in films. And it's a big problem.

In literature, characters absolutely need to be credible. I can go on watching a movie with boring whothefucks because it's probably got effects, or a nice soundtrack, or sculptured abs to compensate. You don't get that with printed words. Without the characters I just stop reading.

That said. As a woman, I hate it when I see a woman being treated like she's only allowed to exist if she's faithful to a flattening idea of what a woman should be. And I share the same feelings about men and whoever gets the "you should" treatment. It's just irritating.

I like my female characters as diverse as they can be. Ditto for the men and the kids and the dogs and the droids and the monsters and stuff.

L.W. Flouisa's picture
L.W. Flouisa from Tennessee is reading More Murakami October 4, 2013 - 3:18am

Also hollywood needs to drop rescue arcs completely. I don't find them endearing. Or at least make it realistic. Just a side note.

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 4, 2013 - 9:54am

Women, gays, people of non-white ethnicity, even the obvious typical male roles are all just tropey movie-making in action. I understand the women/minority depictions might sting more than the various stereotypical white male depictions to those sensitive to such things, but unless there's a wide movement towards naturalism in general, any concessions in one film or another won't be anything close to an actual paradigm shift across Hollywood.

Questions:  If a movie depicts a far-fetched, realistically impossible plan being executed, what difference does the sex/color/orientation of the protagonist make? Who is going to watch it and think that people who physically resemble the actors are more capable of commiting such acts than others? Do people actually think white men (in real life) are more badass than everybody else thanks to Tom Cruise, Bruce Willis and their ilk? Not I, nor anybody I know of.

avery of the dead's picture
avery of the dead from Kentucky is reading Cipher Sisters October 4, 2013 - 10:47am

I think all Asians can do kung-fu.* 

 

 

 

 

*i don't really think that

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 5, 2013 - 5:15am

@Avery - Observations, even ones no one likes, aren't baiting. I'm never pumped that any word has moved from conveying information to noise. But that is what it seems to have happened to the word 'feminism.'

In political and academic circles the word doesn't convey much information. Between 2nd wave, 3rd wave, womanism, and the various subdivisions/other types it has many varied meanings. They all seem to agree that women's suffrage is good, but that is about it.

In daily use, many claim to be a feminist, including people whose world views seem nearly polar opposites and fairly diverse. Princess Donna (born Alison O'Connell), a bondage porn star  with a degree in women studies claims she is a feminist. Susan G. Cole, among other things a anti porn advocate, claims she is a feminist. Sarah Palin claims she is a feminist. Hillary Clinton claims she is a feminist. The Dalai Lama says he is a feminist. 

Some folks claim some of those movements and claims are more legitimate than others, but they are all out there.

@JHY - That is a very well thought out point, but I am under the impression that most people speaking of things like this don't demand common naturalism. They would strongly prefer if the archetypes had a wider inclusion, not so/at all tied to gender/sexual orientation/race.

ReneeAPickup's picture
Class Facilitator
ReneeAPickup from Southern California is reading Wanderers by Chuck Wendig October 4, 2013 - 10:43pm

It's a fair point, but it raises it's own questions when paired with Ms. Portman's statement. She is saying that a woman doesn't have to be an ass kicking action hero to be "strong" or feminist. I can agree her use of the word feminist is confusing in this context since so many people define it differently, but I think what she means is that we say "we want strong female characters!" and we get Laura Croft or Black Widow (and I personally love Black Widow, but that's a different discussion), we don't necessarily get the kind of women who are strong in other ways on screen in Hollywood, and when we do, those characters aren't always recongized as "strong". 

Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff October 6, 2013 - 3:14am

might sting more than the various stereotypical white male depictions

I will never understand the reasons of that. It appears like the radius of acceptable manly behaviour is magnified, and many are okay with that. But is this magnification only artificial? Men are not called a "slut" each time they turn around and walk their way. They are not called a "witch" every night they cook something exotic for dinner and "dike" when they don't. They aren't called a "sissy" when they cry for a woman anymore. A "twoface", perhaps. Men do get occasionally called "monster" when they slaughter a family of twelve. Or "gay" when they don't.

I see the double standard. But why that? What I will actually, really, never understand is how can men accept this kind of brown nosed treatment all the time. That's why I talked about comfort. Maybe I just don't get what (generically, publicly) being a man implies (and why the abuse of adverbs is so tempting when speaking Essay). Is the fear of losing some kind of barely existent privilege worth the cost of never being able to have one's feelings acknowledged and respected by others? Does the inherent danger of being wrongly considered gay, or weak, or strong by proxy, bring such a lack of emancipation? Are all women, in fact, evil? Must they be? Do you like them to be? Do women talk too much, or is it because men don't talk at all. Egg or chicken. This is just all too binary to be liberating.

 

unless there's a wide movement towards naturalism in general

well, even in that case, I'm afraid we would have to endure endless oners of women jokingly bitching at each other in the open, calling each other a slut when in smaller groups where the slut is never there to respond. Hopefully a catfight here and there.

Just kidding. We're frosting cupcakes*! xoxo <3

 

*boobie-shaped

 

EDIT: couple of minor fuckups

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 5, 2013 - 12:21pm

@Renee - A much more varied and honest attempt at portrayal of women in media, with much less emphasis on violent women being the only way they can be strong might have been more her intent. Point being if she'd just said, "Hollywood's idea about feminism are silly and narrow," she wouldn't have conveyed much information.

 

@Flaminia Ferina -

They aren't called a "sissy" when they cry for a woman anymore.

Still happens.

I see the double standard. But why that? What I will actually, really, never understand is how can men accept this kind of brown nosed treatment all the time. That's why I talked about comfort. Maybe I just don't get what (generically, publicly) being a man implies (and why the abuse of adverbs is so tempting when speaking essai)

When the concept is at its worst it is a pridefully enforced declaration of superiority that disproves itself, when at its best a selfless dedication to the protection of and providing for those who are weak or you have an obligation to. So, Hesinburg VS. Walter White.

Is the fear of losing some kind of barely existent privilege worth the cost of never being able to have one's feelings acknowledged and respected by others?

I won't claim to be some expert on all men ever, but I feel it is safe to say I've been exposed to a fairly patriarchal group of people in my life and still have what others would call a fairly patriarchal world view. Not 'expressing emotions' was never a means to an end. It was an end in and of itself, a goal not a tool. Expressing emotions, especially in long drawn out ways, is exhausting. I've known of men who instead found it frustrating. I'm sure you can have the whole "is it exhausting because you think it is exhausting/frustrating or vice versa or combo" debate, but the answer doesn't make it less true. Plus, on a strictly personal level, if you don't know me well enough to know how I feel by a simple statement of fact, I consider my feelings to be none of your damn business.

This is just all too binary to be liberating.

You are forgetting loyalty to the concept. Good or bad, people are loyal to concepts that those not loyal to them would feel imprisoned by. Thrones, cults, whatever. Men who want to be traditional men would often consider the 'liberation' from the idea would be having their identity stripped away, their humanity.

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 5, 2013 - 9:05pm

@Dwayne --- I agree, many (if not most) people are not looking or hoping for true naturalism; therefore I think it's logically futile to complain that one unrealistic element out of many is unrealistic. I'd be interested to hear someone make a case that these parts of a work of fiction will be a negative influence while these other parts are just fiction and everyone will ignore them. It's either fiction or it's not. Every reader/viewer appraoches things in a slightly different way, so the big sweeping condemnations of movies or books are hard for me to take seriously.

@FF --- I think there are people of all backgrounds who don't care at all what types of characters are portrayed in film and fiction. But, (!?) since I and all other white men enjoy such equilaterally profitable hegemony over the rest of humanity, I can totally understand why the thought of Tom Cruise kicking infinite ass in a movie makes some people hate me. (?!)

Michael.Eric.Snyder's picture
Michael.Eric.Snyder October 5, 2013 - 10:22pm

So... is Connie, the protagonist in Oates's short story, a feminist? Or is the story an indictment against feminism? 

WWNS (What Would Natalie Say?)

Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff October 6, 2013 - 4:03am

Thanks for helping me out my doubts, Dwayne, what I expressed does genuinely elude me. But,

It was an end in and of itself, a goal not a tool

I always mix my tools with my goals, and I don't think being a woman - or expressing feelings - plays any part in that. I also think you will never reach a goal using inappropriate tools. Or, as they put it, you can't pretend to become a virgin by having sex. You see by yourself that, if your goal is to never express emotion, you can become prey of never having the possibility to express your emotions.
 

if you don't know me well enough to know how I feel by a simple statement of fact, I consider my feelings to be none of your damn business.

Word to that. Respect. But it could be a very demanding stance against people who honestly want to get to know you.
 

Men who want to be traditional men would often consider the 'liberation' from the idea would be having their identity stripped away, their humanity.

I have no problem with that. Be traditional all you want. I only don't understand why traditional men always want to impose their traditionality on everybody else. I really have no interest in becoming a threat to them. In fact, if they are so dispotic, all I want is to keep to myself very much.


JY

I can totally understand why the thought of Tom Cruise kicking infinite ass in a movie makes some people hate me. (?!)

They'd better hate you for your beautiful use of words, if they really have to. 
Haters gonna hate. Mehers gonna meh :D


M.E.S


WWNS (What Would Natalie Say?)

lovely. Let's bring it with us. #wwns
 

 

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 6, 2013 - 5:43pm

@JYH - Most people take them too seriously, but they do get old.

@Flaminia Ferina 

...if your goal is to never express emotion, you can become prey of never having the possibility to express your emotions.

Yeah, if you avoid something you avoid it.

But it could be a very demanding stance against people who honestly want to get to know you.

At a practical and ethical level it'd be dishonest to be open to people, in my dad to day life when I'm too slammed to really bond with anyone who isn't a part of my life.

I have no problem with that. Be traditional all you want. I only don't understand why traditional men always want to impose their traditionality on everybody else.

The same reasons my atheist friends get on to me for going to church; almost no one knows how to mind their own business. The ability to admit you might be mistaken, or that your ideas shouldn't be taken to extremes seems only slightly less rare then rocking horse poop.

Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff October 7, 2013 - 4:07am

You seem to be a very balanced traditionalist, Dwayne. That's cool. And because it's true that atheists can be rather unreasonable, I would rather say that I'm an agnostic. If I'm really forced to speak about religion, that is.

I have one more question. For years, in my early youth, I've been treating men pretty harsh because I had learned their only three feelings were Pride, Erection, and Remote Control. This behaviour of mine turned out being not only unkind to the men I met, but of course it also backfired. Now I know that the notion of Man As An Electrode is culturally constructed and I treat the men in my life fairly. Problem is, some are not used in being treated fairly (not just by me cause I had been harsh. By anybody).

Now I wonder if being treated fairly is offensive to men.

Tyler Runde's picture
Tyler Runde from Teutopolis, IL. is reading Unnatural Creatures October 7, 2013 - 7:18am

@Flaminia: I want specific examples of how you're treating men fairly. You may only think you're treating them fairly, or the intentions of your behavior are so ambiguous that it's made him suspicious. There's far too many possibilities to give an answer if we don't know the details.

Also, if you're feeling brave, check out some of the videos on the manwowanmyth Youtube channel. It might help answer some questions for you, especially about why men seem to perceive all women as evil. Just remember that the videos aren't meant to bash women but to instead help men become aware of the discrimation and even oppression they face in modern day western society.

And if you'd like to understand the male psyche a little bit better, read Way of the Superior Man by David Deida. If I ever have a son that's the first book I intend to give him when he's ready to learn what it means to be a man.

If you'd rather read something for free head on over to David Wygant's dating blog for women, and swing by his men's blog as well since that'll help you gain more insight.

I hope that sets you down the right path because this really isn't the place to be coming to to learn about male psychology and interpersonal relationships.

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 7, 2013 - 7:49am

No one wants fair treatment. If we are really fair we hold each other accountable for every action, good or bad. Nothing from the heart, just a giant ledger of debts owed us and to others. Doesn't seem like much of a way to live. I'd suggest trying to be kind to people, especially when they don't deserve it. 

Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff October 7, 2013 - 9:07am

I'd suggest trying to be kind to people, especially when they don't deserve it.

Exactly! I don't know with that expecially though, and that seems to be the whole point here.

Back to Portman's message, maybe what she meant is something along the lines of: The answer to a historical predominance of women portrayed as a decoration in films shouldn't necessarily be a series of rocky women that could end up losing touch with their own emotions, just so that way they think men will respect them.

Women rights movements don't need a sterile symmetry with men's attitudes to prove their point, the same way a polite person doesn't need to respond symmetrically to a rude person addressing him or her.

We have said in many ways already, but now it's deconstructed.

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 7, 2013 - 9:31am

I think you're right she'd prefer variety to reactions, but I've never been a big fan of deconstruction.

Dave's picture
Dave from a city near you is reading constantly October 7, 2013 - 4:46pm
Flaminia Ferina's picture
Flaminia Ferina from Umbria is reading stuff October 8, 2013 - 3:16am

Nice one, Dave.

Even when we get a film about a strong woman, it's always with the caveat that she behave like a man -- but never in a sexual manner because that would be slutty.

But I'm not going to decontruct that now, cause I sort of agree with Dwayne. My take is, Deconstruction is a drag, people should get paid for doing it.

Cavalcading on, and to bring it back to a literary context, I want to propose this other article - linked through VIDA: Be that woman

In short (and expanding), don't expect others to write the characters you want to read: do it yourself.

Dave's picture
Dave from a city near you is reading constantly October 8, 2013 - 3:44am

don't expect others to write the characters you want to read: do it yourself.

This.

 

 

FOREVER.

 

 

TIMES A THOUSAND.

 

Thuggish's picture
Thuggish from Vegas is reading Day of the Jackal October 19, 2013 - 1:48pm

Never liked Krisen Sewart, but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVeimNmGpvM

 

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 19, 2013 - 8:25pm

I hate to think that if I write a story about a 'kickass' or 'macho' woman, people will think I'm trying to be political or, worse yet, 'trendy'.

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 19, 2013 - 10:10pm

I think it depends on how you do it; if you write something about a well rounded woman who is tough/smart/violent/whatever because that makes sense in the life you present her it won't seem political. If it seems like she randomly uses those things because they are her only tools and/or that proves she is better than men/other women it will seem political. And ham-fisted. 

jyh's picture
jyh from VA is reading whatever he feels like October 20, 2013 - 8:06pm

Yeah. I think it also depends on the reader. Some people are more apt than others to force stories and characters through the sort of 'scrutiny' that might come to such a conclusion.

Dwayne's picture
Dwayne from Cincinnati, Ohio (suburbs) is reading books that rotate to often to keep this updated October 20, 2013 - 11:05pm

Well you can go for idiot resistant, but no such thing as idiot proof.