Miranda Suzanne

So does the film He's Just Not That Into You raise your ire or threaten you in any way?

Is it a simply a romantic comedy as some suggest, albeit with some dated concepts that were never taken seriously by anyone least of all women, or should feminists again take to the barricades to repel the sinister backlash against feminism that it represents.

If the latter applies should we immediately stop re-runs of Bewitched for a start.

Of course the review of He's Just Not Into You is a silly, pretentious overreaction to what is nothing more than the usual fluff romantic comedy from Hollywood. There is more to complain about in women's magazines than in this film and respondents who claim otherwise are wearing their feminist belts much too high to be comfortable.

Cornflower

Are you in the slightest bit aware that your comments to Miranda held no relationship to any of her points whatsoever. She was commenting on the vitriol of the likes of Runner and his ilk who still persist in dividing women into virgin or whore categories, a view which belongs in the Dark Ages from whence it came.

I too, in my real life, do not encounter the type of males who prowl the blogs looking to insult and demean specifically women, but sometimes men who agree with the idea of equality (in fact CJ Morgan was referred to as a "snag" on another thread). I have to wonder how small their lives must be if whenever a women posts a POV she is immediately accused of being a "misandrist" or "feminazi"just for having an opinion.

I couldn't give a rat's about the movie - any intelligent person can see it for the Hollywood schlock it is. However, the price of freedom (to work, buy our own homes, education, reproductive health etc) is constant vigilance, hence the humanist response to blatant prejudice and bigotry.

Miranda, you sound like a reasonable person.

As you point out people do not see things the same way, and the reasons for this are many.

I remember an exercise in communication where everyone had the same passage, yet there as many interpretations of that passage as there were people in the room. The first two obvious divisions were gender based, then came life experinces etc.

Some people do not want to think very hard and prefer to take the written word as gospel.

"In the real world, most people just want to live their lives peacefully, extracting as much joy and satisfaction as they can along the way. Most of this joy and satisfaction derives from happy, healthy relationships"

I agree with you on this and I would suggest most people cant be bothered or don't care about this subject.

However a recent article by Cathy Young is interesting.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/a_lack_of_reality_about_women.html

Thank you for that link, James. The author is saying exactly the same things that you and I have been saying for a long time - the constant pandering to "women's issues" is out of all proportion to the actual issues they may face and is primarily politically motivated. The once-egalitarian drivers of feminism have turned to a drive for dominance and total control over socio-political matters. Fair enough, perhaps, but let's call a spade a spade.

I'm fascinated by how closely the author's language mirrors my own words on these issues.

Cornflower, you ask "So does the film He's Just Not That Into You raise your ire or threaten you in any way?". Well no - as I pointed out in an earlier post, I haven't seen the movie and don't intend to. It would take a pretty big, powerful film to pose any sort of threat, and this one doesn't sound like that. It is just another bit of ephemeral popular culture and will fade away soon enough. The more interesting thing has been the conversation that the themes of the movie has sparked. I have stumbled here into a display of attitudes that are not common, or at least I haven't encountered them very much. Maybe I have just been lucky. Certainly I have worked in areas where gender stereotyping, of either kind, has been absent or minimal. It has been a shock to find men pronouncing on what I should or shouldn't be doing or claiming to believe that they know who I am because I am a woman. That is self-evidently unsafe, unwise and wrong. When those pronouncements are based upon religious belief they are even more so, because the formulaic and archaic thinking of religion has inbuilt prejudice and always leads to oppression.
While I am no feminist crusader, I do know that there still exist gross gender-based inequalities, particularly in developing countries and/or theocracies and more education and enlightenment are needed there. Maybe a little compassion for some of these issues, rather than angry denouncement of women for impolitely raising them, might lead to wins all round for everyone, including all men.
I think I am a reasonable person, James. That's why I am easily shocked by what I read in the blogs.

Miranda Suzanne. "I live in a world where it is taken for granted that I will exercise my right to work and contribute in ways best suited to my talents, and this doesn't need to be defended. The men in my life, whom I adore, don't feel the need to dictate what I can and can't do. For them, women's freedom has been a positive and natural development."

What a simply wonderfully perfect feminist world you must live in and doesn't the existence of manginas who worship you, stroke you and support you prove that it is so! It is lucky you're not into stereotypes and myths.

Unlike you, I live in the real world where there is always some inequality and unfairness, perceived or otherwise and there is always spirited debate to be had about all sorts of things, including the various brands of feminism that abound. Feminism is a political movement and critical discussion should be encouraged wouldn't you agree? It would be unhealthy and undemocratic to do otherwise.

While on this point, you must lead a sheltered life if any of the comments in this article have startled you because similar issues and concerns are common in books, the media and in other forums. The subject film 'review' by Sheree Cartwright and Anastasia Powell was discussed on ABC Opinion and Analysis and the criticisms were much the same and from women too.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/26/2526555.htm

Rather than being a forum seagull (fly in, circle at a great height above and dump on respondents), why not read the book, look at the film and offer some informed criticism of the article? Or would you rather die than do that?

As far as some of the male respondents to the OLO article are concerned, I think most only want the word 'some' used more often where men are being unfairly faulted as a group.

A good start would be to say outright that the men in your life are caring, well-intentioned humans who are not abusers of women and there are many others just like them around.