Attacking the image of a child?

Hollywood is shite but they do try.

In my ‘Let’s do a search of Blogs mode – I did a search, I can’t remember the search term but it had feminism in it. I know, I know – stupid, masochistic me.

But I did look around and read a few blogs – the usual man hating shit as normal. Remembering that the Feminist movement STILL hasn’t invaded Saudi yet – but that is besides the point.

As the feminist movement is all about equality – yeah, I know, they are really about total power exchange but that I have blogged about before, I thought a movie review would be interesting reading from a feminist’s point of view.

But…this was the lead on the post:

Swing Vote: Racist, sexist, asshole tripe

OK – well that kind of sums up what the author, L, thought of it – pretty cool.

She went on to say:

OMG she’s ten and she’s literally being Bud’s mother and wife. It’s so gross. The entire first twenty minutes is dedicated to making it very, very clear that Molly is the “mature” “adult” of the house, and it ends, finally, when Bud drops Molly off at school and she reminds him to meet her at the polling place because that day is voting day and voting is very important to her. I seriously almost left in the middle of this section.

Why didn’t she leave? that is beside the point but I had to ask.

What I did find disturbing is that in real life there are many children who find themselves right in that situation. Where they are the adult in the family – and not always because their dad (it couldn’t have been a mum because mums have vaginas) is an alcoholic. No matter how the film depicts the dad – L says he is obviously an alcoholic – it is, after all a film, But my point being what if the dad had been a very disabled person? Would L have found that so disgusting?

Many of those children don’t get help because society hides them away – and some feel it is OK to belittle them. If the dad, or in just as many cases mums, have an alcohol addiction shouldn’t they need help rather than scorn?

It seems the case it OK to attack.

Next time – don’t go see the movies or, if you are so horrified, leave.

Advertisements

About Bolshy

Blogging in the ether to see if that elusive literary agent or publisher wants some new talent.
This entry was posted in Blah!, Blogroll, Blogs, Christianity, Comment, Feminism, Personal philosophy, Political correctness, Politics, psychology, Rant!, Sociology, What a Bitch!, WTF! Moment and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Attacking the image of a child?

  1. L says:

    The movie isn’t about disabled people. It is about able-bodied people. Way to go with the red-herring there.

    I’m not really sure what your problem is with my blog post aside from reading misandry and ableism where there isn’t any, but thanks for the linkage.

  2. Matt says:

    LOL! Well done Will!

  3. dz says:

    well put will. i couldnt finish reading her entire review. i can’t believe people like that exist. she just needs to go lick her girlfriend’s tw@t and then she’ll feel all better about herself.

  4. Will Rhodes says:

    The movie isn’t about disabled people. It is about able-bodied people. Way to go with the red-herring there.

    I pasted the quotes directly from your post, L. Obviously you missed the point I was making – but that said, you are a feminist so that is par for the course.

    There are child carers in this world that do look after parents who are able-bodied but do have psychological problems and some had problems with alcohol – those children are very mature and are, in effect, the adult you so criticised. In doing so you criticise the child for being a loving, adorable human being who is willing to go that extra mile to help the parent(s).

    I would presume your answer would be to lock up the parent(s) and take the child into care – much like many of your PC compatriots. And of course – never let Hollywood bring anything to the big screen if it remotely resembles the real world and doesn’t promote your warped agenda of female supremacy.

  5. L says:

    I wasn’t criticizing the girl for having to be the adult, Will. Please show me a quote where I say something about her being a bad person for being mature. Criminy, illiteracy rates are skyrocketing! I was criticizing the movie for making this sort of situation — a horrible, stressful, unfair situation for a child — a glamorous, funny situation to be in. I’m not arguing that situations like the one in the movie don’t exist; I’m arguing that they aren’t funny. A ten-year-old has to literally mother her father, that’s not funny and movies like Swing Vote are stupid for trying to make light of such things. That’s my problem with the movie, not the fact that Molly was forced to act mature.

    Seriously, try reading the whole post instead of cherry-picking the bits that rub you the wrong way and criticizing them completely out of context.

  6. dz says:

    L… no one could read that whole post unless they’re just huge fans of bathing in garbage. grow up. recognize entertainment for what it is… entertainment.

  7. L says:

    I wasn’t talking to you, dz. It must be difficult for you to tell when you’re unwanted. Let me give you some hints: When no one is looking at you, talking to you, saying your name, talking about anything you said, or otherwise giving you the time of day, you’re probably not an integral part of whatever’s happening around you. ‘Kay?

  8. Will Rhodes says:

    L –

    OMG she’s ten and she’s literally being Bud’s mother and wife. It’s so gross. The entire first twenty minutes is dedicated to making it very, very clear that Molly is the “mature” “adult” of the house

    You call this gross – is it an over-simplification on my part that is deemed as a criticism?

    If so I apologise – yet most would say it is.

    As for calling me illiterate – is that your way of belittling my point of view on a post you made? If you have a criticism about my post I accept it without insult. That is what I call mature in a discussion.

  9. dz says:

    who cares if i’m unwanted? i’m posting, and you’re reading.

    the important thing is that others see how rediculous you are…
    i mean, i’m trying to inform you that it’s entertainment and shouldn’t be viewed literally or as hate propoganda. i’m trying to form some discussion… kinda :-p

  10. L says:

    Let me spell it out for you, Will, since you insist on maintaining your ignorance: THE FACT THAT SHE IS EXPECTED TO CARE FOR HER FATHER AS A WIFE/MOTHER WOULD — AT THE AGE OF TEN — IS GROSS. THE FACT THAT THE MOVIE DOES NOT QUESTION THIS AND IN FACT GLORIFIES IT IS GROSS. The little girl herself is not gross, and I am not — nor have I ever been — criticizing her or little girls and boys like her who must care for their parents because their parents are immature, irresponsible assholes.

    Are we clear?

  11. L says:

    dz, did I say that I was viewing the movie literally? Did I say that I thought it was hate propaganda? No, I didn’t say either of those things. I’m aware that movies are entertainment; the argument implicit in any review, especially reviews that come from a particular activist lens, is that entertainment matters, that entertainment affects people. If you don’t agree with that basic premise, fine, but it’s not my problem and I won’t be deleting the post (or any of my other movie reviews) just because you don’t think entertainment matters. Kindly shut up now, thanks.

  12. Will Rhodes says:

    Are we clear?

    Well no, not really.

    All I can see is that you are being judgemetal on an aspect of both Hollywood and peoples lives in the real world – that you have no real clue about. Caps-locking [shouting] really doesn’t add to your voice – it shows that you have made a mistake in what you have posted and are not willing to discuss it.

    I still cannot understand if you hated the movie so much – and didn’t take it as literal, you say that you find it gross that the movie – as pretend feel-good movie it was/is you didn’t leave?

    You judged it from a very narrow viewpoint and you wish to proclaim that this movie somehow will effect people in a negative way. The movie was more about getting people to vote/showing that voting counts and showing that a girl – mature in her thinking, which I would have thought from your feminist perspective was a good thing, you judge it as wrong to do such a thing.

    Make no wonder young women are turning away from the feminist movement.

  13. L says:

    Do you leave or stop every movie you don’t enjoy? I wanted to write about the movie, so I stayed to the end. If I had left and written a review of half the movie, I still wouldn’t have any cred with you, so why should I bother explaining myself to you?

    How is explaining what I wrote evidence that I am “not willing to discuss it”? I don’t think I made a mistake — I think that you’re having a difficult time reading — and I explained what I wrote to you since you obviously didn’t get it. Sorry for the shouting.

    I sure did judge the movie from a very narrow point of view. I am one person, and I have a perspective of the world. I am not able to represent all views of all movies everywhere — besides, it would be unethical for me to attempt to do so. I realize what the movie was intended to be about — it’s plainly obvious from the trailers what the moviemakers were trying to do. There are other things to talk about than what moviemakers intended to do and the main theme of the movie; I picked up on the characterization and the secondary messages that the characterization of Bud, Molly, and, to some extent, Kate send out to viewers. If you disagree with my readings of those things, that’s your prerogative. But I don’t see why I have to talk about opinions I don’t have in order to have my writing deemed acceptable to anyone else. Do people come around to your blog and take you to task for not representing their views? If it happens, I bet it’s annoying.

    Since you still don’t really get it, I think it’s wrong that a situation involving a ten-year-old taking care of her alcoholic, immature, irresponsible father because she is forced to be mature in order to survive is deemed heroic, loving, adorable, funny or otherwise positive. I think it’s wrong that the movie makes light of a difficult, horrible, all too common situation in such a way. I DON’T think that the child in the movie was wrong, and I DON’T think that children who are in similar situations in real life are wrong for doing what they must in order to survive.

    Why don’t you write your damn review instead of piggybacking on and nitpicking mine, since you apparently understand it oh so much better?

  14. Will Rhodes says:

    L –

    So you do agree that your point of view on the subject is narrow?

    I am glad that you do.

    Writing a review, I always find the most entertaining and informative review is one where the author is as objective as possible – I hardly ever read a narrative that is, as you openly say, is a narrative of looking for the political point where there isn’t one.

    Starting a review with racist, sexist etc seriously means that you have judged the movie on behalf of your readers well before they have had time to watch it. If it’s crap in your point of view that is perfectly fine – but give a leader so others may watch it and make their own minds up.

  15. L says:

    Wow. Are you aware that you too have a narrow perspective? That, in fact, everyone on the planet has a narrow perspective? That pure objectivity is impossible? That all reviews of anything judge stuff “on behalf of . . . readers,” since that’s the point of reviews? That every review of every movie I’ve read in hardcopy publications has a judgmental title/leader?

    Do you write to your local newspaper demanding that they not publish the number of stars a reviewer has given a movie so that you can make up your own mind about it? Thought not.

    If you want to read a non-subjective, non-spoiler-ridden, non-opinionated piece about a movie, why, oh why, would you look at a review?? Why wouldn’t you look for a summary of the movie? You are just being ridiculous now.

    People can still make up their own minds, even if they’ve read my review. I see you have, and I don’t even think you’ve seen the movie — quite an amazing feat, right there. Obviously, my opinion on an esoteric blog isn’t as powerful as you seem to think.

  16. Will Rhodes says:

    I do write to the local paper asking them why they do such things – but that is by the by.

    What was the first response to that review? Do I remember correctly or incorrectly that the person who wrote the response was not going to see it because of what you wrote? I could be wrong of course.

    If I should write a review I wouldn’t be as judgemental as yourself – but as you correctly said, that is my prerogative to take the high ground.

  17. L says:

    This is par for the course at this point, but I shall sally forth nonetheless: You’re missing the point. A review is judgmental — that’s the whole point of reviews. Wikipedia says that a review is “an evaluation of a publication . . . or a piece of hardware”, and evaluation is “systematic determination of merit, worth, and significance of something or someone using criteria against a set of standards. Evaluation often is used to characterize and appraise subjects of interest in a wide range of human enterprises” [bolding mine]. If you don’t like Wikipedia, check out the definitions of these words with a dictionary — they’ll give you the same information. Go ahead and write the non-review-review, Will. That’ll get published somewhere other than your blog, definitely. *eye roll*

    If someone decided not to see it because they read my review, I don’t see how that is a problem. My review still isn’t preventing people from making up their own minds, and it’s certainly not preventing people from seeing the movie if they want to. If they want to save some money and if they trust me as a writer because we have similar perspectives of movies such as this and they choose to take my word for it, that is their choice. Besides that, I don’t see why you’re taking up the defense of movie conglomerates by denouncing my review — what’s in it for you to be so nice and forgiving and generous to a bunch of people who don’t care about you beyond your wallet?

  18. Will Rhodes says:

    Par for the course indeed – what’s next?

    Evaluation is not judgemental, which your piece was, two very different things.

  19. L says:

    You have got to be fucking kidding me.

    Evaluation is NOTHING BUT judgmental. What are you even talking about? Do you have some evidence for your ridiculous claim?

  20. Will Rhodes says:

    Why would I be kidding you with expletive or not?

    You are judgemental and that isn’t evaluation and objectivity.

    You judged the film to be sexist, racist etc – that wasn’t the intent of the film-maker so you judged it, not evaluated it.

  21. L says:

    Okay, I can see we’re done here. Have fun making up the definitions of words and living in your own little world of non-reality!

  22. Matt says:

    Winner and still champion….WILL! (though you have to admit it wasn’t a fair fight – you were up against a feminist…)

  23. Will Rhodes says:

    LOLOL

  24. Julie P says:

    I was wondering how this forum would turn out while I was trapped in a day long corporate function. It looks like it went south.

    I read the review of the movie and, in my opinion, it could have been written with far less foul language to get the point across. Without seeing the movie, I can only rely on the review of it. Given that movie revolves around a parent who appears to drink too much and has a child who appears to be raising the parent, perhaps the review would have been written from the perspective of children raising a less than desirable parent. That is an extremely important subject that many can relate to and it would shed light on it.

  25. L says:

    Oh noez! Not foul language! That is perhaps the end of the world!

    There are other reviews, Julie. You don’t HAVE to read my review, let alone rely on it.

  26. Julie P says:

    @L,

    People who use foul language to communicate a message show their ignorance. It’s a free world and I will read whatever I like and criticize it for whatever reason I like. Try reading some Gloria Steinem, not once in any of her writings has she used foul language.

  27. belledame222 says:

    So, Julie, Will et al, out of idle curiosity, does “go lick your girlfriend’s tw@t” count as “foul language?” Or are we giving it a pass because of the supposed anti-feminist sentiment, or possibly the oh so coy @?

    Hint hint: a) not all feminists are lesbians b) not all lesbians are feminists c) some of us who are both don’t consider either an insult, and d) are sad for the gentleman who apparently is at least somewhat revolted by the idea of licking icky girl bits. Well, more specifically, e) sad for any partner of his. Then again, I suspect that would just be one checkmark on a long list, all things considered…

    And while I haven’t read the entire works of Ms. Steinem, I really don’t think the occasional use of the eff-word would exactly negate what she had to say, either. lord knows most of the women she purports to speak for are not always so genteel. As the gentleman says, “peoples’ lives in the real world” are not always so tidy.

    As to your/Julie’s point about the child raising the parent, I do believe that that was what L was objecting to in the first place, gentlemen; it may happen in the real world, but there are those of us who don’t think it’s so hot there, either. In any case, the phrase “and grow up” from the aforementioned anti-cunnilingus gentleman was, well, interesting.

  28. Will Rhodes says:

    Hi Belledame – thanks for calling over.

    So, Julie, Will et al, out of idle curiosity, does “go lick your girlfriend’s tw@t” count as “foul language?” Or are we giving it a pass because of the supposed anti-feminist sentiment, or possibly the oh so coy @?

    Well no, not really – I personally ignored that comment because I was speaking to L – L decided to answer him then decided to go on the defensive or attack, take your pick. Here you can comment as long as there isn’t hate speech.

    Hint hint: a) not all feminists are lesbians b) not all lesbians are feminists c) some of us who are both don’t consider either an insult, and d) are sad for the gentleman who apparently is at least somewhat revolted by the idea of licking icky girl bits. Well, more specifically, e) sad for any partner of his. Then again, I suspect that would just be one checkmark on a long list, all things considered…

    I agree 100% with you – I do, believe it or not, have friends who are both lesbian and feminist – but we do have a record of discord where we, sometimes, agree to disagree on political matters – God forbid, some of them are anti-liberal women with vociferous opinions on gay marriage. They say in their argument that it isn’t natural – I, on the other hand, completely disagree with them – funny, eh?

    As to your/Julie’s point about the child raising the parent, I do believe that that was what L was objecting to in the first place, gentlemen; it may happen in the real world, but there are those of us who don’t think it’s so hot there, either. In any case, the phrase “and grow up” from the aforementioned anti-cunnilingus gentleman was, well, interesting.

    My point about L’s “review” was that she judged it with no background other than saying OMG she’s 10.

    Girls and boys around the world, both developed and not are just that – the parent in the family – and they need our support not ridicule. Whether the film depicts a drunken man or woman is, in my opinion, irrelevant – and I do think that L was looking for much more in the film rather than the story the film-maker was trying to get over.

    That said – this has been part of the major conspiracy theories about Hollywood for so long. I am sure you have read L’ “review” – if you haven’t seen the film – may I ask how her “review” made you feel about the film? If you have seen it, please, by all means, tell us your thoughts on it?

    I look forward to that.

    Thanks again for calling over.

  29. L says:

    My point about L’s “review” was that she judged it with no background other than saying OMG she’s 10.

    Girls and boys around the world, both developed and not are just that – the parent in the family – and they need our support not ridicule. Whether the film depicts a drunken man or woman is, in my opinion, irrelevant – and I do think that L was looking for much more in the film rather than the story the film-maker was trying to get over.

    As I have explained over and over again, I was NOT criticizing the little girl. You took a sentence out of the context of the rest of the review (a very long review, according to dz, with “a lot of words,” according to another commenter on the post — you can’t say there’s no other background there) and twisted its meaning so you could have something to whine about. Not only that, but you weren’t even honest and forthright enough to comment on my post — I found you through a cowardly trackback. How is the fact that Costner’s character is a drunken immature idiot — who allows his 10-year-old daughter to dote on him hand and foot — “irrelevant”? Where do you get this shit? Seriously, you are totally off your rocker.

  30. Matt says:

    L:

    I understand the issue you are bringing up, but I think there’s some miscommunication between you and Will. Will is trying to state that in his eyes, your review wasn’t a review of the movie (didn’t read it, wouldn’t know) but rather social commentary on the portrayal of the situation in the movie. You, however, are trying to explain that you didn’t find fault with the little girl, but with how the movie seemed to be okay with Costner’s relationship with her. While both merit value, there IS a difference between social commentary and a review. I hope I kind of laid out both sides – if not, I have no clue what either of you are talking about…

  31. L says:

    Thanks for your input, Matt, but what I wrote is a review (you should probably go take a look at it before deciding what the argument’s about here). I’ve been writing reviews for a while, so I kinda know what they are and what they are not. If you look upthread a ways here, you can see that Will doesn’t think that movie reviews published in newspapers should even have star-ratings next to them. While it takes two to tango, it takes just one to be a total idiot — and I’ll just say that I’m not the total idiot in this dance.

  32. Matt says:

    Oh L, you shouldn’t have pointed me to your “review” because now I’m starting to get ticked off: what you wrote, whether you want to classify it as such or not, is social commentary mixed with a plot synopsis. You explain the plot, clearly pointing out all the things that society does wrong and that the movie doesn’t capture correctly. You ignore all of the points about the movie except for the plot: you don’t talk about the acting, you don’t talk about the score, you don’t talk about the effects or lighting. You were clearly upset at the fact that none of this can happen in real life (as you point out multiple times in your essay). Need I remind you that Swing Vote is, in fact, a fictional movie? If you wanted a documentary that ends in misery, as real life would have, then why did you go see Kevin Costner (whom you clearly hate – and blaming him for any popularity in “insourcing” instead of the writers who provided his lines is just stupid by the way) portray that kind of father; you had to have known that he’d come around in the end, as all those stories do.

    Just because you’ve been writing ABOUT movies for a long time, doesn’t mean that you’ve been writing movie reviews.

    On another note, Will can have his opinions: most of the time, I disagree with him which he’ll certainly corroborate. Frankly, I think the star-ratings are pointless too, from an objective sense. However, I find out through trial and error which reviewers seem to share my taste in movies and only then do their star-ratings actually make any sense to me. So they are useful, but not on an arbitrary 1-5 scale. Kind of confusing, but that’s my personal opinion.

    And you’re a bit off on your last line: it takes two to be a total idiot – one to be the idiot, the other to point it out. I’ve taken the liberty of being the latter 😉

  33. Matt says:

    P.S. I thought you were done here:

    L // August 5, 2008 at 5:36 pm

    Okay, I can see we’re done here.

  34. L says:

    you don’t talk about the acting, you don’t talk about the score, you don’t talk about the effects or lighting.

    This is what you get for not reading closely enough:

    There is absolutely nothing redeeming about this movie, even if I were to approach it from a mainstream reviewer’s perspective. It was only mildly entertaining, the music was horrible, the characterization overdone in general, the acting was really not very good (except for Madeline Carroll as Molly — she was somewhat believable), and the story was just boring. Overall, this is a fucking shitty movie and I don’t recommend it to anyone.

    I didn’t say it was a good review or a review that would be published in mainstream newspapers, but it fulfills the function of a movie review, namely to give others an idea of what I thought of it, why I thought that, and whether they should see it or not, in my oh so humble opinion.

    Need I remind you that Swing Vote is, in fact, a fictional movie?

    No, but thanks for asking. As I’ve already said in this thread, fictional movies are entertainment, but I wrote this and my other feminist reviews from the premise that entertainment matters because it affects people.

    As for being done, I changed my mind. So sue me.

  35. Matt says:

    I apologize for missing 37 out of 1,918 words. So sue me. But then again, one usually doesn’t have to wait until the end of a review to reach any substance…

  36. L says:

    Apology accepted.

By all means, leave your 2 bobs worth

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s