Posted on 01/05/2017 2:30:30 PM PST by iowamark
Two recent films, Deepwater Horizon with Mark Wahlberg and Sully starring Tom Hanks, represent something of a breath of fresh air, for both movies feature men who are intelligent, virtuous, and quietly heroic. If this strikes you as a banal observation, that just means you haven’t been following much of the popular culture for the past twenty years.
One of the distinctive marks of films and television programs the last couple of decades has been the Homer Simpsonization of men. Don’t get me wrong: I’m a big fan of the The Simpsons and laugh at Homer’s antics as much as the next guy. But the father of the Simpson family is stupid, boorish, drunk most of the time, irresponsible, comically incompetent, and childish. In the cartoon world, he is echoed, of course, by Family Guy’s Peter Griffin, who is similarly buffoonish. In both cases, the wives—Marge in The Simpsons and Lois in Family Guy—have the brains, the competence, and the moral responsibility. And in The Simpsons, Homer is imitated by his son Bart, who is sneaky, stupid, and unmotivated, and Marge by daughter Lisa, who is hyper-smart, uber-competent, and morally alert. In one memorable episode, Lisa is worried that she has inherited her father’s terrible qualities but is relieved to discover, by the show’s end, that the “stupid gene” is communicated only to the males in the Simpson line. In another of my favorite Simpsons scenes, Homer is told, at a moment of moral crisis, to consult that “little voice that tells you right from wrong,” and he responds, “You mean Lisa?”
If you think this male-bashing is restricted to cartoons, think again. Ray Romano’s character in Everybody Loves Raymond, Ed O’Neill’s hopeless father in Married With Children, and Ty Burrell's hapless goofball in Modern Family—all are variations on the Homer Simpson theme. Add to all this the presentation of fathers as not just inept, but horrific in Game of Thrones, and the absent, indifferent fathers of Stranger Things.
And I wonder whether you’ve noticed a character that can be found in practically every movie made today? I call her the “all conquering female.” Almost without exception, she is underestimated by men and then proves herself more intelligent, cleverer, more courageous, and more skilled than any man. Whether we’re talking about a romantic comedy, an office-drama, or an adventure movie, the all conquering female will almost inevitably show up. And she has to show her worth in a domineering way, that is to say, over and against the men. For her to appear strong, they have to appear weak. For a particularly good case in point, watch the most recent Star Wars film.
Now I perfectly understand the legitimacy of feminist concerns regarding the portrayal of women in the media as consistently demure, retiring, and subservient to men. I grant that, in most of the action/adventure movies that I saw growing up, women would typically twist an ankle or get captured and then require rescuing by the swashbuckling male hero—and I realize how galling this must have been to generations of women. And therefore, a certain correction was undoubtedly in order. But what is problematic now is the Nietzschean quality of the reaction, by which I mean, the insistence that female power has to be asserted over and against males, that there is an either/or, zero-sum conflict between men and women. It is not enough, in a word, to show women as intelligent, savvy, and good; you have to portray men as stupid, witless, and irresponsible. That this savage contrast is having an effect especially on younger men is becoming increasingly apparent.
In the midst of a “you-go-girl” feminist culture, many boys and young men feel adrift, afraid that any expression of their own good qualities will be construed as aggressive or insensitive. If you want concrete proof of this, take a look at the statistics contrasting female and male success at the university level. And you can see the phenomenon in films such as Fight Club and The Intern. In the former, the Brad Pitt character turns to his friend and laments, “we’re thirty year old boys;” and in the latter, Robert De Niro’s classic male type tries to whip into shape a number of twenty-something male colleagues who are rumpled, unsure of themselves, without ambition—and of course under the dominance of an all conquering female.
It might be the case that, in regard to money, power, and honor, a zero-sum dynamic obtains, but it decidedly does not obtain in regard to real virtue. The truly courageous person is not threatened by another person’s courage; the truly temperate man is not intimidated by the temperance of someone else; the truly just person is not put off by the justice of a countryman; and authentic love positively rejoices in the love shown by another. And therefore, it should be altogether possible to hold up the virtue of a woman without denying virtue to a man. In point of fact, if we consult the “all conquering female” characters in films and TV, we see that they often exemplify the very worst of the traditional male qualities: aggression, suspicion, hyper-sensitivity, cruelty, etc. This is what happens when a Nietzschean framework has replaced a classical one.
My point is that it is altogether possible—and eminently desirable—to say “you go boy” with as much vigor as “you go girl.” And both the boys and the girls will be better for it.
"One of the distinctive marks of films and television programs the last couple of decades has been the Homer Simpsonization of men. This has led to a Nietzschean over reaction, by which female power has to be asserted over and against males. That this savage contrast is having an effect especially on younger men is becoming increasingly apparent."
Except that it has now been so long (mid-70's) since this portrayal was the norm that it is completely irrelevant to any current discussion of the topic.
You go gril!
Just google MGTOW (Men going their own way) and you will see how so many guys are giving up on women. They may or may not date and do casual sex, but they won’t commit to to women or share their resources with them.
The toxic culture mentioned in this article is real and has quite an impact on the young guys. In short, many guys don’t assume women need protecting. They’ve been told their whole lives how capable such women are.
Apart from the ludicrous premise that Black Widow can hold her own against physically-superlative males (enemy soldiers etc) in a hand-to-hand melee, the Marvel Universe has mostly avoided this. Female characters aren’t domineering, and the male leads are not in the least incompetent or bumbling. Indeed, the two “superhero” females are both somewhat damaged (Black Widow is a former assassin with a very questionable past, and Scarlet Witch is right on the edge of crazy and has to be talked down from the ledge by male characters a couple of times).
I’m sure it is having an effect on young men but it hasn’t reached Staten Island yet :)
As for Ray Romano, unless you have an Italian mother, you CAN’T know how real that character is.
And Al Bundy started “NO MA’AM!” He’s an American icon :)
On a serious note, the danger lies in women (I’ve seen it in Manhattan MANY times) taking some “cardio” boxing or a few karate classes or whatever and thinking they can fend off a man who becomes overly aggressive when they are alone.
That leads to a lot of one night stands ending badly and a bunch of women walking alone to their cars that are blocks away from bars, ending badly.
OF COURSE these men are animals and wrong, but THEY EXIST. Living in reality is a good thing.
I grew up with Father Knows Best, Leave it to Beaver and The Donna Reed Show, where the dad was the wise head of the family. I recognized this trend of male bashing a few decades ago. My only child is a white male and I was damn sure I wasn’t going to let him be sucked into the Lib mindset that men (particularly WHITE men) are stupid, selfish, insensitive and only out for themselves. He is now a successful adult with a family of his own. I hope many more moms awaken and build up their young sons instead of destroying them with the Lib mindset.
I agree totally with the premise of the story but the Bundys are not a good example.
Sure Al is an idiot but Peg is worse in most ways. Also the daughter is an idiot and the son is smart.
“Just google MGTOW (Men going their own way) and you will see how so many guys are giving up on women. They may or may not date and do casual sex, but they won’t commit to to women or share their resources with them.”
There’s a term for these males: boys.
Pathetic and as damaging as Democrats.
Married with children was a good show. Al Bundy was the only sane and competent character on that show.
The dolt father model really took off with Norman Lear’s set up of Archie Bunker aimed straight at the blue collar male worker supporting his family of nit wits and an ingrate lineral leech of a son in law.
So glad you posted that.
Grils NEVER get fair representation in this controversy.
GRIL POWER!
Shep Smith was on a mascara rant about Trump today. I thought, “You go girl!”
And that's the problem. Almost everyone who complains about the shows and the commercials and the "feminization" of fill-in-the-blank makes no changes in his consumption habits.
There are a lot of American men who like women, but don’t like American women. This article explains why.
The Bishop misses a key point. A culture that continues to produce 40% or more of it’s children born out of wedlock will fail.
Grillin’ is a man’s job.
I agree.
Why the attitude pal? What’s it to you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.