Ghostbusters and Feminism
Okay, so you aren't anti-feminism or anti-egalitarian if you think this movie looks like crap. I agree it looks like crap, and clearly I am the arbiter of what is or is not sexist (sarcsasm).
If you're one of those people accusing people who think this movie looks like crap of being sexist, only because they think it looks like crap, you're full of it.
That said, if you're one of these people who are like 'SWJs Fail again! This is what happens when you make a comedy starring women!' Then yes, you are a misogynist asshole. And the whole egalitarian crowd who said 'oh, it should be whoever is best for the role!' and then when the vast majority of lead roles go to men you say "oh, well! Men and women make different choices because SEXUAL DIMORPHISM! That's why men have leading positions and women have fewer roles and make less money!" Then yes, you are a vaguely thinned misogynist. Nobody looks at the whole 'Grown Ups' crowd and goes 'ugh, men, this is what happens when you give roles to men!'
That said, this movie looks like crap, but I think a lot of the reaction to it brings a lot of the bullshit on both sides to the fore - people saying OMG THIS IS THE BEST THING EVER WOMEN BREAKING STEREOTYPES OMG! IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU'RE SEXIST! for one side of bullshit and THIS IS WHY SJWS FAIL MWHAHA for the other side of bullshit.
My bet on how this convo will go? Nothing gets shut down faster than the F word.
Comments
I like this, though I don't think all feminists like the concept purely because it has women in it. Instead most talk about it as that section of art which is about inversion. Like rewriting the Aeneid with a gay hero or something. Inverting other art can lead to interesting discussion.
Yes and no, only to the extent that it works, and that depends on how closely the source material is adapted, or how well the spin on it is based on the diverse cast. Last year had some major films which were talked about in feminist circles, namely the new Mad Max (which I embarrassingly haven't seen) and the movie whose trailer is linked below (turn on captions for English). My complaint with the latter was that in inverting they paradoxically inverted them, in that, by putting a female in the male role, and a female in the male role, as much as it subverted the location of those types, it paradoxically reinforced a dichotomy between male and female.
enter link description here
Well, personally I think people are overreacting. I really don't see why there should be so much hate on it, but from the first trailer it just looks "okay" but not bad, and really people who are upset that its an all female cast is just kinda sad. My personal problem with it is that based on the first trailer it doesn't seem like its going to be like the old Ghostbusters, where there was comedy, but the main movie was focused on just catching ghost.
I feel like a way for the movie to have done really well with audiences would have been if they had Bill Murray in it, and trained the new Ghostbusters, similar to Rocky in Creed, because then it feels less like a reboot, having a past characters in the new movie. Kinda similar with Jurassic World, how they acknowledge the past movies, and even have a past character, but doesnt feel like a real "reboot."
It absolutely depends on how it's done, though i'd say your example is different, as it's not a remake or taking some art which already exists and inverting it.
Before we ask whether what Ghostbusters did is successful we must see the film, but we can certainly say that remaking the film with a cast of 4 women isn't inherently a bad thing, any more than it'd be bad to remake a film with 4 different male actors.
I do, also, think that lots of the vitriol the movie has received would not be happening if it was a film with 4 women characters being rebooted with 4 male. The same people wouldn't be complaining, that's for damn sure.
The film has become the new target of anti-feminist, anti-free art rhetoric that America in particular has succumbed to in the last 5 years or so.
I agree completely,so far it looks like, judging from the trailer solely, a poor remake, and being male or female has nothing to do with it, it's the type of comedy which is being put forth, and frankly, I think they're going for the PG slapstick/toilet humor crowd. My point is that people who automatically support it because of the female cast are full of it, and people who go 'oh, this is what happens when SJWs put women in the lead,' are also full of it. Though I will say, I find the latter far more prevalent and obnoxiouis.
I will also say, with the Coin Locker Girl example, it's taking major strain of film, in which one, normally male, gangster comes to fight with their boss over their love interest, so it isn't necessarily a direct remake of an existing film, but it is the gender inversion of a very common plotline in gangster film, at least in the Korean cinematic context.
Here's a very famous example of Korean noir that the movie above movie is the opposite ove.
enter link description here
Haha it looks terrible. That's what you get for casting women as the leads. . .
So you're saying that women are inherently inferior to men?
I think he's sarcastically parroting the view you expressed in the OP as finding annoying.
I think movements like Feminism are their own worst enemies... and very self destructive as well.
They make everything about gender--when it shouldn't be.
So when something like this happens, suddenly its being judged on its portrayal of women, instead of, you know, its actual merits as a movie. It's the same bizarre distinction that arises when critics laud a character as being a "strong female character!" like, it's a weird thing to specify the gender in there.
She is a strong female character! Why can't you just say she is a strong character? Why are you twisting into a gender matter?
Now I don't know much about this Ghostbusters film, or the series at all really, but I'm sure I'll be hearing more of it from now on. So I'll save my judgement until then.
Ah, lol, it's all okay then.
I'm trying to figure out if this ironic too...
I'm more inclined to believe that the backlash, from the more sensible critiques that is, is less to do with the leading characters being women, and more to do with how a beloved film of the 1980s generation is being given what is believed to be an unnecessary reboot that may not offer anything substantial to justify its existence.
I will agree that the backlash based solely on the female cast not being all male is not only utterly immature, but completely unwarranted as well.
It's all well and good when they reboot a movie with all female roles. Totally fine. But when they market this movie solely based on gender, that raises a couple of red flags.
One of the female actors tweeted a photo of the whole movie crew being women and showcasing it as 'girl power'. Without depictions like this, it would be fine to judge the people who are shaming this movie to be some kind of 'SJW propaganda'. But when you have the cast doing things like this, it shows the true possible motives of why they wanted to have a female reboot of Ghostbusters in the first place.
The marketing of this movie has directed everything towards gender roles.
Which feeds into my point exactly. Feminist pollution has created a society where everything becomes about gender. It's quite ironic, really. They supposedly want women to viewed the same as men -- yet spend all their time making sure that doesn't happen, by twisting every issue to be gender-centric, and making the sex of a movie's cast more important than the movie itself.
Urgh, god I hate identity politics. It's such a fucking blight. I hate that we've become a society that cares more about who you are, than what you say and do...
Have you seen the trailer? It's not marketed solely based on gender at all. If anything SRWs are they one's making it about gender, complaining about the gender of the characters (have you read the youtube comments?)
Posting one picture, as well, does not mean the only reason they're making the movie, nor it's only feature, is women. 'Girl power' is an old, old phrase used to empower women. You're putting too much emphasis on one picture.
And yet most people commenting about gender in the comments of the youtube trailer are anti-feminists. They're the main ones judging the film on gender. So it doesn't seem to be a feminist issue.
Most complaints on the trailer, and reasons giving for disliking it, are about gender.
Again, if the film had been remade with different male actors, and had humour in its trailer, I doubt it'd have more dislikes than likes.
I was talking more generally than about this specific film--as I said, I know little about it.
And if it wasn't for Feminists, there wouldn't be Anti-Feminists either. So it all comes full circle, in a way.
You used this point as evidence for your idea - I'm showing that it's very bad evidence because it shows the opposite of your argument to be true.
Wait so...feminists are bad because people who disagree with them make everything about gender when it doesn't need to be?
But...that's the opposite of what you're saying? You're saying feminists are the ones making 'everything' about gender?
Based on?
Now, if only most complaints about the film in the youtube comments expressed valid criticisms like this.
I think the most important thing to remember is this, as I see it:
If they were basing their film off of gender inversion and gender inversion only - which may be true, and may not be, we'll have to see the film first to decide that - that may be disagreeable to some, and its fine to disagree with it. But it's a mainstay of art that a piece of art being disagreed with conceptually does not make it absolutely bad.
Secondly, criticising the film for any of it's actual content is fine (too slapstick etc.), but the youtube comments and dislikes show that a significant number of people complaining about the film are in fact annoyed by the fact that 4 new female actors were cast instead of 4 new male ones - this is pretty childish, and jumping the gun as we barely know anything about how gender plays in the film yet (and the trailer really doesn't actually have much to do with gender issues other than, you know, having female leads, and the latter doesn't necessarily entail the former).
Tl;dr: Wait until the film is out to complain about a film having an agenda, but rembmer that all art has an agenda of some kind as well, as that is the purpose of art, and so having an agenda does not make a film automatically bad.
Reserve your judgement about the film until you've seen the film. That's just common sense.
The majority of third-wave-Feminists are "bad" for many more reasons than making everything about gender... but yes, that aspect in particular is one of them.
Yes, they are 9 times out of 10. If what you say is true, that the majority of people finding problems with this film are in fact anti-Feminists, which again, as I've already admitted twice, I know little about this movie... then I think my rebuttal was fair. The existence of Anti-Feminism is a result of Feminism itself; therefore it's all one problem, with one root cause.
I'm ambivalent. I'm a bit young to be a big ghostbusters fan, but the gender swap seems a bit gimmicky. Too early to tell though. I'm sure hat people much more invested in film than I will tell me if it's good or bad.
The amount of booty-ache and whining over this is pretty amusing. I'm sure some alt-right loons already have their blog posts about this and how the "Hollywood, cultural Marxist agenda" is ruining Ghostbusters.
You know enough third wave feminists to describe accurately 'the majority'? That's impressive, how many third wave feminist theory discussion groups are you in? And what third wave feminist theory academic books have you read? I can recommend some as an introduction to the theory and sociology if you don't know much about it and have access to a respected library.
Right, but think carefully about what you're saying. You are saying that: Feminists make everything about gender.
However most people complaining about the film are people who aren't feminists. And they are making it all about gender.
Therefore, this specific situation, whereby people who aren't feminists are making everything about gender, does not support your argument that feminists make everything about gender.
Reading it as a gimmick, now that's a valid complaint too. People should learn from you and GOUST.
None, because I have no desire to regurgitate. However, I have been on this earth for a while, and met many, many people. A portion of which were Feminists. I have also read more articles, and seen more videos, on the news and YouTube, than I can count... I've also done countless hours of my own research. As such, yes, I think I can describe the majority with relative accuracy. Certainly as well as most that discuss the topic.
It was never my intention, then or now, to use this movie as a specific example to my original point. And I'm getting rather bored of explaining the fact, I do not know much of anything about this movie. So you could be right about this being an Anti-Feminist issue, or you could be wrong, I do not know.
But I do know people and I do know Feminism. And yes, they love twisting matters so that there focal points become gender-related, even and especially when such a thing is entirely unnecessary.
It wouldn't be about regurgitation though, the point of a discussion group is that you put your opinion across and engage in debate.
But have those articles and videos been shown to you by feminists? Or by people being annoyed about feminists? Because that'll filter what you do and don't see and do and don't hear.
I'm interested, what did you do your countless hours of research into?
Also if you want to talk about feminism like you know feminism, I really would recommend actually gingering with groups and reading academia, even if some academia is a bit tough to read because the language is complex.
I reckon if you want to speak about a topic you should first do fair research about said topic, which is best achieved in base material like academia and base interaction like discussion groups.
You said
About a post specifically about the movie, but your point contradicts it.
I think it's a bit unfair to say that the women of a studio holding up an iconic phrase in solidarity means they have an agenda. It's like one picture.
If the instagram had a picture like that every week, then yeah maybe.
Also girl power is nothing about white power or related to it, it was a second wave feminism slogan used to inspire, and it changed a hell of a lot positively for women. It's iconic of the Riot Grrrl musical movement which produced some of the best art and poetry in the world.
E.g. this song, which is about racism in feminism which was a particular problem at the end of the second wave. It heralded discussion of intersectionality for, like, the first time ever, which is awesome. 'White girl, I want to change the world, but I won't change anything until I change my racist self'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8popa7M4tI
Anyway I'm getting carried away and excited about riot grrl lol, back to the point.
I don't think that picture was particularly broadly advertised? If they really wanted to use pictures like that to get interest then they'd be doing it more than once. Either posting it like 10 times or taking many pictures like it.
I really don't see how this can be said when the only evidence presented thus far has been a single picture? The trailer directs everything to slapstick humour, not gender. In fact wasn't that your complaint..?
They did point out what they don't like about the film in the comment section (namely the main characters being women), it just wasn't a good reason.
I'm just going to say this: This trailer looks like garbage. Part of the Problem are the actors. Not because they're Female, But because they're so unlikeable. There is just No Chemistry between the actors. And the humor...it's the humor of stupid People. Would it Be better with the Original cast? Not by much. The script seems to Be pretty Bad. Atleast in the Trailer.
You say that, yet I'm all reminded of is the Feminists in college I used to "debate". And by that, I mean them shouting at me in packs, while cherry-picking false statistics, and refusing to hear anyone else out. Come to think of it, that's not so different to the majority of actual Feminist debates that occur on TV.
Even better. They're ones I've come across over the course of my life-time. Many written by Feminists, promoting their views, many the exact opposite, and many somewhere in-between. Unlike them, I don't cherry-pick my sources.
Regarding this matter specifically, I looked into such things as the bureau of justice statistics, and most of all, the countless articles written by Feminist journalists. The former of which almost always renders defunct the latter.
I'll give you credit, @Flog61 at least you're just passive-aggressive, as opposed to genuinely aggressive like most of the other Feminists I encounter.
No, it doesn't. Somebody showed me a picture that displayed "Girl Power" as marketing for the movie. Since my point was the gender of the cast should be irrelevant--it does feed in.
I disagree with your first point.
I disagree with your second point.
No, I wasn't being serious. . .
Hah, thanks.
Honestly, I think the main sources of the angst are 1.) changes to a familiar, nostalgia-laden series and 2.) people seeing agendas and ulterior motives where the (probably) don't exist.
That makes it seem like bad experience of a few have coloured your understanding of the many. And while this is understanbable, surely you can appreciate this is unfair?
And what feminist debates that occur on tv? I didn't know there were such things on national tv.
Yes, I know they were written by feminists, I'm asking how you became aware of the videos. Was it because someone reccomended them to you as feminist thought, or because someone was annoyed by it and shared it, or because you just 'googled' feminism and chose the video with the most views (which will OBVIOUSLY be the most extreme, and the msot downvoted)?
I don't think I'm being particularly passive aggressive, how have I? I don't think I'm debating in a particularly different way to yourself.
Oh ok. Most of that post wasn't about the poster is all. You weren't especially clear that you were only referring to a third of the post, my mistake though!
An example of feminists actually doing shit rather than jsut whining on youtube: the 'let toys be toys for girls and boys' movement has made MASSIVE progress in making it so that there aren't gender labels on children's toys, which means that if a boy wants to play with a doll, he doesn't feel like it makes him less of a man, which is great, and actually an example of them trying to make society less about gender.
There are lots of movements like this, and again, most of your evidence even comes from college (which is full of angsty people expressing over the top views, feminists and anti-feminists alike) or from the internet which is a cesspool of the exact same problem. I wouldn't even know where to start if I wanted to show you videos and articles written by anti-feminsits which are incredibly disturbing, talking about rape being made legal in private residency.
My point is that forums like the internet make point pushing likely and are unlikely to allow you an unbiased view, which is why I recommend reading actual facts about feminist theory, and then making your mind up about it, through feminist books in an academic library.
If you're interested at all in feminist theory when approaching the ancient world, for example, there's a wonderful book including much of feminist thought about Graeco-Roman women and 'otherisation' called 'Inventing the Barbarian' by, I think, Edith Hall.
It's not at all. When I discovered how vile the Feminists at my college were, I didn't hate the Feminist movement--quite the opposite, I wanted to know more about it. I wanted to know if they all were the same. Turned out for the most part, they were. Twenty years of beholding this movement as its blossomed, I don't think I'm being unfair in the slightest, coming to that conclusion.
Many. You need only look them up yourself. The names Milo Yiannopolous and Christina Hoff Summers springs to mind and the countless Feminists they have debated on TV.
Well, for a start, I haven't included any snide smiley-faces, or implied the language of a specific subject may be too difficult...
Hey it's the passive-aggressiveness again! What perfect timing.
Oh, thank god, boys can now play with dolls. That will be curing cancer in no time. Thank God Feminism is here to solve these monumental problems for the betterment of society... let's disregard all the stuff they've ruined along the way. Barby is a bit curvier now, so it was all worth it. (See, I can play that card, too! And I get why you do it now. It's pretty fun)
But in all seriousness, if that's the one thing you can point towards to validate the existence of Third-Wave-Feminism that is very sad.
You are very selective. Sure, just dismiss my assertions over the fact I've consumed HUGE amounts of media surrounding Feminism, articles, videos, and not to mention I've met Feminists outside of college, too, and instead state it's just that one occurrence that impacts most of my outlook. It doesn't. Not even close.
I have done so. Not extensively, I admit... But, from the bottom of my heart, I am not someone who subscribes to something without seeking out all the facts I can. And my life to this point--taking into consideration everything I've ever read, seen, or considered--I think I can fairly and firmly stand by my viewpoint, that Feminism is a blight. Because I've watched it for so long.
Thank you. That will be a good source to have. And I mean that sincerely.
one thing i liked about the trailer was the blonde character (Jillian Holtzmann) played by Kate McKinnon.
i don't know about the whole gender debate, if it was about gender equality there would have been two men two women, and i honestly think that would have been better for the dynamics as well.
Wow even I don't want to step into that swamp
I'm all for a female cast, but that trailer was weak and hasn't convinced me it will be a good film. It has nothing to do about the gender to me because it could've been an all male cast and I still would've thought the same thing. My main issue stems from it being a reboot rather than continuing from the previous films and these characters not having any connections to those in the previous Ghostbusters characters. And like I said the trailer was weak, and choppily put together and made the film come across as such.
Until the film comes out or there's less lazy attempt of a second trailer, I'll still give it the benefit of the doubt.
This fuckin movie looks very stupid.
Watched the trailer the other day and I face palmed I doubt it is going to have the witty humor the originals had. Oh and the screaming stereotypical fat black lady really ruins it. Talk about a racist stereotype in a nut shell with that character. I mean were there not Warner Brothers Cartoons banned because they had stereotypical fat sassy mouth black ladies in them? But this film goes right ahead and does it. lol