I went to see "Sex and the City" this weekend, after months of anticipation. And I absolutely loved it. I was grinning as soon as I heard the opening credits, and I laughed and teared up several times throughout the movie. I left feeling satisfied and full of emotions that only certain stories and characters can bring out in me.
Now, what is your reaction to the above paragraph? If you're a guy, or a woman who has only heard of the show and never really watched it, you may have just seen the words "Sex and the City," rolled your eyes, and not even gotten this far. Which may make the rest of this blog pointless, but I'm going for it anyway. Sidenote: I'm still not comfortable using the word "blog." When I used my OD, we always called them "entries" - I'm so used to that I still feel pretentious when using the word "blog." I digress.
Let me start off by saying this – it's ok not to like the show or the movie. I'm not saying EVERYONE who dislikes "Sex and the City" is sexist or stupid. Just make sure your dislike is for the right reasons. I'm not one for trying a lot of new tv shows, and I can't think of one I really dislike off the top of my head as an example. But you can be sure that if I don't like something (such as a band or a tv show), I've taken the advice of people who DO like it and given it several tries before throwing it in the recycle bin. I grew up judging things I actually knew nothing about, so I get really angry now when myself or others do it.
I also want to state that this blog isn't about "Sex and the City." To me, it just serves as a perfect example of the way women are viewed and treated. I don't even like to use the word "sexism" – like the word "feminism," it has adapted very specific and strong connotations that I don't necessarily agree with. But there is a certain condescension that men (and women) who aren't "sexist" have towards women, even if they believe they are being lighthearted or joking.
Here's a fact:
"[Sex and the City] opened with $56.8 million last weekend, the highest-grossing debut ever for a movie starring women."
That's pretty remarkable. What I can't understand is how an event that has such strong female support also gets such strong negative reactions when the topic is brought up. Actually, let me clarify. While I have heard strong negative reactions, the more common reaction has been condescension or patronization. Wherever there is conversation about "Sex and the City," you can be sure there will be jokes about shoes, cosmopolitans, sex, or clothes from someone who has never seen the show. Yes, the characters in the show like to dress fashionably, buy expensive shoes, and drink cosmopolitans. But those were just parts of the show – do you really think something could have such a lasting following if it were based on materialism? One of the main problems are people who have never seen an episode, or never really given it a chance, who form instant negative judgments from what they have heard or what they imagine it to be. I could take anything that has a cult following and cut it down to something trivial and demeaning. All Batman does is brood and jump around in a cap and a stupid animal mask. All the Sopranos did was eat Italian food and kill people. Anything can be condensed and trivialized if it is repeated enough. And it's a shame when that happens – people could miss out on the turmoil and adventure in Batman's life, on the drama and intricate storyline of "The Sopranos", or the heartbreak and bonding that is found in "Sex and the City."
Yes, obviously the movie is aimed at women. There's absolutely no argument there. But why is that something to be made fun of? I once knew a guy who gave the show a chance, watched a few episodes with no prejudices, and ended up really liking it and understanding it. Of course, that is a very, very far cry from your average male. I didn't bother to even ask my boyfriend to watch it with me – and I didn't even give a second thought as to WHY I didn't ask him until after this opening weekend passed. But it's due to the fact that even he exhibits the same dismissive reaction to something obviously aimed at women. For example, for the first time in the 1 ½ years we've been dating, I watched some "Sex and the City" in front of him (some 1st season episodes, a couple days before the movie). He was playing on the laptop, not paying attention at all, but I tried explaining some differences that the 1st season had from the following seasons, and he just said "It wouldn't make a difference to me anyway" and went to bed.
If my boyfriend, who is generally a very kind, non-judgmental man, can react that way to a show which affects me in a deeply emotional way, what chances do all the other girls have out there? Are we supposed to laugh when men around us make superficial jokes about the show – when we secretly are a little mad and would really like to tell them exactly why they are wrong? Are we supposed to accept it when men roll their eyes or make jokes about the hours-long conversations women can have with each other over coffee or drinks – when we actually wish we could talk to our boyfriends in the same way? Obviously men and women are different – I'm not saying men should be like us or even completely understand it, but someone has yet to give me a good reason why the deeper conversation and connections that women have is something to be joked about. THAT is what makes "Sex and the City" hit so close to home for women. If you think the characters are superficial or shallow, you either don't understand women or have only watched a couple wrong scenes out of context.
"'Sex and the City' the TV series was a revolution, yadda yadda, because it was one of the rare forms of entertainment that showed women in the flesh (and flesh), with all their vulnerabilities, anxieties and intelligence. But when you listen to men talk about it (and this is coming from the perspective of a male writer), a strange thing happens. The talk turns hateful. Angry. Vengeful. Annoyed."
That's the thing about the "Sex and the City" storyline and characters. I'm fairly certain that most women who love the show/movie love it because in some way it reminds them of themselves and their friends. The appeal is not in the shoes, fashion, men, or sex, but in the honest way these women are portrayed. The conversations (whether introspective, humorous, comforting, or raunchy) that the four friends on the show have are, without a doubt, reflective of the conversations most women have in private with their friends. It was the first show that really showed how women bond with each other, how they analyze relationships, and reactions to men – and it's the first show that did all this unapologetically, without regard to whether men (or even women) would find it stupid or trivial. Therefore, at least for me, when men give the impression that they find the very idea of this movie frivolous or stupid, a part of me (which I have unconsciously learned to suppress) feels as though they think I am frivolous or stupid.
And that's the thing – I'm not a girly girl by any means. Yes, I like to get dressed up and feel pretty from time to time, but you will never, ever find me spending money on designer purses or shoes unless I happen to have a couple million dollars lying around and it's something I just happen to like. It doesn't take me an hour to do my hair and make up every day (or pretty much ever). I would definitely hate the show if it was simply about women going around buying shoes and fucking - anyone who knows me should understand that I ask for much more substance from a story. This show delivers on substance that women can truly relate to. And I'm tired of things that women can empathize with or things that make them happy being trivialized or made fun of. And god help you if you're a man who bravely risks trying to understand things that make women happy. Any time I heard talk of a man going to see "Sex and the City," the man was given an immediate verbal castration by all other men around. A man going to see "Kung Fu Panda" is acceptable, but a man who goes to see "Sex and the City" – the number one movie of the weekend – is instantly emasculated by his peers (if they find out, because lord knows he wouldn't tell them on his own).
Another fairly common thing you'll hear when the "Sex and the City" movie is brought up is instant judgments on the female characters sex lives. I've heard "whores" and "sluts" and other random uncreative derogatory remarks on the amount of sex the women have. Yes, in the show the women had a lot of sex with a lot of different people, and some people automatically associate "whore" with someone with that description. But one of the points of the show was that these women could have sex on their own terms, with self-respect, regardless of societies' judgment. The number of people didn't matter – what mattered was how the women handled themselves and why they did what they did. Anyone who actually watched the HBO show more than a few times would understand that instead of calling the characters names. And of course it goes back to the classic double standard - I have yet to discover a likeable male character that has a lot of sex in a tv show or movie that gets anywhere near the scrutiny that female characters' sex lives do.
"'The blog "Women and Hollywood" features telling statistics: last year only five of the top 50 films of the year had major roles for women.'"
The author of the article I've been quoting from also makes a reference to the fact that in most blockbuster movies, women are just the "blinking love interest" – something which has annoyed me for years. One of the reasons I loved the new Indiana Jones movie was because for the majority of the action, only one of the four protagonists was under the age of 40! And the one main female character was actually older, not trying to be sexy, just a sweet and likeable woman. Women in movies and tv shows generally have to be in a certain age range, and look and dress a certain way to be a love interest, and it gets old for me. I love seeing Karen Allen and Sarah Jessica Parker because they are different. Before I watched "Sex and the City," before I knew anything about Sarah Jessica Parker besides superficial impressions, I irrationally hated her. Now my blood boils anytime someone calls her ugly or makes fun of her nose. She is someone who actually broke through the ridiculous Hollywood standard of beauty – and on top of it, starred in a brilliant show with a huge following and became a fashion icon. And yet any time I go to a Sex and the City message board (which has only been recently), I see some remark trying to take away the success of the franchise by calling her "ugly."
Now THAT is superficial and frivolous.
Contrary to what this superbly long blog may imply, I don't get on feminist soapboxes and preach about injustices and inequalities. I think generally we're ok – and I could write a whole other blog about how men are often unfairly portrayed in tv shows and commercials. It's just this past weekend and the surprisingly strong, widespread, and unexplained negative reactions towards the movie (and feminine things in general) forced me to think about why these reactions exist. I still don't know why they exist, but at least I've decided I'm pretty sick of it.
"Fay Ann Lee, the director of 'Falling for Grace,' tells the site, 'The point here is can women open movies? Meryl Streep can't. Jodie Foster can't. Julianne Moore can't. Julia Roberts can't.' But Carrie? Yes she can."The quoted article is from http://www.newsweek.com/id/139889.
No comments:
Post a Comment