Did anyone else like LMI better as a film?

[sauvin]

My not-so-learned response might start with a [...] and you can bring your neotonies and atavisms on [...] though { if ] experience is any indicator, this "learned response" will either elicit a lot of yawning or a lot of yelling.

We are so on the same page. It sounds as though this is your wheelhouse, too.

Don't know anything about "wheelhouses"; if that's a naval term, what I have is a dinky little canoe proudly sporting the call sign "PS 132" ( I believe that's what I called it ), and the waters in this forum occasional get to be turbulent enough I'm seriously thinking about trading it in for a kayak.

Yes, sexual dimorphism is critical to the discussion, and, that said, you can be sure there will be blood (mine, no doubt). Best if I don't say more until I can say it all. That will take a while. Suggestion for which forum to start the thread on?

Your guess is as good as mine, honestly. Possibly better, since I'll bet you're cruising around in something that has three bedrooms, two bathrooms, a walk-in refrigerator and a "wheel house" with enough electronic equipment in it to make NASA drool. You're right, though, better make sure your gyros are in good working order.

Okay, here's a preview. When I delivered this topic as a talk to about 70 learned men and 10 learned women, the men tried to shout me down. (Alcohol may have been a factor. The meeting had stretched on into the night. ) I cheerfully and good-naturedly pursued the topic to the end. Women ("girls" in evolutionary terms) come out looking pretty good. Men ("large animals" in evolutionary terms), not so much.

I've shared things in this forum that I've never shared with anybody in real life - ever. This is partly why. I don't know anybody in my personal life who can follow this kind of discussion, either because they're simply not used to this kind of thinking (or subject matter), or because they're not capable of entertaining anything that seems to challenge their personal beliefs or value systems.

For maximum benefit (and mirth), please read the entire topic, start to finish. Maybe it'll add some gasoline to your "learned response". If needed, I might still be "with it" enough to supply matches.

A suggestion, though: if the bulk of the discussion references Oskar and Owen and Eli and Abby only tangentially, it might be best to start this potentially supersized bonfire in the "Off Topic" section. The same is true if all four kids are together heavily referenced, since I don't recall any really logical place to discuss all of them together.

[PeteMork]

Okay, here's a preview. When I delivered this topic as a talk to about 70 learned men and 10 learned women, the men tried to shout me down. (Alcohol may have been a factor. The meeting had stretched on into the night. ) I cheerfully and good-naturedly pursued the topic to the end. Women ("girls" in evolutionary terms) come out looking pretty good. Men ("large animals" in evolutionary terms), not so much.

Now, this is getting most interesting! Go for it!

Thread name suggestion: Misogyny or Misappropriation?

(By the way, is it neoteny, or neotony? )

[dongregg]

This is partly why.

<Gasp!> Don't anyone wait up for me. That's a lot of deep and well-organized material to live up to. I read that thread and similarly-brilliant threads when I first joined WTI. I can't honestly say whether they influenced me to become an active member or whether I became active in spite of them! You can be sure, though, that they got my attention.

But, yes, my dear Sauvin--I, too, have no other outlet for airing my ideas as they arise, even though I am surrounded by fellow academic types and belong to a few smart societies. Just having a lot of learning and a bunch of brains don't make folks as lively and interesting as the members of WTI are. Here I find knowledge, humor, wit, creativity...and the stuff it takes to readily mix it up in a good verbal slugfest.

So, then, having poured kerosene on the kindling, I must ask my fellow members to be patient while I prepare to strike the match.

[Jameron]

This looks like it is escalating into a $10 discussion and all I have is 2 cents.

I may just become a silent observer.

.

[Alice?Maybe]

The very fact that it is an insult is misogynistic. As an insult it says that girls are inferior, less than. Misogyny happens in everyday events, it's not just something from an authority. The use by Kenny and his brother Jimmy just makes them more hateful. But Reeves could've accomished the same thing without resorting to demeaning an entire class of people. The P word would've worked better. In the commentary he did say he made a film for adults. For me it's the film's biggest weakness.

Thinking we're running into a cultural bias.

What I'm also thinking is this: the movie contains cold-blooded murders, multiple incidents of disfiguring emotional abuse, massive institutional indifference (or ignorance) while a young man is being continually brutalised, preteens jumping naked into bed together, just off the top of the head... and the movie's "biggest weakness" is that it contains a common slur? That'd almost be like my claiming the movie is vastly inferior to LTROI because it contains a scene of a woman leaving the TV on to some empty, meaningless religious show while wining herself into oblivion.

I'm not making light of the problem of misogyny. Kenny resembles a man I once knew so closely it's frightening, both physically and in terms of 'character'. Thirty years on, and I'm still having trouble forgiving him for the fact that I (or anybody) had to take his girlfriend to the hospital after one of his fits of rage; violence towards or against women has always boiled my blood easily, but in the time since this incident, I'm still almost instantly suspicious when I see women suddenly wearing turtleneck sweaters, large dark glasses or heavy makeup.

At the same time, I'm having trouble finding any evidence of misogyny in LMI.

Bullying is a theme of the movie. Reeves has said that he sees Kenny & Jimmy and the gang as the real monsters of the movie. So when he has them bullying it both draws attention to bullying and demeans the bullies. However, misogyny and other bigotries are not themes of the movie, so misogynistic attitudes are not drawing attention to misogyny and not demeaning the misogynists for their misogyny, although it does make them more foul. The same effect could have been accomplished by other insults and taunts. One(s) that doesn't degrade half the population.

The problem is exactly what you said, it is a common taunt, insult. That IS the problem. That IS misogyny. Defending the use of the phrase as common and therefore acceptable is misogynistic. The same way it works with homophobic slurs, racist slurs. Now IF the movie were dealing with bigotry, misogyny in particular, then the usage would be appropriate, IMO.

[Alice?Maybe]

I think things are more complex than that, and that Alice?Maybe is right. By letting one of the characters use "little girl" as an insult, Reeves is in practice using it that way himself.

If that were the case how could one ever make a film that has anything bad in it, without running the risk of being seen as supporting something that you are trying to discredit by showing it in a bad light?

Have you seen "Requiem For A Dream"? Do you think it is promoting drug abuse, or pointing out that it is not a very good idea (to put it mildly).

How about "Schindler's List"? Was that film promoting the persecution of Jews because it showed it, or was it arguing against it?

Was "The Wicker Man" promoting paganism and human sacrifice?

To make an omelette, you first need to crack eggs. To show something in a bad light, you first need to show it.

Do I think that Reeves set out to show that misogyny was bad? Probably not. But I do think that he balanced realistic levels of intimidation with responsible framing.

.

Loved requiem for a dream. The central theme was the horror of drug addiction. So drug addict behavior is appropriate, even when exaggerated (although not too much if at all really). Bullying in LMI is a central theme. Misogyny nor bigotry in general are themes in LMI. Its use is gratuitous and serves no legitimate purpose as another insult could have been used with the same results, bullies are vile. So, it's not an all or nothing kind of thing.

[Alice?Maybe]

I happened to come across this movie, which has some relevance to the discussion:

Love it and it makes my point. This video is about misogyny, so what they did was appropriate. Loved the kid who said, "No, yeah." He seemed to grasp midsentence how he injured his sister.

[Alice?Maybe]

This is partly why.

<Gasp!> Don't anyone wait up for me. That's a lot of deep and well-organized material to live up to. I read that thread and similarly-brilliant threads when I first joined WTI. I can't honestly say whether they influenced me to become an active member or whether I became active in spite of them! You can be sure, though, that they got my attention.

But, yes, my dear Sauvin--I, too, have no other outlet for airing my ideas as they arise, even though I am surrounded by fellow academic types and belong to a few smart societies. Just having a lot of learning and a bunch of brains don't make folks as lively and interesting as the members of WTI are. Here I find knowledge, humor, wit, creativity...and the stuff it takes to readily mix it up in a good verbal slugfest.

So, then, having poured kerosene on the kindling, I must ask my fellow members to be patient while I prepare to strike the match.

Ooo fire I wanted to do a Bevis and Butthead impression, but can't figure out how to make it come across in print

[sauvin]

I happened to come across this movie, which has some relevance to the discussion:
Love it and it makes my point. This video is about misogyny, so what they did was appropriate. Loved the kid who said, "No, yeah." He seemed to grasp midsentence how he injured his sister.

Since I cannot understand speech easily, I can't comment on its "relevance" to the contention that content Reeves included in his movie constitutes misogyny. If it "makes your point perfectly", perhaps you could provide a transcription.

[Alice?Maybe]

I happened to come across this movie, which has some relevance to the discussion:
Love it and it makes my point. This video is about misogyny, so what they did was appropriate. Loved the kid who said, "No, yeah." He seemed to grasp midsentence how he injured his sister.

Since I cannot understand speech easily, I can't comment on its "relevance" to the contention that content Reeves included in his movie constitutes misogyny. If it "makes your point perfectly", perhaps you could provide a transcription.

I'd have no idea where to get a transcription. The video is about what people think is is to act like a girl, run like a girl, throw like a girl, hit like a girl. The adults and the boy all have exaggerated and erroneous views of how girls do those activities. That is contrasted with how actual girls perform those tasks. The director then asks the boy, presumably after seeing his sister actually demonstrating how she runs, throws, etc., if he felt he had just insulted his sister. He starts to answer no, but then changes his answer to the affirmative. The video is about attitudes towards girls. The erroneous, insulting view is contrasted with reality with the desired effect of showing how insulting (misogynistic) these views really are. Therefore the misogynist position helps in bringing about the point. It's use is entirely appropriate. In LMI I find the use gratuitous as misogyny, attitudes about girls, is not a theme that is being furthered.