Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
This is a discussion on Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash within the General News anti misandry forums, part of the General category; Melissa Silverstein Posted May 15, 2008 | 02:15 PM (EST) Read More: Carrie Bradshaw, Feminism , Film, Sex And The ...
- 16th-May-2008 #1
Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
Melissa Silverstein
Posted May 15, 2008 | 02:15 PM (EST)
Read More: Carrie Bradshaw, Feminism, Film, Sex And The City, Sex And The City Backlash, Sex And The City The Movie, Entertainment News
As the opening of Sex and the City gets closer I've noticed a bunch of articles asking whether you can be a feminist and still like Sex and the City. Give me a break. Of course you can be a feminist and like Sex and the City.
While some feminists may now want me to turn in my feminist card (and yes, we do have a card...it's called a brain) I just want to take a step back. I understand that many feminists have trouble with the show's obsession with clothes, shoes, skinniness and men. I, too, couldn't understand how those women wore those shoes without falling over.
But honestly, I am so happy that we are even having this conversation. When was the last time a fictional film (and remember this is FICTION and FAKE) caused such a stir and encouraged a debate about feminism? Just the fact that people put the words Sex and the City and feminism in the same sentence makes me excited.
But the point is Sex and the City wouldn't exist without feminism. Sarah Jessica Parker herself sees Carrie on the same continuum with Erica (played by Jill Clayburgh) in the classic feminist flick An Unmarried Woman (a must-see); and to me, she also couldn't exist without Erica Jong's Isadora Wing of Fear of Flying.
The Guardian had some good points about the feminist messages in Sex and the City Can a Feminist Really Love Sex and the City?
And to dismiss the programme entirely on the basis of its shortcomings as a feminist text would also be to lose out on what it does deliver. Just to take the most headline-grabbing example, that includes some pretty frank discussion of sex, in which female sexual pleasure and agency is obviously considered a fundamental right, rather than a privilege. McCabe says, "The way they spoke, and the things they talked about, were revolutionary. And it was also a great study of female friendship."
And I think the relationship between the women and all the questions women have about how we fit into the culture is what sold the show and what makes women excited about seeing the film. (Remember it is the top requested film on Fandango)
From the NY Magazine cover story on Sarah Jessica Parker:
And despite the gobbling consumerism of its characters, the show has unsettling insights into women and money: the way bodies function as currency; the degree to which a woman alone can truly be autonomous of free; the marriage hunt as negotiation disguised as romance.
The Backlash
But since we are talking about women, sex, feminism and movies it was only a matter of time before the backlash started. For some reason (which I don't understand) the film premiered in London. But overexposure has set in and the knives are now out with still two weeks to go. The press made fun of the Sarah Jessica Parker's hat at the premiere, and then I did a double take when I saw the cover of Time Out NY (to the left) which had duct tape over the four women's mouths with the headline: "No Sex! Enough Already -- we love 'em, but it's just too much."
I'm sorry, isn't doing press a requirement for all movies these days? Is it these women's fault that there is such overwhelming and unprecedented interest in their film? The culture demands that they appear everywhere yet it criticizes them for being everywhere. Robert Downey Jr. was everywhere promoting Iron Man and there was never a picture on a cover of a magazine with his mouth covered in duct tape? That picture is beyond unacceptable and blatantly sexist.
And now the LA Times has a story this morning entitled Sex and the City movie may lack wide appeal which talks about whether there are enough women in this county over 30 interested in seeing this movie to make it a hit. (News flash to the studios -- there are a lot of women in this country over 30, we have money and we go to the movies.)
Some box office prognosticators are predicting that it could make as much as $40 million on its opening weekend, others see it more in the $20 million range. Let's keep in mind that only one film starring a woman made more than $40 million on its opening weekend -- Angelina Jolie in the first Tomb Raider movie. That was an action movie (that appealed to boys more than women). Next is Charlie's Angels, another action flick that grossed $40 million. The Reese Witherspoon starrer Sweet Home Alabama has the highest grossing numbers at $35 million for a romantic comedy.
Let's not let this growing backlash put this film in a no win situation. It's not going to make as much money as an action film because it's not an action film. I also would love for Hollywood to take a pause and look at the numbers for this film beyond the first three days to see if women are coming out during the first week in larger numbers than usual.
We started off the movie season two weeks ago with the NY Times discussing the lack of films coming out this summer that have any women in significant roles. I find it very easy to reconcile my feminism and my love for movies on this one. This film needs all of our support. This feminist for one will be there supporting Carrie, Samantha, Charlotte and Miranda. Hope you'll join me.
Cross posted at Women & Hollywood
- 16th-May-2008 # ADS
Advertisement Circuit advertisement- Member Since
- Always
- Location
- Advertising world
- Posts
- Many
- 16th-May-2008 #2
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
Women are fake. Their lives are fake. It's no wonder that Hollywood fake lives are so important to females.
Blessings
Bob
- 16th-May-2008 #3
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
"Significant roles" lmao--she's having a laugh.
- 16th-May-2008 #4
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
More accurately, women embrace a fantasy of themselves which vacillates between empowered single career woman (on the one hand) and stable family with husband and kids (on the other). They live out these competing fantasies in the products they buy and the entertainment they watch. That's why men ought never to look to a woman for stability; you never know what fantasy world she's living in at any particular time of her life.
- 16th-May-2008 #5
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
Is this to say that women should not be leaders? Stability is required for leadership, is it not?That's why men ought never to look to a woman for stability; you never know what fantasy world she's living in at any particular time of her life.
- 16th-May-2008 #6
- 16th-May-2008 #7
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
The fixation with Hollywood and celebrity goings on is nothing more than scaled-up female obsession with the personal. The "wider world" becomes a mirror of their own world.Women are fake. Their lives are fake. It's no wonder that Hollywood fake lives are so important to females.
I'm not seeing much of a backlash. Most women I know young and old are head over heels for the Sex and the City film. Just another cash-cow and well-received ego-massager for the "empowerment" movement. Which is basically the essence of that scheme with which we are now familiar - a mixing of pro-female mass psychology and financial imperatives.
- 16th-May-2008 #8
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
While the women in Sex and the City are not feminists, they are the result of feminism. They are the 'I'm not a feminist...but' women; they are the ones who embrace all the female empowerment that feminism has promoted while still expecting the deferential treatment of chivalry. Most women today live in a fantasy world because their expectations can only be played out to fruition in fantasy. In the real world, you can't have it both ways.
"Every noble impulse, every unselfish expression of love; every brave suffering for the right; every surrender of self to something higher than self; every loyalty to an ideal; every unselfish devotion to principle; every helpfulness to humanity; every act of self-control; every fine courage of the soul, undefeated by pretense or policy, but by being, doing, and living of good for the very good’s sake—that is spirituality." -David O. McKay
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Ephesians 6:12
http://equalbutdifferent.blogspot.com/
- 16th-May-2008 #9
Re: Sex and the City Part 2: Feminism and Backlash
These women are nothing new. They have money and no scruple, and use men like things. Rich bitches have been around since the first cities at least.
Feminism = Fear + Flattery
You may also enjoy reading the following threads, why not give them a try?
-
Open Question: what's the best and worst part of feminism?
By RSSreader in forum Chit chat (MAIN)Replies: 1Last Post: 11th-January-2010, 11:30 AM -
Resolved Question: Why is there a sudden backlash against feminism?
By RSSreader in forum Chit chat (MAIN)Replies: 1Last Post: 16th-May-2009, 01:41 AM




LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks








Reply With Quote








Bookmarks