Rachel Redfern – Page 3

Miley Cyrus Has America’s Sex Drive By The Balls

But what I do want to talk about is the conversation that has swirled around young Cyrus ever since the ill-fated twerking incident at the VMA’s, and her subsequent music video of her naked on a wrecking ball. Everyone has slut-shamed Miley Cyrus. They’ve wagged their fingers at her dance moves, her tongue, her hair-cut, her entire demeanor, her (unsurprising) change from Disney star to adult, her drug-use, and the fact that she’s just “not a role model for young girls.”

Because apparently America thinks, as it has for the past, I dunno, forever, that female sexuality is “icky.”

Written By Rachel Redfern

Over the weekend you might have noticed the Sinead O’Connor and Miley Cyrus kerfuffle that happened on the internet. The whole thing started when Miley Cyrus states that the Irish singer was one of her idols; a little while later, O’Connor posted this public letter to Cyrus, “advising” her; though really, her advice sounded a lot like condescending, passive-aggressive slut-shaming. So Cyrus then acted out an immature and hurtful scene on twitter by referencing O’Connor’s personal struggle with mental and emotional health. Sinead then descended to the 20-year-old pop star’s level and posted an irate tirade on facebook, cussing out the young singer and just plain-old aggressively calling her a “prostitute.”

The whole thing is horrible and ridiculous and both have acted badly and today, I’m not here to defend or support either of them.

Because apparently America thinks, as it has for the past, I dunno, forever, that female sexuality is “icky.”

News flash: she’s a POP SINGER. Like Madonna, Cyndi Lauper, Britney Spears, Christina Aquilera, Nicki Minaj, Rihanna, Lady Gaga, and virtually EVER OTHER FEMALE POP STAR OF THE PAST 40 YEARS.

And of course the real issue here isn’t that each of these women has had a bout with a dirty dance move and a lot of flesh showing on camera, but rather, that they dared to do it and not feel ashamed. That they dared to do it and own it as a part of who they were, a part of their own sexuality. Because this is what people are really scared of, they’re scared of women’s sexuality just like they always have been. If Miley takes her clothes off and grinds on a wrecking ball in front of their little girl, then someday, their little girl, or little girlfriend, or little wife, might do they same.

You know what world. They are. And some are going to like it.

But I know what you’re thinking, “How dare they like it?!” “There will be no liking of sex!” “Good girls don’t like sex.”

Scary thing about all this? Sometimes, BOYS DO IT TOO! Only nobody really cares if boys do it because they’re uncontrollable sex maniacs anyways, amiright?

And the big thing is, pop singers have been doing this for a long time, to generate controversy, get attention, and sell albums.

Welcome to showbiz, baby.

And you know what, someday, maybe Miley Cyrus will look back on all this and regret it. But maybe she won’t. Maybe she’ll be a sex-icon like Madonna for the rest of her life and make millions of dollars and be perfectly happy.

Now, I applaud O’Connor for pointing out the insidious nature of much of the music business executives and the way that they are using the female stars in their contracts. However, it’s possible that Cyrus, who literally grew up in the music industry, is also a market-savvy pop princess entirely aware of the best way to keep herself current and in demand: controversy.

And since she’s embraced her rebel idol status with a rockin’ hair cut and intense tongue use, part of that is expressing an overt, in-your-face sexuality with stunning confidence.

For some reason, America (and much of the world), fears that deep V between a women’s legs and the fact that we like having access to it. For some reason, it’s incomprehensible that some women might enjoy taking off her clothes and feeling the thrill of voyeurism. Some women, just like some men, love excess and attention and the body is a powerful way to get those things

As media reviewers who pay a lot of attention to female interaction with the media, we often complain the inappropriate sexual exploitation of women, specifically when that happens with the goal of a directed male gaze. For example, these stupid superhero posters with ridiculously designed uber-feminine poses.

But female sexuality that aggressively maintains control over what it wants and how it chooses to be presented? Well, I can get behind that because it’s her choice.

We also complain when that sexuality is lacking in substance and obviously operating off of a limiting standard of female beauty. As an image think of Megax Fox straddling a motorcycle in booty shorts for no other reason than Michael Bay wanted her to.

How Megan Fox looks when her car breaks down.

But super spiky bleach blond hair whilst wearing tennis shoes and a bear-studded leotard? Sure, whatever.

Amanda Palmer, that brilliant musician and feminist extraordinaire, once got fully nude at a concert FILLED with people in a fierce reclaiming of her own body after a snarky post by the Daily Mail. Nudity and sexiness won that day. She’s also written her own letter to Cyrus and its awesome.

Lady Gaga, (Funny feminist Caitlin Moran once wrote in stellar praise of the pop singer), who I’ve seen more times without clothes than I have with, is considered an eccentric purveyor of the avant-garde and hyper-camp. And while she’s occasionally controversial, no one is writing her open letters demanding that she put some clothes back and stop gyrating.

It’s because of age. As always, Miley’s coming out into the realm of the adult, from a coveted child star’s position, means that she must always be sweet and funny and America’s girl-next-door.

But here’s the thing, she is America’s girl next door. At least some of them. She’s experimenting and projecting herself, just do it in a far more public one than your average 21-year-old. And making a lot more money.

So America, get over yourself and your Victorian, false-nostalgia ideas about what a women’s libido is really like. Cause you’re babbling and my vagina and I have better things to with our time.

Older Women Week: Funniest After 50: Four Comediennes to Love Forever

Betty White, Maggie Smith, Judi Dench, and Helen Mirren… At first, when writing this article, I thought about pointing out the ways in which Hollywood has shorted these prolific and amazing actresses, and while I’m sure that’s happened to them at some point in their careers, in reading about their lives, I realized that would almost be a disservice to all that they’ve accomplished. Rather, this piece is meant as a tribute to these enduring female comediennes, who have not only flourished but also paved the way for so many other actresses and actors.

Written By Rachel Redfern

The always hilarious Betty White

When thinking about female comediennes, we often consider the hilarity of Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, Sarah Silverman, Ellen Degeneres and Mindy Kaling (plus many more); however, rarely do we think about those funny women who helped to pioneer women in comedy, and who manage to stay current today. Even more than that, do we ever think about actresses over the age of 80 who are still out there, busting sides and helping to expand the boundaries of cinema? Four people who are doing just that? Betty White, Maggie Smith, Judi Dench, and Helen Mirren. These women have managed to retain a certain appeal and charisma, keeping them current and having a substantial effect on popular culture.

But what roles are they playing? Are they merely fulfilling our stereotypes of older women? It is common knowledge that most female actresses are given a narrow width of roles once they top the age of 45, the focus at that point aiming more towards how well they aged and can they convincingly play Scarlett Johansson’s mother?

At first, when writing this article, I thought about pointing out the ways in which Hollywood has shorted these prolific and amazing actresses, and while I’m sure that’s happened to them at some point in their careers, in reading about their lives, I realized that would almost be a disservice to all that they’ve accomplished. Rather, this piece is meant as a tribute to these enduring female comediennes, who have not only flourished but also paved the way for so many other actresses and actors.

Betty White (1922)

While Betty White has had a career in show business for most of her life, White was most known for her role on Golden Girls over twenty years ago, a role in which she was spunky and hilarious. But the steam generated by that show built her up until suddenly, ten years ago when she started guest starring on dozens of shows, won seven Emmys, become the oldest person to ever host Saturday Night Live, and even had a spot on a major super bowl ad.

But why? What’s so enduring and endearing about her? Is the fact that White, born in 1922 (she is now 91 years old) retains a youth and vitality that is staggering? Is it the comedic roles she easily slips into as a lovable and sassy grandmother? At first, when considering the usual roles that she plays I wondered, is White fulfilling a wishful stereotype for audiences (that of a hilarious, raunchy, older woman) without playing more dramatic roles or portraying realistic situations for the elderly?

But in my consideration of her career, I changed my perspective; Betty White is a comedienne and has been for most of her career. The fact that she’s still entertaining and embracing offbeat comedic roles, and even hosting her own prank show called Betty White’s Off Their Rockers, is actually one of the best tribute to funny women everywhere.

Maggie Smith (1934)

You’ve watched Harry Potter, and probably Downton Abbey, so you know who she is, but Smith has been a prominent actress since 1952, although she started her career in the theater. However, I didn’t necessarily consider Smith a comedic actress until actually taking a closer look into her expansive and productive bibliography. Since 1956, Smith has been recognized as both a powerful dramatic actor (becoming a member of the Royal National Theater in the 1960’s, nominated for an Oscar only a few years later for her role as Desdemona in Othello) and as a woman of great comedic timing and talent.

Consider her acerbic wit and hilarious disdain as the Dowager Countess in Downton Abbey, the prim nun in Sister Act, and a lovely, elderly Wendy in Hook. The unfortunate moment in all of this research is the realization that most people of my generation have tasted only the barest sample of Maggie Smith’s range, especially in regard to her comedic abilities.

Judi Dench (1934)

We don’t always consider Judi Dench as a comedic actress, because well, let’s face it, she’s a drama powerhouse. Elegant, confident, she displays all the characteristics of a self-assured woman of grace and intelligence, both off- and on-screen. However, similar to Smith, Dench was also a fixture of the England theater scene for many years, being a member of the Royal Shakespeare company, and it was there, that she gained prominence for both her drama and comedy work, once being cited as the greatest comedic actress in all of England.

In 1981 she starred in the critically acclaimed British romantic sitcom, A Fine Romance, with her husband, Michael Williams, but it’s her more current work as M in the James Bond series that I find interesting. Her performance has been acclaimed for its combination of British sarcasm and competent, cold leadership.

Besides that, she’s hilarious in private life, once stating that since Harvey Wienstein helped to further her career that she had his name “tattooed on my bum ever since.”

Helen Mirren (1945)

Helen Mirren has retained a sexiness and a dynamic appeal, which she happily carries with her as she enters her seventies. I love that. While it’s true that too much emphasis is placed on the physical beauty of the women in Hollywood, Mirren’s draw comes from more than just her good looks. She’s always been known for her sensuality and for the heat and intensity she could bring to a film or theater production.

Like Judi Dench, Mirren was also a member of the Royal Shakespeare Company in her youth who then moved onto fame for ability to portray British royalty, having played three queens so far: Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Elizabeth II, and Queen Charlotte. Yet, while most of her substantial theater experience was in drama and displaying “sensuality” and “sexual allure,” in film and television, she’s become a recognizable comedic personality.

Her roles in Calendar Girls, the dark-comedy and action thrillers Red and Red II, countless television interviews and even, a night spent hosting Saturday Night Live in 2011 have solidified Mirren as a sultry and mischievous comedienne. (Click here to see Helen Mirren and Billy Crystal consider a remake of When Harry Met Sally and here to see a fabulous video of Mirren talking about women in Hollywood and the “worship of the young male and his penis.”)

I find that combination fabulous, and in many ways groundbreaking; Mirren has managed to successfully embrace her famous sexuality and incorporate it into her own unique style of slapstick, confident comedy.

The brilliance in examining the comedic range of these four women is that all have developed a unique style and are at ease with their age. They don’t take themselves too seriously, and because of their resilience, diligence, hard work, and talent, (in a notoriously competitive and unfriendly-to-women-environment) they embody the best of women in Hollywood—stalwart performers whose years of experience is outstanding and mind-boggling.

What are some other actresses that have successfully retained their comedic abilities as they’ve entered their golden years?

Rachel Redfern has an MA in English literature, where she conducted research on modern American literature and film and its intersection, however she spends most of her time watching HBO shows, traveling, and blogging and reading about feminism.

10 Fascinating Female TV Characters Who Are Often Overlooked

Written by Rachel Redfern

As a spin-off from last week’s discussion about the female characters and the rise of the male anti-hero on TV, I thought that today I would point ten of the most interesting female characters on television within the past ten years (although I’m sure there are many more out there), many of whom are only side characters and might have been passed over.

Note, this is not about the most bad-ass female characters, or even the ones I would consider to be role models (though some are); this is about the most interesting female characters. Just as it can be limiting to find male characters as always the knight in shining armor, or the action hero superstar (hence the darker, more varied male characters on television), I think it can be the same for women since they are often placed into their own boxes.

So here it is, ten female characters that I find unique and fascinating, and unfortunately, often overlooked (please add any more you think of in the comments).

Katee Sackhoff as Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica

Starbuck (Katee Sackhoff)

Starbuck was a man in the original Battlestar Galactica series and Ronald Moore’s decision to revamp the character into a woman for the remake was pretty traumatic; Sackhoff even reported that she had death threats after the casting decision had been made. However, Starbuck quickly became a show favorite and with good reason. Starbuck is one of the most diverse female characters on TV, ever.

She smoked cigars and drank to excess, got into a lot of fights, struggled with commitment, but loved her husband and friends deeply. She was fearless and talented as a pilot, but conversely sensitive to music and painting because of her relationship with her absent father.

Moore gave her a pretty intense back story as well, showing the physical and mental abuse that her mother submitted her to as a child, and her struggles with pain, having children, and the intense developments her character was subjected to.

Robin Weigert as Calamity Jane and Kim Dickens as Joanie Stubbs in Deadwood

Calamity Jane (Robin Weigert) and Joanie Stubbs (Kim Dickens)

Deadwood has a few strong and interesting women, but Calamity Jane and Joanie Stubbs and their relationship have often been overlooked.

Robin Weigert was masterful as the blustering, loyal, drunk Calamity Jane, managing to display both bravado and a deep frailty. Weigert consistently portrayed Jane’s insecurities and sadness, effectively showing her as a sensitive and lonely outcast.

Joanie Stubbs (Kim Dickens) was an elegant whore who has spent her whole life under the physical and sexual control of men, first her father, then her unstable and dangerous boss, Cy Tolliver. But Joanie’s search for freedom and escape from her past life became very painful and difficult to survive and understand her own place in the Deadwood camp.

The fact that the two women, both on the fringes of acceptable society, both damaged and distraught, find each other and develop a strong friendship (with it growing into a possible romantic one) was a beautiful subplot for the show.

Julia Louis-Dreyfuss as Selina Meyer in Veep

Selina Meyer (Julia Louis-Dreyfuss)

Selina Meyer (Julia Louis Dreyfuss) from HBO’s Veep is intensely unlikable, and I love that. She’s selfish and oblivious, whiny and incompetent (the perfect politician) and treats her employees and staff horribly.

But there is something very important about such unrelatable and unlikable characters–not all women in the world are pleasant, but despite her flaws, Selina is a deeply human character in a competitive world.

Yunjin Kim as Sun Kwon in Lost

Sun Kwon (Yunjin Kim)

Sun, at least in the beginning of Lost, seemed to be a minor character, one whose sad smile and soft voice suggested a submissive and lackluster personality being pushed around by her husband. Of course, that wasn’t the case, and it became apparent through later episodes that she was a strong, intelligent, forceful character, willing to do what was needed in order to survive.

Sun’s character and backstory provided a fabulous look into how humans change, seeing her first as the sweet, naïve bride, then the angry, bitter woman desperate for her freedom, and finally as a strong survivor in later seasons.

Maggie Siff as Tara Knowles in Sons of Anarchy

Tara Knowles (Maggie Siff)

Gemma, the great matriarch of the Sons of Anarchy clan, often gets most of the attention, and she is an amazing character: strong, fierce, and dangerous. But I also find Tara, Jax’s wife, to be complicated and compelling character. As opposed to Gemma, whose whole life has been the motorcycle club, Tara is a respected young surgeon attempting to raise her children in a normalized environment.

But then she changes and starts to exhibit a darker side, a change that heralds in her own deep conflicts with her healing career but destructive personal life. In season five she takes a wrench to another woman for possibly endangering her husband; a few episodes later she’s performing delicate surgery on an infant.

Liza Weil as Paris Geller in Gilmore Girls

Paris Geller (Liza Weil)

Gilmore Girls is sometimes dismissed as being light entertainment, an opinion that does a disservice to a snappy show with amazing dialogue and clever, quirky characters.

One of these characters being of course, the hyper-intelligent, aggressive, irrepressible, intense Paris Geller. Originally, Paris was only intended for a few episodes in the first season, but quickly grew into a main character because of the unique perspective that her personality offered to the show.

Paris’ character, that of an elitist academic loaded with money, quick temper, and fast-talking, clever comebacks, can’t really be found in any other show. She was a mashup of brilliance and so many neuroses and problems that it’s almost overwhelming, but also funny and sad.

The truth is, women like her, passionate, intense and bossy, are often completely hated and overly stereotyped, whereas Gilmore Girls managed to present her as a lovable and competent women, albeit with a few idiosyncrasies.

Rutina Wesley as Tara Thornton in True Blood

Tara Thornton (Rutina Wesley)

Sookie gets all the attention in True Blood, both on- and off-screen. Which is a shame, because Tara Thornton, Sookie’s best friend from childhood is an angsty, wisecracking southern girl who always took the show to the next level.

Intelligent and well-read, but dealing with her mother’s alcoholism (and intense religiosity) and poverty, makes Tara full of emotional issues and anger, but also passionately loyal. Tara is astute and honest and not afraid to tell other characters when they’re being stupid. The world probably needs a lot more people like her.

Natalie Dormer as Margaery Tyrell in Game of Thrones

Margaery Tyrell (Natalie Dormer)

The rich world of Game of Thrones has several noteworthy women–so many in fact, that some of the minor, but equally interesting female characters, can get passed over. For example, Margaery Tyrell (most prominent in the third and last season) is actually far more dynamic in the TV show than in the books, and much more unique.

Margaery is an incredible politician; she’s manipulative, cold, ambitious, charismatic and astute. I love how each action is carefully planned out, revealing a methodical and calculating nature, one that is far more dangerous than Cersei (I think) because of her ability to control her temper.

I love a good ambitious character; powerful women who aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty fascinate me. In fact, I would argue that Margaery Tyrell is a born leader, one with an innate understanding of politics and power.

Vote for Margaery?

January Jones as Bretty Francis Draper in Mad Men

Betty Francis Draper (January Jones)

Mad Men’s women are incredibly varied, from sexy, confident Joan, to naïve, talented Peggy, but often pushed to the side is Don’s beautiful and bitter ex-wife. Mad Men’s portrayal of her obvious loneliness, and her (deserving) anger over Don’s behavior is incredibly sad, but also poignant.

Rather than sugarcoating her character and painting her as a distressed angel, Betty builds upon the difficulties that pushed her way, and her flawed decisions are thrown in with attempts to pull her life together.

Sometimes redemption is hard; so is pulling yourself out of cycles of pain and resentment. Betty is therefore complex and interesting, incredibly frail and static, but also unbending and aggressive in her life choices.

Nicolette Sheridan as Edit Britt in Desperate Housewives

Edie Britt (Nicolette Sheridan)

Desperate Housewives‘ Edie is probably no one’s role model, and at first she seems like the perfect stereotype of a wealthy, self-absorbed, boy-crazy blonde. She sleeps with everyone, has multiple affairs, and has no qualms about manipulating people.

However, she was also hilarious, clever, and often incredibly honest and realistic. She made no bones about who she was or her actions, and more than once was the voice of reason.

And sometimes, there’s nothing wrong with being a little selfish.

Rachel Redfern has an MA in English literature, where she conducted research on modern American literature and film and its intersection; however, she spends most of her time watching HBO shows, traveling, and blogging and reading about feminism.

The Golden Age of Television: Boys Only

Written by Rachel Redfern

The rise of the anti-hero has most TV and media reviewers heralding the past ten years as revolutionary, a “golden age of television.”

And I think it’s true, great television seems to be popping out of the seams of my TV and an ever-expanding “To Watch” list on my desk. In fact, looking at the recent figures for big summer blockbusters (most of which seem to have failed miserably) some (myself included) are wondering if Hollywood studios might be fading into the shadows of networks such as AMC and HBO.

TV, because of its much longer time allowances (12-20 hours of viewing per season) and recently-improved watching options (Hulu, Netflix, DVD releases and, let’s face it, illegal streaming and downloading) seem to create far more interesting characters and way more space for subtle scheming and intrigue in their plot lines. Increasingly, Hollywood opts for a bigger explosion to counteract its total lack of originality and character development.

So, in a word, I would argue yes, I find higher quality entertainment and better stories about life and humanity in television than I do at the movies.

But I don’t see many women in these shows either.

Some of Brett Martin’s “Difficult Men”

GQ writer Brett Martin’s new book Difficult Men: Behind the Scenes of a Creative Revolution from ‘The Sopranos’ and ‘The Wire’ to ‘Mad Men’ and ‘Breaking Bad’ is all about the fabulously conflicted male characters springing up in television: Walter White, Don Draper, Al Swearengen and the others that are the front men for this great revolution. And writing about these complex male characters is important, but the book’s content reveals one of the major flaws within this golden age–where are all the conflicted, complex women and the TV shows that center on their lives?

I can think of only two (please add to this list though in the comments if you can think of any more): Homeland and Weeds, although Game of Thrones has several interesting female characters running around. (It perhaps has one of the better ratios of compelling female and male characters.)

Claire Danes as Carrie Mathison in Homeland

I’m not sure that blaming the producers and writers of these shows is going to get us anywhere because the problem is obviously much deeper than that, and it begs the question, why aren’t women’s stories interesting to producers and writers? Why aren’t female protagonists fascinating and complex?

Do audiences consider stories with female protagonists un-relatable? Uninteresting? Too unbelievable? Or does this lack merely reflect life in that there aren’t any women doing enough “complex” and “darkly-human” things to model the character after?

I don’t believe any of that is true, but that doesn’t change the amount of women headlining an AMC show. In thinking about my favorite shows, I can only think of a few female characters that I would consider unique and groundbreaking. Consider Breaking Bad: while Skyler is an interesting enough character, she’s far less compelling (and obviously secondary) to the character development that Walt is showcasing, often being seen as no more than a “nag” or “hen-pecking shrew” to many viewers (not this one). In fact, the backlash against Skyler (Anna Gunn) has been so intense (consider the meme below as a common example of how the internet seems to view the poor woman) that Gilligan actually addressed the problem in a recent interview.

One of the nicer internet memes for Skyler White (Anna Gunn)

However, as a whole, with the story centering on and following a female protagonist, the number is proportionately small.

So ladies, either we are far too flat and boring to be on TV, or as it has been for so long, our stories and interactions are still being undervalued. Therefore, we should set some goals for ourselves: be marvelously interesting (sarcasm) and (more importantly) continue to write, produce, direct and support more TV shows about women–because I don’t see many others doing it for us.

Rethinking Sex Trafficking and Voyeurism: ‘Taken’ and ‘Eden’

Written by Rachel Redfern

The current Hollywood climate and the overwhelming ridiculousness of most of the big blockbusters being churned out of that machine is something that we talk about a lot over here at Bitch Flicks. The problems with a lack of unique female characters, general lack of original plot and substantive dialogue are just a few of the major problems going on right now. But on top of that has been a trend I recently noticed concerning our portrayal of sex trafficking as a tool to demonstrate the general kick-ass, uber-masculine, damsel-in-distress saving, action star. Specifically, I’m talking about the films Taken, Taken 2, and Trade.

In this case, the horrific abuse that is the daily life of many sex trafficking victims is wantonly used as mere shock factor, and in the process, allows a seedy voyeurism of the acts of torture and sexual assault that happen in such films. Does it do more harm or good to have such shocking and graphic scenes portrayed so cavalierly? For instance, the harm comes from using shocking scenes as a way to drive up viewership and glamorizing a very real global human rights violation; the good comes from the fact that these intense films do have a large viewership and in that, those films can spread awareness of the issue.

The issue is a complicated one and I have written about it for other venues here, but despite the fact that there are some very problematic films about sex trafficking running around out there, there are also some very good ones. Specifically, the 2012 film, Eden, directed by Megan Griffiths and just released on DVD last month.

Jamie Chung as Eden

Eden is based off the true-life story of Chong Kim (Jamie Chung), a young Korean American woman who was kidnapped and sold into sex slavery in the United States. Many do not realize that the United States is unfortunately a huge participant in the importation and the exploitation of immigrations and US citizens in the global sex trafficking trade.

Eden chronicles Chong’s two years of experiences in a well-connected, organized prostitution ring within the American Southwest. Chong (renamed Eden by the organization) begins to climb the ladder of her own organization as a way to survive and eventually escape, an action that fully demonstrates the twisted reach of the organization.

Eden is a slow-moving tale, one that takes time to develop and highlight the changes and trauma that are influencing Chong, allowing the story, and Chong’s character, to grow as a result. The film is episodic in nature, skipping ahead to highlight significant moments within her capture and showcasing the passage of time.

As well, the fact that the United States has a substantial piece of the sex trafficking trade is exposed in this film. Eden is grounded in the US experience, even showing Chong within a standard US suburb being shuttled too and from homes as a prostitute. The landscape is familiar, as are the men and women she comes into contact with; it’s horrifying to realize how easily sex trafficking and its victims slip in and out of American life.

Jamie Chung as Eden–making her way up the ladder of the organization

Chong is an American citizen, and Eden portrays how many of the women are young American youths who have been sold or have run away from home. But Chong also has Asian heritage from her Korean parents, which means that in the film she must pretend to be an underage Chinese prostitute as a gimmick to get clients, a horrifically true detail that Chong Kim talks about here in an excerpt (page 11-12). Immigrants are usually considered the largest target of sex trafficking. It’s horrible to realize that such a situation is considered sexually desirable by some who use prostitutes.

But the film never explicitly shows the rape or torture scenes. We are aware of what’s happening and even of the effect that these actions have on Eden, but neither are we made to be participants in the same actions that the film is portraying. In fact, in this instance, not showing is a far more effective tool in demonstrating the seriousness and reality of sex trafficking. Instead of the focus being placed on the gratuitously violent rape-torture scene, the focus can instead be placed on how this trauma is affecting her, how the organization operates, and its insidious place within much of mainstream society.

Rather than focusing on the big man coming to save her, Eden is about her experiences, how she learns to survive, how she uses her own resources to facilitate her escape. That’s not to say that sex trafficking victims should in any way shape or form be responsible for their removal from sex trafficking, but it is important that films don’t just use sex trafficking as an action movie plot device.

Eden may be a little slow-moving, and I think it could have been longer, giving even more time to show Eden’s development and the effects of sex trafficking, but on the whole, Eden is a fine independent film, by a young and upcoming female director. We need more films telling subtle and focused stories about the thousands of victims of sex trafficking around the world.

Wedding Week: Another Indie Wedding…And Breakup in ‘Save the Date’

Written by Rachel Redfern

Lizzy Caplan and cat in Save the Date

Wanted: Emotionally unavailable girl struggling to realize her romantic potential.

If that is what you’re looking for then Save the Date is here to realize such a fantasy. This is Michael Mohan’s sophomore film (One Too Many Mornings being the first), and it’s a solid second movie with great actors and a timely story.

Lizzy (Lizzy Caplan) just moved in with her boyfriend Kevin (Geoffrey Arend) of two years. One week later, he proposes; she freaks, then moves out, and it’s from there that the evolution of her relationships begin. During this time period, her sister Beth (Alison Brie) and her fiancé and band mate to Kevin, Andrew (Martin Starr), also travel the tricky waters that run to the great waterfall of marriage.

Thematically, the film focuses on the two men in Lizzy’s life, her ex Kevin, and her new boyfriend Jonathon (Mark Webber), and her obvious patterns of relationships; Save the Date is essentially a character study of one woman and her neuroses and the constant mistakes, fears, and decisions that she does manage to get right. She’s not always a completely sympathetic character, but she is still the one we’re rooting for at the end of the day.

This is the second time I’ve seen Lizzy Caplan in her easy portrayal of the emotionally damaged wild child, the first being in Bachelorette where similarly, the wedding brings up all of her feelings about past relationships and a surprise pregnancy. It’s a character I like, one that while not original, is also not the most common of characters (similar to Natalie Portman in Friends With Benefits, Charlize Theron in Sweet November). But I like the character; it’s one where, rather than neurotic, and desperately searching for love and marriage, she’s the opposite–skittish and non-committal, frustrating and sexy.

Caplan is obviously comfortable with the role and slips into emotionally distant behavior with an alacrity that is almost cringe-worthy. However, I think it’s valuable to see women and men in some role reversal; in Save the Date, Kevin is over-eager and anxious to please, while Lizzy barrels around, being incredibly sadly charming and then pulling away from relationships.

Allison Brie and Martin Starr in Save the Date

Allison Brie is also lovely in her role as the more traditional, over-bearing sister. She’s impatient and snappy and obviously stressed about her wedding plans but also deeply invested in her sister. In fact, Save the Date removes many of the external friends for the two women and instead has the focus on the balance of their sibling relationship

It’s also productive that the film doesn’t attempt to explain away why Lizzy is so scared of relationships and why her sister is so excited to take hers to the next level. Rather, the two women are presented as flawed characters who just are who they are. Granted, the ending of the film seemed more focused on fixing Lizzy rather than on her own personal growth, but that’s perhaps a plot flaw more than anything.

And on that note, the plot is incredibly simple and slow. The conflict and resolution was easily anticipated and lacked any originality, even the present felt familiar. The film is very much in the ridiculously popular indie style, a style that I have to confess is starting to get a little old with its careful mullets, obscure acoustic tracks, and an ironic attempt to not take themselves too seriously but usually failing.

Lizzy Caplan and Allison Brie in Save the Date

However, go to this film (or rent it at this point since it’s out on DVD) for the very familiar situations you’ll see, especially of note, Arend’s portryal of Kevin and his struggles with losing Lizzy. Often, romance films pit a “good guy” against a “complete and total lying, cheating bastard,” role that rarely allows for nuance and the complexities and context that accompany our mistakes. Instead, Kevin, Andrew and Jonathon are all different, but likable and sincere. They act like the adults I know, occasionally silly and naive when it comes to love but genuine in their attempts to do the right thing.

Lizzy and Beth as sisters get along perhaps a little too well for a normal sister relationship, but they’re also self-aware of their flaws and apologetic when they cross the line. Sometimes romantic comedies have a tendency to be over-the-top in their caricature of love, so much so that character interactions become excessively unrealistic. Save the Date re-captures some of its lost points for the slow plot with its commitment to showing more realistic interactions between couples and family.

But seriously, no more mullets in indie films.

Rachel Redfern has an MA in English literature, where she conducted research on modern American literature and film and its intersection; however, she spends most of her time watching HBO shows, traveling, and blogging and reading about feminism.

Romantic Comedy (and Female Friendship) ‘Arranged’ Marriage Style

Written by Rachel Redfern

Arranged is a 2007 romantic comedy by Diane Crespo and Stefan Schaefer about two women, one a Muslim woman, the other Jewish, finding love in an unusual way. Setting a romantic comedy within two disparate but highly developed communities of Orthodox Judaism and Islam in New York City offered a unique perspective on the normally tired genre.

Zoe Lister-Jones is Rochel, a twenty-two year-old Jewish woman from New York, just beginning her new job as a special education teacher at a public school. Francis Benhamou is Nasira, an independent young Muslim woman also beginning her career teaching the fourth grade at the same school. Because of their shared students and more conservative beliefs, the two women become friends and help each other through their prospective arranged marriages. Both women are at a crossroads in their lives as they try to please their families and maintain their faith, while also seeking their own happiness.

As a quick side note, Schaefar and Crespo did an astounding job of placing the film within a religious setting and really giving the film a deep center in tradition and devout faith. During the opening credits, the film establishes itself within these religious neighborhoods in such a way that for the first five minutes I didn’t realize the movie was set in the United States until a character specifically stated it.

Original movie posted for ‘Arranged’

In one strong and fabulous aspect, Arranged is a feminist triumph; the film’s portrayal of female friendships might be at the very top (it also passes the Bechdel Test). These two women meet through a shared passion in their careers and their struggles to find their place and fit into their new school. But it is their ability to connect beyond their faith that is most striking; in one scene, a distraught Rochel desperately asks Nasira to join her at the cemetery and stand near her while she prays for guidance and peace. The image is one of generosity and love, since Nasira cannot participate in the ritual and must just stand by and watch her. But both women are intensely supportive of the other and it’s a positive portrayal of the ways that women build each other up in communities.

Similarly, the film is mostly women and mainly centers on the interactions among mothers and daughters, sisters and friends and the ways that they struggle to understand one another through the lenses of their own experience. I found the mother-daughter relationship between Rochel and Nasira and their mothers to be especially poignant. Rochel’s mother, Sheli (Mimi Lieber), and Nasira’s mother, Amina (Gina Schmuckler), are both incredibly sympathetic to their daughters, obviously wanting what’s best for them—Sheli is even willing to support Rochel in her decision to wait, against the judgments of the matchmaker and neighborhood women; however, they’re also dynamic forces in their daughters’ lives, fighting and pushing them to a decision they think is best. It’s simultaneously both frustrating and heartening to watch but also very realistic in how it captured many female, familial relationships.

Arranged is very focused on proving that modern ideals of love and dating are not always best and obviously wants to show that many women in these same situations are independent and beloved by their families, while also having a choice in who they marry. Unfortunately, the film does end up undercutting its own intentions to show that these women have a choice, but should they make the choice not to marry or choose someone other than a person their family approves of, it’s stated that Rochel (and probably Nasira) would have to leave their families and would ultimately be disowned.

Zoe Lister-Jones and Francis Benhamou in Arranged

Ideas about arranged marriages in the United States vary, from deeply traditional communities still using matchmakers and choosing for their children, to critics, both in and outside of these communities, who say that choices are still limited for women and believe that arranged marriages have similar levels of distress and unhappiness. No one knows the exact amount of marriages in the U.S. that are arranged (or forced for that matter), but researchers believe the number of arranged marriages globally to be around fifty percent.

The film attempts to show that love can build and grow from an arranged marriage since it belies the transience of infatuation, but by the end of the film, it feels like a too-convenient tying up of loose ends. I had hoped to see more exploration in one or two of the couples learning to love each other, or perhaps one of the women making the choice to wait or not to marry. It would have been productive to see how two very good actresses and their devout and intelligent characters would have dealt with such a situation.

It was also unfortunate that three of the four secular characters in the film were caricatures of western insensitivity, and it is sad to think that many intelligent and good people of faith, especially of more orthodox religions, have to deal with such harsh judgment (I’m guilty as well, I confess). But, the other characters seemed to be painted with a quick brush that was pretty heavy on the “airhead.” None of these characters was very informed or particularly smart, a glaring group of character flaws that need some more subtlety and diversity. The female principal of their school (Marcia Jean Kurtz) is especially inappropriate and condescending in the way that she speaks to Rochel and Nasira about their religions (in a way that I think no public school principal in New York City could act and still keep her job).

It’s interesting since this film was made over fifty years ago, but The Fiddler on The Roof is still more of a hard-hitting exploration in tradition vs. modernity, arranged marriage vs. choice, religion vs. race than Arranged.

Yet, all in all, Arranged is a sweet and uplifting film about the power of female friendship with great actresses, a beautiful score, and a uniquely positive portrayal of women. I would definitely recommend this film for a Sunday afternoon.

‘True Blood’ Season Six Kick Off!

Written by Rachel Redfern

***Spoiler (or more aptly called, rumors) alert

With the passing of one great HBO show comes the dawn of a new one. While we all cry for the season finale of Game of Thrones and the subsequent nine months without Peter Dinklage, it means now we have True Blood to look forward to.

Starting June 16th, the next great gratifyingly guts and love HBO show will be up and running with ten episodes pleasantly filled with Eric Northman (Alexander Skarsgard), Bill Compton (Stephen Moyer), and Alcide Herveoux (Joe Manganiello); while the show has a normal run of twelve episodes a season, it’s been shortened to a soul-crushing ten due to Anna Paquin’s pregnancy.

As a little recap, season five ended with Eric yelling, “Sookie, Run!” after the creation of Billith, the lovable Bill turned into a religious vampire fundamentalist who drinks the ancient blood of Lillith and becomes an evil liturgical nightmare.

Artwork of Lillith

As a feminist, I find it fascinating that Lillith was chosen as the starting point for the vampire religion. In the original legend of Lillith, she was created before Eve to be Adam’s wife, but she refused to be Adam’s “slave” and so rebelled against god, left the Garden of Eden and then slept with Satan. She gave birth to many children by Satan, but when god demanded she give them to him she refused. Therefore, like so many female mythic figures (and modern day ones) she has been cast as either a demonic prostitute or as a great mother figure who protects children, more commonly known as the angel on the hearth.

This obviously transitions into the use of religious themes from season five, and that will be carried over into season six. (According to the season six trailer, an incredulous Sookie tells Bill, “You really do think you’re god.”) Whether True Blood intends to cast Lillith as a demon or an angel hasn’t been entirely determined (though my money is on demon); however, it’s incredibly unique to have a woman as the savior figure in a religion (the only other film/tv show I can think of is Dogma, and I’m not sure that counts). Unfortunately though, it seems Lillith can’t just stay a woman; Bill drinks Lillith’s blood and effectively becomes a part of her, either taking on some part of her divinity or just becoming her in flesh. While it was a bit frustrating to have her become a man at the end of the season, it’s also still interesting to have a possibly androgynous religious figure.

True Blood is a show that has consistently dealt with some of the more mythological and pagan representations of women: Holly (Lauren Bowles) as a good witch; Marnie (Fiona Shaw) and Antonia in season four as the sometimes bad, sometimes good witches; Maryann (Michelle Forbes), as the evil ancient maenad in season two; and a whole host of good, bad and flighty fairies throughout the entire show.

Of course on the surface, True Blood gets a reputation as a vampire romance with lots and lots of sex; however, the show in general has powerful themes: religious fundamentalism, terrorism, racism, homosexuality, and even PTSD. Todd Lowe and his gentle search for earthly normalcy provided a great counterpoint to the search for supernatural artifacts or dominion of the other characters. Also, Lafayette (Nelsan Ellis) is one of the most interesting homosexual characters on television; Ellis plays the role with a physical masculinity but with a more feminine wardrobe and a flamboyant sexuality. For me, Ellis’ masterful acting as a playful joining of genders and stereotypes is able to move away from a trite rehashing of more mainstream representations of homosexuality. (Note: The following clip, while representative of Ellis’ fine powers of gender melding, also contains explicit language. NSFW.)

True Blood also did an amazing job with firmly insinuating a real sense of place into the series; there is a gritty realism to its deep south with the humidity, rich and poor suburbs, accent, clothing and behavior. Ultimately the show portrays poverty, varying levels of education, spiritual communities, even a few crappy old cars, and unlike many other shows, characters are of varying beauty and body type, have unstylish hair cuts and ill-fitting jeans (except for a lot of the vamps–most of them are just dripping sex). So at least the show maintains some sense of realism while the main cast runs around staking vampires and strip dancing with fairies.

We also have to recognize the incredibly kick ass soundtracks that the producers bang out over every season: Beyond the bland mixes of generic pop music of most shows, True Blood features punk rock, country, folk music, fabulous jazz and sleazy hip hop in a brilliant mashup. It also has in my opinion, one of the best, if not the best, opening sequences of any tv show.

The cast of True Blood

So, on to season six: what can we expect? Spoilers and rumors to follow.

Sookie and Jason: Looks like Sookie and Jason are on the trail for Warlow (Rutger Hauer), the mysterious vampire who killed their parents and to whom Sookie was apparently promised. Sookie also looks like she’s coming in to her own and letting someone (Bill? Eric?) know she doesn’t belong to anyone and that she’s getting sick of the way her life is going.

Eric and Sookie: Eric and Sookie look like they’re getting it on in a few scenes and beyond that, Eric looks sweet, and sexy and amazing. Perhaps this season we’ll get to see him in the heroes’ role as he realizes the best parts of himself? Also, apparently Nora isn’t just his sister? Supposedly, there’s a little bit more of a secret there than we originally thought. Bigger than all of that though, is the rumor that Eric might meet the true death in this season, which if that happens, would entirely change the course of the show.

On a side note however, the show has received some criticism for its unwillingness to kill off major characters, so while I think that Eric dying is a low possibility, (though Skarsgard’s career has been gaining recently; he might want to move on to other projects) perhaps that’s why the show might be ready to take the plunge of major character death? Also, consider this season’s tagline “No one lives forever.”

True Blood Season 6 and tagline

Pam and Tara: Pam and Tara will continue their relationship and the two definitely seem to be going it alone. However, I have heard that Tara has a near-true-death experience, which we hope will only be an experience and not a permanent change.

Evil: The humans might just be the villains in this season, along with Warlow, since rumors have been leaked of scary anti-vampire weapons (one of which might end up hurting Tara). It also looks like there’s some intense secret lab where humans have been conducting experiments on vampires and other supernaturals. Perhaps a vampire/werewolf alliance will be on the horizon this season?

On a happy note, everyone’s favorite pastor family is back with Sarah Newlin (Anna Camp) and Steve Newlin (Michael McMillian), and Sarah looks like she’s probably gonna be a badass.

Trailer #2

Trailer #1

What do you think will happen this season? Is it time for a main character to die?

The Titillating Nature of Sex: Controversy in ‘Blue is the Warmest Color’

Written by Rachel Redfern

Film poster for Blue is the Warmest Color

Abdellatif Kechiche’s Blue is the Warmest Color is the first film with a lesbian protagonist to win the prestigious Palm D’or Award at the Cannes Film Festival. The French drama is based on Julie Maroh’s graphic novel and centers on the life of Adele, a fifteen year-old girl who becomes involved with another young woman. Remarkably, the film is three hours long, which doubles in length the normal hour and half for a romantic comedy in the US, a fact that must develop an enormously powerful love story.

The movie received high praise from critics, and both lead actresses, Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux, were given the Palme as a special prize due to their outstanding performances. Similarly, the film comes at a particularly important moment since France passed a bill allowing gay marriage only a few weeks ago, a bill that has been at the center of huge debates and massive rioting.

However, praise for the movie has been tempered by the controversy of its two graphic sex scenes that have a length on par with the film. While no one has clocked it yet, many have said that the scenes were at least ten minutes in length. This criticism has also been echoed by the writer of the graphic novel, Julie Maroh.

Abdellatif Kechiche, Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux at the Cannes Film Festival

It’s no secret that Maroh was disappointed in the two sex scenes, essentially calling them pornographic. It’s important to note that she wasn’t mad about the inclusion of sex scenes, but rather specifically called out the director on the lack of realism in the aforementioned scenes. In fact, as is the intention of pornography, she felt that the two scenes served no other purpose than to essentially live out a male director’s fantasies.

According to a statement written by Maroh in regard to fact that the audience was giggling during the scenes,

“The heteronormative laughed because they don’t understand it and find the scene ridiculous. The gay and queer people laughed because it’s not convincing, and found it ridiculous. And among the only people we didn’t hear giggling were the potential guys too busy feasting their eyes on an incarnation of their fantasies on screen.”

It’s not hard to sense Maroh’s pain here and with good reason since her reasons for writing Blue is the Warmest Color was to, “catch the attention of those who had no clue, who had the wrong picture based on false ideas.” Considering that Maroh intended to offer a more realistic portrayal of lesbian relationships and that instead she felt her goal had been reduced to the very unrealistic portrayal of lesbian pornographic sex, it’s easy to see why she would be upset.

This leads to some interesting questions about the nature of sex, specifically sex between women, in film. For instance, if the director had been female would the outcome have been different? Maroh believes that Kechiche was utilizing a very popular male gaze in the filming of those scenes; perhaps if the director had been a woman the scenes would have been different? However, if we follow that logic it would seem then that lesbian sex in art can only be created by other women?

Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux in Blue is the Warmest Color

Women sleeping with women constitutes a massive portion of the pornographic film industry; there’s been an almost mythic build-up around the erotic nature of two women having sex. In that case, is there anyway to have non-pornographic lesbian sex scenes? Or is it meant only for the male gaze? (I say male gaze here only because it seems more suitable. While many women would also find it erotic, Maroh felt that it was catering to a very male sexual fantasy.)

Also, it should be noted that not every critic agrees that the scenes were pornographic. Richard Porton on The Daily Beast asks a fair question: “Should men—or for that matter women—aroused by these scenes be moralistically dissed as the arthouse equivalents of the raincoat brigade?” The film is a coming of age story, specifically a story of sexual awakening for a young girl. Sex, is by it’s nature erotic; any movie or novel that attempts to really portray the intensity of vibrant sexuality has to be, well…sexy.

Consider one of my favorite movies, Turn Me On Dammit, which portrays the heterosexual sexual awakening of a young girl but also features a scene where the main character fantasizes about one of her female friends. It’s showing a fantasy; therefore, it is titillating—although a bit silly. Perhaps it was the layer of humor then that kept those scenes from the same controversy and scrutiny as Blue is the Warmest Color? (Well, that and the fact that the scene is only about forty seconds long as opposed to a full ten minutes.)

What about heterosexual sex scenes? Is it possible to have non-pornographic heterosexual sex scenes? I would argue yes, Rules of Attraction, Melancholia, and hundreds of other films have done it. But has it been done with two women having sex? I have to say it’s hard for me to think of any.

However, should we not consider that as we continue to espouse the ideals of a more open and tolerant society—one in which sexuality in many forms is considered appropriate—that we will not agree with the portrayal of every sex scene? Could it also be argued that the director was merely displaying sex in a way that he found beautiful and fascinating?

To be fair, Maroh did differentiate between her perception of the film as a writer, where she understood the sex scenes to be another part of Kechiche’s vision, and her perception as a lesbian in which she felt it was inappropriate. But isn’t that the beauty and purpose of art? To showcase life from a variety of perspectives?

What do you think? Are there lesbian sex scenes that are not pornographic?

I’m sorry to only focus on the most tabloidy feature of an obviously powerful movie, but as it hasn’t been released yet, I’m afraid that I can comment little on the rest of the movie. Also, as stories about homosexuality become more and more a part of film, the hypersexualization of lesbian sex is something that needs to be addressed. Also, perhaps my own judgment of the scenes will be different after actually viewing them.

There is no trailer yet for Blue is the Warmest Color, but two film clips have been released. Go here and here if you’d like to view them.

Problematic Patriarchy in Jackson Katz’s ‘Violence and Silence’ TED Talk

Written by Rachel Redfern

Jackson Katz’s incredibly popular TEDxFiDiWomen talk has a lot of people excited and I understand why. He’s engaging and passionate about his incredible support for feminism and minorities and that’s an amazingly positive thing. However, upon review of his solutions to the great problems of patriarchy in the United States, there are actually some very problematic ideals that he’s promoting.

The first ten minutes of Katz’s talk is filled with effusive praise for feminism and what it’s accomplished. Past that though, during the last 10 minutes of his talk he says that he wants to change people from the level of leadership. He suggests that we work within the existing framework to change patriarchy by teaching patriarchs (CEOs, coaches and other leaders) to stick up for women.

Say hello to corporate feminism.

This corporate feminism is basically the patriarchy co-opting feminism and using it, not only as a way to make money for their leadership seminars, but also as a way to continue to promote the status quo of women being taken care of by their male leaders in jobs that are notoriously difficult for women to get. Within Katz’s idea, women are still held apart from the leadership positions that could help to make the changes that directly affect them.

What ‘leadership’ should look like. I suppose.

Worse than that, those leadership seminars continue to promote ideas of hierarchy and authority. What do these expensive leadership courses say to their students? “Someone has to be in charge.” “Life is like a boat; there has to be a captain, otherwise it would be chaos.” “People need to listen to you because you’re in charge.” “Take control of a situation.” Hierarchy, hierarchy, hierarchy. Move within the system: Maintain, maintain, maintain.

Katz believes that these leaders of men should be held accountable for the disparaging and inappropriate things that they say. I agree; of course men in powerful positions should be held accountable for their actions and for the things that they say. I hope that media, bloggers, and viewers will continue to go further in demanding such levels of accountability from those around us. And then comes the sales pitch: “We need more leadership training.” Guess what Jackson Katz does for a living? Leadership training. He wants to teach men in power to stand up for women. Are we, as a culture, saying we live in a world where in order to attain a level of common human decency men have to participate in weeklong, over-priced corporate leadership training programs?

Are we so naïve that we believe adult men don’t already know that they should be nice to women? These men (the ones in those amazing and out-of-reach-for-thousands-of-qualified-women leadership positions), are most likely men of education and world experience, and they know that disrespecting women is inappropriate. It’s like telling a group of college kids to not answer their phone during a lecture. Everyone knows you shouldn’t answer your phone during a lecture and we shouldn’t even give the idea credence by positioning it as an option of ignorance. They know better and cries of, “my leadership training program didn’t teach me not to say sexist, disrespectful things about the other half of the population” just isn’t a good excuse and we shouldn’t allow it to become one.

If people say sexist, racist, homophobic, and other offensive remarks, more conveniently placed “corporate feminism” isn’t going to save the day. The day is going to be saved when good people speak out (yes, even those who don’t get to become NBA coaches) using a strong sense of justice and morality without relying on leadership training to do so.

Katz states (timestamp 16:37) that it is “institutional authority” which will save us all. In a larger sense, perhaps it will, as in the case of policemen who arrest perpetrators of domestic abuse, and violence and the justice system which tries and judges them. However, propagating “institutional authority” and its intense vestiges of patriarchy and hierarchy are the problem. We can no longer be happy with the meager scraps of freedom that these ideologies continue to throw at us; we need to be more assertive, more demanding of our rights and the need for respect for others and ourselves. Don’t worry; I’m not calling for torches and pitchforks to storm the castle, but I am saying that we shouldn’t rely on the overblown theories of benevolent authority and patriarchy.

Demotivator® genius. Demotivator® truth?

This leadership training is a minor subversion that ultimately still reinforces the establishment of control that is already in place.

I’ll be honest. I resent the notion that I have to rely on the good will of university presidents, coaches and CEOs to lead the way in my own beliefs of right and wrong. I don’t need their leadership though; rather, I need them stop doing bad things and getting away with it. I’m freely capable of knowing good from evil, offensive and inoffensive, without Joe Paterno’s expertise, thank you very much. This idea puts down everyday, good people and robs them of the ability to make powerful changes, by placing that ability on the shoulders of other, more distant folks.

Now, on a few things I do agree with Katz: these issues affect everyone and they should not be designated solely as women’s issues or men’s; rather they are overwhelmingly society’s issues, humanity’s issues, human rights issues. And I believe that there are wonderful men and women out there desperately trying to fix these problems; even Katz’s sincerity and excited approach is necessary. But continuing to perpetuate the systems that are doing the damage by reinforcing so many structures of control and hierarchy is not the way to fundamentally change all the problems inherent within those systems.

Katz closes with this statement: “We need more men with the guts, with the courage, with the strength, with the moral integrity to break our implicit silence and challenge each other and stand with women, not against them.” I would posit that we should change that “men” into “people” and say that just as much as we need people with the courage to speak out, we also need people with the courage to tear down and rebuild the systems of privilege and hierarchy, not reinforce them.

What do you think? Is the Katz talk a brilliant harbinger of change and feminism? Or relying too much on patriarchal authority?

Oblivious Hollywood and Its New Movie ‘Oblivion’

Written by Rachel Redfern

Tom Cruise’s latest movie, Oblivion, is exactly that, a movie about Tom Cruise; upon watching, it felt as though any other character had been thrown in as an after-thought, which obviously denied them of any personality or importance to the plot. This of course leaves one with the odd idea that had they just nixed everyone else from the film and had Cruise be the only actor, it might actually have been a better movie.

Oblivion is the latest Sci-fi action movie blockbuster from Hollywood, directed by Joseph Kosinski and starring (the somehow never aging) Tom Cruise, Andrea Riseborough, Olga Kurylenko, Morgan Freeman, and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (hello, Jamie Lannister!). The plot: Jack (Cruise) and his partner Victoria (Riseborough) are clean-up and maintenance crews for the energy-creating and defense units that are left on Earth after everyone moves to Mars (basically like Wall-E except not as good). Of course, Jack is a curious sort of fellow, and mystery abounds when a spaceship crashes on Earth with a curiously familiar woman inside and the sudden reveal of Morgan Freeman (who, sadly, has basically 10 lines for the whole movie).

Tom Cruise saving the day in Oblivion

While some of the ideas could have been unique regarding the mystery and eventual climax of the film, for the most part it all feels very stock and trade. The whole movie is just watching Cruise go from one location to the next, kick someone’s ass, save someone, and have an inordinately pretty woman make love eyes at him. (Seriously, Cruise has to fly the jet, destroy the evil machines following them with his amazing skills, and shoot one-handed to pop off the ones that get too close, all while the female lead sits in the passenger seat looking scared and confused?) It feels flat and familiar and lacking in any kind of interaction with the other actors or scenery; it’s really a very static film with only one dynamic actor and everything else a fancy prop.

It’s a shame that the rest of the characters weren’t interesting, unique, or even had many lines. There were some great male actors in the film, specifically Coster-Waldau and Freeman who were sorely underused. Beyond that, their plot lines were unexplained and vague, lacking in development, explanation or screen time.

That’s not even the worst though; let’s consider the women of the film. The female characters were a type that I haven’t seen in a while, being so wholly lacking in personality that it was like watching a 70’s action movie. They were fairly helpless, dashingly clueless, often naked for no reason, and sent longing looks in Jack’s direction a lot—with ever-so-slightly-parted, lingerie model lips. Really, is it impossible to close your mouth when you’re in love?

Olga Kurylenko looks longingly at Tom Cruise in Oblivion

I was actually surprised at how lackluster and generic the women were; lately it seems that Hollywood is at least trying to have one interesting woman in a film, but the lack of effort here was laughable. Again, EVE, the female robot in Wall-E was a thousand times more interesting and developed with a far more fascinating and distinct personality.

The effects and the landscape were, as in most big Hollywood blockbusters, impeccable. As is the lead actresses clothes, hair, make-up. But that’s the problem; it’s all so soulless. The technology has a lot of rounded corners and blue, floating touch screens and it’s all very pretty and it’s all very unoriginal. The lead actress is tall and thin, has the ends of her long hair curled and wears a nice 4-inch high heel shoe—the poster child for how to dress for a job interview.

Andrea Riseborough looking impeccably dull in Oblivion

I just want to see something new: a less-sterile spaceship, some messed-up hair, maybe a square corner on a computer screen, hell I’d settle for a power cord. It’s just monotonous. Where is the vibrancy, the life, the touch of grit? Could there at least be one pair of ill-fitting jeans? How about some sense of relatable emotion like embarrassment, rejection, disappointment? What if the technology malfunctioned? Or the Macgyver-ing of the wires just didn’t work?

I don’t know, Hollywood; what if something new happened? Do what you haven’t done in a while and surprise me.

———-

No "Gentleman" Is Psy

Written by Rachel Redfern

K-pop is the standard term for the most substantial part of South Korea’s massively prolific popular culture. Within K-pop there are an elite group of top ten bands that release a new single every few months, a song which then proceeds to dominate every single radio station, YouTube advertisement, and TV show for a week. Even elderly Koreans have the songs as their ringtone just as much as any young person does. For years Korea has been trying to bring that K-pop into the west, but its bubble-gum nature and pre-packaged commercialism has not fared well; Psy suddenly, explosively, changed all of that.

Psy’s surprising viral rise to the top of every musical chart in the world marks a huge moment for Korean culture; in a country often overshadowed by the magnitude of China and the familiarity of Japan (and even its crazy northern neighbor, North Korea), Psy has become the first truly international Korean symbol, an ironic fact considering that his music is not a standard representation of K-pop (click here and here if you would like to see what K-pop normally looks like).

Still from Psy’s latest music video, “Gentleman”

As an American expat currently living in South Korea I see Psy every day. He’s on the side of buses, and buildings, he dances across commercials, and is on every talk show. The next person (either in South Korea or anywhere else in the world) to ask me if I know who Psy is might just lose a limb. For a while he was hailed as a clever entertainer and songwriter, one who’s last song, “Gangnam Style,” satirizes the materialistic culture of one of Seoul’s wealthiest neighborhoods.

However, perhaps Psy’s overwhelming success might need to be tempered a bit, especially in our enthusiasm for his newest video, “Gentleman.”

Korea is, for the most part, a very conservative culture, one where, despite some very short shorts, most female pop stars remain much more covered in comparison with their American contemporaries. Therefore, I was a bit shocked when halfway through the video, K-pop star and lead female in the video, Ga In from “Brown-Eyed Girls,” sucks on a hot dog with cream bubbling out over the edges in one of the most blatant visual representations of oral sex I’ve seen in a while. Oddly enough, KBS, the national broadcasting network in Korea, even banned the video, though not for this scene; rather, the video was banned because he destroys public property.

Psy’s music video “Gentleman” and K-pop star, Ga In

There has been some controversy about how the video treats women, some calling it simple “irony,” others saying, “irony gone too far.” Perhaps the first situation is the case; perhaps it’s only meant to be a funny, silly video about how people treat each other. On the most basic level the video seems problematic and sets a bad example; Psy acts like a jerk and intentionally treats women badly. Of course, the lead female thinks it’s funny and returns the favor, and the two end up together, finally having found their soulmate. Going one layer of analysis under this surface level suggests that he is actually mocking that behavior; perhaps the video was meant as a satire for the way “gentlemen” still treat women? Or perhaps he was trying to comment on the problematic nature of gender politics in the modern world?

And then I read an English translation of the lyrics: Nope, he’s not making that commentary.

I don’t know if you know why it needs to be hot
I don’t know if you know why it needs to be clean
I don’t know if you know, it’ll be a problem if you’re confused
I don’t know if you know but we like, we we we like to party

Hey there
If I’m going to introduce myself
I’m a cool guy with courage, spirit and craziness
What you wanna hear, what you wanna do is me
Damn! Girl! You so freakin sexy!

[lengthy chorus where the following line repeats]

I’m a, ah I’m a
I’m a mother father gentleman

I don’t know if you know why it needs to be smooth
I don’t know if you know why it needs to be sexy
I don’t know if you know darling, hurry and come be crazy
I don’t know if you know, it’s crazy, crazy, hurry up

Hey there
Your head, waist, legs, calves
Good! Feeling feeling? Good! It’s soft
I’ll make you gasp and I’ll make you scream
Damn! Girl! I’m a party mafia!

[Chorus again]

Gonna make you sweat.
Gonna make you wet
You know who I am Wet PSY
Gonna make you sweat.

Gonna make you wet.
You know who I am
Wet PSY! Wet PSY! Wet PSY! Wet PSY! PSY! PSY! PSY!
Ah I’m a mother father gentleman

I’m a, ah I’m a
I’m a mother father gentleman
I’m a, ah I’m a, I’m a mother father gentleman
Mother father gentleman
Mother father gentleman

*translation from Huffington Post

Consider one of the main lines, “It’ll be a problem if you’re confused,” followed by, “What you wanna do is me” and “I’m going to make you sweat/I’m going to make you wet.”

These lyrics and the rampant arrogance that comes with the video does present a problem for me. While the actions of pulling out a chair and just being an asshole to women are annoying, to me they are less problematic than the hyper-sexualization and the obvious objectification shown to all the women in the video, most notably in the close-up on Ga In and the hot dog.

Still from Psy’s latest video, “Gentleman”

This scene and the lyrics put Psy in place as the sexual instigator and idolizes his own arrogance and behavior; according to the lyrics, he’s a dirty asshole who will “make you wet,” with the women only being playthings–sex objects and static recipients of his desires. For me, the mocking and disrespect compounds until “women as funny toys” just gets tied into “women as funny sex toys.”

There are problematic performers and songs running around on the Internet every single day, and I usually try not to support those entertainers. After this video, I don’t think I want to support Psy anymore either, cause Psy, you’re just not all that.

What do you think? Is “Gentleman” funny and forward-thinking satire? Or irony taken too far?

Also, I’m not linking to the music video in this article because I just can’t stand to hear the song one more time.

———-