[ home ] [ site / arch ] [ pony / oat / ef ] [ rp / fan ]

/ef/ - Everfree

A general discussion board with a laxer atmosphere and fewer rules. Keep adult content or controversial issues here.
Name?

This field is optional. You can choose any name you want, or you can post anonymously by leaving this field empty.

Tripcodes are a way to identify yourself between posts without having to register with the site. To use a tripcode, enter your name as ‹name›#‹key›.You can choose anything you want as the key—it is private and will never be shown to other posters or stored on the server. For example:

Rarity#bestpony → Rarity!.4PK7yxdII

If you want a tripcode containing specific words, you can download a program designed to search for tripcodes, such as Tripcode Explorer.

Email?

Entering an e-mail is optional.

There are also code words you can enter here which perform certain actions when you submit your post.

  • sage — lets you post without bumping a thread.
  • nonoko — uses the original post behavior to redirect to the board index.

These can be used at the same time as an e-mail address by typing ‹email›#‹action›.

You can also use Skype names in place of an e-mail. The notation is the same as a link to a username on skype itself, which is skype:‹username›

Subject
Comment?
Giving emphasis
[b] Bold [/b] Ctrl + B
[i] Italic [/i] Ctrl + I
[u] Underlined [/u] Ctrl + U
[s] Strikethrough [/s] Ctrl + R
Hiding text
[?] Spoiler text [/?] Ctrl + S
[h] Hide block of text [/h] Ctrl + H
Special
[rcv] Royal Canterlot voice [/rcv] Ctrl + K
[shy] Fluttershy voice [/shy]
[cs] Comic Sans [/cs]
[tt] Monospaced [/tt]
[d20], [4d6] — Dice rolls
URLs and linking
Link to a post on the current board
>>1234
Link to another board
>>>/pony/
Link to a post on another board
>>>/pony/1234
Hypertext links
[url=https://www.ponychan.net/] Ponychan [/url]
File
Flag
Options
Password?

This field is for editing and deletions.


File: 1581291933632.jpg (93.81 KB, 780x436, harley_quinn__0.jpg)

Female empowerment in Hollywood movies (and also pop music) Chewy!MUSIC.FbVY (ID: 7a2231)Country code: bug.png, country type: customflag, valid:   358663[View All]

I have a feeling I'm gonna regret making this thread, buuut...

Yesterday I saw the new Harley Quinn movie, 'Birds Of Prey', at the theater. It was a fun, silly movie with almost nonstop brutal action that was satisfying to watch, well-choreographed/stylized enough to not be boring, antagonist was decent enough, full-on hard R rating unlike most comic book films, etc. A lot of the humor was cringey but I could forgive it because the action made the film as a whole engaging enough to sit through.
So basically overall it was like a solid 7/10 popcorn flick.

However, after me and my brother left the theater, he said to me "I don't like how much they pushed the whole 'female empowerment' thing" and I said "Well what did you expect, it's a movie about Harley Quinn" but later on I thought about that and how Hollywood really has...a problem with how it portrays female empowerment.

For comparison, the film 'Joker', while obviously intended to be far more serious, artistic, topical etc., was not intending you to look at the Joker/Arthur Fleck as a good person, a role model, an idol etc. There's actually an image I've seen shared a lot that he is featured on, among other male characters such as Rick Sanchez, Bojack Horseman, Walter White, and a few others, with the caption If you idolize them, you missed the point.

But I feel like Birds Of Prey was presenting Harley Quinn as some kind of heroine despite the fact that she's literally a murderous psychopath in most other portrayals. It doesn't make sense to have her be this symbol of "girl power" imo, and the film's attempt at humanizing her, so to speak, felt very hamfisted. "Oh, she goes around breaking people's limbs for fun, but she protects a kid, and she doesn't kill cops because in these films cops are the "good guys"." It just comes off as strange to me, that, as far as I can tell, this movie is trying to make her be all badass and cool. And I'm not trying to say that it shouldn't be allowed or that it isn't enjoyable, I just feel like it sends a weird message to potential viewers, especially young ones. And maybe I'm just looking into it too much, but it makes me think about other films like 'Hustlers' that have similar portrayals of "strong women".

And then you veer into pop music and the whole "sex sells" phenomenon that seems particularly focused on...well, women, but that's kind of a whole other discussion.

Maybe it's an unfair comparison, again, because as I mentioned 'Birds Of Prey' and 'Joker' obviously were trying to achieve very different things, but I just want to point out that Joker was very clearly influenced by Martin Scorsese films, especially 'Taxi Driver', which often deal with the rise and fall of dangerous, violent, criminal men. But unlike 'Birds Of Prey' and other films that portray dangerous, violent women, Scorsese's films have a very human element to them. It's very obvious that these kinds of actions (breaking limbs, shooting people, snorting cocaine, stealing, etc.) are meant to be seen as sins, and ultimately their downfall, as they succumb to madness and corruption and failure as Christian men (in some cases).
I just can't help but feel like Hollywood is taking these normally male archetypes and applying them to women, but passing it off as an empowerment thing, rather than the true horror it is.

One more thing: I'm curious about anyone here's recommendations for films that show female empowerment in a positive way, in your opinions.

As far as music goes, I can certainly name a few, like Rapsody who made an album last year where every song is a tribute to a historically significant black female woman, with powerful emotional lyricism, and fantastic production on the instrumentals, and skillful flow/rapping. Or if you want to reach farther back into history, there is Nina Simone. And delving into the more abstract, you could pick artists like Julia Holter and Joanna Newsom.
80 posts and 67 image replies omitted. Click View to see all.

(ID: 24b85c)Country code: amsterdam.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358953

File: 1581396150697.jpg (439.02 KB, 1355x1920, 69b28fab717871a16efb1915cd2814…)

>>358951
>oh
>my
>god
>feminism IS cancer
>femininity is big womanly bosom and fat ass on display for all the men to fantasize about and oogle over

Yes, apparently. But big hulking shirtless men with huge muscles is okay because that's what men are supposed to look like, right?

Get the fuck over yourself.

>>358952
The original Captain Marvel was male, and the original Ms Marvel looked like this. Ms Marvel became Captain Marvel after the fact and that's when the costume changed.

To look more like the original Captain Marvel.

Who was male.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358954

>>358945
>It's not just about lack of paid maternity leave, it's also about being taken less seriously and being considered for fewer jobs/promotions when you get pregnant.

You wouldn't be taken less seriously while pregnant if you could still be as materially capable as a non-pregnant person while pregnant. There are rational profit-maximizing reasons companies make decisions like this, it can't all just be aggregated prejudice.

We're in a social atmosphere where the antithesis of this kind of prejudiced is being pushed and argued frequently enough that we should subconsciously believe it by now, so blaming apparently-prejudiced large-scale social decisions on irrational personal bias doesn't make much sense anymore.


>Why should paid pregnancy leave come out of our tax dollars? Your employer should pay for it.


I could agree, but they'd then avoid paying for it. By being more hesitant to promote a female worker to a higher-paying position for the same amount of achievement, or by allocating them to otherwise lower-paying positions, because the chance of becoming pregnant and taking time off the job is a risk that they compensate for by spending as little as possible on the risk employee.

A young woman who could become pregnant is the equivalent of a man who isn't currently disabled but has an obvious body marker that he could become disabled any day. Anti-discrimination mentalities want to give both of these people equal opportunities, but a profit-oriented entity is bound to minimize the costs of such an individual in any way they can, in the same way they would with a disabled person they had to hire.

That, to my understanding, is the source of wage/earnings gaps. The inherent risk/cost of possible pregnancy has to be offloaded somewhere, and it inevitably seeps out in the form of net lower earnings by individuals of the same skill level.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358955

File: 1581396463426.jpg (163.58 KB, 692x1000, b5c70363d02756a0a9e11382f64790…)

>>358953
The male Captain Marvel is a DC character who abandoned the name for obvious copyright reasons. Shazam is a better name for him anyway.

OG Miss Marvel looks too much like Psylocke

>>358954
We exist in a world where women NEED equality in the workplace, and we as a society NEED them to start families. The solution is to stop discriminating against women who start families in the workplace, not to try and justify our discrimination.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358956

>>358951
>do you sniff glue or something?
>why would the taxes of low income people rise if companies were forced to pay maternity leave?

If it's the company that's forced to front the bill, it's either going to result in a net fewer hires or they're just going to find covert ways to give women lower-paying positions to offset the losses of paying their maternity leave. Companies can't materialize money from nowhere.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358957

File: 1581396661811.png (99.27 KB, 500x483, 9_11_1365579406.agouti-rex_sku…)

>>358955
>We exist in a world where women NEED equality in the workplace, and we as a society NEED them to start families.
> we as a society NEED them to start families.

I really, really question that.

If you don't have farmers, you don't have food, and everyone dies. If you don't have soldiers, you get invaded, and everyone dies or becomes slaves.

But if no one breeds?

The old die eventually, whether or not anyone replaces them, so who gives a shit about starting more families? I won't be around to see the schmucks who come two generations after me, so fuck them.
I can still live a happy and fulfilling life with no demonspawn of my own. Zoomers like to say Boomers supported massively decadent personal lives by "undermining the future for their posterity," so why the hell shouldn't we do the same?

When you die, the world ends.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358959

File: 1581396850009.jpg (80.72 KB, 568x529, DmPpgy4XcAMShB_.jpg)

>>358957
>LMAO JUST PAY FOR ABORTIONS WITH TAX DOLLARS AND IMPORT IMMIGRANTS FOR LABOR, MUCH BETTER FOR COUNTRY THAN WHITE FAMILIES LOOOOOOOOOL

HAVING KIDS MAKES THE COUNTRY OBJECTIVELY BETTER, I'M SORRY YOU DON'T GET ALONG WITH THEM BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE ONE FOR THE TEAM MY GOOD JEWESS.

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358960

File: 1581396871311.png (34.83 KB, 171x204, 431.PNG)

>>358953
>Yes, apparently. But big hulking shirtless men with huge muscles is okay because that's what men are supposed to look like, right?
which is a male power fantasy, there's a common link here if you bother to think about it

and I'll be heading to bed with a victory over these reactionary ABC dialogue trees
cya and I hope you change your mind

>>358954
>>358956
and the solution is...
>drumroll
men get maternity leave too

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358961

File: 1581396969410.png (650.97 KB, 1052x1063, scene22273.png)

>>358955
My point is that there is nothing wrong with EITHER depiction of the character. The problem is when people say that characters like Ms Marvel are 'problematic' yet characters like Larson's version of Captain Marvel are 'progressive'.

The problem with Larson's depiction of Captain Marvel was not lack of skin, lack of big tits, or lack of ass. The problem with her depiction of it was her insistence that her costume SPECIFICALLY downplay her feminine features on purpose. She specifically had the costume designers rework her costume to make her chest and ass flatter, to the point where even Captain America has a more defined ass than she does.

And this isn't just about 'tits and ass, lol' it's about the fact that there is nothing shameful about the female body, regardless of what shape it's in. The fact that she purposely tried to change her body shape to be more like a board shows me that she's ashamed of even having a female body to begin with.

You don't see people like Thor or Hulk going, "Hm... yeah. Can you make my outfit more blocky? I don't want too much definition of my abs or arms, cause it might detract from the character."

No, you don't see that, because apparently if you define a masculine form it's not considered sexualization, but if you define a feminine form it is, for some reason.

YAY BEING FAIR AND PROGRESSIVE, RIGHT?

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358962

>>358959
Ahh, but I've advocated closed-borders too.

We could be like Japan and have the robots do our bidding without causing serious workforce problems, except less horribly dense and cluttered.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358963

File: 1581397438245.jpg (126.12 KB, 1280x720, 1495231806691.jpg)

>>358961
I would argue that looking exactly like another sex object superhero on your roster with a color swap is a pretty big flaw in the classic Miss Marvel design. It's not really a big deal, it's not like Psylocke is in the Avengers movies or anything, but I like the new Carol.

>She specifically had the costume designers rework her costume to make her chest and ass flatter, to the point where even Captain America has a more defined ass than she does.

She doesn't have a very flattering body in real life either, not trying to be mean but she probably didn't want to show off because there wasn't much to show. And also because yeah, every superhero shouldn't be expected to.

Modesty is a pretty significant and virtuous aspect of traditional femininity too...

I don't think the women of MCU are sexy, and I'd probably care more about the movies if they were. But like, yknow, whatever. I can just watch something else.

>>358962
Japan is full of suicidal incels

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358964

File: 1581397585590.png (698.56 KB, 1049x1086, scene18115.png)

>>358963
I think my main beef is that feminists just tend to treat any macho chick like they are a hero but any more traditionally feminine person, who may actually enjoy makeup or high heels or dresses as a 'dirty slut that is just catering to the patriarchy'. The fact that they think that women should only be allowed to act one way is the part that pisses me off.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358965

File: 1581397660785.png (978.4 KB, 2500x1000, iaALHrv.png)

>>358964
That's because those women are ugly and straight. You see the same type of bitching from incel communities. Lesbian/sex positive feminists probably love OG Miss Marvel.

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358967

File: 1581397759805.png (569.72 KB, 1124x1088, scene27625.png)

>>358965
We shouldn't be supporting that though.

If you want to be plain and respected just for your skills or attitude, that's fine.

If you want to be sexy and flashy and have people fawn over your looks, that's fine too.

There's nothing wrong with either of those, but feminists adore the first and hate the second.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358970

File: 1581397915526.jpg (10.97 KB, 300x300, 1447134751348.jpg)

>>358963
Social issues like that I always saw as the inevitable result of becoming too densely packed. Idk.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  358971

File: 1581397924441.gif (1.43 MB, 500x280, giphy.gif)

>>358967
Ok but not all feminists believe that, you're generalizing feminists as sex-hating cunts just like some people generalize all male nerds as misogynist incels.

>>358970
We shouldn't be Japan, we should be America but better.
This post was edited by its author on .

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358977

File: 1581399140681.png (327.33 KB, 1000x882, benis_coat_of_arms.png)

>>358971
How do you think we're going to handle the problem of automation replacing most jobs until the majority of the population is unemployable by no fault of their own, and the owner class now has an incentive to forcibly exterminate this population they now have no use for?

Mac was worried about this and it's my main concern here. Not trying to be belligerent, just curious.

Anonymous (ID: 064faf)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358980

!FGiFL0Ecls seems like one of those guys that is a "feminist ally" that types manifestos the moment they "friendzone" him.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  358985

File: 1581400163310.png (27.72 KB, 613x474, lankyposting.png)

>>358980
Highly doubt that's a fair characterization.
This post was edited by its author on .

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359001

File: 1581402540177.png (500.45 KB, 1008x1088, scene27595.png)

>>358977
>How do you think we're going to handle the problem of automation replacing most jobs until the majority of the population is unemployable by no fault of their own, and the owner class now has an incentive to forcibly exterminate this population they now have no use for?

The very fact you think this is an actual concern shows you have no idea how people function.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359006

File: 1581403011053.jpg (35.47 KB, 540x738, Some+scalybois+and+scalygoils_…)

>>359001
Mac voiced this idea first and that's why I believed it. He's a lot smarter than I.
It seems that even when I defer to the opinion of someone whose insights I trust, it ends with the conjuring of crazy ideas.

But I'd prefer a crazy idea to agnosticism or blind optimism any old day.
At least when it doesn't trigger my superstitious side.

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359008

File: 1581403174741.png (484.92 KB, 834x1056, scene27355.png)

>>359006
No offense to Mac, but he grew up incredibly isolated and sheltered by a family that taught him to be paranoid of everyone and everything.

He's not exactly the best person to go to for insightful advice on how the world functions.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359009

File: 1581403190452.png (89.89 KB, 336x258, IMG_1261.PNG)

>>358977
We're eventually going to have to adopt universal basic income. Fuck unskilled labor, it's never going to be America's niche, we need to get over it and double down on what we're good at.

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359010

File: 1581403235767.png (515.74 KB, 711x1088, scene32329.png)

>>359009
>We're eventually going to have to adopt universal basic income.

The primary problem with this is that no one will bother to work at that point. Why work when you don't have to?

(ID: 8899d9)Country code: tux.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359011

>>359009
Diabeties and fast food is not something you want to produce as a staple of excellence

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359012

>>359010
You forgot to mention the problem

(ID: b31542)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359014

File: 1581403696679.png (698.56 KB, 1049x1086, scene18115.png)

>>359012
If nobody works, nothing gets done. No more food. No more utilities. No more functioning society. No garbage men. No sewer technicians. No cashiers, which means no stores. No stores means no products, no products means no economy, no economy means no money, no money means no universal income and no society.

This is common sense.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359015

File: 1581404125805.png (403.37 KB, 821x852, d9bvoyu-c876d229-5f16-462a-882…)

>>359014
Yeah I guess everyone in America just wants to be at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Americans wouldn't even wipe their asses if they weren't required to for work.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359016

File: 1581404185994.jpg (101.27 KB, 1280x1280, 1480826431.evalion_photo_2016-…)

>>359014
Pre-automation, yes.

In the 2000s you'd hear schoolkids gossip about how profitable it actually was to be a garbage man. Now when the bots snatch these simple tasks away we'll have a problem.


And none of the Renaissance scientists got paid for their little experiments. They only made the discoveries they did because they were richies with all their needs met, easy access to all the materials they needed for their passion projects, and had intrinsic motivation.

Now look what revolutions their actions bestowed on the world. It's a perfect foreshadowing of post-scarcity motivation.
This post was edited by its author on .

(ID: 2ebbce)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359033

File: 1581407795607.png (569.72 KB, 1124x1088, scene27625.png)

>>359015
>Yeah I guess everyone in America just wants to be at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Americans wouldn't even wipe their asses if they weren't required to for work.

For the most part, yeah. This is absolutely true.

>>359016
>Pre-automation, yes.

Will you stop? We barely have the technology to make robots walk through a room without falling over. Self driving cars are still a far thing from the future, and none of this works without operators and oversight. A society where everything is automated is at least another 100 years in the future, and even then you will still have plenty of jobs that aren't going to be automated.

Your fear of automation is cringeworthy. It's not gonna happen. Stop it.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: ponychan.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359034

File: 1581408274433.jpg (47.3 KB, 513x393, QVelKhg.jpg)

>>359033
They said a moon landing was a million years away.

!FGiFL0Ecls (ID: 1ce177)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359035

File: 1581408495724.jpg (38.63 KB, 650x650, himouto-umaru-chan-trading-fig…)

Snowbell (ID: bfc877)Country code: pittsburgh.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359045

File: 1581418557487.jpg (231.49 KB, 1042x798, 97a381a9671546ce2dcdff9db81f9b…)

>>358960
>which is a male power fantasy

Ah yes, the old saw that the portrayal of beautiful women exists only to shame women who don't measure up. While any portrayal of strong, powerful men exists only to vicariously stroke the egos of men who don't measure up.

Because clearly women are not sentient living being with their own thoughts, feelings, emotions and imaginations but they are instead something more akin to furniture. They do not act, they are merely acted upon. Usually by men. Even those few women with some semblance of self-awareness are still so mentally weak that upon seeing a fictional depiction of a strong, beautiful woman it serves only to break what little spirit she has, reminding her that she is fat, dumb, ugly, unloved and unlovable and always will be so.

Meanwhile men are so mentally and emotionally virile that they can view even the most unrealistic portrayal of the "male power fantasy" and say "Yes! that is me! I am capable of that. NO! I AM THAT!"

If y'all think this is how the world be it ain't no wonder the men rule it.

Mk17(phone)!!Trixie (ID: 6692b6)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359052

File: 1581430541181.png (150.8 KB, 1080x621, Screenshot_2020-01-15-11-07-00…)

>>359045
>instead something more akin to furniture.
>

Anonymous (ID: d0cb24)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359059

>>358675
Because white people can't understand the issues of race am I right?

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359060

File: 1581434974317.png (142.16 KB, 301x381, 573.png)

>>359045
we are talking about comic book characters here

>>359059
I mean... you definitely gain something from going through it yourself

Anonymous (ID: d0cb24)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359064

>>359060

And you need to be an artist to understand art.

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359067

File: 1581439917556.png (36.66 KB, 215x241, 525.PNG)

>>359064
I don't think that argument flies here because of two reasons
1. it still gives you an added understanding or perspective if you're an artist yourself
2. anyone can experience art and get well versed in it, even if they're not an artist themselves

Anonymous (ID: d0cb24)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359075

>>359067
Are you suggesting that empathy and sympathy aren't valid concepts?

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359080

File: 1581450384184.png (48.3 KB, 160x224, 290.PNG)

>>359075
no, I'm saying that the victims of race issues have more than just that

Donald Trump (ID: d0cb24)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359082

>>359080
Really? Because it sounds like you were just saying that unless you have literally experienced specifically racial prejudice that you don't know what racism is and can't even imagine it.

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359094

File: 1581451320933.png (150.58 KB, 225x440, 12.png)

>>359082
well, glad to clear things up for you

Donald Trump (ID: d0cb24)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359098

>>359094
Except you're wrong.

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359102

File: 1581453814954.png (17.99 KB, 98x138, 87.png)

>>359098
wrong about what I said or wrong about the issue?

Snowbell (ID: bfc877)Country code: pittsburgh.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359121

File: 1581459639247.jpg (375.77 KB, 1028x813, d73a150f93c96e449b4be271ba7cde…)

>>359060

Irrelevant! The mere implication that a "male power fantasy" is somehow a bad thing by default is dumb.

!XSAILBoatg (ID: 068d0c)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359124

It was so empowering, that nobody bothered to see it (33M domestic). Somehow, men got blamed for not wanting to see a girl-power movie, even though more men saw it than women (where have I heard this before...). Then they dropped all woke pretense by literally changing the cringey-ass name.

🦊 (ID: a33a23)Country code: windows9x.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359129

File: 1581462663704.png (20.29 KB, 101x145, 624.png)

>>359121
I don't think I implied that

Anonymous (ID: 002110)Country code: cia.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  359775

File: 1581651383572.jpg (26.48 KB, 250x291, nyan.jpg)

I went to see the movie yesterday with my little sister, who is a raging DC comics fan. I went expecting trash but instead got an entertaining music.
Now: Does it has extremely forced female-empowerment subtexts and messages? Indeed it does. In fact, every male character in the movie was an absolute ASS in every way except for the sandwich salesman and maybe the fathers of two of the main cast. There was NO redeeming relevant male, and it really shows you the kind of mentality they went in with this movie.
It is absolute and utter female-empowerment made only to sell, but it is also a fun movie with actually nice jokes and good visual images. It also had action film elements.
Besides the female-empowerment subtext, it also does not really understand its main character: Harley Quinn. She is one female that should not have been used for this. Her original design IS supposed to represent toxic relationships. Why not use Wonder Woman for female empowerment? That's what she was made for.
Also HUGE missed opportunity on revealing that Bruce the hyena was female. Remember how female hyenas have pseudo-penises? They could have made a joke with that but also hammer down how hyenas live in matriarchal societies. HUGE missed feminist icon.
I give it a 3/5 in my scale.
My final opinions: Enjoyable, if a bit on-the-nose with the female empowerment.

----
To answer the other question in OP: I do not have any female-empowerment films, because frankly I do not feel they are needed. Females shouldn't be token, but characters. Like in Terminator or Alien.

Anonymous (ID: 14dc17)Country code: us, country type: geoip, valid: 1  359890

>>359775
>Remember how female hyenas have pseudo-penises
Oh, I forgot about that!

From Wikipedia:
>Subordinate females lick the clitorises of higher-ranked females as a sign of submission and obedience, but females also lick each other's clitorises as a greeting or to strengthen social bonds; in contrast, while all males lick the clitorises of dominant females, the females will not lick the penises of males because males are considered to be of lowest rank.

Whelp!tEfVeritas (ID: edab5d)Country code: goggles.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  360151

File: 1581750399663.jpg (35.66 KB, 311x445, Invoke Prejudice.jpg)

Spitting hot take coming in:

I think there's an idea pushed by media that a "strong woman" needs to be assertive to the point of being abrasive, and that this is ultimately a problem, because it leads to young girls and women starting to act that way and then, when they inevitably get told to stop acting like that, complain that men are allowed to, and this is sexist.

It leads to those girls and women feeling like they're victims of misogyny because men are allowed to be loud and assertive, while they try to do the same and get shut down.The thing is, when they act that way, they end up doing so in a way that's just, frankly, unpleasant. They don't understand how to act assertive without being abrasive. You see men doing that too, and they get shut down in a similar fashion, but those aren't the ones that these people are comparing themselves to.

That's not to say sexism doesn't exist - it obviously still does, and both ways at that. However, with society changing and a lot of traditional things that people build their identity around starting to break down - gender, nationality, etc. - some women are finding that they want to be in charge, but since they were raised with traditional feminine stereotypes in mind, they don't know how to do it right, and they end up making asses of themselves in the process, and then wonder where it all went wrong, before inevitably blaming sexism, because "I did all the right things!"

I've met, and worked with women that are able to be leaders, skilled, and confident. There are plenty of them out there. But those people are too self-confident to make for a good marketing demographic. Movies like this are about selling a power fantasy to girls and women, one in which they get to be a cool, crazy alpha bitch, and you simply can't sell that to someone who's already found and are happy with themself. Gotta go for the insecure people.

!SATSUkIQg2 (ID: e13ee8)Country code: ponychan.png, country type: customflag, valid: 1  360203

File: 1581801594493.jpg (93.85 KB, 311x512, unnamed.jpg)

>>360151
What if the far greater attractive allure women have over men just by virtue of existing, that men don't necessarily have themselves, is already a form of soft counter-power?

In the past, it was expected that males have executive power and that would be their allure, and that's still their allure, because apparently it's the only thing women are drawn to anyway.

But now, if you have an innate allure and some executive power, how can a man possibly rival that? You just don't see women aggressively drooling over anything vaguely broad-chested, in the same way men aggressively salivate over anything vaguely hourglass-shaped. And for a lot of men, even "hourglass-shaped" isn't a basic requirement, you don't even have to maintain your body at all to be attractive to a lot of men, you just have to be female at all.
But you don't see the female preference changing to suit environs, just like the male can, you see it continuing to chase power. You see it continuing to squat on its monopoly as a Selector rather than Selected, or, weirdly enough, you see a rate of female homosexuality increasing far more rapidly than male.

It's almost like an emergent monopoly, but bizarrely you're insinuated as some oppressor for criticizing it.
I don't think you can rightfully force anyone's preferences to change, but the fact is that males have been more willing to adjust their preferences to be realistic than females, and are more willing to let go of the type of privilege conferred by their gender than are females. Males were partially talked into complying with the feminism thing, it wasn't all beating them into submission. So if you can encourage men to adjust their behavior to be more equitable and they comply, then you shouldn't be shamed and called an oppressor for encouraging women to change theirs as well.

But the setup isn't even something you're allowed to criticize, because the moment you speak in these terms, a feminist who probably benefits from these trends and attacks you with ad-homs and calls you an incel terrorist; in effect, turning the same masculine expectation they claimed to subvert, as a way to silence you.
This casts the mythology of "toxic masculinity" being the product of powerful men, not powerful women, in a whole different light, as it suggests that men would be more incentivized to seek emotional support from each other than from women, rather than using masculinity to justify in-fighting, which hurts them as a whole. In this light, male in-fighting is less self-interested and more a catering to the other gender, since it feeds into their preference for selecting against the weakest men. Males who realize this would never be content to perpetuate this cycle, as it keeps their sex in a defensive position, rather than one of equal bargaining with the other.

So the notion of masculinity as a product of selfish male ambition, rather than a defensive position the other sex forces them into as genetic Selectees, makes no sense. Males, in fact, do not necessarily want to be "masculine," they were beaten into it, which explains why females don't care to emulate it: it is in fact a strenuous standard for any person to meet, rather than an empowering privilege to express.


If this setup is grounded in asymmetry, one can't defend it while saying they want equality.


Delete Post [ ]
Edit Post
Posts on this board may be edited for 2 hours after being made.
[ home ] [ site / arch ] [ pony / oat / ef ] [ rp / fan ]