On the ascendancy of the female ass-kicker
Sep. 8th, 2007 06:02 pmOscar-winning actress Jodie Foster, quoted in this week's Newsweek, speaking on her latest film role in The Brave One, in which she plays an NYC public-radio host driven by a vicious assault to become a vigilante slayer of criminal predators, had this to say:
"Women don't kill people. They kill themselves, they kill their children, they drink themselves to death; but they don't do this. It was fascinating to play a woman you can't even begin to understand." (See review here.)
Is this part of the reason for the increasing popularity of violent femmes in TV, film, comic books, novels etc.: Xena, Buffy, the new Starbuck, et al.? Is it still, even in the year of our Lord two thousand and seven, so truly shocking to see a woman kill (even if it's not a "real" human, but a vampire, demon etc., that she's seen killing)? Have we really failed to come so far from chauvinism, as a society, that we still see killing as the province of the male, the guy, the dude, the man? And what does that say about our attitudes toward men, never mind women? Or is it a sign of true equality that we're finally willing to put (and view) women in such bloody, morally ambiguous roles as these?
And more distaff butt-kickers are coming: a "reimagined" Bionic Woman on NBC (with the actress who plays Starbuck as her equally bionic nemesis, yet!), not just one but two female demon-hunters on The CW's Supernatural, a CIA assassin in the new CBS series Chuck. Anyone have thoughts on this?
"Women don't kill people. They kill themselves, they kill their children, they drink themselves to death; but they don't do this. It was fascinating to play a woman you can't even begin to understand." (See review here.)
Is this part of the reason for the increasing popularity of violent femmes in TV, film, comic books, novels etc.: Xena, Buffy, the new Starbuck, et al.? Is it still, even in the year of our Lord two thousand and seven, so truly shocking to see a woman kill (even if it's not a "real" human, but a vampire, demon etc., that she's seen killing)? Have we really failed to come so far from chauvinism, as a society, that we still see killing as the province of the male, the guy, the dude, the man? And what does that say about our attitudes toward men, never mind women? Or is it a sign of true equality that we're finally willing to put (and view) women in such bloody, morally ambiguous roles as these?
And more distaff butt-kickers are coming: a "reimagined" Bionic Woman on NBC (with the actress who plays Starbuck as her equally bionic nemesis, yet!), not just one but two female demon-hunters on The CW's Supernatural, a CIA assassin in the new CBS series Chuck. Anyone have thoughts on this?
no subject
Date: 2007-09-08 11:11 pm (UTC)Now that I've scared you all, I'll be going.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 03:30 am (UTC)The conversation moved on to how 20 years ago (plus or minus ~10), Stan Lee et alia (including Frank Miller) could only deal with powerful women like Elektra and Jane Grey / Phoenix in one way: They killed, and then they had to die.
And we've almost come full circle to the stereotypes I was taught as true:
Then: Men: Unemotional, strong, never cries, only focal point worthy of attention e.g., protagonistic attention. Have to be willing to fight to defend "honor" or "face."
Women: Uncontrollable emotions, weak, flighty, easily cries, not worth noticing.
Now: Men: Prone to outbursts, especially of anger, and can be driven to tears of frustration. Gets the spotlight half the time now.
Women: Have to be strong, have to be always able to cope, can't be seen crying in public. Gets a more even share of the spotlight.
The current reality is that girls who break the law these days are increasingly being jailed for the kind of violent offenses that used to be the province of boys, including fights simply to defend their "manhood."
Jodie Foster's quotes: well, I know where they come from, those declarations about what women are like and will do. They're true about the existing generations of us, but not necessarily about the women who will follow us.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 03:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 06:23 am (UTC)Probably nothing more than one penguin dove off the ice with a female assassin movie/comic/tv show/whatever and didn't get eaten by the Leopard Seal of Ratings, so they all figured it was safe.
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 01:39 pm (UTC)Ah, so women, by this outlook, aren't people, nor are their children. Does she even fucking listen to herself?
no subject
Date: 2007-09-09 02:15 pm (UTC)Moving on to the second point, about women killing their children, she's obviously not implying that children aren't people; she's talking about the larger point (which goes along with the point about suicide) that female violence is much less often rage-driven, like male violence, but is, rather, most often driven by depression. The cases of women killing their children are almost always related to post-partum depression.
This is not stereotyping. It is a statistical reality. Whether it is a result of some neurological difference between the sexes, or (more likely) the differences in how men and women are socialized in most cultures, it is a fact.
Not to flog this to death, but I wouldn't be so quick to jump all over Jodie Foster on this. She's one of the smartest people in Hollywood (she was an intellectual as well as artistic prodigy as a kid), and is generally quite articulate.
If she made that statement to you in conversation, you'd know exactly what she meant; but in print, out of context, the shortcuts and imprecisions of our casual speech patterns are much more evident.
Backyard On Film
Date: 2007-09-09 06:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-09-11 05:42 pm (UTC)P. S.
Date: 2007-09-11 05:45 pm (UTC)