MovieChat Forums > 300: Rise of an Empire (2014) Discussion > Gorgo as female commander was an insult ...

Gorgo as female commander was an insult to both men and women


I hate how gender roles are being all messed up these days under the 'feminist' flag and anyone who dares say otherwise is a sexist. I believe in equal rights for men and women, but this is not that! This is women taking over male atributes and archetypes and thereby both denying men's masculinity and their own femninity.

I think the first 300 did it perfectly: men were men, women were women; both respected and loved the other for their attributes; women were the birthgivers, nurturing and wise, men were the leaders (not bosses!), protectors and somewhat selfdestructive as I believe all men are. This is what made the relation between Gorgo and Leonidas so intimate to me, they had a deep mutual respect for one another whilst maintaining their own gender attributes.

Then along comes Rise of an Empire and we suddenly see Gorgo swinging around a blade in her evening dress as the front commander of the Spartans. Remember how 300 ended with Dilios leading the troops (where did that battle take places anyways?) and not Gorgo; it's because it was not her role as queen of Sparta. Apparantly now we have to ensure women are just as manly as men? Even if it's a historical piece of a time where this wasn't an issue? Are we not simply destroying what it means to be a woman by having them adopt male attributes? To me this is the same as wanting equal rights for gays and then showing they can be just as hetero as hetersexual people. Am I the only one seeing the insanity of this development? I hope someone can provide me with more insight because this was just ridiculous

---

Edit for further elaboration in reply to:

" women were the birthgivers, nurturing and wise, men were the leaders (not bosses!), protectors and somewhat selfdestructive as I believe all men are."

This in itself is sexist against both males and females lmao. You do realize a lot of "feminine" and "masculine" attributes are social constructs? As in they have been made up at one point and then spread? Several aspects and/or things that are commonly thought of as male or female have been neither gender or thought as belong to the opposite once upon a time (easy example is the color pink, considered to be feminine, when it was at first considered a masculine color. Now you got guys like you probably, thinking it make a man look "womanly" if he wears pink. Btw high heels were also for males at first, yet a guy wearing that would get so much crap today for acting "gay"). Do you even realize that the belief in rigid ideas about masculinity is one of the leading reasons for male suicide since it plays a huge role in causing anxiety in men? You whining over what? A female being assertive? Because that belongs only to men? That is utterly ridiculous. And lmao on women being "nurturing and wise". The idea that all women are nurturing is *beep* despite all girls being exposed to the idea that they should be since they are children (e.g. girls are almost always giving toys/dolls that they have to take care off, even if they have no interest). Guys are denied to be shown as nurturing as well as if there is someone wrong to care for others, especially their own children. No gender is inherently wise either. That is just a posterous idea.

I agree with you that some gender attributes are social constructs, but you can't deny there aren't any biological differences between men and women; I must admit I dont exactly know which is which (I don't believe a clear distinction can be made) but I do like to discuss this topic with women and most say they believe they act more from their emotions than men, which act more from their ego (which makes some sense I guess evolution-wise). The examples I gave in the part you quoted where just the ones I felt were set up in the world of the first 300, where women were respected for ''giving birth to real men'' and the men were heavily trained in the art of combat. Sexist or not, that was 300. Obviously these attributes don't apply today; I apologise for not being more clear about that. I also didn't mean to say women can't be assertive; as Gorgo was assertive in the first 300 when she stabbed that corrupt politician dude and she obviously had some control over Leonidas as he asked for her permission to kick the Persian messenger down the pitt. I actually thought she was a strong female character in that movie. My main beef was with how Rise of an Empire broke with these roles set up in the first movie and we suddenly see Gorgo on the front line waving a blade around. Note that I didn't mind Artemesia as a assertive female warrior, just how they changed Gorgo for whatever reasons; as I mentioned in the op my best guess was to conform more to modern gender roles, which is exactly what I hate in a lot of movies these days (or ever)

reply

i have not read your whole text, but i was wishing someone mentions few of the things you did, it seems to me, movies want to change things in our society, about roles, let's watch more movies and see how this goes, and try to analyze some more.

reply

I found that the most ridiculous thing in an overall ridiculous movie. Seeing her lead the charge, striking dudes down with expert swordsmanship was just laughable and completely out of step with her character.

reply

The way I took it was the burning, festering rage in her that she had lost 300 of her countrymen, including her king and husband. As she elaborates, Sparta lost friends, brothers, husbands, and fathers. Once that settled into her deeply enough she was enraged enough to take the charge herself.

It's like the end fight in Last of the Mohicans. Once you touch somebody's relative or family, you'd better be prepared for their wrath.

reply

You speak truth Lin301. Very good points.

Cult Leader my minds frightening, I drink blood from a human skull like a Viking

reply

Eva Green's fighting ruined this bad movie.

reply

Agreed... they should've just gone full-on Fem-bot, and had bullets/arrows/flaming-blobs-of-tar flying out of her tit-tays... 😜

I also noticed that in this Alternate Universe, huge swords weigh only 8 ounces (vs. 20+ lbs.) and can be wielded like hollow plastic toys.

reply

Guys OP is a trash bucket.

IGNORE.

reply

I couldn't agree more. You kind of took the words out of my mouth. I wish there were more clear thinking wo\man like you.

reply

Yes I agree with you OP...couldnt have said it any better actully. This whole pile of trash movie is a big damn joke.

I just watched this, and the one thing I still can't figure out is why the Spartans didn't simply agree to give the Athenians "all their ships" the moment the Athenians asked them to. It's not like it would have been a big deal for Sparta after all -- Sparta was an inland city built along a river but with no ocean access, so it didn't HAVE any ships...

In real life, the Persian invading army marched along the coast with their fleet travelling in parallel to support and re-supply the army as needed. Athens was a sea power, so it took on the job of blocking the Persian fleet, while Sparta was a land power, so it was going to use its army to block the key pass into Greece: Thermopylae ("the Hot Gates").

After the Spartans lost at Thermopylae but succeeded in delaying the Persian army, the Athenian-led navy crushed the Persian navy at Salamis. This then stranded the Persian army with over-extended supply lines, and before it could retreat, it was attacked by the entire Spartan army and allies and largely destroyed at Plataea.

The funny thing is, the original movie "300" got most of this basically correct. In particular, at the end of the movie, it became clear that the narrator was addressing the assembled army the evening before the Battle of Plataea and telling them the story of the 300 at Thermopylae to whip them up into a proper "Spartan spirit" before they took on the entire Persian army in a frontal assault. And the movie ended with the Spartan hoplite phalanx smashing into the Persian army.

So why did the sequel suddenly invent a non-existent Spartan navy and have it manned by the very soldiers who the original movie had properly placed at Plataea fighting the critical land battle?

It was plain flat idiotic. And having all those historians in the DVD special featurettes yakking about how it was just ancient Greek-style non-historic tale-spinning -- without a single one of them even mentioning the fact that Sparta was as landlocked as modern Switzerland -- didn't help...

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

reply

I hate many things about feminism, but a part from forcing a woman warrior into a plot I hate how it is done so unbelievably in Hollywood. There is never any build up, just give the girl some armor and a sword and she's Xena. Artemisia being a bad ass made sense and she was a great exception in the film a worthy female fighter, throwing in Gorgo was ridiculous and was overkill. I also find it insulting that the film is essentially saying Gorgo's strength and will in the first film wasn't enough and she has to act like a man to be truly worthy.

Superman & Wonder Woman

reply

Well put MydnightRose!

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

reply