A psychotic, deranged and controlling woman gets away with all her lies, manipulation and even murder at the end and poor husband ends up being totally pussy whipped and controlled by his vicious wife at the end...isn't this ultimate dream of all of the misandrist females out there? The poor guy didn't have a single chance at the end, as he was already fearing for his life if he "misbehaved" lol. To be fair, I'd probably be *beep* my pants too if I had to live together with a woman like that...
what domestic hell are you talking about? She herself said at the end that being mean to each other and having conflicts is how a marriage supposed to work in her opinion. So controlling her husband and making him miserable seemed completely cool and normal to her.
what domestic hell are you talking about? She herself said at the end that being mean to each other and having conflicts is how a marriage supposed to work in her opinion. So controlling her husband and making him miserable seemed completely cool and normal to her.
Except one day he may snap and actually kill her. Or watch her at her own game and start messing with her. She may have him under control now but how long will that last? She is most certainly creating a hell for herself but is too arrogant to acknowledge it. She is putting her entire trust in the hands of a man who hates her and will grow to hate her even more. No matter how clever she thinks she is, she does underestimate people (like the hick couple who robbed her).
"You have bewitched me, body and soul, and I love, I love, I love you." Mr Darcy reply share
I agree that she underestimates people, especially the people in the Bungalows... However, Nick wouldn't kill her, not even a lil bit, not the Nick in the film. Nothing she says is real outside of the "Honeymoon Phase", the rest is all her. She's the Psychopath. Nick may be a leech, he may be a womanizer and many other things... But he is a Human. She is a Product of Privilege and Victim hood. Her life is as real as her Diary.
2000's feminism is probably the most mysandrist movement ever created. Most intelligent women and men are aware of fallacious claims of feminist. This movie illustrate perfectly how manipulative liberals and globalist media are. Naive people would tell if a men isn't a feminist than he must be a misoginistic person. How convenient it is, a movie about an innocent wrongly convicted. He must be the killer because all man are rapist. Feminist is debunked as a big hypocrite movement. Hyperbole and hysteria isn't proofs but facts is.
2000's feminism is probably the most mysandrist movement ever created.
No, that's just a fantasy spread mostly by stupid, insecure men who never bothered to actually learn what mainstream feminists really say.
Naive people would tell if a men isn't a feminist than he must be a misoginistic person.
Such people are not naive, they are educated, unlike you. Since feminism is about equality, if you aren't a feminist you are logically against equality, and therefore you a misogynist.
Feminist is debunked as a big hypocrite movement. Hyperbole and hysteria isn't proofs but facts is.
Not only are you struggling with English, you are struggling with logic, reason, and evidence. Please, cite your proof that feminism has been debunked, so I can laugh even more at your ignorance. (And don't waste my time with a YouTube video. I only pay attention to respected journalistic or academic sources. Unlike you people, I have standards.)
reply share
My bad. It's not a good reason but english isn't my first language. I try my best and will correct myself. I will start with your last point.
I only pay attention to respected journalistic or academic sources. Unlike you people, I have standards.)
You are saying, ''i only pay respect to liberals journalistic or academics medias''. You know that those medias are slandering, lying, making propaganda, denying, biased and distort reality to obtain what they want, a globalist gouvernement. This is what we call a tyrannical gouvernement. So a youtube video isn't good enough for you, i thought liberals were open minded. You are oppressing me, i'm a young syrian trans woman and i trust independent journalistic youtube channel as the truth because for the most time, they share facts and not some personnal events that hurt their feelings. What is more chocking is that your ''academics sources'' are not representative as good models. Your icon base their point of view from personnal feelings and this is hypocrisy. This is hypocrite to assume that those issues are a social issues as saying that all man are rapist.
No, that's just a fantasy spread mostly by stupid, insecure men who never bothered to actually learn what mainstream feminists really say.
You are a tool and brainwhashed. I though liberal was about open mind. But now that you say i'm stupid, insecure, a man and unintelligent. You are oppressing me. I'm gender-blind, i will call the police for assuming my gender.
(calling 911)... -(police) This is 911 what your emergency? -hello officer, today i feel like a woman and i don't trust cis white male officer can i have a female officer please. -(police) I will arrest you for assuming i'm a cis white male, i have the right to choose my gender. I'm a white trans woman.
So you have standard in sources but do you have an unbiased sources that show facts and statistics?
Such people are not naive, they are educated, unlike you. Since feminism is about equality, if you aren't a feminist you are logically against equality, and therefore you a misogynist.
Let me tell you a story. When i was a kid, i'm a cis white male sorry to offend your life, two older girls have made sexual abuse over me. A year have passed, i have also be harrased with other sexual abuse from a older boy. I don't have to be more explicit on those stories, this was sexual abuse and i condemn every pervert acts done on women and men. But those events and feelings are not what is making a SOCIETY. I'm not a feminist and i respect women and men. I'm not a feminist because i know biology. I know what is equality and it's respect and freedom for all. I want a constant respect from both gender because i care about their freedom. But never i will be a feminist because feminism propagate hatred and mysandry political point of view.
so I can laugh even more at your ignorance.
This is the proof that feminist is a joke. When you bring facts and logic they laugh or make noises because they cannot respond properly or refutate to the truth. Your reality is distorted.
Lauren Cherie Southern is a libertarian activist, political commentator, and writer for the Canadian online media company, The Rebel Media. In 2015, she was a candidate in the Canadian Federal Election representing the Libertarian Party of Canada.[6][7] Party officials suspended Southern's campaign over controversial issues, but she was reinstated as a candidate after public outcry. Southern is studying Political Science at the University of the Fraser Valley. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c0lBHPmulw
You know that mainstream medias will die soon because indie media are emerging and telling more in depths storie with truth facts and statistics.
Am i sexist because i love my mascunality ? Am i misogynist because i care about everyone? Now tell me why we need feminism ?
reply share
You are saying, ''i only pay respect to liberals journalistic or academics medias''.
No, I am saying I only pay attention to sources who either have editors who make them double and triple check their facts, or publish in peer reviewed publications where accuracy is highly valued.
You know that those medias are slandering, lying, making propaganda, denying, biased and distort reality to obtain what they want, a globalist gouvernement.
What I know is that you are a completely insane nut who has no connection or understanding of reality. You are the one who gets your ides from biased, reality distorting propaganda sources.
So a youtube video isn't good enough for you, i thought liberals were open minded.
Anyone can post a YouTube video and say anything they want. They can lie, they can distort reality, and no one holds them to any kind of standard.
Only idiots get their information from YouTube videos.
So you have standard in sources but do you have an unbiased sources that show facts and statistics?
You were the moron making claims about feminism being debunked and you were the one spreading ignorant lies about what feminism is. Therefore you are the one who needs to back up your claims through unbiased sources known for valuing accuracy.
You won't be able to do it.
I'm not a feminist because i know biology.
Feminism has absolutely nothing to do with biology. It is about politics and culture. Once again, you confirm that you know absolutely nothing about this subject.
But never i will be a feminist because feminism propagate hatred and mysandry political point of view.
Prove it by citing a mainstream, respected feminist propagating hatred and misandry in her own words and in her own publications. You won't be able to do it because you are completely ignorant about the subject. I am 100% certain that you have never in your entire life bothered to even read what a real feminist has said.
As for your sources, you cited YouTube videos, as you ignorant morons always do, and started off with a gossip site (not a respected journalistic source) who wrote about the crazy things one woman said, who does not in any way represent what normal feminists think or say.
Just as I predicted, you have no intellectual standards at all. You are a walking joke.
reply share
No, I am saying I only pay attention to sources who either have editors who make them double and triple check their facts, or publish in peer reviewed publications where accuracy is highly valued.
Yeah for sure, how many of your double and triple check articles have mentionned the pay gap myth? How many of your so qualified articles have mentionned the myth of rape culture? How many of your accurate articles have bullying white men into one word, white privileges? How many of your exemplary article have try to ban words that hurt their feelings? How many of your perfect articles has try to show the world how sexist is the video game industry? All of this articles are innacurate, myth, fallacious and more often personnal feelings thoughts writed by social marxists that only exist to obtain a authoritarian multiculturalism regim. Your sources are not founded with accuracy. They are founded with feeling and therefor are meaningless. Feminism is about mass social enginering. It's not even about right women issues anymore but only over fear of being label politically incorrect. I know, it's cool and trendy and your favorite pop singer is telling the world how sincere is the feminism movement.
What I know is that you are a completely insane nut who has no connection or understanding of reality. You are the one who gets your ides from biased, reality distorting propaganda sources.
You are delusional if you do not know what the feminism movement is marching for. A movement inspired by the marxist theory of a society without classes therefor a globalist gouvernement. In other word multiculturalism.
Anyone can post a YouTube video and say anything they want. They can lie, they can distort reality, and no one holds them to any kind of standard.
Only idiots get their information from YouTube videos.
Anyone can share a journalistic and academic articles and say anything they want. They can lie, they can distort reality, and no one holds them to any kind of standard because only the agenda of a marxist will lie.
Only idiots think that the video media is always innacurate therefor all feminism movies and videos are innacurate.
You were the moron making claims about feminism being debunked and you were the one spreading ignorant lies about what feminism is. Therefore you are the one who needs to back up your claims through unbiased sources known for valuing accuracy.
You won't be able to do it.
Stop denying that claims of modern feminism is the truth. Feminism has nothing to do with equality. There is feminism and there is equality. Tell me why is there only 20% of americans who are saying they are feminists? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html
Why is feminism still relevant when it's being refutate by womens? http://womenagainstfeminism.com/ Yes, there is women against feminism.
The rape culture is a myth, look by yourself. I have been raped by two womens in my youth but all i see is how women are being objectify. What i have read and heard of is that most men who have been victim of sexual violence doesn't tell anyone hence the low statistics.
Veteran confronts rape, suicide: 'I am angry that others are going through this' "Often, male survivors may be less likely to identify what happened to them as abuse or assault because of the general notion that men always want sex," says Jennifer Marsh, the vice president for Victim Services at RAINN, an anti-sexual violence organization. "Males have the added burden of facing a society that doesn't believe rape can happen to them ... at all," says psychotherapist Elizabeth Donovan. She says gender roles dictate that males are expected to be strong and self-reliant -- men are viewed as those who seek sexual conquests instead of those who "fend them off."
I don't have to tell you more, just search why feminism isn't still relevant to our western civilization and this is my question to you why do you think feminism is still important? Show me your arguments.
Feminism has absolutely nothing to do with biology. It is about politics and culture. Once again, you confirm that you know absolutely nothing about this subject.
A man will be paid more when the job consist physical labours because biology.
I am 100% certain that you have never in your entire life bothered to even read what a real feminist has said.
i was astonished when i read feminism article. All i read was blattant lies and hypocrisies.
What you fail to realize is that equality doesnt't mean feminism. And yet you still not have respond to my question. Why in 2016, in our western civilization, do we need feminism? reply share
Since psychopaths who have no understanding of reality and no sense of what counts as a good, intelligent source are a waste of time, I'm done with you. You've got your head so far up your arse you have no idea which way is up.
Thanks for demonstrating in a public space what kinds of completely worthless morons oppose feminism. You are an aid to the cause by just being you.
This is the proof that feminist is a joke. When you bring facts and logic they laugh or make noises because they cannot respond properly or refutate to the truth. Your reality is distorted.
Look like i was right. Your only argument on this thread was ''i'm not wasting my time with your stupid arguments''. They must not be that stupid if you have the time to tell me i'm a psychopath (i don't konw where you have taken that from, i should call the police since you are intolerant) but can't refute them.
You should seek help with all that aggressivity.It's not really good to show in public space how intolerant you are and how you can't manage your anger.
I know you will read this and that you still find my arguments ''stupid'' but how about you act as an intelligent person and respond.
Why in 2016, in our western civilization, do we need feminism?
reply share
Can you give me some examples of misogyny or chauvinism in politics or culture?
1. The wage gap. Pursuant to that, not long ago I heard a radio interview with a sociologist who did a study showing that in written job evaluations, women get far more criticism and far less advice than males, even when the boss is a woman. Women can sabotage themselves and each other on this issue--remember that the whole point of Jennifer Lawrence's essay on the subject was that she could have negotiated higher pay for her work in American Hustle but gave up early for fear of not being likable. She blamed herself, not Sony, and was convinced that far less powerful women must experience the same thing.
2. The way rape victims are routinely not taken as seriously as victims of other crimes in terms of their credibility. And the way their perpetrators so often get light sentences. Worst example in recent times: a 13 year old girl sexually abused by a 41 year old man who had images of child abuse and bestiality on his computer. The prosecutor--yes, you read that correctly--blamed her for it, even going as far as to call her "predatory". The guy walked (at least, that was the original sentence. I never followed up to see if the sentence was changed under an appeal, but that hardly matters).
2.1. Related: note how often commenters on the latest big celebrity nude photo hack had more to say blaming the victims than condemning the hackers. That's like blaming someone for getting property stolen just because it was in a public storage facility under a padlock. No one ever even thinks of such a thing, but the case is exactly parallel.
3. The way articles about and introductions to accomplished females inevitably devote more time to their physical appearances than when men are written about or introduced. Related to that, I was amused when Scarlett Johansson was asked about the diet she undertook to play Black Widow, and first turned to Robert Downey and said, "Why do you get the existential questions and I get the ones about rabbit food?"
4. It's only been a few decades since female national legislators had their own bathrooms, and shortly before that they were banned from some cafeterias in Congress. The attitudes which produce such climates do not simply evaporate in a couple generations. They just take on milder forms.
5. Constant sexual harassment that most men never have to deal with. A survey in Silicon Valley found that 60 per cent of experienced female professionals receive unwelcome sexual advances from male colleagues and superiors.
6. As a measure of how unconsciously sexist bias sometimes works, a study last year or the year before found that there are more deaths and loss of life when hurricanes are given female names since victims--both male and female--assessed the threat as less in those cases.
7. There have been video games where the male player-character is offered a reward of sex or the glimpse of a scantily clothed female body for completing some goal or other.
For starters. If you follow these things with even remote interest, you wouldn't have to ask.
reply share
1. The wage gap. Pursuant to that, not long ago I heard a radio interview with a sociologist who did a study showing that in written job evaluations, women get far more criticism and far less advice than males, even when the boss is a woman. Women can sabotage themselves and each other on this issue--remember that the whole point of Jennifer Lawrence's essay on the subject was that she could have negotiated higher pay for her work in American Hustle but gave up early for fear of not being likable. She blamed herself, not Sony, and was convinced that far less powerful women must experience the same thing.
The wage gap is a myth. Do you hvae a source for that?
2. The way rape victims are routinely not taken as seriously as victims of other crimes in terms of their credibility. And the way their perpetrators so often get light sentences
1.Do you have evidence of this? 2.Where is your evidence this is sexism?
[2.1. Related: note how often commenters on the latest big celebrity nude photo hack had more to say blaming the victims than condemning the hackers. That's like blaming someone for getting property stolen just because it was in a public storage facility under a padlock. No one ever even thinks of such a thing, but the case is exactly parallel.
1.How did they blame the victims? 2.Evidence this is related to sexism?
The way articles about and introductions to accomplished females inevitably devote more time to their physical appearances than when men are written about or introduced. Related to that, I was amused when Scarlett Johansson was asked about the diet she undertook to play Black Widow, and first turned to Robert Downey and said, "Why do you get the existential questions and I get the ones about rabbit food?"
4. It's only been a few decades since female national legislators had their own bathrooms, and shortly before that they were banned from some cafeterias in Congress. The attitudes which produce such climates do not simply evaporate in a couple generations. They just take on milder forms
1.What minor forms? 2.Evidence?
Constant sexual harassment that most men never have to deal with. A survey in Silicon Valley found that 60 per cent of experienced female professionals receive unwelcome sexual advances from male colleagues and superiors.
1.The figure you cited doesn't make it constant 2.Link? 3.Males are more sexually aggressive, anyway how is this sexism?
6. As a measure of how unconsciously sexist bias sometimes works, a study last year or the year before found that there are more deaths and loss of life when hurricanes are given female names since victims--both male and female--assessed the threat as less in those cases.
Link?
7. There have been video games where the male player-character is offered a reward of sex or the glimpse of a scantily clothed female body for completing some goal or other.
How is that sexism?
You claim it's both political and cultural. You have provided no evidence it's political.
For starters. If you follow these things with even remote interest, you wouldn't have to ask.
I wasn't even aware of most of these things.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.- Einstein
reply share
The wage gap is a myth. Do you hvae a source for that?
The wage gap is recognized by every mainstream economist and is only called a myth by ignorant ideological nutcases.
If I have to jump through hoops on such an uncontroversial point, especially given your cave-man understanding on some of the other points ("how is that sexist?" when shown something anyone with half an IQ point can recognize as obviously sexist), then obviously you are another delusional moron who is not worth my time. I should have figured that out by your stupid comments on science over on the other board and put your pathetic arse on ignore back then.
Won't make that mistake again. Bye bye. reply share
The wage gap is recognized by every mainstream economist and is only called a myth by ignorant ideological nutcases.
I meant the wage gap as feminists portray it. It's not caused by sexism and no serious economist thinks it is.
If I have to jump through hoops on such an uncontroversial point, especially given your cave-man understanding on some of the other points ("how is that sexist?" when shown something anyone with half an IQ point can recognize as obviously sexist
Statistics or situations that show women have hardships in no way implies the cause of these hardships is sexism.
Comments on science? Im not anti-scence, I have huge respect for science.
Oh and btw refusing to address people's points, insulting them and putting them on ignore is the height of intellectual cowardness.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.- Einstein
reply share
How feminists portray it is a myth. Yes, men earn more than women, but that is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for these things:
1. They generally work more (overtime etc) 2. Choose jobs that pay more (engineer etc) vs nurse (should be payed more, imo) 3. Life style choices
When such relevant factors are considered, the wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing.
No respectable economist believes the pay-gap myth.
Why doesn't every company ever only hire women to save 25% on paying salaries? If you're paid less for the same amount/quality of work you can just file a lawsuit.
This is just my signature and is not part of the post lol... - Signature, Mr
No, how anti-feminist crackpots portray it is a myth.
1. They generally work more (overtime etc)
Even if that were documented as true, it conveniently ignores salaried jobs.
2. Choose jobs that pay more (engineer etc) vs nurse (should be payed more, imo) 3. Life style choices
Which, again, conveniently ignores the sexist social pressures which limit and shape the choices women make.
And which also ignores various studies which show that identical resumes will get far greater call-back volumes when the names attached to them are male rather than female.
Or studies which show that women's reviews from supervisors (regardless of the boss's gender) tend to have more criticisms and fewer tips for improvement than men's reviews.
Or the fact that women are pressured to feel likable and tend not to fight as hard for deserved raises as men do.
No respectable economist believes the pay-gap myth.
No, moron, EVERY respectable economist believes in the pay gap. It is about as controversial among experts as evolution is among biologists or climate change is to climate scientists. And like those two ideas, only ideological crackpots deny it.
Why doesn't every company ever only hire women to save 25% on paying salaries?
Yeah, you people always repeat these idiotic-beyond-belief talking points. It apparently never occurred to any of you people, since you don't understand how these things work, than many of the factors involved are subconscious. Women do it to themselves and each other.
reply share
Not gonna bother responding, since your mind is obviously made up at the point of name-calling. You seem to have many points that just involve: women get bad reviews, they don't ask for raise as much, subconcius choices.
And there lies the problem, there is a wage gap, but not the way you think it is. Women tend to CHOOSE not to work as much, CHOOSE to go to their kids' soccer match instead of working overtime, CHOOSING lesser payed jobs. If the resumes are identical, why not choose the woman since she'll get payed 25% less? Bad point.
If a man and a woman works 80 hours a week and get paid the same, everything is fine. If the man decides to 15 hours overtime each week, but the woman goes to soccer practice, she shouldn't get payed as much. This is where the gap appears. It's a fair gap.
If you don't get payed as much as a man who does the same exact job, sue the *beep* out of your employers.
This is just my signature and is not part of the post lol... - Signature, Mr
The OECD summarized all finding from all OECD countries, stating:
"[In] many countries, labour market discrimination – i.e. the unequal treatment of equally productive individuals only because they belong to a specific group – is still a crucial factor inflating disparities in employment and the quality of job opportunities [...] Evidence presented in this edition of the Employment Outlook suggests that about [...] 30% of the variation in gender wage gaps across OECD countries can be explained by discriminatory practices in the labour market."
women get far more criticism and far less advice than males, even when the boss is a woman.
That doesn't represent at all western politics and culture. It's some personal events that happen from time to time because people are egoist and malicious. ''As one can imagine, Goldin comes to the same conclusion that I and many others have: That the gap is due mostly to choices men and women make in their careers and not discrimination.'' http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/harvard-prof.-takes-down-gender-wage-gap-myth/article/2580405
Long lists of articles debunking and demonstrating the wage gap myth using facts and statistics:
a 13 year old girl sexually abused by a 41 year old man
What is the context and the evidence of this as a misogynist or chauvinist western politics and culture ? I heard many feminists articles backing up the mass immigration recently. This mass immigration have bring many report of sexual harassments and rape. So there is a drastic rate of rape and harassment in our country. Do you condemn yourself for this rape culture?
2.1. How is it suppose to represent a misogynist or chauvinist western politics and culture when a hacker did it? and how?
3. So you are telling us that it suppose to represent a misogynist or chauvinist western politics and culture when your role that you engage for is to play a super heroine in a latex suit than one interviewer ask you what was your regime to fit in your role. When ben affleck played batman and was asked about his regime, was this sexist?
4. Do you have evidences?
5.
Constant sexual harassment that most men never have to deal with.
So you are a feminist but you imply that men doesn't get sexually harassed. A feminist who is sexist, this isn't the first time. Is it supposed to represent a misogynist or chauvinist western politics and culture? and how?
6. Links?
7. Exactly, how is that sexism?
There have been video games where the female player-character is offered a reward of sex or the glimpse of a scantily clothed male body for completing some goal or other.
reply share
Such people are not naive, they are educated, unlike you. Since feminism is about equality, if you aren't a feminist you are logically against equality, and therefore you a misogynist.
I am 100% in favour of equality, so if "mainstream feminism", as you call it, is about gender equality, then I am a "mainstream feminist". But "mainstream feminists" should denounce the extreme (or radical) feminists, aka the "feminazis", who are in favour of anything but equality, but rather in favour of a bizarre mix of woman dominance and superiority, while crying "Sexism!" and "I'm a victim!!" every couple of minutes, and claiming that every man is sexist and misogynist just because of his gender. (Yes, there some famous "feminist activists" with more or less such views. For reference, check these feminist quotes : http://thoughtcatalog.com/jake-fillis/2014/05/23-quotes-from-feminists-that-will-make-you-rethink-feminism/ ).
I really have no problem with female dominance and superiority either (unless it is combined with a constant pseudo-self-victimizing attitude, you cannot have it both ways), I just would not call it an aspect of feminism. Since feminism is about gender equality, as you said, right? And yes, I mean dominance over men, not dominance as a quality of strong women, which is an aspect of feminism and I have no problem with either. In fact these are the women I admire and respect the most.
But I've never seen any "mainstream feminist" denounce their fundamentalist comrades with the above conflicting views (the dominant man hating pseudo-victims; I'm obviously excluding real victims) though. So, my question is simply why? Do you denounce your fellow hysterical non mainstream feminists? Do you even consider them feminists? Don't you think that true gender equality can only be calmly achieved by men and women having equal rights (and equal obligations), and better gender diversity in jobs and governing bodies, particularly jobs still dominated by men, rather than hysteria?
Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.
o you denounce your fellow hysterical non mainstream feminists? Do you even consider them feminists?
A. The extremists are tiny, insignificant minority. Focusing on them is largely a sign of insecurity and an attempt to change the subject.
B. Not all of the quotes in your link were all that unreasonable given the contexts. Some of them were probably taken out of context. At least one of them looked like a joke. Nevertheless, for the most part you wouldn't see me writing or saying most of what those folks said.
reply share
A psychotic, deranged and controlling woman gets away with all her lies, manipulation and even murder at the end and poor husband ends up being totally pussy whipped and controlled by his vicious wife at the end...isn't this ultimate dream of all of the misandrist females out there?
No, what you describe is an idiotic fantasy promoted by clueless, insecure morons who couldn't articulate what real world feminism is if their pathetic lives depended on it.
reply share
Yeah, her other traits are that she is a khunt and an awful human being.
Yup.
If anything, this movie is a pretty cynical comment on feminism, gender relations and marriage/relationships. To me, it's more of a "male nightmare when faced with feminism gone out of control"-scenario.
Notice how Nick is actually the victim in the story - and the only "proof" the media and public have to condemn him is that "he's the man" (because ... no way that a woman could be a manipulative, lying biatch who'd want to inflict harm upon her husband). Sure: He fights back at some points and pulls some pretty slick moves to manipulate the public in his favor. But in the end, he's powerless against his psycho wife and has to let her get her way.
How is that a "feminist dream"? To me, the movie paints a lot of its female characters in a very unflattering light.
- The female talk-show-host who kicks off the witch-hunt is a shallow, prejudiced, ratings-obsessed bitch, who can't even apologize to Nick after Amy's return when he confronts her directly with all the ways that she treated him unfairly before. And while not as openly hostile, the other talk-show host is just as shallow herself and easily manipulated by Nick when he pulls his "I'm an a$$hole"-shtick on her show.
- The white-trash/tramp-stamp girl back-stabs Amy and persuades her new boyfriend to rob Amy of her money.
- Amy's mom is cold, aloof and distanced and - for no real reason - resents Nick for the "attention" he's getting at that "find Amy HQ" in the first act. Although, to be fair, her dad isn't much of a sympathetic character, either.
- Nick's GF is a shallow, sex-crazed bimbo. She did have a nice rack, though.. ;)
- Amy's "best friend" neighbor is hellbent on getting Nick arrested, based solely on what Amy told her about her marriage. She never even witnessed Nick and Amy interacting with each other, let alone Nick mistreating Amy in any way. She probably never even spoke to Nick before Amy's disappearance and yet she was instantly ready to assume the worst when Amy disappeared.
IMO, the only positive female characters in the film are Nick's sister and the lead investigator. One is his twin sister, so she's pretty biased from the get-go and the other is a police officer simply doing her job and trying to get to the truth. But even the cop eventually is ready to view Nick as a potential wife-murderer with no real hard evidence to back her up.
If anything, this movie is a pretty cynical comment on feminism, gender relations and marriage/relationships. To me, it's more of a "male nightmare when faced with feminism gone out of control"-scenario.
How is that a "feminist dream"? To me, the movie paints a lot of its female characters in a very unflattering light.
I agree with you on all points, and it's all well-thought-out. And it's with some kind of relief when I read that this is not you, trying to explain the movie's narrative by pushing a feminist agenda. Because like you say, the movie paints a lot of its female characters in a very unflattering light.
I just want to add one thing and it's about us, the audience, or rather people in general. And the media, paired with morality. I think I've said this in a thread before, but aside from that Amy suffers from some kind of personality disorder, psycho or sociopath, which doesn't really have to do with morality, so the morality of the movie is also that the media we have today is completely ruthless, trying to sell just about anything at any cost. And once the media hype is spinning, there's no end to it. But a huge middle finger get also the people, the average Joe, who are swallowing everything what the media says, without questioning practically – nothing.
Then it's hardly a good advertisement for marriages either, even though Nick isn't the best of husbands. But that doesn't justify Amy's behavior, but has more to do with how she's constituted in her head, pathologically.
reply share
Anyone who thinks a "feminist's dream" is Amy's story has a warped view of feminism. The BOOK is a feminist's dream because most of the central characters are written as full and complex without regard to gender. They may stereotype themselves and each other according to gender roles, but the author doesn't. The author has said men are allowed, as fictitious characters, to be bad in a way women are not.
I've enjoyed the company of plenty of fictitious male protogonists who are horrible people in their fictitious world, but entertaining in fantasy.
The author said she wanted us to understand Amy's motivation even if we didn't approve of the actions that followed. Clearly Amy is some kind of narcissistic/sociopath, as she has a track record that predates her marriage to Nick. And Nick, to me, is a draw. I think some people will end up liking him despite (because he's self-aware and has his own number), and others will write him off. He's a particular character - so is Amy.
I think the cast of characters were written with more thought and originality than maybe you'd get from another author. For example, the divorce lawyer, Tanner Bolt - I figured he'd be a player who'd cheat on his own wife, but he's the opposite of that, and also not a conventional thinker even though he lives with the trappings of a typical high priced Manhattan celebrity level lawyer.
The one character I thought was a bit strained was Andie. Nick is a good looking guy, but come on. The two women, other than Amy, who cross Nick's path turn out to be high maintenance, clingy women scorned types (Shawna Kelly and Andie). I gave that the side eye. The book tried to show Andie wasn't predictable in some ways - she didn't tell everybody about the affair in the way Amy expected. But her reaction to Nick withdrawing the Nick manhood was Soap Opera 101.
When it comes to the book, Cool Girl Amy annoyed me. She was passive aggressive. She was nice to her husband and bitchy about everybody else (for example, her self-congratulation that her marriage wasn't as manipulative as everybody else's "Dancing Monkey" marriage). Her portrayal of what a perfect romance/marriage is was straight out of Sex and the City. Atmosphere (snow), fantastic sex, the perfect after sex drink (scotch), and then perfect intimacy afterwards. And all of the ways she tried to stage manage the relationship, such as the damn treasure hunt every year. And giving her husband writing paper and the cutesy way she was "angling for a love letter." Basically although she was trying to come across as the perfect woman, I thought any guy with a brain would run a thousand miles from her with all those trappings. The reviews claim we'll like Cool Girl Amy, and Amy herself thinks she's appealing, but I thought she was obnoxious. Exhausting. Once Real Amy entered the picture, I liked her much more. She was straight up, knew what she wanted, was tough as hell, nothing about her toughness was cliche, she didn't have a problem with herself or much conflict, and she was really smart. Once she realized Nick wasn't going to be too crazy about "Real Amy" she lost some respect for him, instead of respect for herself. She stopped having that push-pull expectations routine.
I liked that she gained weight and temporarily lost her looks and didn't care. A woman like her is supposed to care, according to the rules of fiction. I can't think of a single way a male character in the same position would be written differently. She was written as an individual and was much less annoying.
I think I've said this in a thread before, but aside from that Amy suffers from some kind of personality disorder, psycho or sociopath, which doesn't really have to do with morality
Amy is textbook case of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). She is not a psychopath or psychotic, she is a very smart sociopath. Sociopaths, particularly extreme narcissistic sociopaths such as Amy have very low morals, and can kill someone without flinching or feeling any guilt at all. And most sociopaths tend to be pretty smart. But people with NPD are very insecure and tend to score low on the happiness index.
Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.
haha, so true...I almost felt bad for the guy at the end when she turned around at him with that look in her eyes, like she totally owns him from that point on. You feel there's no escape for the guy now apart from being totally submissive to that crazed bish lol
This movie is a good enough representation of the feminist mindset that it can turn any man to MGTOW.
Listen to her commentary about domestic life for goodness sake. She's describing all of the reasons why the 2nd wave of feminists rebelled in the first place. She didn't like putting on a facade anymore. She wanted to be free of her boring life and her objectifying, cheating husband. I understand why she would be mad at Ben. BUT doing what she did shows a lady of entitlement. She doesn't care who she hurts or what she does to other people, as long as her twisted misandrist desires are satisfied.
Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.
Listen to her commentary about domestic life for goodness sake. She's describing all of the reasons why the 2nd wave of feminists rebelled in the first place. She didn't like putting on a facade anymore. She wanted to be free of her boring life and her objectifying, cheating husband. I understand why she would be mad at Ben. BUT doing what she did shows a lady of entitlement. She doesn't care who she hurts or what she does to other people, as long as her twisted misandrist desires are satisfied.
I'd take anything she put in her diary with a huge grain of salt. Remember that she wanted the diary to be found and read (by the police) - and that she did that with the intent of framing her husband for her murder/disappearance. It's like the movie states: We'll never know what really went on in her head.
IMO she's simply presenting herself as an "oppressed" woman, caught in a patriarchic world and having to jump through hoops to please men. You could actually see this as another case of her playing a role to meet societal expectations - in this case: The expectations of outraged women who want to view her as a victim of male dominance/cruelty. And perhaps "being oppressed" or "avenging womankind" is really the justification she uses internally for her behavior, but that doesn't mean she really *is* a "victim". Personally, I think she's more of a manipulator, slipping in and out of certain roles to further her own goals.
WTF? Not a chance. I was just as scared as the husband and his sister! Disturbing Stepford Wife character who switches from shades of: Hitchcock, Monster, Carrie and back again is definitely no role model.
George Lucas talking about: 'Hey, give it to me, I'll fix it. I'll make 20 more of them'
On a scale of 1-10, how powerful and impossible to simply ignore are feminists today?
And also - are they good overall or not?
Cause for one, they don't deter bad men from doing bad stuff but it seems that on some occasions, it doesn't mean that men who are good and fair have nothing to worry about either.
Cause how come even if they do fight and struggle for equal rights and in the name of justice, then according to some people, they hate and see ALL men as evil and whatnot and have no problem even when women, who clearly are bad and crazy, kill GOOD men that they even KNOW are good and have done nothing wrong?
And does any of this like make sense to you as a NORMAL HUMAN BEING? Cause it doesn't to me!
And online, lots of people are suggesting that we shouldn't even question them and accept them as normal EVEN UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.
So who are the "good people" and who are the "bad people" then? Oh wait, life is not that simple, right?
Why hasn't humanity already destroyed itself by the way?
The greatest trick the Devil has ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist!