Pointless feminism ruined the entire show. - The Fall (2013) Discussion

[–] Osova 11 years ago

Feminism is never pointless, bye.

reply

[–] !!!deleted!!! (41638798) 10 years ago

Ha!

As a 60-something who came up almost before feminism was in fashion among the younger folks for whom labels are critical, my lifetime of experience in the working world and working in male dominated businesses a lot of the time was this:

A woman who never calls herself a feminist and would never think of applying a societal label to herself is usually the person who really is a feminist. Her life is her testament.

And vice versa.

I can hand on heart say I've never met a woman who went out of her way to call herself a feminist who was anything close to being one in practice.

The two are almost diametrically opposed actions.

Feminism is an internal awareness and set of thoughtful behaviors that inform a woman's actions in life. If a woman has to spend her time thinking too hard about how to BE one, then you are failing. It's organic.

If it's being worn on the outside, you can be highly suspicious that it's not the real thing.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 10 years ago

I consider myself a radical feminist and have been one since I was a kid, even before I knew that feminism existed. I'm guessing I meet your 'organic' description.

Stella to me IS NOT a feminist. She's a sociopath. To me that's the core of the show - she and the killer are alike. What's disturbing about her sexual behaviour isn't the casual sex - it's the fact the act is completely joyless. There's absolutely no indication of her enjoying it - it's all about control. She treats her hook-up with such disdain that it's painful to watch and inadvertently causes his death.

reply

[–] !!!deleted!!! (41638798) 10 years ago

Yes! Paul did hit on something when he told Stella on the phone they were alike.

Remember when Stella told the pathologist that "doubling" was a psychological thing? It's like Stella and Spector are the same deep inside, but his takes an evil murderous expression and hers is dealing with the results of people like Spector's actions.

I rewatched the phenomenally written and acted phone scene at the end between Stella and Paul. It's very enlightening.

Remember how Stella writes at night in her notebook when she wakes up from a dream? The first episode's entries were something about her "daddy" and Dr. something and some other notes. So she's dreaming about her daddy.

After Paul and Stella have their exchange about being alike, and Stella denies it, she then describes Paul to himself and you can see it's freaking him out.

But as Stella talks, you see her face and for the first time in 5 episodes, there are some deep expressions being shown--she's no longer the zombie like, nearly mute visage she gives the world.

She says something like "You have a daughter, she's about 7 or 8, and what do you think she's going to think of her daddy when she finds out he's really done evil and terrible things, what's going to happen to her?"

I'm paraphrasing but at that moment, you realize Stella's talking to herself as much as she is Paul. She's talking about herself and HER daddy.

The whole thing is a mind blowing scene.

Another reason it's my favorite is that I think for the first time we see Paul being his real self. He's always got masks on with others, be it balaclavas or the different faces he puts on for the world when he's in full manipulation mode.

But when he gets on the phone with Stella and starts talking to somebody he knows 'gets' him, and he can just be his kind of open murderer self, it seems as though he undergoes a kind of subtle transformation and gets real.

You really get the idea that for the first time in 5 episodes, you are seeing the real and true Spector. Great acting for both of them.

reply

[–] panic100 10 years ago

Nice post!

reply

[–] alphabase17 10 years ago

The series plays on the familiar crime drama trope (the sociopathic investigator vs the tormented genius-killer) at the beginning, only to subvert it very successfully in the subsequent episodes. Just because the sex act is not joyful (how often is it in contemporary dramas?), it doesn't mean Stella is a sociopath. The viewers find it difficult to identify with her because she has almost no backstory and is never shown in the family context. Well, except that daddy note paradesend mentioned, because this is the only thing Stella and Paul have in common: being abandoned by their daddies.

And Olson would have been killed anyway.

reply

[–] pandacraze 10 years ago

In a scene that was filmed but cut, Stella called her mother and they spoke fondly of her father, how he had read Nietzsche to her.

reply

[–] mmsbk 10 years ago

Nonsense paradesend, nonsense. I too am of your demographic and knew and still know literally dozens of women and some men who not only called themselves feminists but were committed activists and/or workers for various causes and groups . In addition their lives contained sacrifice, bravery , self -deprecating humour .

Organic ! you silly person.

reply

[–] cat_fitz 10 years ago

A woman who never calls herself a feminist and would never think of applying a societal label to herself is usually the person who really is a feminist. Her life is her testament.

I think I love you!

I can hand on heart say I've never met a woman who went out of her way to call herself a feminist who was anything close to being one in practice.

Completely agree. I'd say the same of men that make a point of telling people they're a feminist.

〰〰〰〰〰〰
http://bit.ly/1BXT2z8

reply

[–] NomadNomadovic 10 years ago

men ignore ugly women: men are shallow women ignore ugly men: men are losers

soft porn images in magazines aimed at adult men: unacceptable nude public protests in full view of children: perfectly fine

thinks men's rights are a joke gets butthurt when people don't take feminism seriously

LOL! COW

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] stacy0912 10 years ago

Bosnian? I spent a summer with Bosnians in '94---brings back the memories.

~Keep some room in your heart for the unimaginable~

reply

[–] merimaro1 10 years ago

:) bosnian/croatian/serbian. hopefully good memories, because being in bosnia in '94 at that time was hell on earth. anyway, my message was direct reply to this other balkan member, as I figured from his profile name...

reply

[–] stacy0912 10 years ago

I don't speak the language, just recognized it. I only remember a few words, one expression..shta ema. Bittersweet memories.

~Keep some room in your heart for the unimaginable~

reply

[–] NomadNomadovic 10 years ago

tak en inglish

reply

[–] Cademon 10 years ago

Agreed with everything in the OP. This and Top of the lake are dire.

reply

[–] got_my_head_in_the_clouds 10 years ago

i agree that this show is not nice towards men, it actually portrays masculinity in a very ugly way; but i believe it should not be taken as some kind of hate towards men or "pointless feminism". it's like the millenium saga, as you pointed, it shows the dark side of masculine domination and more than that it shows how female empowerment is dangerous in the sense that it pushes new forms of violence against women.

yes, the uk is not the worst place in the world to be a woman - neither are scandinavian countries; and guess where stieg larssen (millenium saga) is from? these extremely egalitarian countries have formal gender equality assured, but check for example for sex crimes in denmark, finland and others. my opinion though, you're entitled to yours.

apart from that, which i think is sort of the "social morals" of the show, it is very well written, well interpreted, and it kept my eyes on screen.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
act like a bitch, get slapped like a bitch.

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

it shows how female empowerment is dangerous in the sense that it pushes new forms of violence against women.

Oh, I don't think that's right. I think it shows how the same old forms of violence against women happen for the same old reasons.

reply

[–] alphabase17 10 years ago

Perfect comment, Whatlarks.

reply

[–] got_my_head_in_the_clouds 10 years ago

edit:

it shows how female empowerment is dangerous in the sense that it pushes back old forms of violence against women which had been mitigated and replaced with more "civilized" forms of violence (i.e. mechanisms of social exclusion)

so agreed i guess

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
act like a bitch, get slapped like a bitch.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 10 years ago

Feminism is never pointless in a show but it is rarely well executed as a theme. I've seen 4 shows recently with blatantly feminist subjects: The Hour, Top of the Lake, this and Orphan Black. Out of all those, only OB does it well. Why? Because it doesn't preach. There is not a single monologue about girl power and the inferiority of men. It just happens organically. Oh, and the protagonist doesn't normally strut around in lingerie and stilettos. Big plus...She's just as sexually opportunistic as Stella but she's shown to be actually enjoying sex rather than conducting it in the cold manner of a praying mantis.

The Awakening's director was onto something said that female viewers get irritated by overly groomed 'babylicious' Hollywood types onscreen. Gillian's naturally pretty, but Stella's overall appearance pisses me off deeply and it's not just the ridiculous torture devices on her feet. As a result of her costume and hair choices, her whole characterisation comes off as a male fantasy of a feminist. Particularly when she's surrounded by much more sensibly dressed and groomed women on the show. And they don't look any less feminine. How long does Stella's hair styling take daily..?

I'll take Sarah Lund's big woolen jumpers from the Danish The Killing
or Robin's house boots from Top of the Lake over Stella's Vogue outfits any day.

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

As a result of her costume and hair choices, her whole characterisation comes off as a male fantasy of a feminist. Particularly when she's surrounded by much more sensibly dressed and groomed women on the show.

I wholeheartedly agree with the criticism of the tiresome glut of babelicious heroines on TV. However, I think you've thrown the good babes out with the bad in the same bathwater. It seems to me inaccurate and unfair to reduce Gibson's choice to express herself in this way to a male fantasy of feminism.

There is an equally popular fantasy about feminism - shared by both genders - in which it supposedly dictates that women shouldn't seek to be attractive to men, and should wear only "sensible" clothes. If Gibson might be less a male fantasy feminist if she dressed more "sensibly" and took less time doing her hair, she would then become another kind of fantasy feminist who renounces the idea of beauty because it's a form of oppression. Unbuttoned or buttoned-up, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The feminism I know can't be reduced to a position on style. It has room for women who love fashion and want to wear stylish clothes, even every day, even when everyone else dresses with less flair, even if it's not always practical, even if it's attractive to men (and women).

I'll take Sarah Lund's big woolen jumpers from the Danish The Killing or Robin's house boots from Top of the Lake over Stella's Vogue outfits any day.

That's fine, if you left it at that. But you've linked personal taste with a social movement, which makes personal taste seem more authoritative because it's now equivalent to a larger social good.

But feminism, being a social movement, isn't a single POV, so it can't be co-opted to align with any one individual's taste. It has multiple strands, and people typically seize on just one, or the media represents just one, which becomes primary in their minds even though it may not be in reality.

reply

[–] Eva_Marrie 10 years ago

Thank you for your well balanced and expressed critique. I didn't mean that TV heroines or true feminists shouldn't dress pretty. But there is a certain line not to be crossed, because when it is - the character stops feeling real. And unlike the other female detectives I mentioned, I just don't buy Stella as a real human being. It's the writing and acting's fault as well, but costume contributes.

I have similar feelings about the objectification of Jamie in season 2. In season 1 they actually dressed him down in old fashioned sweaters and made him look pale. He looked rather cute but real, not like a runway model slumming it. In season 2 he's near naked and shot in soft focus half the time. It pulls you out of the show and lessens his performance. There're 1000 modelling pictures out there where you can enjoy Jamie strutting his stuff without dragging it into the show.

reply

[–] NomadNomadovic 10 years ago

Feminism is never pointless in a show but it is rarely well executed as a theme

Basically its sexism and it's always counter productive and many ladies dont support it.

http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/

What naive ladies here dont understand is that sexism sells, it's still cheap exploitation especially when it's treated as Taboo, look Brokeback Mountain, Bound, etc this recent surge in strong feminine lead is marketing trick and misleading, two female leads in 300, female villain in Judge Dread and one armed Charlie Theron in upcoming Mad Max to prove what? that women can run faster than men? it's pathetic.

it's a shame that something as sacred and powerful as motherhood is not enough to prove the power of women who endure the labor of nine months gives birth to all great men and women and keeps the family together.

PS

Someone once asked why there are no female prophets? and the reply was that we give birth to them!

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

I don't understand the comment, "basically it's sexism," because you don't specify how. You seem to assume that feminism has a single voice, one you don't happen to like. If so, I want to say that feminism is many different voices, not all of them in agreement. It's not one, monolithic, absolute theory. There’s always going to be controversy about what it stands for and who are the spokespeople, which is perfectly natural to any social movement. It is the same for the civil rights movement, for the environmental movement, the anti-war movement, and so on.

For example, feminism is about much more than equality. As an academic and activist movement, it addresses diverse sources of oppression related to gender, sexualty, race, ethnicity, nationality, class, disability, age, ideology, and so on.

Many women who disagree with feminism on principle have heard a message that isn't necessarily accurate. It's hard to open communication sometimes, because feminism doesn't have a single party line, yet people make that assumption all the time. One voice or one description has reached them, and they don't hear others.

Like other social movements, feminism talks about broad social structures. In criticizing them, their point isn't that each individual participant in that structure is doing something bad. That they're somehow guilty of something. However, people often take it personally. When feminists say that women are oppressed, that doesn’t mean that somehow every single woman is merely a pawn of the patriarchal system, and that they're personally to blame.

Thus it's a good idea for feminists to clarify that they're not passing judgments, for example on women who choose family over career. But because there are many voices, not all of them will take such care. Again, this is the same in any social movement. Sometimes the voices that get heard and end up with sticking power are not necessarily the best voices.

A clear definition of feminism can be found in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, co-written by academic feminists:

1. (Descriptive claim) Women, and those who appear to be women, are subjected to wrongs and/or injustice at least in part because they are or appear to be women.

2. (Normative claim) The wrongs/injustices in question in (i) ought not to occur and should be stopped when and where they do.

I find those premises reasonable, and I think that to accept them makes one a feminist, whether or not one stands up to the backlash that aims to tar all with one brush, and admit it.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] NomadNomadovic 10 years ago

WOW! Great fair moderators calling me troll is ok and calling some one a cow is an insult!

reply

[–] fede_4488 10 years ago

HAHAHAAH, you use tumblr as an example that the majority of women don't like feminism? You're desperate

Basically its sexism

Also, you're ignorant

reply

[–] blueathena623 10 years ago

I really don't get the focus on Stella's clothes. She's a top dog. Yes, the other females dress more casually, just like the other males dress more casually than the top male police officer, who is often shown in a suit. She wears knee length pencil skirts, which is a common silhouette and very professional, and nice blouses. If I could afford them and the dry cleaning, I'd wear nothing but silk blouses either -- they feel great, don't tend to crease, they breathe so you can normally get a few wears out of them before you have to wash them. Maybe she's bought more clothes, but basically she's living out of a suitcase and has a bunch of generic mix and match clothes. As for the heels, no, I wouldn't wear them, but I'm also not short nor do I work in a male-dominated field and I don't like high heels, period.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] odoacer-1 10 years ago

I am responding to this a long time after it was written, and after a lot of other people commented upon it. So if my thoughts have been written by others, I beg your pardon for any repitition...

Gibson's character certainly did interject a lot of feminism of a certain type into her role and the story. However, I think it made her character look way out of step with most of the other characters in the story, male or female. It did not make her look stronger or better than anyone else in the story (with the exception of the killer, Spektor.)

Her one-night stand looked very forced, as if just to demonstrate women can act as superficially as men, especially in a profession dominated by men. She relishes this in her anthropolgy stories about the customs of some way-off culture. But I think the men and women that come into contact her don't see her some sort of pioneer for women's lib, they just see her as a bit loony. A good detective, but more troubled than perhaps she realizes.

As we learn more about her, it is clear she is a bit loony, but not because she is a feminist of a certain stripe. I would posit that her feminism is used by her to convince herself that she is some type of 'new woman'. But, through her journal writing and some other her other interactions, I do not believe that she really see herself that way, even though she wants to.

It was as if she was pretending to be Margaret Mead, if Ms. Mead had been a detective in the modern-day UK.

reply

[–] Whatlarks 10 years ago

My impression of her one-nighter was that it was keeping with her generally rational approach to things.

She relishes this in her anthropolgy stories about the customs of some way-off culture.

We first hear that description of the matrilineal society in the first minute of the pilot episode, spoken by Sarah Kay in the bar. Sarah Kay was a divorce lawyer.

Gibson heard about it from the man she was speaking to, and did some research. Her own description comes in Ep. 104, in answer to Ferrington, who sees pictures of tribal women on Gibson's corkboard:

GIBSON
They're Mosuo women.
They're a small ethnic group
living in China on the border
with Tibet. They're a matriarchal
society. Well, matrilineal. They
don't practise traditional marriage,
no husbands and wives. They
practise what's called walking
marriage. The partners live in
different households. I'm
simplifying. One of Sarah Kay's
work colleagues said she talked
about them at the bar on the night
that she called you to the house.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]