The Common Ambi-emotional, or lack there of, disaster

As a result of the class's analysis of "Fight Club" and the subject of my S/A/R, I've been thinking about movies in a much more analytical and critical fashion. One realization that I came to today was the role that gender extremes play in the Ben Stiller comedy "Zoolander". "Zoolander" displays the awkwardness between the macho and sensitive extremes present in men to exemplify how unnatural it is live with out a balance of the two.


The most blatantly obvious sections that feature this strained relationship are those that involve Derek and his father. After Spending a day in the mines trying to be macho, Derek sits at a bar watching TV with his father and brother. A rather strange commercial featuring Derek as a "myrrh-man" comes on at the bar. Even before he calls Derek a disgrace to the family, Derek's father is obvious that he is disturbed by Zoolander's feminine qualities captured in the commercial. Another issue caused by this imbalance of of 'manliness' and sensitivity is the occasional violent swing from one the other. This is shown when Derek and Hanzel, both very emotional non-macho men, are trying to extract files from a computer. When their civil attempts at this task fail, they revert to primal, violent behavior such as letting out animal like screeches and beating the PC with blunt objects.

Birthday Blues

As I ws catching up on my favorite TV comedy, The Office, I couldn't help noticing the ridiculous amount of stereo-typing that was involved. One of the most prominent gender messages sent by the newest episode is that women are demanding, materialistic, and hard(if not imposable) to please. This stereo-type was brought to life on screen by Kelly, the girly girl of the office. In this episode it happened to be her birthday. Jim and Dwight by her cake and post "happy birthday' signs around the office, but kelly is upset, if not angry, that the cake is designless and that the decorations have no 'theme'. This shows that it's not the thought that counts, it
s the quality of the display. If this situation had happened to a male character, a reaction similar to Kelly's would have been used as evidence of his 'feminine' side or homosexuality.

Distraction/Reaction

Last week while watching "O' Brother Where Art Thou" I noticed something I'd never caught onto before. My observation was that Pete, Everett, and Delmar run off into the woods after some loose women even though they have a very limited time to reach the "treasure" before it is unreachable. This presents a shift in priorities; their actions suggest that women, who they don't even know, are more important than large sums of money. If this is the case, why didn't the trio bust off the farm for the prospect of finding a mate before Everett mentioned the treasure? In fact, if Pete and Delmar truly valued the opposite sex so highly, wouldn't they have been willing to leave with Everett if they had known his real reason for escaping? I contend that in truth, Pete and Delmar do value money more than women. The real reason why they went off course so easily is that men are distracted easily; and among all the distractions that men have, the strongest is the prospect of meeting a woman. The peculiar aspect of this distraction is that when men think about it logically, they can't understand why they abandoned their original goal for the girl. This is the subject of conversation between Delmar and Everett at the restaurant the following day.

MAN! WOMAN! HUMOR!

Last week I commented on how shallow male characters are depicted in most modern film, name sitcoms. This week I'll be looking at the flip-side of this in relation to gender specific humor in 2 episodes of Seinfeld.
As we have concluded thus far, masculine and feminine traits are considered to be polar opposites. So, in this fashion, we would therefore conclude that if men a re shallow in their relationships, then women would be looking beyond physical characteristics into the essence of an individual for who they really are. This is indeed a stereo-type that is often placed on females; and it brings two episodes of Seinfeld to the forefront of my mind. The first one deals with George and his relationship with a woman who proclaims that "Looks aren't important to her." This statement then triggers a series of events that make the bulk of the episode. Now in another episode George gets involved with a bald woman, proving that he is beyond his former shallowness. He is then turned down by the bald woman due to his short stature.
The first incident produces humor when we see George's reaction, which is confusion and disgust, to the woman's idea that looks don't matter. The latter situation is funny because it portrays the exact opposite of the culturally accepted "norm" for an extreme case of irony.

Why What Nice Jeans You Have...

As I was watching "The Office" last night I took special care to look for a message about gender. The one that seemed to stick out the most was Micheal's shallowness and how it affected his actions towards different people in the office. Now, this in itself can be explained by his all around inconsiderate actions and not a specific message about gender, but consider the shows "Two and a Half Men", "Seinfeld", and "Friends". All of these shows have one or more male characters who view women for just their physical qualities and could care less about their personalities. This is, and has been, a common trend in film. Like any other stereo-type, there is no doubt that some men live with this self-centered usury as a way of life. But also like other stereo-types, it is merely assuming that everyone with a certain characteristic, in this case being male, acts in the same manner. Personally, I think that is it rather sad not only that some guys truly are like this, but also that this gender message actually effects the behavior of some women. It proves that even though our culture is highly entered on being an individual we let various forms of media dictate how we view the world.

Manning Up: Fight or Flight?

In my relatively limited number of years in this life I have found, from time to time, that fighting is considered to be a manly act and that evasion is unmanly behavior, and therefore feminine. I really hadn't given this conception much tough until I saw the new Daniel Craig film "Defiance" this past Monday. To be fair I ended up enjoyed it, but I was let down by it at the start. I had pictured it being a guns blazing, action packed war movie, you know a film filled with typical "man" stuff. As it turns out one of the main underlying themes was that of manning up, and whether that should be an action of fight or flight. This "debate" takes place between two brothers who are both natural born leaders and it runs the course of the movie. Due to the fact that this is a new movie, I'll stop the connection here so as not to spoil it for you, although I do strongly suggest that you see it at some point.

Anyways, I've been weighing this fight or flight thing for a few days now; and by the definition of manliness that I provided in my previous post, I have found 'flight' to be the 'manlier' choice in the situation presented in Defiance. This is because the choice to fight would have been made in order to protect pride and honor in a self-serving manner. Flight on the other hand would do the most good for others. Now, I do not advocate flight in every situation. The choice should be made by answering the question "Which will benefit the community the most, fight or flight?"

A Masculine Salad?

First, a question. Is there such a thing as a masculine salad? I'm talking about a regular salad that is at least a 1:10 ratio between meat and lettuce/veggies, not a piece of meat with a leaf of lettuce on the side. So, is that kind of salad ever a permissible masculine meal?

The reason why I ask such a seemingly odd question is that I happened to watch an episode of Seinfeld this week entitled "The Wink". In this episode Jerry goes on a date and orders "just a salad." He sees nothing wrong with it, but his date thinks him less a man for it. I won't go into the details, but "society's" view that a salad isn't a viable masculine cuisine triggers a series of events that leads to a break-up. Is this woman right in her reasoning? Is masculinity really dependent on a diet of meat and potatoes? Or is it just a case of gender discrimination?

I contend that the ordering of a salad, and just a salad, is not only permissible for a man, but possibly even a manly act. I came to this conclusion through my belief that manliness is more about moral strength and self-control/restraint than physical strength and indulgence. Thus eating health food is manly in the sense that is shows the ability to control indulgences and diet. I am not saying that meat is taboo or that it isn't healthy to consume animal protein. I am simply defending a victim of gender discrimination via the medium of food. So, what's your view on the subject?



This post is dedicated to men who are manly with out buying into "Macho Masculinity".