Category Archives: media

Wither Feminism?

This isn’t the first time I’ve lamented about the sorry state of feminism in the culture wars, and it certainly won’t be the last- nevertheless, the time has come for me to really lay out exactly what it is that’s killing feminism.


Sure feminism was necessary at one point, but it’s just not relevant anymore
.

You never hear that stated outright, but it seems to be underlying most responses on why feminism isn’t as major an issue was it was in the 70s or the 60s or the 50s or whenever exactly it was that the last wall of patriarchy supposedly fell.

Let’s face it, women can vote, run for and hold public office, be CEOs or workers, and so on and so forth. Really, shy of being able to serve in combat (American women, anyways), one might argue that all doors are now open. This mentality even seems to be affected most contemporary feminists, who though I am sure have the very best intentions, really can’t find much to rail about themselves. I’ve been through blog post after blog post, article after article, and found that overwhelmingly the subjects being discussed are mostly rants against Todd Akin (not to say that idiot doesn’t deserve it) or retrospectives on the battles of the past. Take a look at the contents of the latest Ms. magazine:

With Wonder Woman at the helm, the issue celebrates 40 years of fearless reporting with 40 Ms. and key feminist moments that shaped our history; birthday letters from dozens of life-long readers; and essays from founding editors Gloria Steinem and Letty Pogrebin, and current Executive Editor Kathy Spillar.

In the special 40th anniversary issue, you’ll also read about:

– What’s at stake for women in the 2012 election

– The significant ballot initiatives in your state

– Record numbers of women running for office

That’s their central points for their fall issue.

Now let’s take a look at Jezebel.

I had a rough time sifting through the articles for one that best demonstrates my point (I know Jezebel isn’t so much a “feminist” website as it is a “women’s interest” one- though exactly what that means I can’t rightly say)- for the most part, they seem tangential at best. “What is it with Women and Law and Order: SVU?”  or “Should Women Run? You’re Damn Right They Should.

That last one’s not talking about running for office- it’s literally about jogging. ‘Cuz apparently there was some blog post asserting that women with a certain body type aren’t cut-out to be runners, and that merited a response. Sure, whoever said that was wrong, but is that what feminists have been reduced to? Chasing down solitary quips of (comparatively) benign misinformation in the ugly bowels of the blogosphere? If that’s the standard for a worthwhile target, Evan and I should be beaten to death for mixing up when the premier of Community is going to be shown.

Please don’t beat us to death…

If this is the substance of the contemporary feminist movement, can you really blame people for feeling that all that’s to be done has been done? Can you really blame people for stereotyping self-proclaimed feminists as just angsty or contrarian? Is feminism just going to wither away?

I hope not- there’s still plenty of work to be done.

See this picture?

It’s from Dove’s “True Beauty” campaign. A series of advertisements aimed at combating anorexic and unrealistic standards of beauty. I’m sure the owners of Dove- a corporation by the name of Unilever- would be proud.

You know what other company Unilever owns?

Yep- these guys.

Now as I have family who read this blog, I’ve got embedded for you below the mildest Axe commercial I can find- be assured that it’s prudish and progressive compared to the rest of ’em.

That’s what we’ve got here- a corporation that on one hand is hawking their products by telling you that you’re beautiful just the way you are, and on the other hand depicting women as mindless dolls in low-cut dresses who can be manipulated with aerosol bottles. The latter alone would be a slap in the face, but that fact that the company is two-faced enough to shamelessly operate both utterly discredits their “True-Beauty Campaign” and exposes the fact that they’re ready, willing, and able to use feminism itself as a vehicle for controlling and objectifying women and perceptions about ’em.

This is Paul Polman, Unilever’s CEO, and he can go **** himself.

See, there’s this offshoot of modern feminism called “Sex-positive feminism” (you might know it by other names), which broken down to its most basic elements asserts that women’s use of their sexuality is empowering- and while no one would deny sexuality as an integral part of any human being- more often than not, this line of thought is used to justify strip clubs, prostitution, pornography, etc. as being actually good for women.

Now I’m not going to start accusing the founders of “Sex-positive feminism” of selling out their own movement- I don’t think that’s what their intention was. But then again, such things are what the road to hell is paved with, and even if the goal of this off-shoot was to make sexuality just as empowering as brains or brawn, the simple truth of the matter is that the prostitute isn’t probably viewed by her client as being a more well-rounded person because of her job. Heck- using this logic, I might argue that a twelve year old Honduran girl whose working for 32 cents an hour in a sweatshop is likewise “empowered”.

Strange how “Dead by 26 feminism” isn’t quite as popular…

Feminism isn’t dead- it’s just got a knife at it’s throat, and if saving feminism from becoming a tool of the very system that it was first established to combat isn’t a worthwhile endeavor- I don’t know what is. To anyone who would complain that all the important battles have been won- I present to you this. “Your solution to saving feminism is by saving feminism?” you might ask- and hey, it’s a valid point. But this isn’t just some circular exercise- this is a struggle for what’s really empowering. It’s a fight over messages- will we be told “These shoes are empowering!” or “No- they are shoes– empowerment comes from how far you walk and how much butt you kick.” Isn’t that worth something?

At the very least it beats writing an angry article about how body shape doesn’t exclude you from jogging.

P.S. I know I should also say some stuff about the “Slut Walks” (“Slutwalks”?, “Slut-Walks”?), the issue of rape, the continued problems of worker-manager ratios, etc. but it’s past 1:30 in the morning- please excuse the narrowness of this post.

British Television VS American Television

Despite our focus on American issues, we here at Culture War Reportersrecognize that in our world of ever-shrinking borders, there’s plenty more out there than just the cloudless skies of Nevada or the homeless-packed streets of Toronto (Evan, seriously- if the healthcare system’s so good, why does Canada have so many crazy people?).

Today we turn our attention to our pasty cousins across the pond, more specifically, their TV,  excuse me, “Telly” (this is why you lost your empire- well, this and genocide), and how it stacks up next to ours.

CGI and Production Values

Now I have to admit- I haven’t extensively researched British and American television financing, nor have I had a chance to compare the two, taking into consideration differences in the economy and advertising fees over the past couple decades.

What I’m saying is- I’m not an expert.

That said, I don’t need to be an architect to tell you that chances are pretty good that a lot less money was put into making a tent than a condo. British TV shows, put bluntly, just seems to be vastly less funded than their American counterparts. Just take a look at this scene from America’s Battlestar Galactica.

Pretty intense, right? If there’s any poor-quality, it’s probably from the YouTube video, rather than the actual series.

Now look at this clip from Britain’s Doctor Who.

Way worse. And oddly enough, Doctor Who has a bigger fanbase than Galactica, and despite it’s ever-increasing popularity, still has to deal with props dug out of someone’s kitchen drawers. I’m not saying Doctor Who is bad- it’s not. It’s really good- only it’s tough to really feel the full effects of a horrific reveal when the monstrous alien that’s been lurking the shadows until now makes your sock-puppets look scary by comparison. I can’t claim to know the reason for it, and I’m not putting the Brits down for it- I’m simply saying that funding- especially in CGI- appears to be a significant difference between the worlds of British and American TV.

Pretty Faces

You’ve probably heard jokes cracked about this. Not the “British are ugly” or the “British have bad teeth” jokes- the fact that the people on British television have the audacity to look like the people you’d see on the street.

That’s not to say the Brits don’t share the American weakness for fantasizing and glamorizing each and every facet of life, but it’s pretty clear that it’s nowhere near on the scale we have here in the US. Here- take a look at the leading characters of the American version of Being Human.

The guy on the left is decently attractive, as is the girl, and the guy on the right looks more or less like a life-sized Ken doll. Idealized people- no question about it. Now look at the same characters in the British original:

There’s not a huge difference between the girl (the blonde girl is another character- ignore her), and the dark haired guy certainly isn’t his American counterpart and stop looking at that guy’s ears! Yes, they’re huge- they’re gargantuan– and no, this isn’t just an unflattering photo- they actually are trying to escape his head in the first three seasons.

The point is, when it comes to their actors, the British are- well, appear to be- considerably less shallow. They don’t need a couple of supermodels to tell a compelling story of murder, secrecy, and perversion- and speaking of which…

Raunch Codes

Watch this clip- but before you do, get all children and Weslyans out of the room.

Pretty nasty stuff, right? Don’t say we didn’t warn you!

People complain that American media is nothing but sex and violence, but believe me- those Axe commercials are prudish compared to the Brits (and indeed- most of Europe). We may give the Brits a run for their money when it comes to blood and gore but never will we compete with them when it comes to explicitness of this degree. It’s almost to the point where it’s not even repulsive- you’re just impressed at how logic-deafeningly far they take it.

But only almost.

The Dying and the Dead

It’s been said that the difference between British comedies and American comedies is that American comedies begin with everything going wrong and end with everything being fixed, while British comedies begin with everything going right and end with everything falling apart. I wouldn’t call a story where everyone dies of scurvy at the end a comedy, but then again, I don’t whittle my life away on a miserable island full of alcoholics and skinheads.

I can say that because the only people who hate the British more than the Irish, the Kenyans, the Indians, the Chinese, the Australians, the New Zealanders, Iranians, and the Egyptians are the British themselves.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is this viciously self-deprecating mentality that pervades every element of British culture (barring fox hunts, which are just weird) that couldn’t be further removed from the general sense of optimism that you tend to find in America. Just take a look at British crime series.

Now I’ve seen quite a few, and while this certainly isn’t universally true, what I’ve typically found is that British murder mysteries focus on the whole “Whodunnit?” element, whereas American murder mysteries either have a “How’d he do it?” or a drive to keep the murderer from murdering again. Gross over-generalizations, I know, but it does seem to be true that American crime series episodes end with the detectives patting each other on the back for having done justice, while British crime series episodes end with the detective giving some despairing monologue about the tragic depravity of all mankind.

Because that’s a very depressing (and therefore, British) way to end the post- allow me offer this:

To say I’ve been ragging a bit on the British would be an understatement, and no- despite our attempts to be unbiased, we here at Culture War Reporters don’t care much for contemporary English culture. That established, there may very well be something to be said for the Brit’s here. Is it pretty? Not remotely, but for all the weirdness (from our perspective) that British TV has to offer, it can’t be denied that it’s simply more “real” than American TV. The sets aren’t shiny, the people aren’t (exclusively) gorgeous, and a stories of sin and murder actually recognize human suffering. There’s certainly a lot from British TV that merits imitation here in America.

Except for sexually explicit sausage commercials. **** that.

This S.H.I.E.L.D. Needs a Little Colour

In the wake of The Avengers‘ 1.5 billion dollar success it was inevitable that Disney/Marvel would be creating a sequel. They also decided to broaden both the universe and the franchise by green-lighting a TV series based on the organization in the comics, titularly named S.H.I.E.L.D.

It marks Joss Whedon’s return to television, as he will be both directing and producing the pilot. Acting as directors and producers, however, are his brother Jed Whedon and his sister-in-law Maurissa Tancharoen. The three formerly worked together on the online cult classic Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog, which actually leads me to the point of this post.

The DVD and Blu-Ray versions of Dr. Horrible a commentary track titled Commentary! The Musical, which consists of entirely new songs performed by the cast and crew. Track 10 was written and performed by Tancharoen, and I’ve embedded it here:

While obviously very tongue-in-cheek, as an Asian-American in the entertainment industry she’s more than a little aware of the imbalance in roles for racial minorities. Having her and Jed Whedon take off as showrunners if the pilot is a hit, this is a huge opportunity for a show other than Hawaii Five-0 to feature a good number of Asians in their main cast.

The perfect opportunity for this takes the form of S.H.I.E.L.D. agent James “Jimmy” Woo. Originally starting out with the FBI, he created and led the first ever super-hero team to exist with a government mandate. Although he later left to join the Agents of Atlas, Woo was a high-ranking member of S.H.I.E.L.D. and definitely a possible addition to the upcoming series.

In general, it’s exciting to have the comics come to the small screen as a live-action show. Cartoons like The Avengers: Earth’s Mightiest Heroes and the classic Batman: The Animated Series have proven very popular, but were directed at a younger audience. In recent years  The Walking Dead is the only program based on comics that has received any amount of positive attention.

Disney/Marvel have a chance, as they often do, to bring diversity through a form of media, this time television. With Jed Whedon and Maurissa Tancharoen at the helm, here’s hoping that we might even see our first ABC series headlining an Asian actor that is also a spinoff of a major motion picture based on a comic book.

Why I Like Captain America vs. Why Other People Do

I’ve been wanting to do a post about Captain America for some time now, and with the breaking news that the Star-Spangled Avenger will be taking over the presidency of the United States, what better time than now?

To backtrack for all you non-comic-readers, this will be taking place within Earth-161, or the Ultimate Universe [the standard canon is Earth-616]. This is also the universe in which Spider-Man is black, so things are very, very different.

Captain America is my one of my favourite heroes. As a Canadian, I love the fact that he exists as a character that exemplifies the ideals of a country but does not in fact represent all of its actions. He’s neck and neck with Superman as being comic books’ most wholesome, and the words “boy scout” are used to describe him more than just a little.

The character, as he exists in the Ultimate Universe, is none of the above. Someone on the Marvel subreddit put up an image a few months ago in honour of the Fourth of July, citing it as their “favorite Captain America line.” Blown up, for your viewing convenience, is that image:


Clicking on the image will bring you to a fuller version in which Cap yells the question “SURRENDER??!!” Compare this to the 616 Captain America who stars in the following panels:

I could leave those two images to sum up the difference between the two heroes, but there’s more. Ultimate Cap has an affair with a married woman. Ultimate Cap is a bully. Ultimate Cap has no qualms whatsoever when it comes to killing his foes, and in fact brutally murders Azerbaijani superhuman the Colonel at the climax of Ultimates 2 Vol. 12.

Abdul Al-Rahman had once been a scrawny teenager enraged at the invasion of Iraq by American super-soldiers, who as the Colonel later led a group known as the Liberators in an invasion of DC. After he has been literally disarmed by a shield thrown by the Hulk he is knocked into the fountain of the World War II memorial and impaled by Captain America with his own weapon.

This man who did that has apparently been inducted as President of the United States.

It’s difficult for me to understand how Marvel got away with publishing Ultimates 2. It’s even harder for me to understand how fans were okay with the Living Legend becoming a xenophobic jingoist, and how some even liked it. At the heart of the character is something that the film made abundantly clear: Captain America is a good man.

“Whatever happens tomorrow, you must promise me one thing: that you will stay who you are. Not a perfect soldier, but a good man.” -Dr. Abraham Erskine

The fact that the image of Ultimate Captain America pointing at his forehead and slamming an entire nation is cited by more than a few as being their favourite Cap moment is, well, disappointing. Especially when panels like the following, from the Marvel Civil War event, exist:

Girl Don’t Need A Man To Get Into Hilariously Comedic Situations

This past Monday a new show called The New Normal premiered on NBC. I wasn’t able to catch the pilot, though I did make sure to watch a preview to see what it was all about. You can watch the whole thing if you want, but what I want you to see is right near the beginning:

So at around 22 seconds into the trailer we’re shown that Goldie’s good-for-nothing husband has cheated on her, which becomes the catalyst to her drive across America to begin life anew with eight-year-old daughter.

Continue reading

Evan and Gordon Talk: Kung Fu Movies

EVAN: Last week you all voted for us to talk about the popularity of kung fu movies, so that is what we’re doing. The question that’s been on my mind being, why aren’t they popular anymore?

GORDON: See, I’m gonna have to butt heads with you right out of the gate. I just don’t think that kung fu movies are unpopular- at least, not anymore than at the supposed height of their glory…

EVAN: But there’s definite evidence of a time when they were all the rage. There were the dubbed martial arts films in the 70s and 80s, as well as the immense popularity of actors like Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan, and now Jet Li.

GORDON: No argument there.

EVAN: Recently, all that really comes to mind is Li’s role in The Expendables 2. Which is by no means a large one, considering the immensity of its cast.

GORDON: Well, that’s part of the problem- movies have developed since the 70s and 80s- none perhaps more dramatically than the action flick. Take The Matrix, for example.

EVAN: Definitely a revolutionary flick.

GORDON: Amazing stunts, choreography, and so on- and all hugely influenced by kung fu movies. In fact, Wikipedia goes right ahead and lists it as a “King Fu” movie.

Now look at an action film from the 60s or 70s. At the very best, you get Dirty Harry pistol-whipping some thug, and more often than not, you get Captain Kirk doing some weird slap-fight with a man in green spandex.

EVAN: Hey, that man in green spandex had it coming.

GORDON: This is true. What I’m driving at here, I guess, is that kung fu movies haven’t gone away- they’ve been incorporated into every major action flick made since the 80s.

Just look at fight scenes in a modern action movie- that’s Judo, or Jui Jitsu, or Karate, or Muay Thai, and so on and so forth.

EVAN: Okay, let me come at this from a different angle. Would you say that at this point in time, Jet Li is the go-to guy as an Asian actor who specializes in martial arts?

GORDON: More or less, sure.

EVAN: How many [Western] movies has the guy been in compared to Jason Statham?

GORDON: Couldn’t say. I’m guessing Statham’s got him beat, though.

EVAN: Why is it that more often than not, whenever martial arts are depicted in a movie they’re performed by a white guy?

GORDON: Oof- where to begin? Tacit racism, hiring ease, translation, and so on.

EVAN: I’m just saying that there was a time, mid to late 90s and early 00s where Asian actors could still headline these films. You’ve got the Rush Hour films and Shanghai Noon and its sequel, to name some Jackie Chan vehicles. And you had stuff like Romeo Must Die with Jet Li.

As far as Wikipedia can tell me, all the martial arts films starring Asians in the last few years were made in Asia.

GORDON: And are nevertheless seen by Western audiences. Take The Raid, an Indonesian film, or The Man With the Iron Fists, which people are pretty psyched for, or Tony Jaa’s work.

EVAN: Yes. Tony Jaa.

GORDON: As there did before. I mean, barring certain movies, like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or Rush Hour, how much appeal did kung fu movies have anyways? I’m not knocking them or anything, but it seems that with certain exceptions for major pieces, kung fu movies (in the West) have always been mostly popular as a sugenre with fans of said subgenre. Much like the monster movie, or the sci-fi horror.

EVAN: At some point they epitomized the action genre, so I’d say they had a lot of appeal. I mean, it rode the trend of dojos and whatnot opening up all over North America.

GORDON: Wasn’t that with the 80s stupid action flick, though? I mean, c’mon. It was the 80s. Get some Aryan guy to face-kick a bunch of minorities, slap on an over-the-top title and you’ve got a hit.

EVAN: I was mostly referring to the fact that Asian martial arts films became so popular that they started creating them in Hollywood, using Asian actors.

GORDON: So the issue here isn’t kung fu- it’s Asians in media…

EVAN: We can concentrate on the genre and its popularity before we follow that train of thought. Why do you think it’s lessened so much? And if it has, what has replaced it?

GORDON: I think that the rise in awareness of martial arts in the West is responsible for that. Suddenly, you can get all the amazing choreographed fights without them being (necessarily) rooted in Asian culture.

The equivalent would probably be the Western/Cop flick and it’s influence on Hong Kong action movies.

EVAN: So what you’re saying is that Western culture has realized that this isn’t a genre that solely the East can lay claim to.

GORDON: Not entirely, anyways. Depends on how you define a “Kung Fu Movie.” I was just going with a movie that’s heavily rooted in martial arts.

EVAN: I mean, I’d say that it’s because the Asian actors that we [Westerners] can relate to are getting old. Jackie Chan is 58. Jet Li is 49. No one has really stepped up [or has been able to] and taken their places.

GORDON: Well- no argument there. Barring perhaps Tony Jaa. Who will **** you up if you so much as look at his elephant the wrong way.

EVAN: ช้าง อยู่ ไหน [chang yuu nai]?! If you saw the movie, you’d get it.

GORDON: Go see the movie. Now.

EVAN: Watch it please. Tom Yum Goong as it was released in Thailand, but retitled The Protector for an American release.

GORDON: Also, eat tom yum goong. It is the best thing ever.

EVAN: Anyway. I just think it’s interesting, the fact that there’s clearly still an interest in Asian martial arts.

Using two panda-related examples, Dreamworks’ Kung Fu Panda movies, and Blizzard’s upcoming expansion for World of WarCraft, Mists of Pandaria.

GORDON: This is true.

EVAN: Pandarens had existed in WarCraft for years before those movies, by the way. Just for everyone who’s saying that Blizzard ripped the concept of anthropomorphic martial arts fighting pandas from a Jack Black movie.

GORDON: And with that, we’re out of time.

EVAN: Don’t we have ten more minutes? We started at ten past.

GORDON: Oh. I thought we started on the hour.

EVAN: Nay. And we’re keeping all of this dialogue.

GORDON: To assure our readers that we too are flawed mortals?

EVAN: Well, that one of us is.

GORDON: Touché.

Back on the subject- let’s not forget that thanks to Netflix and piracy, it’s easier and easier to get movies from out of the country anyways. Just look at Red Cliff.

EVAN: Red Cliff?

GORDON: Epic action movie. Based on ancient Chinese history, and a text called “The Romance of the Three Kingdoms,” if I recall correctly. Some sort of an Eastern equivalent to “swords and sandals” flicks. Which are awesome, by the way.

EVAN: Yes. We do love our “swords and sandals” movies.

GORDON: Go watch Ironclad. Watch it now.

EVAN: If only to watch Paul Giamatti’s veins pop out on his neck as an angry King John.

GORDON: Words cannot describe how irritated he is in that movie. It defies logic.  Also, a man gets beaten to death with his own arm.

EVAN: Actually, I am fairly sure the severed arm belonged to a different guy.

Back on topic one last, time, before we run out of it- It seems that Asian cinema continues to chug on, producing martial arts movies even if Western Cinema has since moved past that. In a way, what was popular for a period of time in Hollywood never stopped in Asia. Though those movies still changed the action genre in a huge way.

GORDON: Absolutely. From The Bourne Identity to Batman Begins, the blood of Kung Fu movies still pumps strong. And with that, we’re out of time. Be sure to swing in next week for our discussion on the upcoming season of Community.

EVAN: Nooooooooo. That’s next-next week. The day before the new season starts.

GORDON: Why must you make a fool of me?

EVAN: Why must you make a fool of yourself.

GORDON: Anyways. Be sure to vote for our discussion topic next week.

EVAN: And thanks for reading!