poptart_fairy posted:People complain about those books though, they're just not profitable or high profile enough to get the kind of coverage Twilight, et al, have. There are books aimed toward women that aren't profitable or high-profile enough to get that kind of coverage either. See the Harlequin romances I mentioned in my previous post. Again, the point I am trying to make is that when a work more acceptable to the male-dominant society DOES get profitable/high-profile, maybe some critics or people on the internet will criticize it, but you won't hear about it from the general public the way you do about things like Twilight which was actively opposed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Electric Lady posted:There are books aimed toward women that aren't profitable or high-profile enough to get that kind of coverage either. See the Harlequin romances I mentioned in my previous post. Can you cite some examples of male-dominant entertainment that glamorized abusive relationships which have been lauded, praised and used as examples of genuine romance - without having the sort of criticism Twilight faced? Pop culture has become a lot less tolerant of that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
What's it called...? That movie where the tagline was "Love means never having to say sorry?"
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 17:50
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:Can you cite some examples of male-dominant entertainment that glamorized abusive relationships which have been lauded, praised and used as examples of genuine romance - without having the sort of criticism Twilight faced? Pop culture has become a lot less tolerant of that poo poo. You are completely missing my point. This is not about WHY the books are bad or about judging specific pieces. It is whether the books are aimed toward men/women.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Regalingualius posted:What's it called...? That movie where the tagline was "Love means never having to say sorry?" I don't think a film from over thirty years ago that was mocked for the line even then is a particularly good example of male dominated entertainment evading criticism.  Electric Lady posted:You are completely missing my point. This is not about WHY the books are bad or about judging specific pieces. It is whether the books are aimed toward men/women. Electric Lady posted:There are books aimed toward women that aren't profitable or high-profile enough to get that kind of coverage either. See the Harlequin romances I mentioned in my previous post. Clarify your point then, because goddamn you are all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:The point I am trying to make is that things like Twilight and 50 Shades would have fallen into the footnotes of literary contribution if not for the fact that they were made for women. Most of the genre fiction "sword and sorcery" stuff is just as poorly written as Twilight, if not worse. The thing is, I can't recall any of the sword and sorcery trash novels ever becoming really popular, especially not on the level of Twilight or 50 Shades. The closest Conan ever came to breaking out of niche nerd products was a single popular movie from 1982. The attempted blockbuster from 2011 fell flat on its face and didn't even recoup its budget, and attempts to make sequels to the 1982 film only resulted in one unpopular sequel, the next one being re-written into Kull the Conqueror, and one that's been in development hell since 2012. And Conan the Barbarian is probably the single most popular character in the genre, to the point where he's the first (and potentially only) one anyone could name off the top of their head. The genre has otherwise barely broken into the mainstream except with TV shows like Xena. Meanwhile, the first Twilight film alone made back over 10 times its budget and spawned even more profitable sequels to the point of splitting the final book into two movies to maximize profits. Merchandise was loving everywhere for years once the first film came out, everyone was talking about it, and Hot Topic is still trying to dump old inventory occasionally. 50 Shades made even more money than the first Twilight despite being panned with awful reviews. It feels like you're intentionally trying to ignore the differences to try and make a point. While I do agree with your point as a general thing, I think you're assigning way too much of the hatred to "It's a girl thing, so people hate it because girls" as opposed to them being hated precisely because they're extremely prominent in the modern mainstream. And I do think "modern" is an important point to make here. Opinions on misogyny have advanced tremendously since the 70s and 80s, so of course something misogynistic and rapey that comes out in the 2000s and 2010s is going to get more notice than some obscure Harlequin trash on a Walmart shelf or a nerd fantasy series from decades ago (even with the growing appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy in the mainstream, the genre you're demanding more criticism of still hasn't become something that most people really look at). If you look at what has become mainstream today like superhero films and TV shows, you'll see growing criticism of sexualization of characters like Black Widow in spite of their popularity. Of course, you also see that growing sensitivity go a little overboard at times (like the attempted boycott of Dr. Strange for "whitewashing", when the explanation for the Ancient One actually makes a ton of sense if you look at things in context of not wanting a racist caricature on accident).
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:01
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:I don't think a film from over thirty years ago that was mocked for the line even then is a particularly good example of male dominated entertainment evading criticism. Okay, fine, I'll break it down for you. "When a work more acceptable to the male-dominant society" -- does NOT specify works focusing around relationships and how they are portrayed, I am just referring to a work that is aimed toward males. "DOES get profitable/high-profile" - makes money. Maybe it sells a ton, maybe it makes a successful film? "maybe some critics or people on the internet will criticize it" - it will receive criticism, but not on a large, sweeping level. This can be criticism for poor writing or it can be criticism for how it portrays relationships/characters/agency/etc. "but you won't hear about it from the general public the way you do about things like Twilight" - these popular male-centric works tend to be either ignored or consumed and forgotten by the dominant society. "which was actively opposed" - to use the Twilight example, the series still gets hate to this day even though it has faded into obscurity. It was poorly-written, it did a lovely job of portraying relationships - we all know this. The point is that even the majority of people who know what "Twilight" is have an impression of the quality of the work than one gets from, say, Snowpiercer or something. chitoryu12 posted:The thing is, I can't recall any of the sword and sorcery trash novels ever becoming really popular, especially not on the level of Twilight or 50 Shades. The closest Conan ever came to breaking out of niche nerd products was a single popular movie from 1982. The attempted blockbuster from 2011 fell flat on its face and didn't even recoup its budget, and attempts to make sequels to the 1982 film only resulted in one unpopular sequel, the next one being re-written into Kull the Conqueror, and one that's been in development hell since 2012. And Conan the Barbarian is probably the single most popular character in the genre, to the point where he's the first (and potentially only) one anyone could name off the top of their head. The genre has otherwise barely broken into the mainstream except with TV shows like Xena. Will people still care about Twilight years from now? Not except as a commercial phenomenon. Will people still care about Conan the Barbarian 30 years from now? Artistic touchstone.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:Okay, fine, I'll break it down for you. Hence why I asked for examples of pop culture that have hosed up relationships presented as positive things, aimed at men but never got the same criticism as Twilight. You just seem to keep repeating yourself without ever actually clarifying what it is pop culture critics overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:Hence why I asked for examples of pop culture that have hosed up relationships presented as positive things, aimed at men but never got the same criticism as Twilight. You just seem to keep repeating yourself without ever actually clarifying what it is pop culture critics overlooked. My first thought is the James Bond novels and movies. Though they do receive criticism for hosed up behavior towards women, I don't think people trip over themselves to insult it whenever 007 comes up in conversation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Naw you're right no one's ever made a movie about a John Grisham book.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Elblanco posted:My first thought is the James Bond novels and movies. Though they do receive criticism for hosed up behavior towards women, I don't think people trip over themselves to insult it whenever 007 comes up in conversation. This is a good example. The novels I can't really talk about as I have no experience with them, but I imagine the movies aren't slated to the extent Twilight is nowadays because of how much of a shift they've gone through over the years; directly tackling Bond as a pretty hosed up person with very lovely lifestyle choices. He isn't the paragon of heroism he once was, with Skyfall all but calling him a government sanctioned thug. It's not perfect by any means, and I'm glad Spectre got leaned on for that, but it's no longer the endless chain of glamorous womanizing and black/white stuff. Twilight...didn't really have any sort of evolution, and even today it gets held up as a romantic story worthy of emulation. Good catch, mind. Plom Bar posted:Naw you're right no one's ever made a movie about a John Grisham book. Not familiar with these books. Someone else will need to explain how they're similar to Twilight. poptart_fairy has a new favorite as of 18:33 on Dec 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:Will people still care about Twilight years from now? Not except as a commercial phenomenon. I'd hardly call Conan an "artistic touchstone" outside of its niche. Most people never read the books or watch the movies and just know it as the quintessential "barbarian fantasy stock character". 99% of people you ask probably don't even know he became king and think he's just a naked rear end in a top hat wandering around in mud killing things, because their interest in the series is nil.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:32
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:Hence why I asked for examples of pop culture that have hosed up relationships presented as positive things, aimed at men but never got the same criticism as Twilight. You just seem to keep repeating yourself without ever actually clarifying what it is pop culture critics overlooked. How many times do I have to say that I am accounting for public reaction that is completely alienated from the actual content of the works What about poo poo like Mad Men, which was supposed to be some gritty, "real" portrayal of the 50s and 60s but everyone talked about how great Don Draper was? To the point where there was an avatar creator as a promotion for a new season of it so people could make their Mad Men-self? There, there's an example. I could give more but other people are helping, too. Stop trying to establish goal posts for which I am not aiming.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:Stop trying to establish goal posts for which I am not aiming. Then don't wade into a conversation about a specific example and write poorly enough that people think you're on about it as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:How many times do I have to say that I am accounting for public reaction that is completely alienated from the actual content of the works Also, most action franchises aimed at men (Star Wars, Indianna Jones, most superhero movies, etc.) that treat women as props to be abused to show how bad the villain is or as a prize to be awarded to the hero. Or more recently, Game of Thrones, which aims at "realism" by lovingly depicting rape. These things have recently been called out for these things, but the criticisms are still mostly ignored by the public that makes these franchises so popular. And most of them have pretty crap writing more often than not. But none has become a singular joke like Twilight, where the title becomes a punchline for lovely, abusive romance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Where is that drat bird
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Let me turn this around on y'all: How much of what you know about Twilight is first-hand experience with the books and movies, and how much of it was absorbed through the collective consciousness, i.e. everyone and their dog making jokes about sparkly vampires? For me, personally, it's all 100% the latter (I watched the first film with Rifftrax, but I don't consider that to count because the movie is at most a backdrop in such a viewing). I'm not saying that the criticism isn't valid or true, as I certainly believe every word of it, I'm just trying to challenge people to examine where these criticisms come from and note certain patterns that tend to historically emerge.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Something about people managing to spin humanitarian nightmares into their own solipsistic neuroses really irks me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:Okay, fine, I'll break it down for you. Stupidest thing in the world. If you get pregnant you willingly opened your legs and hosed some guy. You should have to deal with the consequences, especially if you don't want to you piece of poo poo whore. Abortion is murder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Flip Yr Wig posted:Something about people managing to spin humanitarian nightmares into their own solipsistic neuroses really irks me. What does that last woman think she could have possibly done?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:What does that last woman think she could have possibly done? More
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:Let me turn this around on y'all: How much of what you know about Twilight is first-hand experience with the books and movies, and how much of it was absorbed through the collective consciousness I watched the first movie not long after it came out with an open mind, and was surprised at how cheap feeling it was. Was just pretty awful all around. Also read the first 100 pages or so of 50 Shades before I gave up out of utter frustration. It was like a child wrote it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:What does that last woman think she could have possibly done? Milked how much she cared about it on Facebook for more easy brownie points.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
Well BBC are reporting the Russians and the rebels have made a deal so maybe she finally figured out what more she could have done and brokered that. Hopefully she doesn't feel like a monster any more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Elblanco posted:My first thought is the James Bond novels and movies. Though they do receive criticism for hosed up behavior towards women, I don't think people trip over themselves to insult it whenever 007 comes up in conversation. I see this quite a bit but isn't bond supposed to be a sexist borderline alcoholic at the start who doesn't even want to be an agent and is just interested in himself/selfish etc? Then through the series he becomes less and less like this and is and becomes more and more motivated politically and has a female boss who he ends up respecting?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Probably because the Bond novels and movies are actually good and we'll written, as opposed to Twilight, which is just horrible but people went horrifically insane over it, complete with death threats to Kristin Stewart for "taking their Edward." Plus, the 007 movies evolved with time, and even poked at Bond's inherent sexism. (Though, I am reading the books right now and while the sexism stuff is a bit uncomfortable, it almost seems like it was done completely intentionally as part of Bond's character as the female characters routinely act differently from Bond's perception of them. I mean, there is still the 1950s mentality, but Bond is pretty intent on calling women "bitches" for wanting to help. )
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Bond is a severely hosed up individual who happens to be good at killing and fighting and all the women he has sex with are also hosed up in some way
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:12
|
|
Jippa posted:I see this quite a bit but isn't bond supposed to be a sexist borderline alcoholic at the start who doesn't even want to be an agent and is just interested in himself/selfish etc? Then through the series he becomes less and less like this and is and becomes more and more motivated politically and has a female boss who he ends up respecting? It's the Don Draper or the Sterling Archer situation. Even if a character is portrayed as completely unlikable (like Archer) they will be the one that gets the most focus and the most reaction from spectators. Even if Bond does have this kind of character development in the books (I've only seen Bond movies), the kind of character that is portrayed is the mythic one, James Bond, the womanizer, the killer. Actually, Archer is another great example. How about Dr. Kreiger's literal creepy anime waifu? e: VVVV The point is these portrayals of all the characters being horrible is played for laughs and thus the characters in their horribleness are made harmless. I didn't say enough. No more on this please. I don't want to derail further. Electric Lady has a new favorite as of 19:47 on Dec 13, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
The recent Bond movies certainly challenge Twilight in terms of quality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:It's the Don Draper or the Sterling Archer situation. Even if a character is portrayed as completely unlikable (like Archer) they will be the one that gets the most focus and the most reaction from spectators. Even if Bond does have this kind of character development in the books (I've only seen Bond movies), the kind of character that is portrayed is the mythic one, James Bond, the womanizer, the killer. How about you find examples of this on Facebook, since this is idiots on social media thread, not the feminist lens on pop culture? Which would be a good thread, but it isn't this one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:How about you find examples of this on Facebook, since this is idiots on social media thread, not the feminist lens on pop culture? Which would be a good thread, but it isn't this one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Electric Lady posted:It's the Don Draper or the Sterling Archer situation. Even if a character is portrayed as completely unlikable (like Archer) they will be the one that gets the most focus and the most reaction from spectators. Even if Bond does have this kind of character development in the books (I've only seen Bond movies), the kind of character that is portrayed is the mythic one, James Bond, the womanizer, the killer. I thought it was supposed to be humorous because everyone in the show is a terrible human being. Like they kill people for no reason and, in Kreigers case are actually supposed to be terrifyingly sadistic creatures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Wait, forgive me if I am reading your post completely wrong, but are you complaining about Archer being sexist like that isn't the entire point of his character/the show. I mean, you aren't supposed to actually like the guy, or really anyone on the show, in a "this guy is a good guy" kind of way. Hell, even when they start to make him sympathetic he ruins it. (Both to the audience and also in character)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
jadebullet posted:Probably because the Bond novels and movies are actually good and we'll written Hahahaha, you've never actually read a Bond novel, have you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Went thread spelunking to try and find that picture that was the reverse of the "music this day and age is so much less deep and complex than how it used to be!" but i coulden't find it. If sombody happens to have it laying around i'd appreciate a repost 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Bond is a severely hosed up individual who happens to be good at killing and fighting and all the women he has sex with are also hosed up in some way Though I doubt this was in any way intentional, especially considering when they were written.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Dienes posted:Hahahaha, you've never actually read a Bond novel, have you?  The others are at least readable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
HOOLY BOOLY posted:Went thread spelunking to try and find that picture that was the reverse of the "music this day and age is so much less deep and complex than how it used to be!" but i coulden't find it. If sombody happens to have it laying around i'd appreciate a repost 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Yeah Casino Royale was a bit rough, though it was amusing having several chapters about Bond hoping his dick still worked. In any case, Dr. No was a pretty decent read. I mean, at least the plot and character development is somewhat decent, unlike Twilight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 20:08
|
|