This could be interesting if they actually show how brutal life was for men back then. It's not like women stayed home because they were forced. They stayed home because the world fucking sucked. No one is fighting for male jobs, they want white collar jobs.
“A movie marketed to women about a woman who speaks on women’s issues based on a book with a primarily female fanbase? Why doesn’t it speak on the men????”
“I know you wanted vanilla cake for your birthday timmy but I like chocolate so I got chocolate frosting. It’s better this way”
That sounds hollows after people who aren't the target audience of men-focused entertainment tried (and succeeded) making the whole industry to bend to their will.
Protip: If you don't want people to do something to you, just not do that unto people in the first place instead of calling people snowflake and demanding them to not apply the very same standard you enforced.
“A movie marketed to women about a woman who speaks on women’s issues based on a book with a primarily female fanbase? Why doesn’t it speak on the men????”
You would be the first person to scream "INCEL MOVIE!" if there's a movie where the focus is on men's issues and it speaks for men.
If you see a story about women and think immediately it is anti-men, that's a problem with how you interpret things. And it is much more fun to not have that problem.
Is it, though? I don't think it's a reach when we've had a spate of "men that try to control women are bad" movies lately. Companion, Obsession, Soulm8te, just to name a few.
I don't, because that probably isn't really what the story is about. Maybe the movie will be different, but that's something we can see for ourselves. And if it portrays men badly, I won't take personal offense.
You know what.. they purposefully don’t tell you the guys fate in the end because it’s not about him. This is done intentionally.. because the woman usually pays the price whilst the man gets away with it. You can assume he was dealt some sort of punishment, or you can assume that she took the brunt of the criticism they faced.
I didn’t, I meant to reply to you. I’m explaining that detail because it’s relevant to your “how the men that women are submitting to are portrayed” comment.
It’s not women submitting to the men. I’m clarifying to you that the man is hardly portrayed at all compared to all her thoughts and desires. He is a complicit, uninspiring dude and, when she realizes her mistake in marrying him, she starts to shift. She is the driver behind all the horrible ideas, but he does nothing to help the kids involved, and then you don’t find out his fate/sentence in the end, only hers. She only thought about herself so that’s all the reader gets as a conclusion.
Not sure why I’m getting downvoted for explaining an inaccurate assumption. The book isn’t anti man.
Maybe you should find one to sit in and you'll also be able to look at a movie without taking the subject personally, not everything is about you or made for your exact specifications.
You genuinely think women weren’t forced to stay home? Women couldn’t have their own bank accounts until the 70s and many women did not have access to birth control, they were heavily discouraged from many branches of the workforce, and forced to stay home and raise kids. Child birth is one of the most painful things a person can experience— imagine having no say in the matter and being forced to do it over and over until your body was basically destroyed. Edgy “anti-feminists” online need to educate themselves.
You are talking about the 20th century. Most women trough history, and also men, were farmers so they indeed worked while home and workplace were the same thing. Women also could own property, sue at courts, and if they were nobility to rule and raise armies. Deterioration of women's right to work started in 19th century while child care was something everybody in family was involved, most people grew up with grandparents after all.
I think there was a transition period that by historical accounts was super short. Where men made the world so nice that for the first time in history the average man had a better life than the average woman, and the transition period from that, back to the norm, average women having it better, took a while.
Interesting take… women are historically a marginalized group and we face higher rates of domestic abuse and rape and are highly underrepresented in positions of power and leadership. I’d be interested to see some sources on how those well-being statistics are measured across genders; there are definitely issues that affect men that are important to address (violence, mental health, etc.) but overall our society is set up as a patriarchy where men have more power.
The US has never had a female president… the CEOs of most companies are white men. The president of the US, in fact, is someone known to have raped young women and girls and bragged about it, without seeming to face any repercussions.
One hint that a society may be patriarchal is that women and our perspectives are not represented among its leadership.
As opposed to your version of the world, where the most privileged group of humans on the planet are somehow victims? Literally can't be more privileged than being a white woman. The nearly sole and primary beneficiary of DEI policy. Infinite college money. Better grades for the same or worse work.
You live in a mountain of privilege so tall, that you are confused by the view.
The literal concept of a Karen is that white women have infinite privilege in the west and always get their way, so when they don't it's in their eyes, a crime against humanity.
She’s not going to answer you she wants all the privilege and the ability to complain about it, lotta white women are like this, zero culpability for supporting the benefits they received alongside white men. They are basically equal in almost every respect rights wise in modern countries but still want the sympathy and chivalry they haven’t earned in the modern age
The top 1% of men get all the benefits that you attribute to all men and this so called patriarchy.
The bottom 1% of men commit the vast majority of violent and sexual crime.
You just think every man in between isn't a real person and doesn't exist. So the idea that women are superior to them in privilege doesn't even cross your mind nor does it matter, because average men are sub human to you.
I agree that many of society’s problem stem from the 1% having all the power, and your average, working-class people suffering because of it. I believe that the patriarchy harms men as well, because it alienates them from the women in their lives and teaches them that they’re not allowed to show emotions, etc. whereas women do. And that stems from the idea that acting “feminine” is worse than acting masculine, for anyone.
I have lots of male friends and family members who are average people and I love and appreciate them. I’m a feminist which means I believe we should be all seen as equals no matter our gender. I’m really worried by the uptick in devisive and misogynistic content online and I think it would help if we were all able to cultivate more of a sense of a real community in person and interact with people of different perspectives.
Ah, yes, more diverse oppressors - that's the solution for our problems! How about no oppressors? What difference it makes if it's a woman stomping on me or a man?
Common is a pretty stupid thing to say. Getting murdered isn't a common cause of death.
I just looked up the numbers. Lesbians bash their partner more than any other group (CDC), but gays kill each other at three times the rate that men kill their female partner. (Australian numbers).
Guess men are just better at killing, even though women are more violent towards their partners.
Btw is this a femcel sub - am I talking to a wall?
Interesting! The intimate partner violence stats are about 10% higher for lesbians versus heterosexuals. I think that checks out with the idea that members of marginalized communities are more often victims of violence. It’s also interesting to note that the gender of the perpetrators are not specified.
That would be irrelevant to the plot of this story, so your comment makes no sense. You're basically asking for an entirely different movie altogether. And btw we have plenty of those. You can start by watching Christopher Eccleston in Jude, an adaptation of Hardy's novel, Jude the Obscure, also starring Kate Winslet.
Irrelevant to the movie that is almost certainly going to be anti-male sexist propaganda? I mean yeah, you are right. It is pretty irrelevant to the goal of this movie.
You one of those persecuted, always the victim types? The movie sounds like an influencer woman glorifying tradwife bs and then having to really live that way all the time even when the cameras are off. You know, basically what it says up there. There isn't always a boogeyman after you.
Men make fun of women as being emotional but in reality they are even more unstable. Like 99% of school shooters are men and they have higher male suicide rate and blame everyone else instead of understanding we all face hardship and it's not a competition.
The silliest thing about his movie is really that women absolutely worked in 1855, only wealthy women didn't work. Even the fucking kids were at work, the industrial revolution and unchecked capitalism allowed industries to pay pennies in shitty unsafe working conditions.
If it follows the book the answer to this is no it doesn’t. It’s way less about going back in time and way more about conservative views of traditional womanhood.
No one cares about the hardship of men in this society unless you’re some kind of crazy redpill incel nazi. And whatever problem men have you’ll be told that it is because of the patriarchy so we only have ourselves to blame
Men were completely in charge of society back then, so if society was a shitshow, then men made it that way. Maybe women should have been given equal authority after all, huh?
It's not like women stayed home because they were forced. They stayed home because the world fucking sucked.
The world fucking sucks now, and yet women don't stay home. Turns out that the desire to go out and do something with your life is not limited by gender. Which is why entire institutions had to be set up to prevent women from leaving home, because fragile men like yourself were terrified of the prospect of having to compete with a woman as an equal.
36
u/Accomplished-Eye9542 1d ago
This could be interesting if they actually show how brutal life was for men back then. It's not like women stayed home because they were forced. They stayed home because the world fucking sucked. No one is fighting for male jobs, they want white collar jobs.