Saturday, March 25, 2006
V for Vomitously Foul
Just found out something really sordid about V for Vendetta. From ACE:
You know what I find interesting? This sounds like a perfect example of a phenomena that I started witnessing 10-15 years ago and just gets stronger and stronger. With the full thrust of the pro-homo political movement, I started to see that guys who had always been extremely sexist and endorsed all kinds of psychological violence with sex towards women, all of a sudden were turned into these profound pro-homo advocates. They continued to treat women like trash and push for all kinds of violation of rights of women to respect, dignity, safety, etc, in pornography, in prostitution, were in denial of abuse and violence - but they would have fits and get totally incensed about any little anti-homosexual thing. Homosexuals were *the* victims of the world for them. Meanwhile if you examined their attitudes and behaviours about tons of violence in the world and millions of other types of victims and all these pro-homos could care less.
When I first started noticing this, it puzzled me, because it seemed so illogical, but then I began to understand what was going on. Most men who are very pro-homo, specially if they are very sexist and have such crappy sexuality attitudes and values about women, see in the pro-homo credo a way to legitimize all their crap about sex. Basically what pro-homosexuality says is that no one should criticize anything about sexuality, no one should interfere about any sexual behaviour, no one needs to discern and hold accountable how neurotic, violent, destructive so much of human sexuality is, and that obviously transcends into heterosexuality. However, this is just what people who have a sexist and neurotic mind about sexuality want. Not to be criticized and, on top of it, to put themselves on a high horse about their imagined moral loftiness on sexuality.
All of a sudden, a concept that equated pro-homosexuality with defense of freedom and being sexually enlightened became one of the cards that people slapped on the table as a part of their personal armory in daily sexuality battles; a way to get on that my-sexuality-is-better-than-your-sexuality highhorse. Any criticism to homosexuality was henceforth framed as “prude, backwards, repressive ignorance.”
And by the descriptions above, this movie is another great example. The torture of a woman is not framed as bad, it's unremarkable, it's not nazi-like. Not only that, as mentioned above, this issue gets viciously foul, because afterwards she falls for the guy who tortured her. You know what this also reminds me of on a tangent? Attitudes regarding women who were raped and then forced to marry the rapist, or abused children who were attacked for not loving their abusive parents. I also see parallels to cult indoctrination, as mentioned, which can be extremely violent and damaging. It also reminds me of Greek culture, where women were considered trash and the self-obsessed homo sex was the valued sexuality of the day. (isn't one of the writers a homo, btw?)
Poignantly, there is almost no mention whatsoever of this torture as a problem in most of the reviews. But a bunch of critics join in the “oh but it’s such a progressive movie because it speaks for the only victims in society," which we all know, are homosexuals.
And isn’t the following just classic Hollywood too?
MatrixBack Mountain.
Perhaps the most foul part of the movie conceptually is that V tortured Evie over the space of days if not weeks, ostensibly trying to get her to reach the place were he is at. V repeated shoves Evie's head into a toilet (it is quite a clear toilet, shot from inside the bowl, a trick which Sin City already exhausted). She is enraged when she discovers that it was V and not the State who tortured her, but this rage quickly turns to love. This is vomitously foul.
You know what I find interesting? This sounds like a perfect example of a phenomena that I started witnessing 10-15 years ago and just gets stronger and stronger. With the full thrust of the pro-homo political movement, I started to see that guys who had always been extremely sexist and endorsed all kinds of psychological violence with sex towards women, all of a sudden were turned into these profound pro-homo advocates. They continued to treat women like trash and push for all kinds of violation of rights of women to respect, dignity, safety, etc, in pornography, in prostitution, were in denial of abuse and violence - but they would have fits and get totally incensed about any little anti-homosexual thing. Homosexuals were *the* victims of the world for them. Meanwhile if you examined their attitudes and behaviours about tons of violence in the world and millions of other types of victims and all these pro-homos could care less.
When I first started noticing this, it puzzled me, because it seemed so illogical, but then I began to understand what was going on. Most men who are very pro-homo, specially if they are very sexist and have such crappy sexuality attitudes and values about women, see in the pro-homo credo a way to legitimize all their crap about sex. Basically what pro-homosexuality says is that no one should criticize anything about sexuality, no one should interfere about any sexual behaviour, no one needs to discern and hold accountable how neurotic, violent, destructive so much of human sexuality is, and that obviously transcends into heterosexuality. However, this is just what people who have a sexist and neurotic mind about sexuality want. Not to be criticized and, on top of it, to put themselves on a high horse about their imagined moral loftiness on sexuality.
All of a sudden, a concept that equated pro-homosexuality with defense of freedom and being sexually enlightened became one of the cards that people slapped on the table as a part of their personal armory in daily sexuality battles; a way to get on that my-sexuality-is-better-than-your-sexuality highhorse. Any criticism to homosexuality was henceforth framed as “prude, backwards, repressive ignorance.”
And by the descriptions above, this movie is another great example. The torture of a woman is not framed as bad, it's unremarkable, it's not nazi-like. Not only that, as mentioned above, this issue gets viciously foul, because afterwards she falls for the guy who tortured her. You know what this also reminds me of on a tangent? Attitudes regarding women who were raped and then forced to marry the rapist, or abused children who were attacked for not loving their abusive parents. I also see parallels to cult indoctrination, as mentioned, which can be extremely violent and damaging. It also reminds me of Greek culture, where women were considered trash and the self-obsessed homo sex was the valued sexuality of the day. (isn't one of the writers a homo, btw?)
Poignantly, there is almost no mention whatsoever of this torture as a problem in most of the reviews. But a bunch of critics join in the “oh but it’s such a progressive movie because it speaks for the only victims in society," which we all know, are homosexuals.
And isn’t the following just classic Hollywood too?
“Larry Wachowski has abandoned his wife of nine years - childhood sweetheart Thea - to pursue a sado-masochistic relationship with a dominatrix”
MatrixBack Mountain.
Comments:
Post a Comment
