Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I feel your pain. I've been thinking of starting a post-Magic Mike emotional trauma victim's support group. I think it just might be time for all of us to start the healing.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Misogyny in Game of Thrones?
- Thread starter freethinker44
- Start date
I feel your pain. I've been thinking of starting a post-Magic Mike emotional trauma victim's support group. I think it just might be time for all of us to start the healing.
The funny thing is, even though that movie is rated R, the portrayal of male strippers was actually quite conservative in that movie. Male strippers usually get completely naked and sex acts being performed isn't uncommon.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
At least we can finally have a place where we can wear our ***-less chaps without fear of being groped.
I think portraying women as nothing more than eye candy or tools for sexual pleasure is demeaning to them (hence my opinion that it is a form of misogyny), because it seems to reduce them to one-dimensional characters for the sake of appealing to certain audiences.
I don't know anything about it. Did it portray naked male characters whose sole purpose was to attract more viewers? If yes, then I think that's misandry.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Ah, yes, we're using different definitions.
It's a movie about male strippers and, although it had a good story, the main draw was seeing nearly nude, fit males thrusting their stuff onstage for the delight of ladies.
I don't see sexual portrayals of either males or females as being demeaning. Humans are sexual animals. As long as it's consensual, it's healthy and I don't see anything wrong with it.
I don't think sexual portrayals are demeaning in and of themselves either; that's why I specified that portrayals of one-dimensional characters to attract viewers is what I find demeaning. Depicting sexuality as a natural part of a person's life is fine, but pretending it's a person's one and only reason for existing and that they have no other purpose in life isn't.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Some people find the sexual portrayal of people to be somehow demeaning, so I suppose they could interpret any such portrayal as a form of misogyny or misandry. However, I think this stretches the words beyond their generally used meanings, and somewhat distracts from the more serious core expressions of these attitudes.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Not everyone in fiction can be a fully fleshed-out character. Some characters are included for one purpose - some as sexual, some as violent, some as greedy, etc. I don't really think this implies that the actors portraying these characters are only that, or that a piece of fiction is somehow supporting or validating such characterizations.
Amechania
Daimona of the Helpless
Which club is this and is it near my house?
Alceste
Vagabond
I'm not sure either, but I find the gratuitous objectification of female extras in the show hugely annoying since it takes valuable minutes away from the plot and isn't necessary for any reason but the producers apparently think that's what the viewers want to see. I honestly don't think cutting down on the whorehouse scenes and spending more time with the main actors would make the show any less popular, and might actually have the opposite effect.
Alceste
Vagabond
Magic Mike was a classic bait and switch. Started out promising lots of man bums but ended up being a really stupid action movie full of boring man drama.
Alceste
Vagabond
In the book, there are no one dimensional characters that appear solely during sex scenes for the titillation of male readers. The TV show is full of dozens of female extras who have no purpose in the show other than being used for sex by various male characters. That's why I lean toward considering this particular choice misogynistic. If there were as many pointless male extras popping their kit off to be used for sex, I would feel differently.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
The ship captains daughter existed purely as Theon's sexual toy on the ship. She was completely one-dimensional and was only there to further Theon's character development. Also, her scenes were way more explicit in the book than in the show.
Do you have any examples?
Last edited:
Gehennaite
Active Member
It amuses me that people are offended by misogyny. There are many forms of hatred in existence and sometimes there are very convincing justifications for it.
Alceste
Vagabond
Yeah, some yelly, testosterone fueled, angry nonsense about his buddy's drug debts getting out of hand.
I guess you were just expecting pure eyecandy with zero plot?
Alceste
Vagabond
As I said before, the sex scenes in the book drove character development. The sex scenes in the TV show generally don't. For examples, just last night there were at least three background actresses pointlessly added to a brothel bisexual gang bang that is not in the books, and exactly zero added naked men. (Both the men and one of the women are recurring characters with lines, stories, etc.)