Too ugly to empower

Back in July I predicted that the (then) up and coming divorce fantasy movie Wild would not have the kind of success Eat Pray Love had back in 2010.  A good divorce fantasy needs to show the divorcée ending up with a better man, and it needs to provide moral cover for divorce by showing that divorce makes a woman a better person.  Eat Pray Love and Fireproof are the secular and Christian gold standards for this genre, and both of those movies deliver.

Based on the trailer, it appeared to me that Wild would not deliver these core elements.  I haven’t seen the movie, but from the reviews I’ve read my initial take appears to be born out.  Leah Finnegan at Gawker wrote in Wild Is a Bad Movie and Reese Witherspoon Is Bad In It:

Will Reese Witherspoon win an Oscar for “Wild” because she overcomes the hardship of wearing a really heavy backpack for most of the film? I sure as hell hope not, but she probably will, because Hollywood is stupid. In any case, this movie was awful, and terrible for women. Wild was by far the worst movie I saw this year—and I saw Heaven Is For Real.

The problem is the main character comes across as ugly and the message of divorce leading to redemption falls apart:

Witherspoon is a sniveling, Flickian, narcissistic bitch, and therefore this so-called story of redemption—Woman Goes on 1,000-Mile Hike to Cleanse Herself of Sins and Find Herself—comes across not as real or raw or uplifting but just another tale of easy blonde triumph.

Finnegan makes it clear that she is a big fan of Eat Pray Love, so this can’t be a critique of the genre.  Even worse for the movie, the comments on Finnegan’s review at Gawker were overwhelmingly in agreement with her.  The reviews at IMDB don’t look any better.

This lack of enthusiasm translated into the box office.  I pulled up the weekly takes from Box Office Mojo for the respective movies here and here, and charted them out:

wild_epl_nominal_gross

Overall Wild grossed $37,339,313 during the first 12 weeks of its release (actually 13 weeks, including $47,248 for “week 0”).  In comparison, Eat Pray Love grossed over twice that amount, bringing in $80,574,010 during its first 12 weeks.  If we adjust the EPL gross into 2015 dollars*, the mismatch is slightly larger with EPL grossing an inflation adjusted $86,214,191**.

Given the reviews and the box office figures, the moral should be clear for moviemakers looking to cash in on modern women’s shameless obsession with divorce.  Make sure your divorce empowerment movie provides plenty of moral cover for women blowing up their families;  show divorce as the catalyst for the woman becoming a better and more holy person.  Likewise, be sure to clearly show the woman profiting from blowing up her family in the form of lifetime commitment from a better man than her ex husband.  Follow these two simple rules and you have a license to print money.  Get one or both of these wrong and your divorce empowerment movie will fail.

*Adjusting for inflation, one dollar in 2010 bought as much as $1.07 buys in 2015.

**Here are the weekly inflation adjusted figures in chart form.

This entry was posted in Divorce, selling divorce, Ugly Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

122 Responses to Too ugly to empower

  1. micklively says:

    Rather than considering either the moral implication or commercial success of either film, might we be better asking which best represents the truth? Do women who choose divorce find happiness? Obviously, there isn’t one answer: every woman’s experience will be different. We can make informed judgements of mean and trend though.

  2. Pingback: Too ugly to empower | Manosphere.com

  3. Scott says:

    I am about to drop my credentials as a “civlizationist” because there is a movie genre called “divorce empowerment.”

  4. Pingback: Too ugly to empower | Neoreactive

  5. philochoreo says:

    Dalrock, I daresay, sir, that you are a prophet. And like the best of prophets, you bring enormous benefit to the people. A heartfelt “thank you” for your insights, wisdom, sagacity and guidance.

  6. tweell says:

    I wonder if “Wild” is the product of a black knight. It seems a bit too close to real life, unlike “Gorge, Rationalize, Fornicate”.

  7. Opus says:

    I see that the world-wide gross is about $40,000,000 so someone must like it, indeed IMDB’s users have awarded it 7.3 which is a pretty high score – certainly far higher than the sort of film I tend to enjoy (in fact the lower the score, the keener I get). What amazes me is that they managed to bring Nick Hornby (About a Boy, High Fidelity) in to script the film so he must have thought it a worthwhile project.

    It’s production company Pacific Standard has so far produced three movies. Wild being the first but its second Gone Girl has so far grossed 338,000,000 worldwide and thus I don’t think Pacific Standard will be too worried about Wild.

    Unsuccessful films don’t win awards (though they may garner Nominations) and thus, so far, no awards for Wild.

  8. Dalrock says:

    @micklively

    Rather than considering either the moral implication or commercial success of either film, might we be better asking which best represents the truth? Do women who choose divorce find happiness? Obviously, there isn’t one answer: every woman’s experience will be different. We can make informed judgements of mean and trend though.

    As you say, there will be some variance. But the fantasy of a woman divorcing and marrying up is almost always just that, a fantasy. We can see this when we look at the actual outcomes for the “true life” divorce empowerment books/movies. In real life the man Elizabeth Gilbert of Eat Pray Love fame married is a short balding man who is just shy of 20 years older than her, and married her so he could get a visa to live in the US. Likewise, “Stella’s” young Jamaican stud in “How Stella Got Her Groove Back” was a visibly gay man whom she later claimed only married her for money and to get a visa to live in the US.

  9. micklively says:

    @Dalrock They certainly seem poor outcomes from a woman’s viewpoint. But I don’t think a non-random sample of two is good technique.

  10. Boxer says:

    About a year ago, I saw a trailer for the Witherspoon divorce porn film, and thought I bet I’ll see a review of this on Dalrock, before too long.

    Thanks for delivering.

  11. Robin Munn says:

    @micklively –

    Think about who selected that non-random sample: Hollywood. They had an incentive to pick the “best”* divorce-empowement stories they could find, and those are the ones they picked. Which strongly suggests they couldn’t find any “better” ones.

    * “Best” and “better” from the point of view of the woman, that is. Not from the point of view of the husband she discarded, naturally. There’s a reason I put contempt-quotes around those words.

  12. Scott says:

    We can make informed judgements of mean and trend though.

    Agreed. But there are some situations that are intuitive. I used this example in another thread.

    I see a 1986 Chevy Caprice Classic driving down the road with a pearl paint job, $4,000 rims and 22″ low profile tires. It has blacked out windows. There is loud, booming bass emenating from it.

    What color is the dirver?

    I don’t need a study for that.

    Likewise, I have never met a remarried mom who married “up” using any common metric. The math doesn’t add up anyway. The available men in that portion of the marriage market place tend to be of the kind Dalrock points to in the “real life” versions of EPL and Stella.

    Also, no one will do that study. It is politically incorrect to ask such questions. The official narrative is “fell out of love? Detonate and move on. In the end, it’s best for everyone.”

  13. Lyn87 says:

    micklively,

    You seem to be missing the point: the main reason these movies are worth discussing is that they show how a very large percentage of women think. Simply put, they think divorce should be “empowering” and “liberating” and lead to better things (specifically better men than they perceive their husbands to be), and they will flock to theaters in droves for movies that portray that outcome. But most women who divorce in real life do not end up with Javier Bardem or Taye Diggs, and movies in the “Divorce Empowerment” genre that fail to deliver the “empowerment” punch line get bad reviews and reduced ticket sales. Bored, pampered wives don’t fantasize about the far more common realities of post-marital spinsterhood. I would go a step further and say that the fact that legions of spoiled, entitled, married women fantasize about ditching their solid, hard-working husbands and families in an orgy of narcissism while they re-live their carousel-riding days it itself the root of the problem.

  14. Dalrock says:

    McLively doesn’t really want to debate the efficacy of divorce on women’s empowerment. He wants to change the topic away from the ugliness of blowing up your family with the hope of profiting (and the ugliness of modern women openly entertaining this fantasy). I have shared the type of stats he claims to be interested in in previous blog posts, but I won’t go further down the rabbit hole he desperately wants us to follow.

  15. Opus says:

    I was just thinking as to what other Divorce Empowerment films there are. One immediately comes to mind, although we are hardly meant to approve of the heroine, even as we stand in awe of her effortless rise. I of course refer to Frederick Raphael’s Darling which of course did win some awards. You will recall how she abandons husband number one (‘he was just a young boy’) for Dirk Bogarde’s T.V. anchor, who having ditched his wife, she (Darling) growing bored, takes up with thrusting business man Lawrence Harvey who she in turn ditches for the European Royalty – but then Julie Christie is uber-hawt.

    Gone Girl should of course have had a dollar sign in front of its gross at $338,000,000.

  16. Didn’t Reese Witherspoon frivorce Ryan Phllipe?

  17. Micklively,

    Rather than considering either the moral implication or commercial success of either film, might we be better asking which best represents the truth? Do women who choose divorce find happiness?

    Well, we here in the manosphere don’t really care about that. You can ask that question but we are not going to answer it because all that matters is she violated her vows.

    …for richer or for poorer, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health….

    You’ll note that none of the traditional marital vows are a promise to make one’s spouse HAPPY for the rest of their life. That is because that is a promise that no spouse could ever make to another. Morever, one person could not possibly control whether or not another person is happy.

    So really, your question is NOT a better question because the only thing that is “truth” is that the woman in question is the woman is breaking her vows, a welcher, a horrible person. Whether or not she is happy afterwards, I don’t give a damn, and neither should you.

  18. Renee Harris says:

    Dalrock on March 2, 2015 at 9:33 am
    @micklively

    Rather than considering either the moral implication or commercial success of either film, might we be better asking which best represents the truth? Do women who choose divorce find happiness? Obviously, there isn’t one answer: every woman’s experience will be different. We can make informed judgements of mean and trend though.

    “As you say, there will be some variance. But the fantasy of a woman divorcing and marrying up is almost always just that, a fantasy. We can see this when we look at the actual outcomes for the “true life” divorce empowerment books/movies. In real life the man Elizabeth Gilbert of Eat Pray Love fame married is a short balding man who is just shy of 20 years older than her, and married her so he could get a visa to live in the US. Likewise, “Stella’s” young Jamaican stud in “How Stella Got Her Groove Back” was a visibly gay man whom she later claimed only married her for money and to get a visa to live in the US.” Yeah it a movie.
    But ms Witherspoon real life story iIs that she got a better younger guy and sole custody of her kids . Plus , she got out of paying her ex ryan spousal after he stepped back from roles to playing mommy ,while she buld her career including her Oscar not walk the line. She is dangerous due to her
    Life not her films

  19. Lyn87 says:

    IBB,

    Well said. In fact, I’ve been nodding in agreement with a lot of what you’ve been posting lately. WRT what you wrote in that post: you’re right, the commitment is what matters. I said the same thing yesterday about my nephew who is in the process of frivorcing his wife – it’s wrong, and he will be promptly and summarily disowned for it by my family. The fact that women are so prone to it is why “divorce empowerment” is a pressing societal issue.

    But society rightly condemns men who do it, while celebrating women who do it.

  20. earl says:

    ‘Witherspoon is a sniveling, Flickian, narcissistic bitch’

    Well if is the case it sounds like they didn’t like the truth about how women are presented when they go all divorce. Because it is ugly and you don’t find redemption in it.

  21. Mike says:

    @ McLively
    There’s been several studies that have shown that people who divorce are no happier after the divorce high wears off then they were before the divorce. Linda Waite and Wallerstein both did extensive studies showing this.

  22. Renee,

    But ms Witherspoon real life story iIs that she got a better younger guy and sole custody of her kids . Plus , she got out of paying her ex ryan spousal after he stepped back from roles to playing mommy ,while she buld her career including her Oscar not walk the line. She is dangerous due to her
    Life not her films

    Sadly, depressingly, this is exactly the case….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reese_Witherspoon

    Witherspoon met actor Ryan Phillippe at her 21st birthday party in March 1997.[185][186] They became engaged in December 1998[187] and married near Charleston, South Carolina, on June 5, 1999, at Old Wide Awake Plantation.[188][189][190] They have two children: a daughter, Ava (born 1999),[191] and a son, Deacon (born 2003).[188] In October 2006, Witherspoon and Phillippe announced that they were separating.[192] The following month Witherspoon filed for divorce, citing irreconcilable differences.[193] In her petition, she sought joint legal and sole physical custody of their children, with full visitation rights for Phillippe.[193][194] With no prenuptial agreement, they would be entitled to half of all assets gained during the marriage under California law—with Witherspoon’s being the more significant.[195][196] Witherspoon requested that the court grant no spousal support for Phillippe, and he did not contest.[193] On May 15, 2007, he filed for joint physical custody of their children and made no motion to block Witherspoon from seeking support from him.[197] Witherspoon and Phillippe’s final divorce documents were granted by the Los Angeles Superior Court on October 5, 2007.[198][199]

    Throughout 2007 there was persistent speculation in the mass media about a romantic relationship between Witherspoon and her Rendition co-star Jake Gyllenhaal. After her divorce was finalized in October 2007, they became more open about their relationship, mainly due to the release of paparazzi pictures of them vacationing together in Rome.[200] They reportedly broke up in December 2009.[201]

    In early February 2010 it was reported that Witherspoon had begun dating Jim Toth,[202][203][204] a talent agent and co-head of motion picture talent at the Creative Artists Agency, where Witherspoon is a client.[205] Witherspoon and Toth announced their engagement in December 2010,[206] and married on March 26, 2011, in Ojai, California, at Libbey Ranch,[207] Witherspoon’s country estate (which she since has sold).[208][209] Their son, Tennessee James Toth, was born on September 27, 2012.[210]

    So to recap….

    Reese frivorces Ryan unilaterally….
    Reese out-earns Ryan but pays him no alimony….
    Reese gets child-support from Ryan when he gets joint custody….
    Reese starts f-cking Jake Gyllenhaal. (Is that a trade-up from Phillippe?)
    Reese married Jim Toth just 4 years after her frivorce. (Is that a trade-up from Phillippe?)

    It appears Malibu Barbie from Louisianna did wind up getting it all…. her true, real-life, Eat. Pray. Love. fantasy. Hollywood should just to a real-life divorce fantasy movie about Reese’s own life, the ladies would love it.

  23. Yoda says:

    I have never met a remarried mom who married “up” using any common metric

    Perhaps “tingles” a good metric it would be.
    Tingles recieves she does.
    Money receives he does.
    Payday in divorce for him there will be.

  24. earl says:

    ‘Rather than considering either the moral implication or commercial success of either film, might we be better asking which best represents the truth? Do women who choose divorce find happiness?’

    Feelings aren’t truth.

    I can however give you some truth.

    For I hate divorce,” says the LORD, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the LORD of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.”
    Malachi 2:16

    There are few things I can think of where God mentions He hates something.

  25. Lyn87 says:

    I’ve seen the trailer for Wild, and although Witherspoon’s character can certainly be called sniveling, narcissistic, and bitchy, “Flickian” she is not. Flickian isn’t really a word, but rather an insider’s allusion to the character Tracy Flick (played by Witherspoon) in the movie Election 16 years ago. The reviewer’s phrase “easy blonde triumph” jumped out at me as well. I pulled up an image of Leah Finnegan and…. surprise, surprise: she is an utterly unremarkable brunette with dork-chic glasses. (Just the kind of girl who would be jealous of the pretty blond cheerleader-types who get elected as prom queens and date quarterbacks… and go on to star to in major-studio movies.)

    Feminists are amusing to watch – they have to vie for levels of disadvantage among themselves, with plain brunettes higher on the victimology ladder than pretty blondes. No wonder so many “WOC” sneer at feminism and its focus on the first-world problems of UMC white women.

  26. Scott says:

    Lyn87-

    I was wondering if that was the Flick she meant. Pretty obscure if you ask me, but I guess her audience might be more atuned to it.

    “Not like some rich kids who everybody likes because their fathers own Metzler Cement and give them trucks on their 16th birthday and throw them big parties all the time. No, they don’t ever have to work for anything. They think they can just, all of a sudden, one day out of the blue, waltz right in with no qualifications whatsoever and try to take away what other people have worked for VERY, VERY hard for their entire lives! No, didn’t bother me at all!”

  27. earl says:

    ‘Woman Goes on 1,000-Mile Hike to Cleanse Herself of Sins and Find Herself’

    Well sure that story would fall apart. You can’t create your own salvation, cleanse your sins, or find yourself from your will.

  28. Lyn87 says:

    Correction to my post at 10:58. Finnegan does not say that Witherspoons character in Wild is a sniveling, Flickian, narcissistic bitch… she is saying that Witherspoon herself is a sniveling, Flickian, narcissistic bitch.

    This is more about plain-girl jealousy than I thought.

  29. earl says:

    ‘This is more about plain-girl jealousy than I thought.’

    It could be jealousy or perhaps projection from the author about herself. Don’t judge lest ye be judged.

  30. Dalrock says:

    @Lyn87

    Correction to my post at 10:58. Finnegan does not say that Witherspoons character in Wild is a sniveling, Flickian, narcissistic bitch… she is saying that Witherspoon herself is a sniveling, Flickian, narcissistic bitch.

    This is more about plain-girl jealousy than I thought.

    She clearly doesn’t like Witherspoon, and neither do the commenters on the review.  But either way, the important part is the women didn’t get what they crave out of a divorce empowerment movie.  These movies need to sell the idea of spiritual rebirth, that divorce is the beginning of something wonderful.  Trust in divorce, and God (Fireproof) or the universe will use your act of faith to bless you with good fortune and remake you into a better person.  Blowing up your family for profit* must be cast as a morally positive thing to do, because the woman fantasizing about doing this knows the amount of destruction she will cause her own family, specifically her husband and (if present) children.  Wild didn’t deliver this essential component of a divorce empowerment movie, and this is the fundamental problem:

    therefore this so-called story of redemption—Woman Goes on 1,000-Mile Hike to Cleanse Herself of Sins and Find Herself—comes across not as real or raw or uplifting but just another tale of easy blonde triumph.

    *Note that McTroll above in his effective effort to reframe doesn’t deny the desire/fantasy is to profit from treachery.  He wants to discuss whether treachery is actually profitable.

  31. Opus says:

    Are there however (and there should be) any movies where a man ditches his tiresome wife and gains a newer younger more pleasant one? If so, they would surely be comedies. The closest I can think of is (either version of) W.Somerset Maughan’s The Razor’s Edge where in obtaining enlightenment Larry Darrel is only too happy to lose his fiancee (and the possibility of wealth). Is it misogynist?

  32. Boxer says:

    Are there however (and there should be) any movies where a man ditches his tiresome wife and gains a newer younger more pleasant one?

    Blue Jasmine, 2014

  33. Lyn87 says:

    Yeah, D, I got it. You’re correct that “Wild” is a flop relative to EPL and Stella because it doesn’t deliver on the “empowerment” half of the the “divorce empowerment” formula. I wasn’t trying to derail: I just found it amusing that the reviewer expresses such a personal dislike for Witherspoon and her body of work because she’s a pretty white woman (or at least she used to be pretty), and the reviewer is not. (Although, by any measure, the reviewer is living a life of incredible privilege herself.)

  34. Lyn87 says:

    Crap, I did it again.

    “pretty white woman” should be “pretty blonde woman.”

  35. Yoda says:

    Woman Goes on 1,000-Mile Hike to Cleanse Herself of Sins

    Too much work this is.
    Cleanse of sins easier it should be.

  36. Dalrock says:

    @Lyn87

    Yeah, D, I got it. You’re correct that “Wild” is a flop relative to EPL and Stella because it doesn’t deliver on the “empowerment” half of the the “divorce empowerment” formula. I wasn’t trying to derail: I just found it amusing that the reviewer expresses such a personal dislike for Witherspoon and her body of work because she’s a pretty white woman (or at least she used to be pretty), and the reviewer is not. (Although, by any measure, the reviewer is living a life of incredible privilege herself.)

    You weren’t derailing.  I just wanted to make that point.  One thing I do wonder is how well the reviewer is really able to separate her view of Witherspoon from the character she portrayed.  In her own mind she has separated these, and she dislikes Strayed in the movie because of Witherspoon.  She might be right.  But it could also be the other way around, and while her imagined version of Strayed is a positive character, when the woman’s actions are put on the screen she finds them despicable.

    One thing is clear, and that is that the kinds of things women shamelessly consume in written form very often become darker and uglier when brought to the big screen.  Wild is just one example.  We saw the same thing with 50 SoG.  Another example would be Gone Girl, where the feminist hero becomes too much the evil villain in the movie, and the husband she destroyed comes across as a victim.

  37. Dimitri says:

    One I really liked was this Ron Howard movie back in the day ‘Night Shift’. Henry Winkler’s protagonist character was engaged to this frumpy young woman who didn’t make much effort for him, and there is this scene where he is sandwiched between her and his mother in a cab and his mother is saying something along the lines of ‘don’t worry sweetheart, I will show you how to make him obedient and train him properly etc, his father had ridiculous dreams too but I took care of that nonsense’ when the poor guy’s dad had been a good man who worked hard for his family and died quite young.

    The next day Winkler took the plunge and became a full on pimp and hooked up with one of his prostitutes (probably not the ideal type to worship in the manosphere but there was something about it that got to me.

  38. Neguy says:

    OT, I know but I’m not sure where else to put ’em. This is a classic:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/28/why-i-m-coming-out-as-a-christian.html?via=twitter_page

    She “comes out” as a Christian, to, wait for it, critique Christians. She’s also pro-choice and talks about her personal relationship with Jesus.

  39. Lyn87,

    Feminists are amusing to watch – they have to vie for levels of disadvantage among themselves, with plain brunettes higher on the victimology ladder than pretty blondes. No wonder so many “WOC” sneer at feminism and its focus on the first-world problems of UMC white women.

    This is repeated over at Bloomberg a lot, the problems of the UMC are not really problems at all. They are just people who are used to a certain level of comfort and luxury who are (for whatever reason) no longer getting that. Worrying about what the UMC has or doesn’t have should not be the concern for feminism (in and of itself.) But when you get right down to it, the problems the UMC face IS the concern of feminism.

    Put it another way, if you gave a poverty striken minority never-married single-mom two choices (and she could only have one) free housing, free health care, free higher education, and a government check eat month for her support OR her right to vote, her right to frivorce a husband, and her right to abort her own unborn children, which one would she choose? That is obvious. That said, which one would feminism rather she choose? Given what she would choose and what feminism wants of her, is it not obvious how unuseful feminism is for so many women feminism thinks it is empowering?

  40. Anchorman says:

    Neguy,
    That article is “cover” for Obama.

    It’s also bait on the line for Christians to criticize her elastic views of her professed faith. Criticize her and she’ll say, “Most Christians were loving and accepted what I said, but these Christians are intolerant and must be attacked by all “good people.” The actual mix of the responses will be immaterial to selling the, “Let’s you and him fight” attempt to split Christians into camps.

  41. BillD says:

    Guys: Don’t marry. In this day and age, you’ll be just setting yourselves up for your wife’s divorce drama soap opera down the road.

  42. Cane Caldo says:

    Speaking of divorce porn and Witherspoon: I keep forgetting to mention that “Fireproof” is nothing but a bad rehash of “Sweet Home Alabama”. The core differences are that the secular producers don’t think life is a bummer all the time, don’t hate men, and don’t present their story as “The Christian Way”.

    I am not recommending SHA, but it highlights another part of the sickness in Christian culture. It parallels your diagnosis of acute inflammation of Ugly Feminism: The acceptance and expectation of joylessness. It is a defining characteristic of Christian cultural artifacts; movies, music, everything.

  43. Novaseeker says:

    It appears Malibu Barbie from Louisianna did wind up getting it all…. her true, real-life, Eat. Pray. Love. fantasy. Hollywood should just to a real-life divorce fantasy movie about Reese’s own life, the ladies would love it.

    Wouldn’t fly, because they know that Reece Witherspoon isn’t a “regular woman” like E. Gilbert was when she EPL’d, or when Stella got her groove back with a visa-seeking gay guy. WItherspoon is a woman whom they can’t relate to, so it doesn’t play as well from the vicarious thrill perspective.

  44. Novaseeker says:

    This is repeated over at Bloomberg a lot, the problems of the UMC are not really problems at all. They are just people who are used to a certain level of comfort and luxury who are (for whatever reason) novery sol longer getting that. Worrying about what the UMC has or doesn’t have should not be the concern for feminism (in and of itself.) But when you get right down to it, the problems the UMC face IS the concern of feminism.

    Of course. The obsession with who is sitting in the corner office, with “leaning in”, with equity between working spouses — all of this is UMC/+ woman type stuff. It doesn’t speak to the kinds who are just holding it together.

    Keep in mind, Friedan, who was one of the main instigators of the second wave, was very solidly UMC/+. These concerns have always been the core concerns of feminism, because this is the class that created feminism, and it’s been the class that has always controlled feminism.

  45. Novaseeker,

    It appears Malibu Barbie from Louisianna did wind up getting it all…. her true, real-life, Eat. Pray. Love. fantasy. Hollywood should just to a real-life divorce fantasy movie about Reese’s own life, the ladies would love it.

    Wouldn’t fly, because they know that Reece Witherspoon isn’t a “regular woman” like E. Gilbert was when she EPL’d, or when Stella got her groove back with a visa-seeking gay guy. WItherspoon is a woman whom they can’t relate to, so it doesn’t play as well from the vicarious thrill perspective.

    I don’t know of many (really, ANY) real life pure Eat. Pray. Love. “regular woman” divorce porn stories. Well, I know one. But hers was a very unique situation, the ONLY situation where a woman could Eat. Pray. Love.

    She married very young (and he was young) and they were married for a number of years. She was very pretty and had her undergrad (he was a short fat guy who didn’t have education) but she was very religious and was in love and wanted to have s-x. So they had a quickie elopement, moved to the suburbs, and stayed married for a number of years (no kids.) Welp, after a while his lies in their marriage added one on top of another and one more lie just broke the camel’s back, she divorced him. But she had no one waiting for her. So she went and got more education, a Master’s degree, got a job in the big city, met a good looking, educated, professional Christian man. They fell in love, got married, moved back to the suburbs, and had kids.

    Now her situation was sill MC (maybe even UMC) but it required enormous work/effort on her part AFTER her divorce. She needed to get more professional education and more professional employment before she found him. She didn’t just stumble onto this Christian man who was willing to violate Luke 16:18 while on vacation somewhere. And I’m not even sure he knew about Luke 16:18 when he met her. But hers is the only Eat Pray Love scenario that I know of in all my years. Every other woman who divorced her husband, those that remarried severly traded DOWN (drug addicts, Harley-McBadboys, con men) with their next husbands. So I would say that the Eat. Pray. Love. IS possible, but extremely unlikely and requires a lot of hardwork (and time) that most divorced women are not willing (or able) to invest.

  46. krakonos says:

    @IBB
    “Every other woman who divorced her husband, those that remarried severly traded DOWN (drug addicts, Harley-McBadboys, con men) with their next husbands.”

    They married down from your point of view. Though objective, still irrelevant. They traded up in gina tingles. They replaced their responsible, hardowrking and in result boring men, for much more fun and excitement. Literally🙂.

  47. Novaseeker says:

    Sure, EPLing isn’t likely. The point is that the *person* (E. Gilbert) is more relatable to the average woman than Reece Witherspoon is. Witherspoon is the kind of woman many other women hate. That kind of mucks up the narrative, as compared with Gilbert, who was a bartender when she met her first husband.

  48. Anchorman says:

    krakonos ,
    I’m not so sure. I think the stats show a greater chance of failure for women’s second marriage. I could be mistaken.

    Women enjoy an initial boost of popularity from divorce. If you ask me, it’s a mirage because what she’s actually experiencing is being the center of attention due to drama. Once the drama becomes tiresome or new drama sparks the interest of friends, she slides into the background of the social stage.

    Eventually, she notices that no one notices her.

  49. krakonos,

    They married down from your point of view. Though objective, still irrelevant. They traded up in gina tingles. They replaced their responsible, hardowrking and in result boring men, for much more fun and excitement. Literally .

    As far as I know, only Oregon allows a woman to continue collecting alimony from betabux husband that you frivorce if you go and marry UnemployedHarleyMcBadBoyRockBandDrummer for ‘gina tingles. Remarriage in the other 49 void a significant portion of the ‘cash’ you are rewarded in your frivorce. So.. yeah… that is trading down.

    To truly Eat Pray Love, for the women who can’t upgrade in husband earning power from #1 to #2 and do NOT want to void the cash from #1 but want to get ‘gina tingle, just live with UnemployedHarleyMcBadBoyRockBandDrummer but never marry him. But that was not the circumstance I was talking about above. She truly did “trade up” in every sense of the word.

  50. Dalrock says:

    @IBB
    Your story doesn’t surprise me. The keys to pulling off divorce and remarriage to a good man is to start young, and to not have kids. Even then for the second husband to outrank the first husband generally requires that she not have done a good job searching/choosing the first time around. In your scenario all three aspects are there. Obviously not an endorsement for frivorce, but it doesn’t surprise me that she fit all of the requirements.

    What is tough for would be empowered divorcées is that women are delaying marriage so long now that they are at or approaching middle age by the time they divorce. This is the wrong age to be in the market for a husband (first or otherwise). Even worse, anymore in order to do divorce proper (with cash and prizes) children are all but required. Single mothers take a significant hit in the marriage market, and women know this.

  51. Dalrock says:

    @Cane

    Speaking of divorce porn and Witherspoon: I keep forgetting to mention that “Fireproof” is nothing but a bad rehash of “Sweet Home Alabama”. The core differences are that the secular producers don’t think life is a bummer all the time, don’t hate men, and don’t present their story as “The Christian Way”.

    I am not recommending SHA, but it highlights another part of the sickness in Christian culture. It parallels your diagnosis of acute inflammation of Ugly Feminism: The acceptance and expectation of joylessness. It is a defining characteristic of Christian cultural artifacts; movies, music, everything.

    Good point. I’ve been noting that Christian husband/father bashing films are much darker than the secular movies they are mimicking, but your larger point is accurate. Joyless indeed.

  52. This is more about plain-girl jealousy than I thought.

    That was my first thought on seeing the “easy blonde triumph” jab, and the rest of the review backs it up. I think Dalrock is right about what women want in these empowerment/redemption stories, and why this movie missed the mark for the general audience.

    But this particular reviewer doesn’t criticize the sluttiness or drug use of the character. She doesn’t say a single negative thing about the story, actually, and even praises part of it for the strong feminist message. She just has a serious hate-on for Reese Witherspoon, thinks she can’t act, and couldn’t look past her looks long enough to say anything else about the movie. The envy is oozing out of that review. Kind of embarrassing for her, really.

    But that’s the thing: she can’t criticize the character for drug use or sluttiness, because nothing a woman does is ever wrong. So whatever discomfort she feels at the character and message has to be directed somewhere else, which only leaves the actress. I’d say she really does hate Witherspoon, but she’s also projecting her dislike for the movie onto her.

  53. Novaseeker says:

    Single mothers take a significant hit in the marriage market, and women know this.

    Indeed, which is why the blaring is constant that men should man up and marry single mothers.

  54. Dalrock,

    Your story doesn’t surprise me. The keys to pulling off divorce and remarriage to a good man is to start young, and to not have kids. Even then for the second husband to outrank the first husband generally requires that she not have done a good job searching/choosing the first time around. In your scenario all three aspects are there. Obviously not an endorsement for frivorce, but it doesn’t surprise me that she fit all of the requirements.

    Yes, she had all three requirements and they are requirements for EPL. And yes you are not endorsing it but women need to understand if they think they can EPL to a better husband the second time around, they have a very small window to succeed.

    It very well might go without saying that if you marry young enough (under say 23????) then by virtue of your shorter time on this planet being of marriage age you are more likely NOT to have done a good job searching/choosing the first time around. So two of the three requirements go hand-in-hand for EPL. So what is the lesson taught here for EPL divorce porn?

    Dont be picky (marry the first guy who will have you just for s-x)
    Marry extremely young and most importantly
    Don’t breed with #1

    Do the above three, you maximize your possibility to “trade-up” EPL style.

  55. Hank Flanders says:

    Cail Corishev

    She just has a serious hate-on for Reese Witherspoon…

    She even manages to sneak those feelings in in her review of Gone Girl (http://gawker.com/why-gone-girl-is-great-1647694100). I’m not even sure what she’s trying to say except that the antagonist isn’t what we expect of women, so therefore, “great movie” (and book)…whatever. anyway, at least that’s not as bad as some of the commenters saying they loved Amy specifically because she’s evil.

  56. Dalrock,

    Even worse, anymore in order to do divorce proper (with cash and prizes) children are all but required. Single mothers take a significant hit in the marriage market, and women know this.

    Exactly, Carol Brady (from the Brady Bunch) pretty much only existed in television. She frivorced #1, and “traded up” to #2 with her three girls, (Cindy, Jan, and Marcia-Marcia-Marcia) and that pretty much… never happens. Why would a good looking, tall, har-working, educated, successful man, want to marry a frivorced mother of three who can’t work outside the home or even make bag lunches for the kids in the morning? She didn’t do laundry, Alice did. She didn’t cook, Alice did. She couldn’t even drive in the parking lot of a supermarket without getting into a car accident. Her only use was in the bedroom and singing in church on Christmas morning.

    Maybe there is this whole legion of frivorced moms with kids in tow who “trade up” EPL style in real life, but I sure as heck never met any of them. And I know lots of frivorced moms.

  57. Hank Flanders says:

    *antagonist in Gone Girl, Amy,…

  58. nathanjevans says:

    Hate to be the Devil’s Advocate here, but my mother married up with my stepfather in her forties. She didn’t exactly frivorce my father, though: He was a serial adulterer, alcoholic who couldn’t hold down a job. Seriously, though, the amount of times people see that are so miniscule as to be hardly noticeable from a sociological standpoint. The other second marriages I know of tend to follow the more common pattern.

  59. Scott says:

    nathanjevans-

    Not really the Devi’s advocate so much as the exception that proves the rule. You actually did a pretty good job of explaining it. Point taken.

  60. Lyn87 says:

    IBB,

    the problem with that is that it requires a very calculating assessment of probabilities and cause-and-effect, and a willingness to put off temporary pleasure for long-term matrimonial gain.

    To follow that script the woman would have to forgo her “best” carousel-riding years by marrying “beneath her” when young, in order to secure a long-term meal ticket that permits her to fund her “real” search for a husband – later – in style.

    But if a young woman wants to win big in the marriage sweepstakes she doesn’t need to play that game, which is fraught with peril (since she’d be competing against her peers who may never have been married at all). The only thing such a woman would need to do is conduct a serious husband search when she’s at the top of her SMV/MMV and marry the best prospect she can get when she’s young. That is what smart women do. The odds are overwhelming that she’s never going to do better than that.

    My point is that a woman savvy enough to plan what you’re suggesting would also be smart enough to realize that it would be stupid to try: not only is it unlikely to confer any advantage (no advantage in the marriage market when she’s ready), but there is an inescapable opportunity cost as well (no carousel when she’s young).

  61. Random Angeleno says:

    Never quite thought of Brady Bunch that way, well heck, haven’t thought about that show in years, but yes, that is an excellent point about Carol Brady. Sly EPL-style marketing even then, at the dawn of the no-fault age …

  62. Lyn87,

    the problem with that is that it requires a very calculating assessment of probabilities and cause-and-effect, and a willingness to put off temporary pleasure for long-term matrimonial gain.

    To follow that script the woman would have to forgo her “best” carousel-riding years by marrying “beneath her” when young, in order to secure a long-term meal ticket that permits her to fund her “real” search for a husband – later – in style.

    Yes this call this the “starter”-marriage. I don’t know if this is commonplace in churchianity (as I have said before, all the people I know in my churches have all been OLD) but “starter” marriage is pretty common, secularly.

    Problem with “starter” marriage is that if you go into it thinking that way, it is pretty much pre-determined that your marriage is “at will” and will “end” longe before God ends it. Moreover, you can’t exactly TELL your spouse in the starter marriage that he (or she) is just a “temp” that you get to f-ck while waiting for the one you get for the rest of your life. What person would marry under those parameters?

    There was actually an episode of Rosanne that deals with this, Becky’s auto-machanic husband is getting all upset with Rosanne and Dan for trying to get Becky into medical school. They can’t figure out why. And then he finally lets Rosanne know the problem, he loves her daughter and is afraid that she will just frivorce him if she goes to medical school after all how many female medical doctors does she know that are married to auto mechanics? The answer (of course) is zero and Becky DOES in fact look at husband #1 as the “starter” and that really hurts him, (as it would any man.)

  63. Lyn87 says:

    IBB, Okay… I see where you’re going with that. I can see how people would “fall into” that, but I still can’t see why anyone would deliberately go with a “starter marriage” philosophy. It is both risky and costly; oddly enough, for both parties.

  64. Dalrock says:

    @IBB

    Yes this call this the “starter”-marriage. I don’t know if this is commonplace in churchianity (as I have said before, all the people I know in my churches have all been OLD) but “starter” marriage is pretty common, secularly.

    Yes. Some of the middle school aged girls at one of the Christian private schools my wife taught at would talk about their future “starter husband”.

  65. Yoda says:

    He was a serial adulterer, alcoholic who couldn’t hold down a job.

    A low bar to surpass this is.

    But perhaps with respect to tingles a high bar it was.

  66. Yoda says:

    would talk about their future “starter husband”.

    Prefer to talk about “final” husband would they not?

  67. Well Reese has already had one flop in this genre with “Sweet Home Alabama” where she abandons her “upgrade” a Kennedy-esque politician for her ex. She’s clearly not doing it right.

  68. Spike says:

    It’s good to see that the criticism of ‘Wild’, nailing Ms Witherspoon’s character as a ‘narcissistic bitch’, comes from a woman. This just gives cynical me a glimmer of hope that some – a few – women can actually see and call this behaviour what it is.

    Speaking of calling out bad behaviour, it seems that ‘headship’ doctrine in the Christian church is under the spotlight in the Land that brought the feminist world Germaine Greer, Australia:

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-editorial/abuse-inside-christian-marriages–a-personal-story-20150301-13rrvr.html

    Apparently, the author of this article wants to ‘anonymously’ publish ‘anonymous’ submissions about how Christian husbands ‘abuse’ the doctrine of headship. A corresponding article even sells out men by saying that headship doctrine is a ‘distortion’.I will believe it when the author were to receive the complementary “divorce terrorism” that women put men through.

  69. Cane Caldo says:

    @Spike

    It’s good to see that the criticism of ‘Wild’, nailing Ms Witherspoon’s character as a ‘narcissistic bitch’, comes from a woman. This just gives cynical me a glimmer of hope that some – a few – women can actually see and call this behaviour what it is.

    Keep those expectations low. Complaints are usually just a sign of a desire to complain; not of comprehension. See Dalrock’s preceding posts.

  70. Dalrock,

    Yes this call this the “starter”-marriage. I don’t know if this is commonplace in churchianity (as I have said before, all the people I know in my churches have all been OLD) but “starter” marriage is pretty common, secularly.

    Yes. Some of the middle school aged girls at one of the Christian private schools my wife taught at would talk about their future “starter husband”.

    That is terrible, but not all that surprising.

    Lyn87,

    IBB, Okay… I see where you’re going with that. I can see how people would “fall into” that, but I still can’t see why anyone would deliberately go with a “starter marriage” philosophy. It is both risky and costly; oddly enough, for both parties.

    To f-ck, mostly. It gives you a clear conscience that you are “sinning.” (Ask b0xer how many BYU and UofU students make runs to Las Vegas or Wendover to get “married” on a weekend and why.) There are other “benefits” to the “starter” marriage.

    #1) If one (or the other) works for an airline (part time or full time), both can fly for free
    #2) If one (or the other, or both) are in college, they will have a much easier time living together (which make things much cheaper for both)
    #3) If one (or the other, or both) are in college, it is easier to “game-the-system” for financial aid money if you are married because you are now (offically) independant student. Your parents bigger income and home equity does not kill you on the FAF form
    #4) If one has health insurance (and not the other), both can get on it cheaper if married (which is even more important now with the ACA mandate)
    #5) It makes it easier to apply for loans and mortgages
    etc…

    There are lots of reason for the “starter” but none of these reasons of God’s design. I mean getting married young just to f-ck and not sin….. okay I get that. And so does God. And to be perfectly honest I don’t even have a problem with that. My problem with it stems from the belief that you are doing it intentionally with the understanding that it is only an “at will” marriage. But I mean who really cares now, with marriage 2.0 and divorce laws, pretty much every marriage is already “at will” so…..

  71. On edit…. It gives you a clear conscience that you are NOT “sinning.” I’m pretty sure that this is the main reason why God hates divorce (as a means to get around His rules.)

  72. earl says:

    ‘Guys: Don’t marry. In this day and age, you’ll be just setting yourselves up for your wife’s divorce drama soap opera down the road.’

    Depends on the woman. They aren’t all that bad. But the bad ones have plenty of advertisement before you get involved with them.

  73. Boxer says:

    Dear IBB:

    Good question

    Ask b0xer how many BYU and UofU students make runs to Las Vegas or Wendover to get “married” on a weekend and why.) There are other “benefits” to the “starter” marriage.

    Almost none. The people who are worried about sinning want to get married in the LDS temple, and a civil marriage delays this (along with carrying a heavy subtextual load — people assume that the couple “wasn’t worthy” to marry in the temple when a civil marriage happens).

    The people who aren’t worried about sinning, aren’t worried about getting married either.

    Best, Boxer

  74. Ask b0xer how many BYU and UofU students make runs to Las Vegas or Wendover to get “married” on a weekend and why.) There are other “benefits” to the “starter” marriage.

    Almost none. The people who are worried about sinning want to get married in the LDS temple, and a civil marriage delays this (along with carrying a heavy subtextual load — people assume that the couple “wasn’t worthy” to marry in the temple when a civil marriage happens).

    Hmmmmmm… I do believe that BYU has (far and away) the HIGHEST percentage of married undergraduates of any university in the entire country (public or private.) I think it has pretty much always been that way (at least, since they have been keeping records.)

    That is NOT a knock on BYU, by the by. I don’t have a problem with that. Actually, I think that MOST kids at univerity SHOULD be getting married while at school (provided they stay married for life.) But they don’t and they don’t.

  75. Nothing new under the sun (and all that): Silly Novels by Lady Novelists.

    https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/e/eliot/george/e42e/chapter6.html

  76. MarcusD says:

    Don’t Blame It on the War
    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/dont-blame-it-on-the-war/

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/03/facts-about-families.html

    According to Eurostat, the European Union’s statistical agency, the probability of marriage before age 50 has been plummeting for European women and men, while the chance of divorce for those who do marry has been soaring. In Belgium—the birth-land of the scholars who initially detected this Second Transition—the likelihood of a first marriage for a woman of reproductive age is now down to 40%, and the likelihood of divorce is over 50%. This means that in Belgium the odds of getting married and staying married are under one in five. A number of other European countries have similar or even lower odds.

    Europe has also seen a surge in “child-free” adults—voluntary childlessness. The proportion of childless 40-something women is one in five for Sweden and Switzerland, and one in four for Italy. In Berlin and in the German city-state of Hamburg, it’s nearly one in three, and rising swiftly. Europe’s most rapidly growing family type is the one-person household: the home not only child-free, but partner- and relative-free as well. In Western Europe, nearly one home in three (32%) is already a one-person unit, while in autonomy-prizing Denmark the number exceeds 45%. The rise of the one-person home coincides with population aging. But it is not primarily driven by the graying of European society, at least thus far: Over twice as many Danes under 65 are living alone as those over 65.

    …Given recent trajectories, demographers Miho Iwasawa and Ryuichi Kaneko project that a Japanese woman born in 1990 stands less than even odds of getting married and staying married to age 50.

  77. Oscar says:

    @ Dalrock & Lyn

    Putting your two observations together makes me wonder if “Wild” might have been more successful (if not necessarily a hit) if Reese Witherspoon had been in her prime.

    It wasn’t that long ago that Witherspoon seemed like the next Meg Ryan (whose looks were fading just as Witherspoon was ascending), but now Witherspoon’s beauty is fading (earlier than Ryan’s, I think). I don’t recall any women complaining about “easy blonde triumph” back then. People usually want to see themselves in the protagonist of their favorite stories.

    Maybe one reason women are rejecting “Wild” is that they don’t want to see themselves in a fading beauty.

  78. Novaseeker says:

    I’d love to see the cites for those stats — too bad they aren’t cited in the AEI artricle.

  79. Oscar,

    Maybe one reason women are rejecting “Wild” is that they don’t want to see themselves in a fading beauty.

    They are rejecting “Wild” because women are hypergamous and there is nothing hypergamous about it. She replaces her frivorced husband with… nothing. THEY can do THAT. They ARE doing that. There is no fantasy there. They want the fantasy of financial provisioning with no investment on their part other than s-x (50 SoG)

  80. olympiapress says:

    Actually, the difference is bigger than that. You’re only counting domestic #s. Eat Pray did another $120 mil. overseas. This one won’t do squat outside the U.S.

    Roberts is (or was) a better actor in terms of marketability than Witherspoon, and the international settings/Javier Bardem may have had some impact as well.

  81. Oscar says:

    innocentbystanderboston says:
    March 2, 2015 at 6:54 pm

    “They are rejecting ‘Wild’ because women are hypergamous and there is nothing hypergamous about it.”

    Yeah, I got that, and I agree. I’m proposing an additional hypothetical motivation, not an alternative one.

  82. Boxer says:

    Dear IBB:

    I didn’t say they didn’t get married. I said they got married in the temple.

    Hmmmmmm… I do believe that BYU has (far and away) the HIGHEST percentage of married undergraduates of any university in the entire country (public or private.) I think it has pretty much always been that way (at least, since they have been keeping records.)

    Right. They all (and I do mean all) get married in the LDS temple, rather than at a sleazeball casino in Wendover, Mesquite, or Las Vegas. The weddings usually happen within weeks of the male returning from his missionary service.

  83. Boxer says:

    As an addendum: BYU and “the U” (University of Utah) have very different atmospheres. The U is full of apostates, secular Mormons like me, and also hosts hundreds of repressed kids from farm country. There’s a greek system at the U, and plenty of sex and drugs for those who want such stuff. BYU throws kids out for having sex (or even for growing their hair too long) and religion courses are mandatory. They both turn out capable graduates, but in many other respects, they’re opposites.

  84. David J. says:

    I don’t think Mike and Carol Brady had divorced their former spouses; I think the former spouses both died.

  85. CBA says:

    David,

    Both Mike and Carol Brady were divorced. In fact, when the actor who played Mike Brady left the series there was a short discussion whether or not to continue the series having Carol remarry her ex. This plan was shot down as a bridge to far for 1970’s audiences and the Brady Bunch was ended as a tv series.

    Corey

  86. Corey and David,

    Mike Brady was definitely a widower. Carol Brady? Unclear.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Brady_Bunch

    While Mike Brady is depicted as being a widower, Schwartz originally wanted the character of Carol Brady to have been a divorcée but the network objected to this. A compromise was reached whereby Carol’s marital past was left open (not made clear whether she was divorced or widowed).

  87. micklively says:

    @Robin I take your point but it’s not good sampling technique irrespective of who is responsible for it and so not reliable evidence.

  88. I went to see this film, not for the divorce part but for the pacific crest trail part. The film was actually very raw and emotionally heavy, nothing like epl. Her divorce (caused by her derailing into sex addiction and herion addiction after her mom dies of cancer) wasn’t painted as empowering, more like going off the rails completely. The film is very empathetic to her husband actually, does not portray him at fault for or deserving any of that. I would say the film probably portrayed the reality of divorce, the instability and worse off part, rather than glamorized it. Even her doing the trail, it’s obvious she is completely an idiot and had no idea what she was doing, she’s lucky she didn’t die (the real life gal.) something I didn’t think was good was there were at least two “rape culture” moments in the movie where the character is alone on the hike and runs into men and is afraid of being raped (and isn’t raped) That seemed way overdone, reinforced the “all men are rapists given the chance” meme. And was ironic in that the character had been having random sex in hotels and alleys earlier in the film, she didnt seem concerned about being raped then. In short the character does get divorced in the movie but rather than it being a “go girl” type film, this one seemed to be about a gal really messing up her own good thing. In the end she takes responsibility for it, admits it, regrets it. At the very end it references her remarrying years later, but it wasn’t framed in a “she moved up and did better” hypergamy type way. Or at least those were my impressions of the movie.

  89. Opus says:

    Query: can a woman be raped if she leaves civilisation; enters a Hobbesian state of nature? is outlaw?

  90. JDG says:

    Her divorce (caused by her derailing into sex addiction and herion addiction after her mom dies of cancer) wasn’t painted as empowering, … the character is alone on the hike and runs into men and is afraid of being raped.

    A question I have wanted to ask some of my conservative acquaintances for some time is: How is the rape of a sexually empowered woman a life changing event anymore than that of a mugging? The assault part I get, almost no one wants to be assaulted. But to me it seems more like robbery when a woman who gives it away to different guys on a regular basis suddenly finds her self in a position of having it taken from her against her will.

    I don’t want any woman to ever be raped (neither do I want them to fornicate), but I get irritated when i hear someone equate the rape a sexually empowered you go girl with that of a virgin or a chaste woman, especially if she is married. I’m sorry if that makes me an ogre, but that’s how I see it.

    I’m already a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot, so why not an ogre too.

  91. JDG says:

    Query: can a woman be raped if she leaves civilisation; enters a Hobbesian state of nature?

    If she belongs to a man she can be.

  92. cynthia says:

    @Oscar

    Reese Witherspoon really is one of those women who other women just hate. I would be hard-pressed to explain why, but she really is irritating.

  93. Oscar says:

    @cynthia

    Then why was she (and therefore her movies) so popular in her prime?

  94. Pingback: Christ is wild, and that is not a movie [Jer 4, Jn 5] | Dark Brightness

  95. Spike says:

    I haven’t seen the movie either Dalrock, but from Box Office receipts it isn’t EPL. It more closely resembles that other great movie of female empowerment, “The Hottie And The Nottie” starring Paris Hilton in her second movie (her first being her night-cam filmed acting and directing debut, “One Night In Paris”). “The Hottie..” made $8000 in it’s first week of world -wide release, that being it’s biggest take.

  96. Looking Glass says:

    @Oscar:

    Because she was Hot (and a good actress), so she got good marketing budgets & good scripts. Those really, truly, do go a long way with Movies.

  97. She probably hates the movie because the character comes off looking like a proper whore and not some independent and powerful woman. The character is bad, evil and loathsome, not what exactly women want to see portrayed on the big screen. The movie isn’t liked because it shows exactly what divorce empowerment is. The critique is quite right, the only redeeming quality of Witherspoon’s character is that she is a somewhat pretty blond.

  98. fh,

    The movie isn’t liked because it shows exactly what divorce empowerment is.

    Yes. Exactly. Women go to see the fantasy, not the reality. They live in the reality. That is no fun, nothing to pay money to watch.

  99. Oscar says:

    @Looking Glass says:
    March 4, 2015 at 2:46 pm

    “Because she was Hot (and a good actress), so she got good marketing budgets & good scripts. Those really, truly, do go a long way with Movies.”

    I get that. My question to cynthia was, if Witherspoon annoys women as much as cynthia claims she does, why were Witherspooon’s movies so popular with women when she was in the prime of her beauty? I seriously doubt women made “Legally Blonde” a hit because they were annoyed by the star.

  100. Renee Harris says:

    Can’t think of a guy divorce porn but wolf of Wall Street is close( goldrigging second wife leave him). There also hall past, I hope serve beer in hell. But the best love siucks with the guy from 3 rock

  101. Luke says:

    innocentbystanderboston says:
    March 4, 2015 at 10:55 am

    I am feeding more red pills at Bloomberg.

    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-04/fixing-america-s-baby-bust-might-require-help-from-france

    Keep our eyes on the prize people.”

    =======================================================
    “First thing you need to do is identify the root of the problem, the marriage rate. When they started keeping track of this (in 1976) 72% of all people over the age of 18 (in the US) were married. It has dropped by (roughly) 0.5% per year, linearly. Today, just 49.2% of all people over the age of 18 (in the US) are married. That is simply untennible. You can not have a Constitutionally based Republic without marriage, can’t happen. So why are marriage rates so low?

    Put bluntly, there simply is no reason for men to marry. Because of the feminist imperative, NO ONE is listening to what MEN WANT regarding wives and marriage. No one cares to listen to them, their opinions don’t matter. So it should come as no surprise that men have increasingly “opted out” of going down on bended knee with a diamond and women are increasingly trying to “game the system” at the expense of other women (their competition for the alpha male husbands who are in short supply) by reading books on how to “catch a man.” You’ll note Noah, there are no books for men on how to catch a woman. You and I (and all men) know what we must do to get a wife.

    So what do marriage minded men want? Several things.

    #1) They want to get married younger (like 20 or 21) and yes, they marry for s-x (but they don’t have to do that now since they get s-x without marriage.) Girls do not want to get married at 20 because of pure hypergamy, someone better might come along and she’ll miss out (make a terrible mistake)…. besides, she is too busy having fun. Couple this with the belief that some parents have that no man is good enough for their daughter and low and behold, there are no women for the 20 year old man to marry.

    #2) They want to marry a young virginal wife. There are none to be had at age 20. These girls are all out finding themselves in college sleeping with the entire school, spending $100K of money they don’t have for tuition, to earn their women’s studies degrees. The thought of her being able to compare him (s-xually) with all her other men makes a husband feel terrible which ruins the bonds of lifelong marriage.

    #3) They want to marry a wife who will OBEY them, in all things. He leads, she follows, always. He picks the house, the church, tells her when he wants to have s-x, makes all the decisions, and she says ‘yes dear.’

    #4) They want unilateral divorce law in ALL 50 states gone tomorrow. Why get married if it is perfectly legal and even “moral” if she falls out of love, finds an old lover on facebook, divorce #1 so she can have s-x with #2? Why get married if she can just divorce him at any moment for no reason and take half his stuff and get alimony and child support? You think men want to get married to women if they can threaten to leave him and take all his hard earned wealth with her? When ALL pre-nups are subjective and never binding in family court? Forget it.

    #5) They want to marry a woman who isn’t in debt. No more anti-dowry. She can have $0. She shouldn’t have -$100,000 of student loans that now HE must answer for (not to mention her $25,000 on the credit cards.)

    Because these young, obedi[e]nt, virginal, marriage minded women WITHOUT the anti-dowry do not exist anymore and our country has created laws for the sole purpose of keeping husbands in check with wives threatening divorce at any moment, men don’t want to get married which means no more marriage (particularly in the inner city.) If we are NOT willing to change the above, marriage will disappear (or ONLY exist for the UMC, which is what is happening now.) Lo and behold, no babies Noah. This is not rocket science.

    Do you really want to live in a country with more and more women going full “Life of Julia” and having kids out of wedlock and destroying more lives simply because men wont marry them? Because that is what is happening. And the result of this nightmare of no marriage is Detroit, Camden NJ, and Ferguson MO. We even have a POTUS who is perfectly happy with this because the feminist imperative must trump the desires of men.
    You want to fix the problem with no babies? Fix marriage for men so that women get married younger, must STAY married for life, and start breeding legitimate children (and while you are at it, outlaw abortion.) If you cant or wont do this, then I guess you don’t really want to fix it.”

    This was the best comment there by far. Kudos to you for composing and posting it.

  102. Pingback: Too ugly to empower | Truth and contradictions ...

  103. Renee Harris says:

    Scott, what is a virgin? I never had sex and I never kissed a boy. I am 28. I hate hearing that a girl must be a virgin to marry: it’s bullshit! You guys write like all women over 21 are whores or are riding ever cook around. I did not do that… But I starting to think my virginty is null and voild due to my age. Moreover, white girls ( my crush’s ex) who shallow are seen as pure, but I’m black and I have not touch um… That body part so I am a slut. So what is a virgin and how I know if am one. Also if I never marry, ( read: die as Virgin) what can I do for body of Christ ?

  104. Luke says:

    Renee, why did you put off marriage so late (as opposed to under age 23, say)?

    Was it A) due to you growing up in the inner city (where there truly are almost no currently-marriageable men by all accounts), B) didn’t think about it for years and years due to focus on post-HS school & careerism, C) was opposed to the idea, or D) you had hypergamy gone nuts (e.g., were a “6” who thought she could bag a “9” guy for marriage)?

  105. Lyn87 says:

    Renee,

    slut” is an individual thing based on sexual promiscuity: you don’t become one be being black or getting older. You are not a slut. Nobody here (or probably anywhere) would think of you that way. You’re a virgin… period, and it doesn’t become “null and void” unless you lose it by engaging in sexual activity.

  106. Luke says:

    Lyn87 says:
    March 5, 2015 at 8:42 am

    “Renee,

    slut” is an individual thing based on sexual promiscuity: you don’t become one be being black or getting older. You are not a slut. Nobody here (or probably anywhere) would think of you that way. You’re a virgin… period, and it doesn’t become “null and void” unless you lose it by engaging in sexual activity.”

    This is actually correct, as long as “sexual activity” is used in its widest sense (any kind of “job”, anyone climaxes or reasonably could have, any contact with genitals by anyone, excessive light petting even making out (mainly WRT partner # outside of marriage, but frequency/duration as well), etc.

  107. Renee Harris says:

    Was it A) due to you growing up in the inner city (where there truly are almost no currently-marriageable men by all accounts),
    No grow-up in middle-class burbs. I was wearily by globaly.
    B) didn’t think about it for years and years due to focus on post-HS school & careerism, I was ugly and pure . Guy don’t like that combo. You can only one….so I need money for upgrade my face and some how I scholarships a full ride to second chives ( I know whf).
    Yeah well after I try to kill myself ( long story) I found Christ and felt like I should honor my step dad by helping financially independent . I hate my job , but I love my paycheck.
    C) was opposed to the idea, or D) you had hypergamy gone nuts (e.g., were a “6” who thought she could bag a “9” guy for marriage)? Kinda . I was a porn addit in college . I had a crush on a nine but I make over 1200 aper check and he self employment. So yeah he was like no. I have godly men in my live but they want girl who screw
    E) ugly girls don’t marry.

  108. Lyn87 says:

    Re: the definition of virginity:

    “…as long as “sexual activity” is used in its widest sense…

    Debatable.

  109. Luke says:

    Lyn, she asked about being a slut, not a virgin. She already knows her status WRT virginity.
    By any measure, a “technical” virgin (has done everything but PIV, many times with lots of different partners) is very much a slut.

  110. Lyn87 says:

    Luke,

    Dude, you need to read more closely. Renee wrote, “I’m starting to think my virginity is null and void due to my age.”

    I was pointing out that that is not the case. You don’t have to attack everything I write.

  111. Luke says:

    Lyn, I took her comment about her virginity becoming “null and void due to her age” as approaching no longer mattering to men as she got older, NOT that it “went away” without her ever having been penetrated. Perhaps she could clear this up?

  112. Lyn87 says:

    Luke,

    Fair enough. Renee was speaking metaphorically I answered literally. I withdraw my objection.

  113. Renee Harris says:

    Lyn, she asked about being a slut, not a virgin. She already knows her status WRT virginity.
    By any measure, a “technical” virgin(has done everything but PIV, many times with lots of different partners) is very much a slut.
    I’m not a a “technical” virgin I’m a form born virgin

  114. Luke,

    This was the best comment there by far. Kudos to you for composing and posting it.

    Thanks. Posting something similar got me banned at the Atlantic. Most people can’t handle the truth.

  115. Renee Harris says:

    Luke
    My meaning of “null and void” is that’s virginty is no longer an asset in my marriage search ( other showing small albity to honor God.) the godly men in life (most are whte) date girl who give “job”. But I can’t go there. I did show a man my boobs. That was my sin and repent to God for that.
    I just won’t see The guys who what virgins.. Thus I can’t be a virgin due to age.
    I hate Technical Virgins. I just hate them and they seems to be getting the guys. For me if I don’t marry I will mostly like die as a viegin. I want to marry. No I think that just want to sree with out sinning ( I was teach that sex is an act of worship for marrige people only and not to kiss a man tell I marry).
    So I get madd when virginty is praise as it should be “white girl only can be Virgins” .

  116. Renee,

    I did show a man my boobs. That was my sin and repent to God for that.

    (smiles) Okay, I don’t think God is going to hold that one against you. There is not one person here who would give you a hard time for that.

    I just won’t see The guys who what virgins.. Thus I can’t be a virgin due to age.

    You are only 28. I have known two women (both in their early 30s) who were virgin. And I have a couple close friends of mine (guys) who are both in their 40s who are virgin (and NOT by choice, if you know what I mean.)

    I hate Technical Virgins. I just hate them and they seems to be getting the guys. For me if I don’t marry I will mostly like die as a viegin. I want to marry. No I think that just want to sree with out sinning ( I was teach that sex is an act of worship for marrige people only and not to kiss a man tell I marry).

    Okay. I don’t think anyone here is going to give you a hard time for that.

    So I get madd when virginty is praise as it should be “white girl only can be Virgins” .

    I don’t think anyone here is saying that.

  117. sandals with socks says:

    “I am not recommending SHA, but it highlights another part of the sickness in Christian culture. It parallels your diagnosis of acute inflammation of Ugly Feminism: The acceptance and expectation of joylessness. It is a defining characteristic of Christian cultural artifacts; movies, music, everything.”

    Care to explain? You might be able to argue that a few Christian movies are dismal, but music and particularly “everything” is certainly over reaching.

  118. Renee Harris says:

    On ryan Philipine: he working again . In abc sercet and lies. It displays a man having to prove did not kill neighbor boy. OC The cop on case is a chick

  119. Cane Caldo says:

    @sandals

    Care to explain? You might be able to argue that a few Christian movies are dismal, but music and particularly “everything” is certainly over reaching.

    Sure. It will be a topic of a post on my own blog. For the meanwhile: Popular Christian music absolutely is more joyless than joyful, and I meant “everything” as in I know of no category (books, music, movies, etc.) of popular Christian art that is not dominated by dismay.

  120. RadiumJ says:

    Having read the book, not seen the movie, and having done long distance hikes, the book didn’t quite feel right. Redpillgirlnotes mentioned the “rape culture” moment in the film. It’s been about a year and a half since I read the book. If I remember correctly, that scene didn’t make sense because the time of the year was too early for hunting season. There were other things in that scene that didn’t feel right like one guy coming back without his friends. Was he going to rape her without his friends knowing or wondering where he was? At least that was what I remember about that scene. Someone else can correct my memory if I got anything above wrong.

    There are always strange people on long distance trails, but the danger is very very low. The Appalachian Trail has millions of people hike it per year and only a couple reports of violence per decade. With that said, to make sure you maximize your safety, always camp away from roads where drunks and idiots can easily access the trail.

  121. RadiumJ says:

    Another thing that surprised me about the book was the number of women who loved it. I thought the young woman was an idiot. The scene about her attempting to kill her horse was really disturbing. I feel sorry for anyone in her life then or now. No amount of miles hiked can cure that level of stupid.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s