Does Sex and the City Patronise Men?

rockysweatpants

Having read a few articles on the new Sex and the City, I couldnt help but notice a few things.
Namely :
1 : The four 30+ women are selfish. One article reviewed the movie to describe how one of the women ( didnt say have to see movie i guess )
had LEFT her boyfriend so she could "Love ME more!".

2 : Women just wanna buy clothes , shoes, be seen at all the right parties
and have lots of sex with weird men.

3 : The Patronise Men bit I refer to is this: The have branded men.
For instance, men in their 30's are branded 'Darwinists'.
The term means men who are not married after 30 are not in the natural selection process to father kids.

Hey I know its all fun, and women need this kind of humour to deal with the serious issue of not finding a man to settle down and have kids with. Cities are incredibly hard to meet people, and that women have a difficult time.

Hey these are VERY serious social problems we all face. Remember its YOUR RIGHT as a Human Being to settle down and have kids full stop.

However does the movie get it wrong by focusing too much on the charactors of the women and ignore the real questions as hinted at above.

i.e Patronising BOTH Men and Women with selfish charactors that don't necessarily hit the real social issue mark.

Please feel free to express your thoughts about this

Pigman II

Here is my ranking of the four ladies in order of hotness

1. The cute one with the black hair
2. Yer woman from Big Trouble in Little China
3. Sarah Jessica Parker
4. The one with gingivitis and gingervitus

Please feel free to express your thoughts about this

rockysweatpants

I agree they are all HOT.

Kim Katrall is the best.

However it still doesnt answer my questions
Namely is the Movie just out a load of lost opportunities to explore
real social issues ( namely the fear amongst women and men of never marrying and having kids ) in place of selfish women who just wanna "love themselves more"?????????

Ivicia

My brother thinks SJP is very unattractive (not his exact words).

My ex use to leave the room when the program was on - scared the bajasus out of him (his exact words).

Its not to be taken that serioulsy but does reflect real life a lot.

A lot of women will get more excited about shoes than a new born and they will go over a date to death.

jameshayes

Just like anyother chick-flick it is giving women a false and extremely disillusioned sense of the real world. These movies fill them with hope that one day they will find bad boy turned good brad pitt, mysterious and unpredictable johnny depp or anyother man with two letters at the end of his name for no reason.

rockysweatpants

The reason I posted the question
was that I thought one of the main reasons of the shows success was that it tackled real issues.

Its all fun and so it should be also. However my real question is

Is the Movie just another give conning the public with real life social talk , make money off gullible women , feed their heads with junk , and then cash the cheques.

It can not be forgotten , that SATC has dominated LOTS of womens' lives these past few years.

Should women deserve better than that ??????

jameshayes

rockysweatpants wrote: »

Is the Movie just another give conning the public with real life social talk , make money off gullible women , feed their heads with junk , and then cash the cheques.

Yes

Doctor DooM

jameshayes wrote: »

Just like anyother chick-flick it is giving women a false and extremely disillusioned sense of the real world. These movies fill them with hope that one day they will find bad boy turned good brad pitt, mysterious and unpredictable johnny depp or anyother man with two letters at the end of his name for no reason.

I have two letters at the end of my name, they just happen to be different letters.

This was more or less discussed before. I would consider the message of SATC to women more worrying than it's treatment of men.

Stargal

Moved to Films. Mods, feel free to punt it back (or possibly over to The Ladies Lounge? Wasn't sure where this belonged tbh) if it doesn't belong here.

stereoroid

rockysweatpants wrote: »

3 : The Patronise Men bit I refer to is this: The have branded men.
For instance, men in their 30's are branded 'Darwinists'.
The term means men who are not married after 30 are not in the natural selection process to father kids.

Hah! I haven't seen the movie, but I have seen most of the HBS show, so that does not surprise me. I'm one of those men (30+, not married), but I don't find that offensive. I think it has an element of truth to it.

It's pretty clear that the women in the show are (generally) the ones doing the choosing, and not vice versa. Even in the case of Miranda and Steve, she chose to let him back in to her life. (Miranda's pregnancy was not in the books - it was written in because Cynthia Nixon became pregnant.)

If that's the case, then so be it: if it's evolution in action, who am I to complain? You make your bed, you lie in it, and by doing so you decide what kind of people the next generation will be. At least I won't be around to see the Idiocracy. :rolleyes:

Galvasean

Sex and the City makes a mockery of feminism.

And SJP looks like a foot.

grumpytrousers

Sex and the City is quite quite patronising.

But you don't need to worry your pretty little head about that...:D

Vic Vinegar

Galvasean wrote: »

And SJP looks like a foot.

You watch Family Guy too then....:)

Driver 8

No, it patronises humans.

rockysweatpants

Ha ha that is kinda funny.

Eirebear

The TV series was one that i found patronised women TBH.
It didnt patronise men in the slightest, instead it stereotyes them making it easier for the writers to patronise women.

I havnt seen the film (and i doubt i will) so to be honest i reckon im better off staying away from any commenting on social issues that arise.

Nolanger

That SATC movie needed male characters played by Tom Green or Don Rickles.

rockysweatpants

The SATC movie shows men as dumb and women as dumb
hey its a dumb movie. But fun they say.
For that at least it is worth seeing, but strictly for women only.

zAbbo

I always thought SATC partronised women, with the ultimate goal of getting a man...

It's only a TV show I guess

IanCurtis

zAbbo wrote: »

I always thought SATC partronised women, with the ultimate goal of getting a man

Yeah that's what I thought too....it's hardly liberating women!

faceman

I dont find it patronising. I think its a film that gives a dumbed down view of what women want/are. Men are second rate characters no different to women in a James Bond flick.

I would dismiss it as harmless, only the film puts a massive emphasis on consumerism and product placement it shouldnt be allowed.

Look at it this way. One of the biggest complaints about the last James Bond film from fans was that there was too much product placement in it. SATC goes a step further associating happiness and social acceptance with consumerism. Expensive brands at that.

L31mr0d

mountain lips wrote: »

You watch Family Guy too then....:)

Kirsten Dunst would win the Hot Body/Ugly Face contest

But yeah, programs and movies like this do tend to patronize men. But its no different to the way that African American comedies poke fun at white people and incessantly stereotype them, heck I've seen the likes of Chris Rock call white people "Crackers" on stage, which I find highly offensive, but if a white comedian used the "N" word they will never see a stage again. Also a comedy with white people for the majority would get canceled if they showed a black person eating fried chicken.

Its the same with female orientated programs/movies, they are allowed to get away with stereotyping men. They will also do things, like grab a waiters ass or treat men like slabs of meat to be used and get away with it. But where a male orientated show to do this it would be "promoting abuse and marginalization of women"

I guess it's some unwritten rule that if a race is still suffering from stereotypes in the real world then they are allowed to stereotype all other races on TV and in Movies.

Pigman II

L31mr0d wrote: »

Kirsten Dunst would win the Hot Body/Ugly Face contest

TBH

her face > her body

Galvasean

L31mr0d wrote: »

Kirsten Dunst would win the Hot Body/Ugly Face contest

WHAT!?!?!?!

Aurora Borealis

Galvasean wrote: »

WHAT!?!?!?!

+1

She's gorgeous!

faceman

L31mr0d wrote: »

Kirsten Dunst would win the Hot Body/Ugly Face contest

I think she ugly too. But i dont fancy her body much either.

L31mr0d

Aurora Borealis wrote: »

+1

She's gorgeous!

Galvasean wrote: »

WHAT!?!?!?!

*sigh* Do none of you people watch family guy!?!?!?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJC1IALVOq8

She just has a very homely face, and her eyes are sunken into her head like she used to be a crack addict or something. She's no Jessica Alba or Charlize Theron.

constitutionus

IanCurtis wrote: »

Yeah that's what I thought too....it's hardly liberating women!

well in fairness it was written by two gay men !

rockysweatpants

SATC encourages women to love themselves more, be more part of the US of A consumerist society, thats United States of Advertising.
All the time the real advert is for more money from lonely lost women who just happen to identify with the charactors.

Men and women have evolved to NOTHING.
Am I right or am I just Drunk. Answers please.

Galvasean

rockysweatpants wrote: »

SATC encourages women to love themselves more, be more part of the US of A consumerist society, thats United States of Advertising.
All the time the real advert is for more money from lonely lost women who just happen to identify with the charactors.

Men and women have evolved to NOTHING.
Am I right or am I just Drunk. Answers please.

Bit of both.

hot fuss

I find it hard to understand why this film/series has provoked so much debate like this.

I'm sure we could all list 100 movies that patronise women and if SATC patronises and stereotypes men - so what? When does it actually claim to be a bible for how women should live and how they should treat their men?! It's a light, entertaining TV series for feck sake - pure entertainment!!

The Sopranos doesn't exactly make women look like the most liberated bunch, but we're not out there bitching and moaning about it, are we?!

stereoroid

http://www.sarahjessicaparkerlookslikeahorse.com/

That is all.

maverickIRL

just wondering if a regular guy would enjoy sitting thro
2.5 hrs of this? or is it just a chick flick?

JangoFett

I love this tv show and am looking forward to the movie and I'm a dude!

Look, how many years of tv shows and movies have we had the men's point of view? Its the first show where women talk candidly about sex, more the power to them!

Jack B. Badd

maverickIRL wrote: »

just wondering if a regular guy would enjoy sitting thro
2.5 hrs of this? or is it just a chick flick?

As a straight woman, I wouldn't enjoy sitting through it (based on what little I've seen of the tv show and what I know of the premise). I have no idea what a guy would get out of it. Go see Doomsday instead, that looks like fun :pac:

As for empowering women (as the last poster put it), it's yet another situation where women define themselves through their men. It's the same old bondage message only this time the key is to get the guy who can afford chains that are pretty.

gordon_gekko

Aurora Borealis wrote: »

+1

She's gorgeous!

agreed + she seems like a really cool chick too

Acacia

''Is the Movie just another give conning the public with real life social talk , make money off gullible women , feed their heads with junk , and then cash the cheques.''

Now, that I find patronizing. As if women who enjoy 'Sex and the City' are bimbos who believe that everything who happens in the movie is going to happen in Real Life. *sigh* What do you take us for? :pac:

kowloon

It's just an offshoot of Americas most popular mainstream religion; Oprahism.
Consumer spirituality and $hit books .

lisbon_lions

Men, like new shoes or certain hand bags are mere objects in this show. Accessories or props upon which other women judge them.

Maybe its because this is the first time a generation of women have the chance to objectify men in the mainstream media (we have been doing the reversal since the birth of moving pictures) and they are making the most of it?

And men cannot be seen to be saying 'hey, this is cringy - I want to complain' as he would clearly have issues with his identity hence a sign of weakness.

The GF loves it and I watch it with her at times, and she has to sit through the pain of Bear Grillis in return

Its just down-time tv after work - thats all

irish_bob

in reply to the op,s question , does satc patronise men

men dont care about things like that
thats one of the things that makes us different than chicks
we dont get annoyed about unimportant crap

chalad07

for some peolpe on this thread - Patronise means when you talk down to someone,

Mossy Monk

Ivicia wrote: »

My brother thinks SJP is very unattractive (not his exact words).

Did he say she was an ugly ****? He'd be right.