Right off the bat, I want to say it’s kind of amazing the conversations that are stemming from mainstream media in terms of feminism and women’s representation. Maybe it’s because I’m so tuned in on social media or maybe there actually is a change in the tide? Well that’s a conversation for another day, today’s think piece came about when two people I absolutely adore maintained opposing opinions about a kid-friendly movie titled Mad Max: Fury Road. These stances held by Anita Sarkeesian and FILMCRITHULK all pertain to the topical and most frequently overlooked/misunderstood ideology of FEMINISM. Before we enter the ring, let’s do some history on what’s going on:
- “Mad Max: Fury Road” has been touted as having significant feminist overtones in its narrative and cast, specifically Charlize Theron’s ‘Furiosa’. Don’t believe me? Here’s a list of articles saying so and if you guess which one is from Jezebel you’ll get a a dollar
(Oops! I Made a Feminist Manifesto: George Miller and “Mad Max”)
(Is ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’ a feminist action movie?)
(The Heroic Masculinity of ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’)
(The New Mad Max Film Is So Feminist My Scrotum Killed Itself)
- People fucking LOVE this movie
(#23 on IMDB’s Top 250 Movies of All Time)
(My review: “ASDFAGDHS out of [skull emoji])
- BUT Sarkeesian and FilmCritHuk disagree on the basis of feminism
(see @FemFreq and @FILMCRITHULK for the full Twitter opinions)
I guess this is what it feels like when parents argue but I wouldn’t know, I’m a child raised by a single mother…maybe that’s why I’m so easily accepting of feminist ideology…? Whatever this feeling is - I DON’T LIKE IT. They are essentially saying the same, rooting for the same but arguing about semantics and disagreeing on the quality or significance of Mad Max. Sarkeesian’s tone reminds me A LOT of Neil deGrasse Tyson’s fact-check of Gravity, which at the time also rubbed me the wrong way because it felt very reductive. I understand that Sarkeesian is making some very strong points on the societal relationship to violence/power and the oversimplification of Mad Max’s feminism BUT (and this is a big BUT) I can’t help but feel that Sarkeesian, like Tyson, is overlooking the absolutely breathtaking accomplishment that these films achieved. Sure, there is a flexibility for which these films progress, either terrible representations or empowering - both debatable, but there is no absolutism. It frustrates me when there is a bold line drawn on the field, which ultimately leaves out any flexible, conducive discussion of large, complex ideas. It essentially creates a boxing ring where we are pigeon-holed to either root for A or B - for either it being feminist or not?
As a man, nothing I say really matters when it comes to the discussion of this movie being feminist or not. I have my personal opinion, which I will openly share in order to create a dialogue that doesn’t inherently create camps. In order to make this point I have to compare Mad Max to some other relevant media that is being spoken about which will involve SPOILERS FOR GAME OF THRONES/MAD MAX/TAYLOR SWIFT NEW MUSIC VIDEO (I guess)
Firstly, I disagree with Sarkeesian on only a few points but I agree with her on the following:
- “On the surface, Mad Max is about resisting a cartoonish version of misogyny. But that resistance takes the form of more glorified violence.”
- “Fury Road is different from many action films in that it lets some women participate as equal partners in a cinematic orgy of male violence.”
- “Feminism doesn’t simply mean women getting to partake in typical badass “guy stuff”. Feminism is about redefining our social value system.”
- “Mad Max’s villains are caricatures of misogyny which makes overt misogynists angry but does not challenge more prevalent forms of sexism.
- “Viewers get to feel good about hating cartoon misogyny without questioning themselves or examining how sexism actually works in our society.”
- “It makes me profoundly sad that mainstream pop culture now interprets feminism to mean “women can drive fast and stoically kill people too!”
- “We’re starved for representations of powerful women but we need to re-imagine concepts of power & move beyond the glorification of violence.”
Here’s what I disagree with:
- “Sometimes violence may be necessary for liberation from oppression, but it’s always tragic. Fury Road frames it as totally fun and awesome.”
Sure, action/violence frames it as fun and awesome forgoing the elements of tragedy but (AND I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY THIS TO ME BUT I’M GOING TO SAY IT) it’s just a movie - specifically, it’s an action movie. The whole plan is contingent on Furiosa and Max escaping the violence to retake the Citadel for peace and environmental regrowth, essentially acting as a metaphor for a woman’s ability to produce life in the face of a violent and arid patriarchy. I understand the possible problematic implications of framing it as necessary AND fun but is it really? I’m not sure but my gut is telling me ‘no’ but that might be me taking joy in this fun climax.
- “As a film Mad Max absolutely adores its gritty future. The camera caresses acts of violence in the same way it caresses the brides’ bodies.”
Yes, this happened. During the reveal of the brides’, there is a very stylistic shot (almost how one would see a mirage in a desert) but the objectification ends there. Sorry but I really did not sense the camera meandering over the women in any gaze-y way. If anything, the film tackled this issue head on in terms of their rebellion of being objects.
- "We are not things” is a great line, but doesn’t work when the plot and ESPECIALLY the camera treats them like things from start to finish.
Again, I don’t think the camera treats them like things. They are characters and the few lines this film has does a decent job characterizing these females better than a majority of the male cast. Also, to simplify the female role in this film to “We are not things” is a mistake. There is a lot of meat, albeit hidden in the marrow, that opens up the conversation of masculinity in relation to these well-thought out characters.
Okay so what the hell am I talking about?
I guess my major argument for why I think Mad Max is ultimately a very good representation of feminism and female empowerment comes at the reflection of another popular piece of media, Game of Thrones.
SPOILER
Sansa gets raped. The act alone is terrible and could be explored with complexity and maturity but the creators of the show did not do so. Instead, this action is left to repeat the larger themes of the show about power, bad men, and broken men - nothing about women other than being pawns in a larger game played by MEN. The scene ends with this shot:
The episode ends with Sansa getting raped, never showing her face, and slowly pushing into a disgusted Theon as he is again tortured by forcibly seeing this occur in front of him. This piss poor handling of Sansa as a dynamic character has again regulated her to a sex object for men’s larger design (within the narrative and from the show runners - meta). My coworker and I got into it but I couldn’t get him too riled up so I withheld some of my stronger concerns whereas he sided with the show because to him, it was just ‘going to happen’/’what do you expect’? The world of Game of Thrones is so widely accepted because it is a biome of our current world and culture, which is dominated by patriarchy and misogyny. The show was more concerned with Theon’s arc, Theon’s experience, and Theon’s future than Sansa, which is a god damn travesty considering the ramifications of ‘going there’ and then completely ignoring the female experience. It’s like going to the Grand Canyon and looking purely at your Dad’s face as he gazes upon the beauty of the vista. What’s the point? Is there point!? Hasn’t this show made this point repeatedly!?!?!? THIS IS A STUPID, OVERDONE POINT!!! STOP REGULATING FEMALE CHARACTERS FOR MALE FODDER!!11!
It’s clear: this episode has failed. However, I think it illuminates a very important point about authorial intent and execution in terms of Mad Max.
The parallels between the patriarchal world of Mad Max and Game of Thrones are clear:
- women are objects and men are the power, exuding their force on these objects
- women have agency/are imprisoned in both pieces of media through their rebellion/submission towards men
- these cultural givens are understandable considering our current climate
The distinction is that Mad Max NEVER revels in the sexual violence despite it essentially requiring it considering how blatantly exploitative of women this world is. However, Game of Thrones’ elevated prestige essentially demands this territory be explored? On the basis of what? Being edgy? Being necessary? or being desired? Think about it - the women of Mad Max are LITERALLY called breeders yet they are never raped as a plot device.
Consider this:
The final image of Mad Max: Fury Road and the final image of that GoT episode really encapsulate everything you need to know. One ends with Theon’s face who has endured countless traumas as brutally visualized in the series, the other with Furiosa who has endured countless traumas off-screen, never realized in the film, and the worst the film explores are that of battle wounds she encountered while fighting for her own self-motivated desires.
Think about authorial intent and what each creator was going for.
Think about the execution via the final shot.
Think about that.
FEMINISM: who’s right? They both are…sorta…
I guess up to this point I’ve been very defensive of Mad Max: Fury Road because I think it does a lot more good than harm but Sarkeesian is definitely onto something. The whole notion of the female character only being feminist when they embrace men’s penchant for violence is definitely problematic. I’d say Mad Max plays into this social narrative but to an extent that is mostly quelled by its more nuanced introduction of other feminist notions. The most damning piece of evidence revealing Sarkeesian’s concerns is the new Taylor Swift music video for “Bad Blood”. I guess you should watch if you want to continue reading my rant-essay-thing if you’re still here.
Need I say anything? Sure, it’s female “empowerment” but its playing into a narrative in which women must embrace man’s destructive game of violence and brutality. Then again, you look at the music video and that deeply engrained, socialized penchant for cathartic violence excites because women are in the driver’s seat now, which is arguably empowering but restricting. Like how gender roles, femininity and masculinity, limit our ability to love and engage without conforming to a socially constructed list of pros and cons, depending on how well we play within our ‘role’. The lack of flexibility in the dialogue, though, is what I’m pointing out as problematic in Sarkeesian, too.
By merely limiting Mad Max’s role to just “not being feminist” is reductive and dismissive of its larger role in exploring feminist ideas, despite not meeting one specific social parameter regarding violence, power, and masculinity. But just by not agreeing with Sarkeesian on some important points, doesn’t mean I don’t still love her work. And that’s not to say I will discontinue Game of Thrones either, despite how shitty it’s getting it is. I guess if this rant had a thesis it is the removal of moral/ideological/philosophical absolutism in pursuit of higher truths. I guess I just want people to be more open, flexible, and fluid in their discussions of feminism because I personally believe that it takes a village…even if you don’t like the fucking misogynist villager next door.
Also, here’s proof that I’ll always be rooting for Feminist Frequency/Anita Sarkeesian:
^ my computer that this entry was written on :)
Thanks for reading and remember - everything is grey, there is no absolutism.