Like sexist ‘Minions,’ giants in ‘The BFG’ are all male

Like the all male “Minions” featured in no less than 3 blockbuster movies, Roald’s Dahl’s giants in his book The BFG, coming out as a movie directed by Steven Spielberg in July, are 100% male.

bfg-movie-2016-ruby-barnhill-mark-rylance

My 7 year old daughter and I were reading The BFG when we came across the first illustration of 8 giants, all hairy and shirtless, sporting a distinct caveman look. “Are there no girl giants?” we wondered. “There must be!” insisted my daughter. “The moms.” Not thrilled that the mother role could be the only way female giants were essential to the story, I took her point. Still, I was pessimistic about the appearance of any female giants. I’d been burned in the past. I held on to the same hope that the minions weren’t all male until, in the last movie a male narrator confirmed for me, and all the kids watching, that minions have no mothers as well. They evolved from amoeba-like creatures. They came out of the sea.

By the time my daughter and I reached to page 51, Dahl let us know for sure: There are no female giants in the story at all. Disturbed by his poor grammar and vocabulary, Sophie, the girl kidnapped by the giant, asks the BFG he had a mother to teach him. The BFG responds in shock, almost disgust:

“Giants don’t have mothers! Surely you is knowing that.

“I did not know that,” Sophie said.

“Whoever heard of a woman giant!” shouted the BFG, waving the snozzcumber around his head like a lasso. “There never was a woman giant and there never will be one. Giants are always men!”

Sophie felt herself getting a little muddled. “In that case,” she said, “how were you born?”

“Giants isn’t born,” the BFG answered. “Giants appears and that’s all there is to it. They simply appears, the same way as the sun and the stars.”

How very minion-like.

I hope Spielberg’s adaptation lacks this sexism and that at least half of the giants in the movie are depicted as female. I especially hope that millions of kids don’t hear the line: “Whoever heard of a woman giant! There never was a woman giant and there never will be one. Giants are always men!” I’m not optimistic. In the trailers for the movie, I’ve seen only male giants.

Why do I want half the giants to be female? After all, they’re villains. They eat children. They’re ugly and brutal and mean. Don’t I want females to be heroes?

Yes, but that’s not all I want females to be.

Defending his sexist minions, creator Pierre Coffin said: “Seeing how dumb and stupid they often are, I just couldn’t imagine Minions being girls.” Simon Ragoonanan of Man vs Pink responds, “I read Pierre’s comment as ‘I just couldn’t imagine girls being funny.” Not only do I agree with him, I want females to be depicted in the incredible range that males are: funny, serious, fat, thin, old, young, good, bad, geeky, heroic and on and on an on. Once you put female characters in a box, they’re always in a box, limited, stereotyped, and hardly there at all. Because all of the giants are male, females get far less lines than males. Earlier this year, a study was released that shows in children’s movies, even when there is a female protagonist, males almost always get more speaking time.

The BFG has “a strong female character” in Sophie, but besides the queen, those two are the only major female characters in the whole story. The queen is only in about a quarter of the story. Besides the all male giants, there’s an all male army. Sophie is a Minority Feisty, a sexist phenomenon that often fools parents into thinking they’re watching a feminist movie when they’re watching a sexist one. I define Minority Feisty as this:

If you see an animated film today, it will usually include a strong female character. Or two. Or maybe even three. But however many females there are, there will always be more males. Females, half of the human population, will be depicted as a minority. The token strong female character (or two or three, you get the point) reviewers will call “feisty.”

The problem is that because Pixar or Disney has so magnanimously thrown in this “feisty” female (who may even have some commentary about sexism or male domination) we’re no longer supposed to care that almost all of the other characters in the film are male.

If the male dominance in The BFG was about one book (or one movie) it wouldn’t be a problem, but this sexism is part of a pattern that is so repeated and normalized, we don’t even notice it. With so many girls gone missing from children’s media, we’re training a new generation to expect and accept this sexism. We’re missing a huge opportunity to use creativity to show them that the world could vbe another way. Once again, I ask: Why does the imaginary world have to be sexist at all? If rats can cook, unicorns prance around, and lions befriend warthogs, why can’t we picture gender equality?

According to Chris Rock’s opening monologue, sexism in Hollywood doesn’t exist

In a disappointing opening monologue at the Academy Awards, Chris Rock claimed there was no need for male and female categories and mocked #AskHerMore.

ABC_chris_rock_hosting_mm_160228_12x5_1600

For the first time in possibly 20 years, I’m watching the Oscars at home and not at a party. Last year, I was at a viewing event, Tweeting about #AskHerMore and people around me either didn’t get it or made fun of me. It was such a frustrating and uninspiring experience for me that I decided not to venture out tonight. This year, while lying in pajamas on my couch, I was thrilled to see Ryan Seacrest actually ask women about their roles and give actresses an opportunity to discuss their craft. His questions about clothing were limited and always came at the end of the interview so it was impossible to go on and on about jewelry and shoes. Progress, I thought.

Then Chris Rock came on. He addressed racism in Hollywood, which is hugely important for the whole world to see him do. He opened with a great point: racism has been going on since the Oscars began, so why is everyone upset now? When people asked me about racism at the Oscars this year, I replied I’m happy that, at least, people are finally discussing this bigotry in mainstream media. Racism in Hollywood has become part of a national conversation. The first step in changing something is recognizing that it exists. That’s why I’m pissed about Rock’s monologue. Fury about sexism at the Oscars has not garnered much media attention. #OscarsSoWhite is taken seriously. It is a political act. #AskHerMore, on the other hand, is mocked. Rock referred to the latter in his monologue:

Another big thing tonight is you’re not allowed to ask women what they’re wearing anymore. It’s a whole thing: “Ask her more.” You have to ask her more.” Well, you know, you ask the men more. Hey, everything’s not sexism. Everything’s not racism. They ask the men more because the men are all wearing the same outfits, OK? Every guy in here is wearing the exact same thing. If George Clooney showed up with a lime green tux on and a swan coming out his …, someone would go, “What you wearing George?”

A Reel Girl fan comments:

Chris Rock basically said “She was asking for it because of what she was wearing.” Good job.

Categories for female and male actors create an illusion of equality. Never mind that the roles for women are far more limited as far how old the actresses are allowed to be, how complex the characters they play are, and what kind of heroes are depicted in the narratives. Behind the scenes awards including producing, directing, screenplay writing, adaptations (I could go on, see chart below) the male nominees, and of course winners, far outnumber women. Instead of recognizing this inequality, again Rock acts as if sexism doesn’t exist.

Hey, if you want black nominees every year, you need to just have black categories. That’s what you need. You need to have black categories. You already do it with men and women. Think about it. There’s no real reason for there to be a man and a woman category in acting. There’s no reason. It’s not track and field. You don’t have to separate them. Robert De Niro has never said, I better slow this acting down so Meryl Streep can catch up.

I didn’t expect Rock to deal with sexism, but I was surprised he made fun if it. His reaction put me in a weird space. He calling attention to racism, basically saying it’s not “bring me lemonade” racism; it’s subtle, but its pernicious. For example, he said Leonardo DiCaprio gets a great role every hear. Jamie Foxx is a stellar actor, but great roles for him are rare. Does Rock not get the same situation exists for women?

All right, back to the show. More later.

womenInFilm-light-revised

 

 

 

‘Minions’ most sexist kids’ movie of the year, rated Triple S for gender stereotyping

Yesterday, when my three daughters and I went to see “Minions,” two lingering questions I’ve had– are they really all male and if so, how did they come into being– were answered.

minions-poster-1

So, yes, now I know: the minions are all boys. When I’ve complained in the past about the utter lack of female minions, commenters responded that they’re “genderless.” In kidworld, where everything from robots to cars to planes are assigned a gender, I doubted this was the case, but I watched the new movie carefully just in case I was mistaken, that the minions were an exception to this rule. Guess what? Not only does every minion mentioned have a male name, but they are also repeatedly referred to as boys with lines delivered like: “Growing boy creatures need their strength” or “Good luck in there, boys!” or “Buckle up, boys!” So, please don’t waste your time emailing me that a 6 year old kid won’t notice what gender these creatures are.

Now, for question #2. The movie opens with a scene where the minions seem to evolve from amoeba like creatures that come out of the sea. Clearly, no female is involved in their reproduction. A male narrator describes their creation story and also how and why minions came to be: to serve an evil master. As evolution continues on the screen, we hear the narrator introduce “man.” We then see a caveman, followed by a series of other male leaders including a pharaoh and Napoleon. Around this point in the movie one of the minions, I think it was Bob, emerges from the sea wearing a pair of starfish on his chest in the first of several breast/ female jokes. Another minion sees Bob and quips: “He’s an idiot.”

Right after the narrator assures us this is going to be the same old, same old narrative we always see where one male saves the world, announcing: “One minion had a plan and his name was Kevin” I turned to my oldest daughter, who is 11. I told her I had to take a bathroom break and to watch for any female character who speaks, as none had come into the movie yet at all. My daughter responded, “Mama, the villain is a girl.” She was referring to Scarlet Overkill who she was familiar with from the many, many previews we saw of the movie. I, too, had high hopes for Scarlett even though as the only main female character in the movie, I was pretty sure she would be limited by the narrative to a Minority Feisty role.

For those who aren’t familiar with Reel Girl, Minority Feisty is the term I’ve assigned female characters in children’s movies. These females are “strong” and therefore often referred to as “feisty” by reviewers. “Feisty” is a sexist adjective. A reviewer would not label a male character, such as Superman “feisty.” “Feisty” refers to someone who isn’t really strong but plays at being strong. “Feisty” isn’t a real threat to any power structure. The Minority Feisty can refer to one or more female characters in a movie, the point being that though there can be more than one, females are shown as a minority population. The Minority Feisty represents our slow, slow, slow progress from the Smurfette Principle, a term coined by feminist writer Katha Pollitt. The Minority Feisty serves to pacify parents, so we can sigh in relief and say to ourselves: “There’s a strong female or two, this movie is feminist!” And thus, we’re all supposed to ignore and forget that girls– half of the kid population– are reduced to a tiny minority in the movie and almost never represent the protagonist.

Scarlet Overkill is one of the WORST EVER representations of the Minority Feisty. The male narrator introduces her at Villain Con: “There’s a new bad man in town and that man is a woman.” Then Scarlet is on the stage in her red dress and stilettos, saying: “Hey, a girl’s got to make a living.” She is the keynote speaker at the conference, defined as “the world’s first female supervillain.” Before Overkill came to town, she tells us, it was believed that “a woman could never rob a bank as well as a man.” Overkill proves them wrong, so YAY feminism, right? Let me remind you that the minions represent a fantasy world where little, yellow pill shaped creatures have sprouted from the sea. Why, why, why in “Minions,” and most other children’s movies, do we recycle sexism into so many stories that are otherwise imaginative and creative, because “that’s just the way it is in the real world?” Why does Scarlett Overkill have to be represented as an exception to her gender? Why can’t we show children a fantasy world where gender equality exists?  “Minions” does the opposite, reproducing and in fact, managing to exaggerate sexism so that females have hardly any place or representation in the world at all.

You wouldn’t think it possible, but things get even worse for sexism and Overkill’s character. She wants the minions to steal the crown for her because she wants to be a princess– not a queen!– “because everyone loves princesses.” Is any kid watching this movie going to get a message of female empowerment from this single, sexist character? If you still have doubt, at the end of the movie, this first female greatest villain of all time, cedes her status to Gru who you know from the “Despicable Me” movies. It is he who is the real greatest villain of all time, Overkill’s 15 minutes are up.

I’m appalled and disgusted that movies like “Minions” are allowed to be made in 2015 and shown to little kids, teaching a new generation to expect and accept a world where girls go missing. If you think I’m overreacting, imagine the reverse: A movie about three female characters– Kara, Stella, and Becky, who lead an all female tribe. They defeat the first male super villain ever, while pursued in a world populated by hundreds of female villains, groups of all female police officers, troops of all female guards, and visit English pubs where almost everyone– except for the pink suited king– is also female. Would you notice the sexism? Would your kids? The fact that the lack of females in children’s movies– from protagonists to crowd scenes, from heroes to villains– isn’t glaringly obvious to us and our children shows how sexist the world is. In the fantasy world, anything is possible, even gender equality. If we can’t even imagine it, we can’t create it. Unfortunately, “Minions” teaches kids, one more time, that females don’t matter much at all.

Reel Girl rates “Minions” ***SSS*** for gender stereotyping

11223819_862423443812427_9050879917763006415_n

(Photo features 2 of my daughters, ages 6 and 8)

Reel Girl’s Gallery of Girls Gone Missing From Children’s Movies in 2014

See Reel Girl’s Gallery of Girls Gone Missing From Children’s Movies in 2013

Reel Girl’s Gallery of Girls Gone Missing From Children’s Movies in 2012

Reel Girl’s Gallery of Girls Gone Missing From Children’s Movies in 2011

In the 5 years since I started Reel Girl, I’ve never done this before but comments on this post are now closed. Generally, I let most commenters post because the imbeciles inadvertently prove all of my points. But I’ve reached a point where there are too many trolls who repeat the same comments over and over and over, the same arguments (if they can be called that) which I’ve already rebutted numerous times. My energy needs to be focused on writing and creating, not reacting and responding.

Reason #1,001 to skip Disney’s new (ha!) “Cinderella”

I’ve seen so many movies for you guys and for this blog. I’ve sat through “Spongebob” and “Planes” and “Tintin.” I’m so sorry, but I don’t think I can do another fucking “Cinderella.” “Ever After” is great. If your kids want to see a Cinderella movie, please show them Drew Barrymore’s fantastic feminist version of this fairytale. If you’re somehow mystified as to why “Cinderella” should be skipped, please read the About section of my blog. In fact, read any post on my blog, or better yet, get off the internet and read Peggy Orenstein’s fabulous book Cinderella Ate My Daughter. But here’s a bonus, reason 1,001 to skip Disney’s latest money grab. (Yes, that number is random, only not far larger because I didn’t want to use up characters in my blog title with infinite zeros.)  Today, I read on Jezebel:

Lily James went on a partial liquid diet to accommodate that stupid corset. In a recent interview with E!, James explained how she made it work on set by foregoing solid food.

ywtddo8tto97s5lkrbvw

No solid food. That’s right children, our female protagonist did not transform into her best, most beautiful, desired self through her Fairy Godmother’s magic but by not eating. Yes, little girls, you too can starve and make all of your dreams come true!

Reel Girl rates “Cinderella” without even seeing the movie ***SSS***

 

Academy Awards for adults only, rated Triple S for gender stereotyping

In a patriarchal dystopia, once a year the public gathers for PR blitz that serves to solidify the foundations of this sexist society. This annual event celebrates narratives created by men, starring men, and produced by men with prestigious awards (golden men) bestowed by an organization made up of men. The messaging is clear: women’s stories don’t matter. Males attending this event, required to dress alike, are peppered with questions from journalists about their work while the females are encouraged to wear extravagant gowns to outdo each other. For the women, the competition is relegated to yet another beauty contest, where their looks– from hair to make-up to jewelry– are picked apart, the most common question: Who are you wearing? This ritual shuts down challenges or protests to the mantra of the civilization: Men are valued for what they do, women are valued for how they appear. This is the way it has always been and the way it will always be. It is human nature.

16743081-mmmain

 

No, this is not a synopsis of Hunger Games 4, but the 87th Academy Awards, created by the good old United States of America, a country devoted to liberty and justice for all.

So how we explain this sexism? In 2015, 100% of the nominees for the greatest writers, the Best Adapted and Best Original Screenplay awards, the creators of our stories, are men. I really don’t get it. I thought girls were supposed to be verbal….

 

Cinematography– the eyes, the perspective, how we see– also 100% male nominees. What about the whole vision, the genius? The Best Director category is also made up of 100% males. No actor of color was nominated for both genders including the supporting actor category. A black woman has never never never been nominated for Best Director. This year Ava DuVernay was not chosen for her movie “Selma.”

 

Here’s a funny coincidence: The LA Times reports that the members the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the voting body, is 94 percent white, 2 percent African American, less than 2 percent Latino, and 77 percent male with the average age of 62. On Sunday night, the majority of winners will be middle aged white males.

 

Much has been written about the sexism and racism of the Academy Awards. I’m really blogging now to ask you to please consider not allowing your kids to see the show. Watching the Academy Awards is often a family event. It’s on early, a Sunday night, children are often lurking about. But this kind of TV is not mindless fun for kids; it’s one of the worst programs a child can take in. It’s not only the actual performance, where men win and win and win again, but the people watching in your living room, parents, relatives, friends, people who your kids look up to, will invariably be commenting on how the women look, who’s pretty, who’s neckline dips too low, and who looks too old ladyish. We are trained to judge and value women for how they appear, and if we can spare kids and their malleable brains this immersion in sexism, they will be better off for it. My advice is that if you’re watching the show, as I am, not to forbid your children from joining you because that will only make it appealing. Instead, distract them. Let them see a Miyazaki movie or something else good (links at the end of this post to great lists of Reel Girl’s recommended movies for kids) or set them up with an art project or have a friend over or play a board game if your spouse doesn’t want to watch (like mine.)

 

The alternative, if your child must watch, is to point out the sexism to her. Include her in Tweeting #AskHerMore every time you and she see an actress asked first, only, or mostly about her outfit. (I hope you will be Tweeting #AskHerMore if you’re watching at all) While Oscar media criticism can be educational for older kids, say 11 and up, I wouldn’t saddle younger ones with this vigilance. But I still advise not letting older kids watch. There’s the issue that you can’t control what other adults say, so unless you’re going to respond every time someone talks about how a woman looks, it’s better to have your kids out of the room. As parents, we need to do our best to create a world for our children that is the opposite of the one that the Academy Awards presents. We need to show them through conditioning that women’s stories are important.

 

The Academy’s snub of “Wild” really says it all.The star of the movie, Reese Witherspoon, is nominated for Best Actress and her co-star Laura Dern is nominated for Best Supporting Actress. “Wild” is beautifully directed by Jean-Marc Vallee, whose last movie, “Dallas Buyers Club,” was nominated for Best Picture and 4 other awards. In Slate, Dan Kois asks what’s the difference?

 

 

Well, Wild has sold more tickets. Wild is more artfully made—a more confident piece of filmmaking, one that finds an ingenious cinematic method to tell its intricate, emotional story. But the chief difference, of course, is that Wild is about a woman’s journey, not a man’s…

 

In some ways, the dismissal of Wild, and the frequent non-nomination of movies about women, calls to mind the ongoing debate in the literary world about the way critics and awards-givers dismiss “domestic fiction.” Wild is determinedly one woman’s story, and it doesn’t make a claim that Cheryl Strayed is an exceptional woman. She’s not a queen or a muse. She’s not a wife or a girlfriend. She’s flawed and sad in many of the same ways that all of us have been flawed and sad, especially in our early 20s. Her struggles are not world-historical but instead have to do with her mother, who dies unfairly early in life; with her ex-husband, whom she betrays again and again; with her body, which she numbs with heroin and casual sex, and then brutalizes hiking a thousand miles on the Pacific Crest Trail. Her struggle, in the end, is with herself.

That is to say, Cheryl’s story is a prototypical “woman’s story,” and thus one not worthy of a Best Picture nomination, apparently. In the past 20 years, only 21 movies that primarily tell the stories of women have been nominated for Best Picture, out of 125 movies nominated overall. This disparity reflects the reality of moviemaking in Hollywood, sure, but it also influences that reality. When the stories of women—those out in the world, living real human lives, existing not as auxiliary characters but as the heroes of their own stories—are deemed unsuitable of the industry’s biggest prize, it becomes harder to convince studios and producers to make those movies.

 

Teach your children that stories about girls and women matter. Don’t let them watch the Academy Awards.

 

Reel Girl rates the 87th Academy Awards ***SSS***

If you’re watching the Academy Awards on Sunday night, and you want to let your kids watch a movie, Reel Girl recommends the titles on these lists:

Movies for younger kids (up to age 9)

Movies for older kids (10 and up)

10 best movies for kids starring heroic girls

 

Only girl in ‘Penguins of Madagascar’ is love interest

After writing numerous blogs about the sexist penguins of Madagascar, I finally saw the movie today. I don’t think my 5 year old stopped laughing once during the first 20 minutes, a period of time in which also featured almost no females, just like the rest of the movie. I deduced this sad ratio from the preview (not to mention the 3 previous Madagascar movies.) What I didn’t know was that Eva the owl, the Minority Feisty in the North Wind  group of 4 males– not to be confused with the Penguin group of 4 males– would be the love interest of Kowalski. He goes ga-ga when he sees her for the first time just as Emmet does when he sees Wyldstyle in ‘The Lego Movie.” At the end of the movie– surprise, surprise– Eva and Kowalski kiss. Typical of a new trend I’ve noticed with Minority Feisty, Eva has the impressive title of intelligence analyst, but we don’t see her actually use her skills much at all.

New-Screenshot-Eva-penguins-of-madagascar-37597912-1095-617

Why couldn’t the head of the North Wind, a male fox, have been female? Half the members of the North Wind? All of the members?

168959

Why couldn’t the villain, an evil scientist octopus, Dave, have been female? What about all of his octopi underlings who also had male voices?

brine_gallery_01_v2

Technically, Eva is not the only female. There are a few others in the long line of penguins at the beginning of the movie. There are 3 mermaid penguins who have a small part, shells covering up where I suppose their breasts are supposed to be. These mermaids are so insignificant, I can’t find a pic of them on Google images to post here. There a couple human girls and women with tiny parts. As far as gender stereotypes, the best thing I can say about this movie is that evil Dave is purple, a girl color you know. That’s something my 5 year old pointed out to me, telling me that at least I could blog about that. So there you have it.

Reel Girl rates “Penguins of Madagascar” ***SS***

Sexist Penguins of Madagascar shouldn’t get their own movie

I’ve written a few blogs about the Penguins of Madagascar, to summarize:

* In the upcoming spin off movie (like so many spin-offs) there are even more males than in the original 3 (yes, 3) Madagascar movies which magnanimously included a Minority Feisty girl hippo, Gloria played by Jaden Pinkett Smith. “Penguins of Madagascar” coming out for Thanksgiving stars 4 brothers.

the-penguins-of-madagascar-movie

*In the preview for “Penguins of Madagascar” there is just one female voice who comes in at the very end, saying:”Where’s the sound?”

*The Penguins make sexist jokes as show in this video/ preview for “Madagascar 3” where one chides the others “You pillow fight like a bunch of little girls.”

Now, Mecano comments on my blog:

The Penguins of Madagascar TV show on Nickelodeon is esp annoying. In this the 4 male penguins live in a zoo along with many animals.Only one of the zoo animals is female (Marlene, a female otter) .She appears in many episodes (but not all) All other animals (around 20) are male.We also never see any female Penguins. What’s more one of the penguins,Rico, has a plastic doll as a “girlfriend” .He calls her “Mrs. Perky” .In some episodes this doll is the only female “character” we see! Just…sad.

 

Look at this image:

wtf-penguins-penguins-of-madagascar-29040740-550-333

Mrs. Perky? This picture shows pretty much everything bad about gender and children’s media. I Googled “Mrs. Perky” and found this on Wikia.com (she is alternately referred to as Miss Perky and Ms. Perky):

The doll was given her name and temporarily a voice in the second season episode Hello, Dollface. But, by the end of the episode her voice-chip was removed.

 

I already hated these penguins, but WTF? And these guys get their own movie? Why doesn’t Gloria the hippo and her sisters get their own movie?

Do you want your children– girls and boys– to be entertained by sexist jokes? Do you want a new generation to learn to expect and accept a world where females are marginalized, sexualized, and sidelined if they get to exist at all?

 

In another sexist cover, Time uses porn cliche for Hillary Clinton story

In the new Time, to illustrate the cover article “Can Anyone Stop Hillary?” the magazine uses cliche porn imagery, showing a man trapped beneath a woman’s shoe.

g9510.20_Hillary.Cover.indd

Seriously, Time?

What did you use for inspiration, this YouTube video? (One of thousands just like it.)

Or perhaps, this shot from a porn site? (One of millions just like it)

femdom-erotica-domme-trampling-her-boy-toy-with-high-heels-498x441

With so many options, I picked this image because its caption “Ending the sexual dark age,” listed in the category “dominatrix in heels standing on male slave’s chest” seems to echo the point Time’s cover attempts to make.

The Hillary Clinton cover isn’t the first time a “news weekly” has borrowed from porn. There was this cover of Newsweek. The subject of the story: great food.

newsweekcover

Time also did a story featuring the “best” chefs. No porn, but the magazine opted for this pic. Hmmm…what’s missing here?

godsoffood

That’s right, Time’s “Gods of Food” story featured ZERO women.

Wouldn’t it be nice if “news” magazines weren’t sexist? What would our news look like then? Does anyone even know?