Female replacements
Won’t somebody please think of the role models?
A Tory MP has linked young men turning to crime to women playing traditionally male roles in TV and film.
Nick Fletcher said “female replacements” in shows like Doctor Who were robbing boys of good role models.
…
“Is there any wonder we are seeing so many young men committing crime?,” he asked MPs taking part in a debate on International Men’s Day.
I don’t get it. The male Doctors Who are still there; the female one is in addition, not instead of. Also there are still lots and lots of male role models besides Doctor Who and other tv shows. So many. Why would new versions in which a woman plays the heroic figure cause young men to commit crimes?
But later, Mr Fletcher tweeted a statement, saying his “rather nuanced point” that there were “increasingly fewer male role models for young boys” had been “misconstrued”.
But there aren’t increasingly fewer, because we live in the Fun New World of technology, in which the existing versions remain available for your viewing pleasure.
Mr Fletcher said: “Everywhere… there seems to be a call from a tiny, but very vocal, minority that every male character or good role model must have a female replacement.
“One only needs to look at the discussion around who will play the next James Bond.”
But he said it went further than 007, adding: “In recent years we have seen Doctor Who, Ghostbusters, Luke Skywalker, the Equaliser, all replaced by women, and men are left with the Krays and Tommy Shelby.
“Is there any wonder we are seeing so many young men committing crime?”
But it’s not replacement, it’s supplement. It’s not instead of, it’s in addition to.
He sounds like the marchers in Charlottesville – “Jews will not replace us.”
Well, you know, one female role model is one too many.
When did they replace Luke Skywalker with a woman? In the 3 Star Wars prequels which featured a new, female protagonist but also Luke Skywalker?
“In recent years we have seen Doctor Who, Ghostbusters, Luke Skywalker, the Equaliser, all replaced by women, and men are left with the Krays and Tommy Shelby.”
Even if these new versions were actual replacements, I think the list of movies and tv shows is a touch longer than just those six. But isn’t it interesting that he acknowledges the importance of having good role models in fiction, yet doesn’t mind girls not getting any.
Holms, you’re assuming a world view in which girls will grow up to do something other than cook, clean and provide sexual relief for their masters.
Yes the new Dr. Who has caused a crime epidemic among young men, right. I for one would love to see a female 007, or a female US president, in fact I voted for one. Tough cookies Fletcher, the infinitessimally small sampling you offer doesn’t show any evidence for your idiotic theory. There have been female heroes and superheroes throughout history from Athena to Xena who didn’t cause a crime epidemic among young men, and the new Dr. Who won’t either. Fecking idjit.
Interesting that the lack of good rôle models for girls hasn’t led to an epidemic of female crime.
Yes, the number of crimes committed by men who watch Dr. Who has certainly gone up recently. So he might be on to something.
Is this guy the Tory equvalent of Dan Quayle with his “Murphy Brown” moment?
Crime rates are down broadly and dramatically across the United States and the U.K. over the last 30 years.
No one is sure why, and there may be multiple causes. One conjecture is that young men are spending more time creating fake mayhem in video games and less time committing real crimes in the real world.
@Skeletor
In SW part 7-9, Ray basically fills the same role as Luke did in 4-6.
So once again, women (fictional ones at that!) are to blame for the crappy choices that men make? What a surprise.
There seem to have been a lot of interconnected superhero movies in recent years. I am only aware of two female ones across all of them, but then I haven’t really paid attention. That’s the only reason, I’m sure.
I can think of four: Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel, Birds of Prey (more of a super anti-hero movie, I guess), and Black Widow.
Sonderval: And, that entire time, regards Luke Skywalker as a literal role-model, someone she should emulate and aspire to be like.
I quite like the fact that there are more powerful female characters in fiction these days, even if we still have a long (!!!) way to go before we’re anywhere near equal representation. Some movies have even started deliberately (it has to be!) turning the old sexist tropes on their heads, e.g. the latest Suicide Squad where the guys are supposed to “rescue” Damsel- in-Distress Harley Quinn from captivity, but by the time they get there she has already broken out herself and wiped the floor with every man in the building.
The one area where I don’t necessarily see that many signs of progress is when it comes to objectification/sexualization. It’s as if Hollywood has reluctantly been forced to concede “*Sigh* ok, so women are allowed to be strong and smart, maybe even superior to the men, as long as they’re also hot (and preferably not overtly feminist)”.
I suppose it might be a bit of a problem in itself if obsession with superheroes or might-as-well-be-superheroes (e.g. Angelina Jolie’s character in “Salt”) serves to plant the idea that the way for women to gain respect is by going out there and physically beating the crap out of men. On the other hand, I do think there is a room for some characters like that. If we’re going to have Dave Bautista and Jason Statham, let’s have Gina Carano as well.
I remember reading an article about the “Strong Woman Trope” (by a feminist, but I don’t remember who it was) years ago. It made several points, but one of them (IRRC) was that most of these strong woman movies make it so clear that the heroine is exceptional/not the norm/”not like other girls” that it inadvertently (?) ends up reinforcing the idea that most women are not strong, or tough, or great.
Since when is The Doctor a role model? Maybe it’s just the reboot but they seemed pretty amoral a lot of the time.
“Nuanced” is increasingly used as a synonym for “stupid”.
That is not a nuanced point, Mr Fletcher, and you don’t get to weasel out of saying something stupid by claiming that it is.
Women and girls can be excellent role models for boys. If the new Dr who does the same sort of things as the previous Drs Who then what difference does it make if she currently has a female body? Shouldn’t role-modelry by about actions and principles and things like that?
I’ve had and have plenty of female role models. There are plenty of women I would like to be more like. The fact that they are not men is unlikely to cause me to rob off-licenses or kick poor people in the stomach.
Well I think that’s harsh. Basically, he has a good point: boys need good role models. Many boys today grow up without a father at home, and, given the gender skew in primary schools, many 10-yr-old boys will never have interacted with a male teacher.
So who are their role models? Well, there’s films like James Bond movies, and while those action heros are the good guys, they always get their way through violence.
Dr Who is different: Dr Who never used violence (there never was a fist fight between Dr Who and the baddy), he always attained a good outcome through ingenuity,
I’m not that familiar with current TV aimed at 10-yr-olds, and what the balance of role models is, but the basic point about role-modelling positive, non-violent, acting-for-the-good male behaviour seems a good one.
Except that 10-yr-olds tend to watch the current series, not past series.
Would you adopt that tone if it were about successful women in STEM acting as role models for girls?
Of course boys need good role models, and so do girls.
That’s why I “adopt that tone.” There is an absurd and insulting gap between role models for boys and role models for girls. Boys get more. A lot more. I find it extremely irritating that a male MP would complain about girls getting some fraction of the role model supply that boys get.
MRAs should be grateful for Ocean’s 8. Thanks to women the “Ocean’s” franchise will no longer lure men to a life of crime.
Girls have to read books and watch movies with male protagonists all the time, but boys complain when the protagonist is female. If I recall correctly, there is a good discussion of this issue in “Invisible Women”.
@Sackbut #20
Right. It’s that same phenomenon that men think women are hogging the conversation if women speak 30% of the time.
And it’s another example of how, when men do bad things, it’s always women’s fault.
Oh dear, what a naughty tone you’re taking.
As others have put it, if you expect privilege, equal treatment begins to look like discrimination:
“It’s unfair that men only get as much as women, and not more”
“It’s unfair that men only get more, and not a lot more”
“It’s unfair that men only get a lot more, and not a lot everything“
Good old subtractive masculinity
http://doctorscience.blogspot.com/2007/11/gay-hatin-and-subtractive-masculinity.html
Short version: Man-stuff and woman-stuff are two absolutely separate circles in the Venn diagram, and once something is moved into Girlie territory, it is tainted with Girlie cooties and no Man may touch it without losing his Man-card.
So of course a female Doctor is a crisis. Those old Doctors *aren’t* still just as they always were. They’ve all retroactively turned Girlie.
Ahhhh yes, that makes sense of it. The Doctor has now been retroactively ruined because if a gurrl can play the part then a gurrl always could have so ewwww. Bang go the role models.
Sure, but Luke is literally also in all those movies, so he’s not “replaced”. He’s depicted as a legend and then as Ray’s mentor.
Surely we don’t expect Luke to stay the exact same in all Star Wars movies forever?
As for Doctor Who, all those shows are garbage anyway, so who really cares who plays “the doctor”?
I kid, I kid! I’ve somehow never actually seen Doctor Who (except maybe in the background in college?), despite people telling me for decades that they’re sure I’d really like it. Maybe some day I’ll get around to watching it.
Re #26
Rey is the primary protagonist in episodes 7-9, Luke was primary protagonist in episodes 4-6, so Luke was “replaced” as primary protagonist. I’m sure there are plenty of instances in team sports, where a player is perhaps moved from a principal position to a different or secondary position, and is “replaced” at the primary position. Also in business, where an executive is, say, the Chief Financial Officer, and a new person becomes CFO, the first person was “replaced” as CFO, even if the first person is still in the company, possibly even promoted.
There are, to be sure, instances where (for example) one actor is playing a role and then another actor is cast for the same role in later TV seasons or movies, and that’s also “replacement”. But I think it’s rather obvious what was being talked about in the Star Wars case, and I’m surprised that you raised the question. Surely you saw that there were complaints about Rey in Episode 7, and those complainers were not mollified by Luke having a tiny presence at the end of the episode.
I suppose Nick Fletcher has been paying too much attention to that hysterical bore Jordan Peterson. He probably has no interest in the arts, anyway. Who on earth, young or old, reads stories and novels, or watches plays, films or TV series, serious or entertaining (I like both, by the way), for the sake of the clichéd role models they supposedly provide and inculcate? The idea is preposterous, and an example of the insidious moralising of everything by philistines such as Peterson, who suppose that art and entertainment are, or should be, illustrations of the depressing moral ideas that they happen to like. Why on earth not have more women in important roles, and also more people who are not nicely white? Open things up.
Art and entertainment should be like MEDICINE, preferably medicine that tastes nasty.
Sure, Rey replaced Luke as the primary protagonist in the new Star Wars movies in a situation where he had aged out of being in that role. I don’t know if it’s completely analogous to the CEO, etc., examples, but I also don’t think we’re really in much disagreement. My snarky point was just that the Luke character was kept around in an appropriate role in the new movies, so, yes, people should have been mollified. Boys still had Luke and several other characters as role models in the new Star Wars movies and in many, many other movies.
Ophelia#30. Horace’s dictum that the ends of poetry are ‘aut delectare aut prodesse est’. Ezra Pound on the way a good poem refreshes the senses and mind, bucks you up like a breeze in spring. Yeats in Lapis Lazuli: ‘Hamlet and Lear are gay’ – words that would probably be taken as too alarmingly ‘woke’ by ignorant moderns like Nick Fletcher. The delights of the prose of Beatrix Potter, Bunyan, Swift, Joyce, Virginia Woolf, Beckett, Penelope Fitzgerald and a host of others… Not many ‘role models’ in the plays of Harold Pinter. Diawl! (Welsh for ‘the devil!’), what fools these mortals be! There is the cynical, craven, and corporate belief, well represented by Disney, that the arts and entertainment should crawl along illustrating the latest influential ideas and movements and providing ‘role models’, hence the noisy unveiling of the latest ‘Disney Princess’ every couple of years.
I don’t how to link to these things, but the comedian Rosie Holt speaks (on Twitter) about the trouble lads are having as a result of an increasing paucity of properly masculine male role models. It’s very funny, and shows up the sheer ridiculousness of those humourless, sentimental males who attach importance to role models and rabbit on about women taking over. A breath of fresh air after all the over-serious discussion of the matter.
@RosieisaHolt
MP’s wife defends husband’s fear of female Dr Who turning men to crime.
You can also find it readily by going to the Crooks and Liars website.
Of the people I could call my “role models”, looking back to a time when I was young, they were people who I knew personally for the most part, both men and women of integrity and good character. Of course there were fictional characters and literary figures who were inspirational, with good stories of courage and moral uprightness, but they were not actual role models to me. I think I was more grounded in real life and my local environment to think that a fictional character, sports figure, or historical hero would serve very well, as they all lacked dimension compared to people I actually knew, no matter how much I read or heard about them.
Heh.
In case you’d like to know where the link to a tweet is, it’s the date or time stamp, right next to the Twitter handle.
https://twitter.com/RosieisaHolt/status/1464264954178060292
That’s brilliant, lol :D
The video I mean, here >> https://mobile.twitter.com/RosieisaHolt/status/1464170045861515277 Too much :D
I think that is a very good point, twiliter. I adored the Icelandic sagas in my youth, and still do now, and was particularly taken in those early days by the character of Gisli, whom I liked because he an was outlaw and a loner, but it never occurred to me that I should adopt him as a role model and get involved in murderous quarrels and cycles of revenge, however exciting. But look at certain web-sites on the Vikings, and you can see how important they are to myths of masculinity and race among a certain kind of rather childish people. Jordan Peterson seems to think lobsters provide a useful role model.
It is also not the case that ‘role-models’ (however upstanding they might be) might be suitable for you. The imitation of Christ, say? I suspect a great deal of unhappiness is caused by adopting the wrong role-model – but does one adopt role-models in the first place? There are of course people and fictional characters one admires, but one has in the end to find one’s own way, and I don’t think I have ever thought of anyone as a role-model, to be sedulously imitated. One grows in all sorts of ways that are largely unconscious, and I hate the shallow manipulativeness that has designs on young minds.
Tim, yes, and I can’t think of any one specific role model as such, but more an amalgamation of people I admired in my personal life, many of them women. Some historical and fictional characters had some admirable attributes, but they were lacking dimension for patterning one’s life after, or being a loyal disciple of. Maybe if I was raised by a single teacher and brought up without having a wide world of people, books, theatrical portrayals to draw from, but that wasn’t my experience.
I live in Japan, and despite the fact that Japan can hardly be called an enlightened country where the treatment of women is concerned, nobody here, so far as I know, has complained about the fact that it is girls who are leading characters in many, or most, of the films of Miyazaki Hayao (Studio Ghibli); Miyazaki is, among other things, a wonderful story-teller, as well as a wonderful artist & director. His films are morally complex and thought-provoking, and wholly lacking in the saccharine and morally black-and-white qualities of Disney, or of the American film company who ruined the very good story by Ted Hughes, ‘The Iron Man’, by reducing it to a simple & nationalistic story of ‘good’ and ‘bad’, adding in the ‘good’ American military to boot. There are also, in Britain, Alan Garner’s extraordinary novels, which are about young people, but not necessarily intended for them; he is a wonderful stylist, and writes extraordinary, lapidary prose. The Western mind too often falls, it seems to me, into a Manichaeism that denies or ignores the complexity of things, but it is the virtue of good art that it does not deal in such simplistic categories. These men going on about proper role models for boys and how these are being taken away from them by girls and women come across to me as thoroughly pathetic and, yes, unmanly individuals.