I know exactly why the 2009 numbers increased.  If you follow the business it’s not too hard to figure it out.  The reasons are New Moon and The Blind Side with a side of The Proposal (now Sandra Bullock’s Oscar makes even more sense.)  Maybe folks are going to try and say that it is a fluke because there were two female centric successes and we don’t have those frequently.  Friends, that is the whole fucking point.  It’s like that line from Field of Dreams – “if you build it they will come.”  It is only looked at as a fluke because of the shortsightedness of people who won’t believe that women will continue to go to the movies.

Melissa’s thinking here makes sense. But since nobody tracks the demographics of who is going to which movie in any serious way, there is room for additional speculation. We’ve heard in recent years that women pay for dates more often than they used to (movies being typical date fodder). Could it be the wage gap is finally closing, and the spending power of women is reaching parity with men? There could be any number of cultural factors at work here, but what seems clear from any reading of these stats these stats is that movies which appeal to women are worth making.

But Hollywood executives might just find it easier to dismiss all this as a non-recurring phenomenon. Or, as The Other Patrick pointed out:

So any day now, films will be target primarily at women, and only dumb actioners will be made for men. Right? right?

Or the studio executives will see that and think: “See, we’re doing it right. Women go to the movies even when we don’t make films for them, so why should we start.” Because either way, women do it wrong.

Yes, exactly. If we watch, we’re “easy to please”. If we don’t watch, we’re “impossible to please.” That’s why women can’t vote with their dollars in the entertainment marketplace. It’s not that we don’t generate the numbers – see above. It’s that no matter what numbers we generate, the film industry is working from a data set which assures them it’s just not possible that women are actually worth appealing to. Once you’ve eliminate the impossible, you consider the improbable. Hollywood has always managed to find any number of improbably scenarios to explain away the (im)possibility that women are consumers and somebody ought to want our money.

Another quote from Silverstein’s article:

Here’s the money quote from the MPAA:

“A higher percentage of women than men are moviegoers in all categories of frequency.”

In. All. Categories. of. Frequency.

Women make up 9 million more filmgoers than men.

This will make a nice shut the hell up the next time some dude feels the need to “mansplain” to you how chicks don’t go to movies enough, and if chicks did, why then surely those lovely film executroids would accommodate their little pink-lovin’ asses better. It’s just not true. Huge industries do leave money on the table. They just do – all the time. I’m frequently looking to buy services or products only to find they’re not available, or they’re available but shipping will cost 3 times the product price, or they’re available but the website doesn’t show you all your options because they want you to call a customer service rep and let them tell you what to buy so you’ll overspend, or because someone wants to hard sell me something I was already prepped to buy before the salesfool made me homicidal.

It happens all the freaking time, people. Free markets are beautiful things, but buyers can only purchase what’s offered. And even when they do spend, if the people in charge are so incapable of reason that they look for ways to explain that spending away, it doesn’t change the industry’s scope like it should.

1. Mazda gets that women buy cars
2. Don Imus: you can’t buy publicity like this
3. Are more women writers what we need?

While I acknowledge I’m not going to sit down with stacks and stacks of DVDs and catalog all the victims and their coloring, I have been watching DVDs of Criminal Minds lately. Even accounting for the reality that white men who prey on women of their own race are the majority of known serial offenders, I’m seeing an awful lot of long blond hair on corpses and victims. In addition, they’re all (hardly surprisingly) slim, Hollywood-pretty and young or youngish. I recently watched two episodes in a row (Season 2’s “Open Season” and “Legacy”) in which the serial killers were hunting people of every description. But who were our main victims in these two episodes? Two Hollywood blond women, slim, white and young.

I remember forming the same impression with other cop shows, including the well-above-average Davinci’s Inquest, which centered a couple of seasons on the serial killing of mostly First Nations prostitutes, but chose a pretty, healthy-looking young white blondish girl for the prostitute we actually got to know (Sue).

Is this just because blond is the beauty standard for actresses? Does this argument even make sense, given how many popular lead actresses have hair of other colors? Or is it that someone thinks blonds look more vulnerable somehow? Or that it’s a more tragic waste when the victim is blond? What’s the thinking here?

1. Double Beauty Standards
2. Save All Starving Starlets (SASS)
3. Lifetime’s Blood Ties

But she does also prove to be kick-ass at shooting or some other manly endeavor, and the entire rest of the episode will be a series of ironic gender essentialist asides and behaviors that defy gender stereotypes, so it’s a good thing, isn’t it? Our writers sure think so. They’ll be patting themselves on the back all the way home.

Except there’s one small problem: whether our guest star’s complaints about “men” have any legitimacy or not, she will turn out to be a Man-Hater who was Wrong To Hate Men, at least insofar as concerns our heroes (who are of course male because the industry requires it). In some instances of this trope, all her complaints turn out to be Just Plain Silly as she becomes enlightened to the fact that These Menz Are Different (or at least that’s what we’re told in dialog – often, evidence is in short supply). In other instances, her complaints are legitimate (i.e., we’ll find out she was indeed mistreated by her daddy or lover or some other man or men) but she will still come to understand it wasn’t very nice to blame all men for that. Shame on her.

She’s a strawperson – the woman who unreasonably hates all men – and it’s much easier to set her up and tear her down than it is to address the likelihood that if our heroes were faced with some chick doin’ a man’s job, they’d probably react in a perfectly sexist manner.

Both versions of this trope induce vomit. The first fails to explore any legitimacy behind her claims of sexism and misogyny, leading us to the conclusion she just hated men for the fun of it. This is ridiculous: humans of bother genders are trained from birth to glorify the least little good-doing from men and make excuses whenever men do evil. Even women and girls who’ve been thoroughly abused by men frequently buy into their own oppression and blame themselves rather than the men responsible. Where would anyone get the idea to hate men, if not from observing men behaving badly and having the nerve to defy her entire society and blame them for their own bullshit?

The second version, in which her complaints are legitimate but not her hatred of men, suggests there are only isolated incidents of men harming women and no institutionalized sexism for sensible women to be complaining about. It also furthers the pop psychology cultural meme that all women who are harmed by men immediately lose all reason and hate all men. Actual incidents of misandry are far less common than incidents of women not being doormats and men confusing this with boiling hatred.

These stories are almost never about how our heroes need to get over themselves and their sexism.

1. The “Women have it so easy in dating” trope
2. Android Chick, You’re a Better Woman Than I
3. Chick flicks for breast cancer!

The backbone of the series, and this book, is Jodenny Scott, an officer in a military space fleet and a commander on one of its enormous ships. She spends the majority of the book seven months pregnant, or in old age and in several situations depending on the timeline. And being obsessive about getting her husband Terry back from wherever he died, even if the situation seems dismal in whatever time-stream she’s in, and even if she doesn’t completely believe he’s back from the dead. It’s a good thing Jodenny’s a likable character with flaws and a strong streak of heroism in her. Otherwise her obsession (so proper in space opera) puts her totally over the top. And yes, I did say, he died. But everyone knows, especially Jodenny, that no one in SF ever really dies.

Jodenny’s not in a typical position of an abandoned wife: no, her husband was kidnapped in the previous book by a band of humans trying to figure out those spherical portals, and then seized by the gods of his native Australia to fulfill a role in their pantheon. Her main goal is to be at the place he’s going to show up when he comes back to her time and place. It’s a huge leap of faith. Jodenny manages to convince the other man who cares for her to help her in her quest to find her [dead] husband, and McDonald makes his willingness and her determination in this context believable.

The Outback Stars series is fairly unique in US SF/F in that it uses the scaffolding of Australia’s native belief system. Terry Myell is part aboriginal, so he does have this connection in his background. Jodenny Scott isn’t, but she’s from Australia also. The gods/aliens themselves influence events in a series of short scenes, and an earlier seduction of Terry Myell by the crocodile goddess has vast repercussions for Earth, the Roon (who are and did invade Earth in the first timeline), and Jodenny and Terry.

There are a large number of plot-threads, a large cast of characters, and a bunch of time lines to keep track of, and McDonald does a great job of helping the reader keep everything straight. I could have done with less uber-obsession out of Jodenny. She’s a fighter, though, and has command ability flowing out of her, so…okay. Of course, Terry Myell, her husband, has equal plot time; his rests mainly on convincing Jodenny of-well, if I told you, that would be a big spoiler. They’re both saved by being charming characters and by McDonald’s ability to write a good tale.

1. Elizabeth Bear — All the Windwracked Stars
2. Big Brother All-Stars, Part 3
3. Big Brother All-Stars, Part 1

And now, my transcription:

The theme music from Bewitched begins to play as Ripa enters a spacious, completely clutter-free room with white shelving and a clothes washer and dryer in turquoise. She wears casual, fitted clothing. She is carrying a large white laundry basket.

A voiceover says: “Now that I have my Electrolux washer and perfect steam dryer, I can juggle more things in my day.”

Ripa smiles broadly as the music picks up. She twirls toward the camera with her laundry basket, then leaves the room. She walks down a hallway. She throws a garment in an open doorway, and the camera follows it to show that it puts itself away in the closet of a pink bedroom. The bedroom is spotlessly tidy. A pre-teen girl is sprawled on the bed, reading a book. She exclaims, “Wow!”

The scene changes. Ripa is now visible through the back of a white storage unit in a yellow room. Her arms are a blur of motion as she rapidly places folded clothing on shelves. A girl is visible in the background. She sits on a white bed, playing a clapping game with a partially-visible playmate, who appears to be another girl of around the same age.

The scene changes again. Ripa is walking through a hallway with her basket. The walls are pale blue, hung with art prints. A console table is under one print, and a white chair under the other. A dog barks. Without looking, she slides a bowl across the floor with her foot. The dog appears, and eats from the bowl.

The scene changes. Three girls wearing tank tops and lounge pants in various colors sit at precise intervals on a brown couch. They are sitting very upright, with their hands on their knees. They are facing a large, flat-panel television. Black display shelves and framed art pieces are visible in the background. As Ripa walks by, each girl in turn raises her arms, and is clothed by a shirt Ripa throws into the air. She is no longer carrying the basket.

There is a voiceover: “With the Electrolux washer and perfect steam dryer you can remove wrinkles, and wash and dry clothes in just 36 minutes.”

During this voiceover, the scene changes twice. First, Ripa is back in the spacious laundry room, removing a man’s dress shirt from the dryer and looking at it, apparently appreciative of the lack of wrinkles. Next, a different view of the room is shown. Ripa throws a child’s jacket into the air, and it puts itself away on a hook behind her. She kicks a laundry basket in the foreground. She is very happy.

The voiceover continues, saying, “So you can be even more amazing,” as the scene changes back to the girls sitting on the couch. They have moved closer together, at one end of the couch. They are holding glasses of milk. Ripa enters, carrying a plate with cookies. The camera angle changes. She sits on the couch, and tilts the plate. The cookies fly through the air and into the free hands of each of the girls. The girls smile and begin to dip their cookies in their glasses of milk as Ripa looks on with a broad smile.

Ripa says, “Nice catch!” to the girls. They look at her and smile as they eat their cookies. One girl nods.

The logo for the Electrolux company appears in blue against a white background. Grey text in a font resembling handwriting appears above the logo, reading “Thinking of you.” In voiceover, Ripa says, “Electrolux: Be even more amazing.” The logo rotates, and becomes the Electrolux web address. The commercial ends.

Annnnd finally, discussion time!

I think there are some obvious points to hit here. The theme music along with the laundry “magically” putting itself away, as though there isn’t still labor involved in washing clothes even with fancy appliances. The way Ripa walks through the house for thirty seconds doing things for the children and the dog (and apparently a man who doesn’t appear in the commercial, unless she plans to wear that shirt herself), smiling brightly and all but dancing. The spotless, tastefully decorated house. Is this a realistic portrait of what housework is like? What life with children and a dog is like? SBG hates this ad. How about you? Is there a positive side?

1. Media Monday: Fruit of the Loom’s “Date Night” Commercial
2. Media Monday: Jean Paul Gaultier’s Designs at Target
3. Kelly Clarkson’s ‘Never Again’

Note: Like most of Picoult’s work, the book flits back and forth between present day and events as far back as twenty years ago, detailing events whose consequences culminate in present day, with the final detail being revealed on the last page. It’s kind of like the literary equivalent of an episode of Cold Case. For the sake of clarity, I’ve summarised the plot chronologically, not how it’s revealed in the book.

So we have Jack St. Bride, a popular young teacher whom several female students have crushes on. Honourable man that he is, he doesn’t even register these crushes; they’re just impressionable young minds that he wants to fill with knowledge. One of the students, Catherine, writes her fantasies about him in her diary, and when her ultra-conservative preacher father finds it, along with the birth control pills she was using in her sexual relationship with her boyfriend, he assumes the worst and Catherine’s testimony is disregarded. Jack does an eight-month stint in jail for sexually assaulting a female. Catherine recants at the end of the book, y’know, after he’s done jail time and has a record as a sexual offender.

His time done, he makes his way to the little town of Salem Falls, New Hampshire. He starts up a relationship with (the very much adult) Addie Peabody, but of course it doesn’t take long for him to attract the attention of other members of the female population, particularly teenage girls. Specifically Gillian, daughter of the town’s richest man. Gillian’s a Wiccan, see, except she ignores the advice of her fellow-Wiccans (ie, her doppelganger friends) that magic should be used for good, and instead uses it to get back at the people who laugh at her and make Jack fall in love with her. It doesn’t take long for Gillian to accuse Jack of rape, except what actually happened is that Gillian and her friends were practicing spells, high as kites, when Jack stumbles upon them, drunk. Gillian comes onto him, and when Jack turns her down flat, Gillian cries rape.

So here we have a man who not once, but twice has been the victim of infatuated teenage girls and paid the price for their misplaced devotion – first through a series of misunderstandings with Catherine, then with a manipulative Gillian who cried rape when she was turned down. I’m pretty sure Picoult isn’t actually saying, hey, all rape allegations are just screwed-up teenage girls crying rape, but the book definitely perpetuates that myth.

(Also, has anyone read the book who’s also familiar with the US legal system? Because if I apply Picoult’s logic to the Australian legal system, the state would be lucky to get a trial, let alone a conviction, on the evidence they had in both cases. Come to think of it, My Sister’s Keeper kind of fails there, too.)

Wait, it gets even classier. In the final scene of the book, it turns out that Gillian is in a seemingly consensual sexual relationship with her father. I say ‘seemingly consensual’ because it’s hard to gauge as the whole scene takes less than a page; she goes into his room and there’s references made to ‘an old, old dance’ and ‘sealing the deal once more’. It’s left up to the reader to decide how consensual it is. Has Gillian been so damaged that she cried rape with Jack as a cry for help? Is she just an out-and-out evil, manipulative tramp? Somewhere in between? We don’t know, because Picoult thinks it’s a good idea to let the reader decide her motives. Uh, no. Sometimes, it’s a good plot device – but not when we’re talking about crying rape and father-daughter incestuous relationships.

The shame of it is that Salem Falls could have been a thought-provoking read about people’s tendency to judge out of fear and ignorance. Girl cries rape and naturally the new guy in town with the criminal record had to have done it, because men who are devoted fathers and pillars of the community don’t commit crimes, let alone such heinous ones. Or maybe it could have looked at the idea that instead of Jack being the victim of Catherine and Gillian’s actions, he was indirectly the victim of their fathers’ unhealthy attitudes towards their daughters, which in turn screwed with their way of interacting with men. Instead, Picoult not only relies on a seriously bad trope, but ends it with an even worse one that should never be treated lightly, let alone as a throwaway ‘Ohmygod! It was him all along!’ moment.

1. Cattle Call #4
2. Tit for Tat on CSI
3. 24: Chloe Rocks!