Sexism in Hollywood? What what?

Already Under Fire, a Producer Is Going Further
By MICHAEL CIEPLY

LOS ANGELES, June 24 — For a while Wednesday night’s block party for “Transformers” was shaping up to be the hottest ticket in town.

But that was before Courtney Solomon, planning a celebration of his own, called in the SuicideGirls.

Having already provoked parents, women’s groups and the ratings board with explicit ads for the coming torture movie “Captivity,” Mr. Solomon and his After Dark Films now intend to introduce the film, set for release July 13, with a party that may set a new standard for the politically incorrect.

This is disgusting... this filmmaker is openly declaring his outright, unapologetic misogyny. And hoping to make money from it. His 'justifications' read like a Hollywood version of the explanations "white power" groups give publicly for their politics. Let's see if people actually speak out against it.

One person already has: Joss Whedon, creator of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and other proudly feminist art, on the blog Whedoneque (thanks to Tina for the link).

Incidentally, can we finally put to bed the whole debate about whether the Suicide Girls are a feminist organization?

A few highlights:

“The women’s groups definitely will love it,” Mr. Solomon hinted. “I call it my personal little tribute to them.”

[dot dot dot]

Mr. Solomon, a Toronto-born entrepreneur who acquired the rights to the game Dungeons & Dragons while working from his bedroom and wound up directing its film under the tutelage of the producer Joel Silver, casts his struggle with those who object to “Captivity” as a Larry Flynt-style fight against censorship and repression. Yet this promotional master of Hollywood’s dark side is waging the battle with typical outrageousness. The movie, which is rated R, will screen only once before its opening, at an expected showing for women’s groups in New York, at which he wants to engage in a town-hall-style debate with detractors.

“We would not be receptive,” said Meaghan Carey, deputy director of the New York City chapter of the National Organization for Women. “We’re not going to go protest so they can get press.”

OK, so let me get this straight: promoting a film about how torturing women (in a very real and non-consensual way, just to be clear) is sexy by paying women to participate in a deliberately, openly anti-woman event is a brave fight against censorship and repression? Amazing. I'm still waiting to find out exactly which movies have been censored for being too sexist. You know, as opposed to the movies that actually do get censored, such as Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia by the great Australian documentary filmmaker John Pilger.

And NOW's predictable response, of course, is to remain silent, because they don't want to take the bait.

Granted, Solomon certainly is deliberately baiting the women's movement. Why? Perhaps he wants to prove that the women's movement is dead in the water, or that feminists are all humorless caricatures who just can't understand that it's "just a movie." (Hint: So was Birth of a Nation. Wonder if the Times would also glowingly describe that gem as, like, so awesomely politically incorrect and badass!)

But here's the thing: the women's movement isn't dead, despite the best efforts of groups like NOW. And we do have sense of humor, and we are a damn creative bunch. So here's a call to my sisters and brothers in LA-- get on this! Show this asshole what a real women's movement looks like!

Now, I'm not advocating that you sunny California types do anything illegal. But according to the article, "the primary audience... will be fans, who can cycle through the club free in groups of 50." How hard is it to get those tickets? And how much chaos could a group of 50 cause once it's deep in the heart of a party filled with a "warren of live torture rooms"? Especially one that "everybody on the Internet gets to watch"?

I'm just saying.

Dehumanizing Aboriginal people in Australia-- again.

Alcohol banned in Aborigine areas (BBC)

Alcohol and poverty have blighted Aboriginal communities Australia is to ban alcohol and pornography in Aboriginal areas in the Northern Territory in a bid to curb child sex abuse.
All Aboriginal children in the territory will be medically examined.

The new proposals follow a report last week which found evidence of abuse in each of the territory's 45 communities.

The report blamed high levels of alcohol and poverty for the situation, which Prime Minister John Howard has described as a national emergency.

"We're dealing with a group of young Australians for whom the concept of childhood innocence has never been present," John Howard told parliament.

"That is a sad and tragic event. Exceptional measures are required to deal with an exceptionally tragic situation."

The article continues on to explain that Aboriginal people have imposed their own alcohol bans in their own communities for decades; most who drink buy their alcohol in nearby towns with mixed white/Aboriginal populations.

So let me get this straight: The government which has murdered Aboriginal people, destroyed their way of life, kidnapped their children and condemned them to racism and poverty, has suddenly developed an interest in protecting Aboriginal children-- not from the white supremacist machinations of the Australian government, but from their parents.

Imagine, for a moment, that the government decided to start a campaign against the sexual abuse of white Australian children, and began requiring mandatory, invasive genital examinations of all children; instituted criminal penalties for not just use or sale but possession of alcoholic beverages; and gave itself the right to search the hard drives of private citizens without a warrant or any justification whatsoever. How long would the Howard government last? Would the courts ever let such a policy stand?

But the Aboriginal population, apparently, doesn't get such constitutional considerations. Just as always, Aboriginal children are treated as the property of the state, not as human beings who are part of families. And since, according to Australia, Aborigines are not people, there's no need to provide decent jobs and infrastructure, end racism, and allow Aboriginal self-determination-- after all, it's not like the problems of alcoholism and sexual abuse have material causes that can be addressed. The answer, clearly, is to treat all Aboriginal people as lazy, drunk, child-molesting criminals without brains or human rights of their own.