Originally Posted by bell110
Your first problem is how you went about trying to get this discussion started. You think people should be offended by these movies, and if they're not, they're just to stupid to realize they are bing offended.
Yes, I get your point. You see sexism, racism, jingoism, and homophobia in society and you think this movie helps perpetuate it and that offends you. I get your ideology. Myself and other do not see those things in these movies. YOUR problem is that you take that as us not being able to recognize what we are watching on screen. What you see as highly offensive on screen, I see as a trivial matter. Yet your opinion is somehow more valid than mine.
You gave superficial examples to illustrate your point, then when somebody deconstructs your examples you claim it's just an excuse and the person just isn't getting it.
Is there sexism, racism, jingoism, and homophobia in society? Yes, there always will be. Do these films reflect or perpetuate them? I say no. And you haven't made a strong case to the contrary either. All you've given us is your perception, opinions, and feelings.
These things exist in this film (whether you realize it or not) and by virtue of the fact that they are not looked down upon, but rather encouraged as harmless, ignorant fun, they are perpetuated and endorsed. It's just that plain and simple. I can only say the same thing in so many different ways (as myself and others have continuously done throughout this thread).
Also, "deconstruction" is the wrong word to use in this case as that implies the systematic breaking down and analysis of my argument...I am sorry my friend, but this has not been done in this thread at all.
What has been done is the simplistic refutation (to paraphrase): "I don't believe these things exist in these films and you're over-thinking it by trying to investigate them".
Sexism: Specifically, the objectification of women- Women are trophies to be won or lost. They must always appear sexy and seductive (for all the adolescent boys and peter-pan syndrome boy-men watching).
There is nothing wrong with having sexy and seductive women in the movies. Was the first scene with Rosie necessary? No. Was it awesome? Absolutely.
I am saying, women are objectified and treated as objects...which is plain to see in these movies as Michael Bay practically date-rapes the women with his camera, lingering on needless shots of them bending over cars and full-moon shots which exist for no purpose other than titillation. It's degrading, plain and simple. The women in these films have no personality and are shallow, emotionless husks that exist for the adolescent boys in the audience to drool over.
You are saying, that it's perfectly OK to degrade women because it's awesome and because it serves you.
That's not a deconstruction my friend. That is barely a refutation. You're saying you accept the fact that women are objectified and you're OK with it because she's "hot". The same goes for the rest of your rebuttals.