The Right Opinion
Shame on Family Films?
Don't read Newsweek magazine while drinking a beverage. A spit take is the obvious first reaction to a column by Julia Baird headlined "The Shame of Family Films." On the Internet, this article is coded as "Why Family Films Are So Sexist."
Baird's denunciation of Hollywood's fraction of decent entertainment began: "They have all been smash hits: 'Finding Nemo,' 'Madagascar,' 'Ice Age,' 'Toy Story.' Fish, penguins, rats, stuffed animals, talking toys. All good innocent family fun, right? Sure, except there are few female characters in those films. There are certainly few doing anything meaningful or heroic -- and no, Bo Peep doesn't count."
So what does feminist bean-counting have to do with whether a movie is "good innocent family fun"? Did any young girl come away from "Finding Nemo" feeling like the memory-challenged Ellen DeGeneres fish character didn't represent female empowerment effectively? Were they offended by the oppressively archaic stereotype of Jessie the Yodeling Cowgirl during "Toy Story 2"? Families can't enjoy these films without expecting them to pass some politically correct quota exam?
The Newsweek columnist was promoting a new study from Stacy Smith and Marc Choueiti of the Annenberg School for Communications and Journalism at the University of Southern California. They reportedly analyzed 122 family films (rated G, PG and PG-13), including 50 top-grossing ones, between 2006 and 2009. She found it "startling" that there is "only one female character to every three male characters in family movies." (Well, not exactly -- they claim 29.2 percent of characters were female.)
Worse than that, Baird the Angry Feminist protested, "The female characters were also more likely than men to be beautiful." Well, that's scandalously unfair! (Don't think Baird wouldn't also protest if a certain number of women were ugly beyond repair.)
There's more. One in five female characters were "portrayed with some exposed skin between the mid-chest and upper thigh regions." If a conservative tried to suggest "The Little Mermaid" should put on a shirt, tell me Newsweek wouldn't point fingers and laugh. But that's what Newsweek's Angry Feminist is suggesting.
Baird was especially upset that cartoons might exaggerate the female physique: "One in four women was shown with a waist so small that, the authors concluded, it left 'little room for a womb or any other internal organs.' Maybe we could carry them in our purses?" Baird even claimed "another study" found "women in G-rated films wear the same amount of skimpy clothing as women in R-rated films."
That just sounds ludicrous. Anyone wanting to check on Baird's academic assertions would have trouble, since these two studies she's referring to cannot be found on the Annenberg School website or anywhere else online. The Annenberg study was commissioned by the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, which has been compiling data on women in film. Davis, the actress who most recently played the president on ABC, told Newsweek that 17 percent of animators are female, and women form 17 percent of crowd scenes in family films. Only 17 percent of narrators are female.
Ridiculous -- and funny, too. How nit-pickingly intricate are these studies to count genders in "crowd scenes"? WHO CARES? As for only 17 percent of females being narrators, does Davis find it distasteful if her husband reads a bedtime story?
But Davis isn't done with her feminist footnotes. She also claims research shows that the more TV a girl watches, the fewer options she believes she has in life, and the more a boy watches, the more his views become sexist. A look at the Geena Davis Institute website shows that her group is marshaling feminist research attacking on all of these fronts -- the dearth of female characters, animators, directors and so on -- with the entire panoply of TV and movies, not just the family films.
There's nothing wrong with seeking more female directors, producers or major characters in Hollywood -- they're supposed to be feminist enough to have already imposed "affirmative action." But for Newsweek to single out family films as somehow shameful is beyond unfair -- especially since none of them are truly singled out. Tell us how "Finding Nemo" or "Toy Story" are the work of sexist pigs.
Baird isn't just an Angry Feminist; she's a hypocrite, too. Last year, her own magazine tried to embarrass Sarah Palin by putting an old photo of her on the cover in running shorts, suggesting this Caribou Barbie wasn't ready for prime time. Did Baird protest? No, she defended the cover since Palin "has been photographed and filmed more than once in aerobic gear."
Newsweek, heal thyself.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

9 Comments
karl anglin
Friday, October 1, 2010 at 11:57 AM
Whenever a situation develops toits extreme, it is bound to turnaround and become its opposite.----Frank Capra (1897-1991)
Caseace
Friday, October 1, 2010 at 2:54 PM
What a bunch of boobs. Oops excuse the term. Is it not fair to conclude 'family' films are sucessful for the exact reason they want to denigrate them. Films portarying familys with strong male role models and pretty women. What child does not think their momma is beautiful? What child does not think their father is powerful who protects and provides? Every year studios and pundits alike are 'surprised' when these type of films prove successful, while some other big screen drivel fails and audiences are derided for not being cosmopolitan enough to understand what their missing. Wrong again. Families don't attend enmasse, because responsible parents don't want their children exposed to gratuitous sex, excessive swearing and violence. I must say I am sometimes even shocked at what passes for PG-13, but then I can be over protective of my little charges as Daddys are wont to be. But don't project that onto the movie screen.
Convet
Friday, October 1, 2010 at 8:44 PM
I wait for movies to be "cleaned up" for cable. Every once in awhile I can see where the character says one thing and mouths another. I'll never go to an expensive, ill cleaned and noisy cinema house again. I also NEVER WATCH THE NETWORK STATIONS!
Ruffslitch
Saturday, October 2, 2010 at 1:27 PM
I find it ironic that the feminists are the ones who said girls could be as slutty as they wanted to be in the first place instead of adhearing to "old-fashioned" notions of propriety.
Pamela Heckel
Monday, October 4, 2010 at 10:39 AM
When will questions about race and sex be eliminated from all Federal and State forms?When will urban youths understand the difference between sperm donor and responsible fatherhood?Why is television pre-occupied with amoral fringe behavior?
RHJunior
Monday, October 4, 2010 at 2:30 PM
A feminist is a beast who demands the right to go topless in public so that she can slap any man who stares at her breasts. Hypocrisy? No, just simply, deliberately impossible to please.... because she knows it's in men's natural instinct to try and please a woman. Feminism is an outlet for angry, unattractive and unpleasant women to vent their spleen at not controlling the mainstream.... to complain about EVERYTHING, so as to make everyone as miserable as they themselves are.
pete
Monday, October 4, 2010 at 2:44 PM
>Newsweek, heal thyself.< No, Newsweek, turn out the lights and lock the door on your way out.Ruffslitch, I though I was the only person who remembered Allred and Steinem and their feminazism of America. Thanks.
Joe Phillips
Tuesday, October 5, 2010 at 10:16 AM
The more you know about Newsweek, the less the $1 price tag for which it recently sold seems like a worthwhile expenditure. I am not in favor of censorship, but does any magazines that has Eleanor Cliff on staff deserve to be taken seriously other than for comic relief?
rippedchef
Tuesday, October 5, 2010 at 12:16 PM
angry lesbians with penis envy and chain wallets