We’re Not So Different, You And I

at

Tuesday’s Guardian (top) and today’s Irish Times

*pushes ejector seat button*

Niall N writes:

Different articles….you only feel like you’ve read the same thing twice…

PS Leave Bond alone, soy boys!

FIGHT!

James Bond has always been a misogynist dinosaur. Now he has to change (Donald Clarke, Irish Times)

Time’s up for James Bond: is 007 too toxic for the #MeToo era? (Ben Child, The Guardian)

Thanks NiallN

40 thoughts on “We’re Not So Different, You And I

  1. Percival

    Few things annoy me more than men who call themselves feminists.

    And so-called feminist journalists who are all entitled middle class chatterboxes who bang on about gender rights and yet rarely ever come across barriers themselves. They never write about women in poverty or single mothers in bleak council estates trying to raise their kids despite constant criticism from a pernicious hateful media and prejudiced civil servants.

    Mullally, Gleeson, Ingle at al need to wise up to which women are genuinely suffering in Ireland.

      1. Paul

        He doesn’t have to contribute to have an opinion. It’s a point about the media and it’s biases and direction.

    1. realPolithicks

      “Few things annoy me more than men who call themselves feminists.”

      Really, you must lead a very charmed life.

  2. curmudgeon

    Donald is usually a cut above this. He really lost me in final paragraph, the cure only for all things branded sexist these days it seems is to hire a woman – which is sexist by definition, but branded as “positive discrimation”.

    1. Nigel

      Bond? An imperialist tool who embodies and enforces the values of the patriarchal hegemony. Get it right.

    1. Steph Pinker

      Hallstrom, does that include Spaghetti Westerns (including the Dollars trilogy), or can you make an exception for those, please? I’d also like to include archaeology and geology, the philosophy of natural sciences, and palaeontology as well… Oh, and Little House on the Prairie, Watership Down and Grizzly Adams – otherwise, I [somewhat] agree!

  3. The Ghost of Starina

    It’s not freakin’ news that the “classic” Bonds are sexist and gross and definitely of-their-era (the same era that advertised coffee to women as a remedy against their husband leaving them). That’s practically part of what makes them amusing to watch — “look at this ridiculous scenario, jaysus”

    But this yo-yo (Clarke, I mean) is jumping on an ill-thought-out bandwagon by forgetting that the Daniel Craig 007 is a wonderfully modern man rid of all that sexist 70s guff. You can’t look at the overall character of Bond without acknowledging that Craig-as-Bond is a different creature from his overly suave, greasy previous incarnations.

    As a feminist harpy, let me declare my love for modern Bond. Now if we could just get sexy, sexy Idris Elba for the next Bond, life would be beauuuutiful.

    1. ReproBertie

      The same Daniel Craig Bond who, in Skyfall, snuck into Severine’s room, entered her shower uninvited and had sex with her?

    2. Daisy Chainsaw

      The same Bond who in Spectre had sex with a woman 5 years his senior, as opposed to half his age?

      Also, Idris for Bond please!

  4. Percival

    A past girlfriend of mine admitted to me that she’d happily marry a wealthy man and do what she was told and bear children as long as she had everything provided for her.

    We split because I wasn’t wealthy enough.

    And because she was nuts.

  5. Dan

    Clarke is a joke – he cannot review a film these days without finding something ‘problematic’, that weak word so beloved of the regressive left.

    1. realPolithicks

      Because the pathetic right don’t see other peoples problems as problems….I’m alright Jack

      1. dan

        Other people’s problems: being offended by a fictional character.
        There are huge structural issues in the West, but the regressive left harping on about Bond been offensive or the word marijuana being racist just make themselves look stupid.

  6. street tooth

    #metoo is used by people talking of being sexually abused. the flippant “too toxic for the #metoo era” is a lot more problematic than james bond films. it’s basically saying “are these films too much for this wave of over-sensitive rape victims we have to endure?” .. the films are from the past, they are also films. they are not a problem. this kind of dialogue is though. getting annoyed about people being too sensitive for james bond, even though no one flippin even said that.

  7. Daisy Chainsaw

    Nobody watches Goldfinger for the sexual politics, you watch it for the craic and the fight scenes. I think M from Goldeneye speaks for all of us…

    M: I think you’re a sexist, misogynist dinosaur. A relic of the Cold War, whose boyish charms, though lost on me, obviously appealed to that young girl I sent out to evaluate you.
    Bond: Point taken.
    M: Not quite, 007. If you think for one moment I don’t have the balls to send a man out to die, your instincts are dead wrong. I’ve no compunction about sending you to your death. But I won’t do it on a whim. Even with your cavalier attitude towards life.

  8. Junkface

    This need to erase the past because it doesn’t fit with modern times is getting ridiculous. Everything will be censored in a few years. No fun, get back to work!

  9. Poordessie

    I hate when people with chips on their shoulder(s) dictate what normal people (me) should think about stuff.

  10. Percival

    Simon Coveney attended the Bilderberg summit with Peter Sutherland a few years ago.

    Within a few weeks he was made Minister for Defence and presented a white paper on increasing military spending in Ireland. The main guest at the Bilderberg summit was the head of NATO.

    Ireland’s neutrality has been under attack for years. Fianna Fail and Fine Gael are both guilty of it. There is no need for Ireland to have military alliances. This is about spending money on arms. It’s simply the arms industry wanting to grow the market by scaremongering about ‘threats’.

    And if we ever do go to war, it will be the underclass and working class who are recruited to fight to protect the interests of the wealthy. Same as always.

Comments are closed.