Studlock, on 09 August 2016 - 11:27 PM, said:
Gorefest, on 09 August 2016 - 10:44 AM, said:
Studlock, on 09 August 2016 - 09:38 AM, said:
This related to both this specific film, internet rating, and wider cultural phenomenon of men disliking things aimed at women (I actually remembering reading a lit review on this subject but I can no longer find it):
http://fivethirtyeig...ngs-are-broken/
Erm. I'm sure Ghostbusters isn't 'aimed at women'. Just because it has a mostly female cast doesn't mean that it is a 'chickflick' or similar discriptor. It's aimed at the general public, as most summer blockbusters are. So I stopped reading after the second paragraph. Because the author just mutilated their own point by formulating it that way, in my opinion.
It doesn't have to be a 'chickflick' to be courting a women audience--just having a majority woman cast is often enough to signal to society that its interested in courting women as an audience unlike most summer blockbusters (especially action movies) which are definitely branded toward young men. But that's not really the point--its looking at the internet ratings (before the movie was out btw) and looking at how it was rated by men, and by women. Men outnumbered women 5 to 1 in the ratings on IMBD and significantly marked it at a lower rating. You can go ahead and disagree with his analysis but the numbers don't lie.
@ Apt, sure that good be the result, but are you willing to argue that men objectively have better taste that women--essentially stating the women are objectively inferior to men?
And finally at the Redpiller stand-in, uh, good burn man.
Oh no, we're going to derail this thread aren't we...
See Studlock, I was kind of worried that you might take offense, it was a joke made in jest. So was Maarks, by the way, the way I read it.
You complain about red pill commentary but the piece you link to and the research in it, is in and of itself a part of the (some times quite rabid) feminist discourse, that makes everything about gender war, instead of gender understanding. That's what Maark was referring to, I think.
Your question:
Quote
@ Apt, sure that good be the result, but are you willing to argue that men objectively have better taste that women--essentially stating the women are objectively inferior to men?
Is in and of itself insane.
You're arguing that one group having a better taste in films (which was a joke), means that the other group is somehow made inferior by such a declaration?
You are attributing a very large non-homogeneous group of peoples likes or dislikes to the idea that one group feels superior or inferior to the other. You are taking millions of people and mushing them into one easily quantifiable and eaily dispised ball of hatred that you label "men".
When in reality we're talking about a pop-culture subject that was a train wreck from the moment it was launched. People don't hate New Ghost Busters because it's "made for women". They hate it because it looks god awful.
Go back and look at the first page of this thread and read the forumites reactions to the trailers. Everyone is apprehensive if not outright dismissive. Now consider that we're on a very civil messaging board that makes the rest of the Internet look like barbarians and what do you expect?
You're using IMDB and metacritic-like scores to synthesize an opinion on gender equality through some kind of alchemical-pseudo-social science funnel that only ever churns out "This is what's wrong with the world", instead of accepting that maybe it's okay to just not like the same things. (Maybe people commenting on IMDB are garbage people that should be launched into the sun.)
Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus and people on the internet are assholes.
This post has been edited by Apt: 10 August 2016 - 07:41 AM