Why hasn’t Hollywood produced a rom-com about a Nazi soldier murdering the Jewish boyfriend of his secret crush? It’s comedy gold!
Jill Filipovic reviews a “rom-com” about abortion:
Yes, Obvious Child is an abortion film. But it’s primarily a film that tracks neatly with romantic comedy construction and finds authenticity and humor in some of the rawest expressions of humanity. A few times, there’s a joke about farts. But the comedy also comes in the film’s treatment of pregnancy. There are few things more fundamental, or more common, than wanting to control your own reproductive capacity — humans have been trying to do that for about as long as humans have been around. Yet in our on-screen fantasy worlds, reproductive choices occupy a shockingly narrow space. This film expands it and situates abortion as one very common thing women do, but not the only thing any individual woman does.
“It’s important that, yes, Donna has the abortion and she makes the decision,” Slate said. “But what’s interesting to me is how she lives her daily life.”
The abortion is a plot device in the film, but not a traumatic one, or one that punishes Donna. Instead, it shows Donna who will show up for her. Her best friend is there from the moment she takes the test to the moment she goes to the clinic. Her mother finally says something close enough to the right thing. The guy who got her pregnant turns out to be a pretty decent human, and the abortion is a catalyst for a potential romantic relationship. It’s a pregnancy story that has a happy ending, even when the ending isn’t a baby.
Just a dismembered baby, a weed choking the barren ground of heedless sex.
I preferred Filipovic at the Marxist amen corner, UK Guardian. At Cosmopolitan, she corrupts teen girls.
Liberals loudly condemn the “social Darwinism” of free markets, but there’s nothing more social Darwinist than the unfettered sexual marketplace. By inverting love that makes happy marriages possible, feminists promise a lifetime of empty self-regard to millions of sub-super model women. Of course, when you look this fabulous, survival in the mating game is an afterthought. Janice Shaw Crouse writes:
Sadly, far too many of today’s young people live desperately lonely lives: living alone, raising children alone with no support from anyone else or living with someone unwilling to make a permanent commitment. Every day is a matter of personal survival; every day increasingly more Americans face the world having to fend for themselves with no support system and feeling like no one understands or cares about their problems and challenges.
The post-modern worldview – an attitude that says: “I’ll do as a please,” “I answer to no one,” “Don’t you dare judge me” – has resulted in a huge segment of society that accepts no standards, no demands, and no accountability, a crowd of isolated persons whose relationships are at best tenuous. They have defiantly said they don’t need anyone; they especially declare they don’t need God or a personal faith that makes demands on their freedom to do as they want. These are the legions of the uncommitted and unconnected – 81 percent of the nearly 42 million single-person non-family households are persons living all alone. While married couples made up 70 percent of all households in 1970, today they are less than half (48 percent).
Such are the results of self-indulgence. This is what happens when the capacity for commitment and pair bonding is stunted by promiscuity. When self-centeredness rules, life boils down to just surviving; it’s “everyman (woman and child!) for himself” in a “dog eat dog world.”
Filipovic’s feminist comrade, the more subdued Jessica Valenti, who—while we’re embracing social Darwinism, it may be noted—middle age’s approach has treated less kindly, is still stirring up trouble at the Guardian with headlines like this: “The case for free tampons: The cost of a product that half the world’s population needs multiple times a day, every month for approximately 30 years, is simply too much.” Filipovic had her friend’s back with this headline on the same day: “Should Tampons Be Free?: Half the world’s population needs them once a month for several decades. Shouldn’t we at least get a tax break?”
Ah, the smallness and entitlement of feminist ethos.
Filipovic ends that article, which was shared 6,300 times on social media, with:
Hopefully Valenti’s article, and the backlash to it, will be a call to women to demand better for our health and our bodies.
What a joke to pretend the woman’s body is a temple, when she celebrates its defilement by loveless sex and murder weapons.
Further reading: “Sex object.”