Misogynist women, or men?

[scifes]

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie...atuitous-star-trek-strip-scene-171222662.html
when they brought up his "partner in crime" i thought they were finally gonna mention the lady who agreed to play the scene in the first place, but no, some people are thicker than i can fathom, his partner in crime was the co-produced co-writer whatever.

I mean are those people adults? Do they have minds? Why not the cries of misogyny over porn movies or all the sexual scenes in other movies?
Why is the writer who wants to sell tickets to his movie to blame for assigning an acting role to a grown up actress with no mental disabilities who willfully and i'm sure proudly took it?
Are they saying she's being used? that he's exploiting her need for money like prostitutes are? Or are women morally alright to show off their bodies inappropriately and are not to blame, unless there was a man behind it?

The hypocrisy and sheer stupidity is revolting uke:

 

[iceaura]

If you be sure to wear a burqua at all times and use the hood to cover your eyes at key moments, you will be spared the horror of seeing women offend you without being called "misogynists".

 

[scifes]

I can't see how your post is relevant.
She acted a role, he's a misogynist for casting her in that scene, what about her?

 

[Balerion]

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie...atuitous-star-trek-strip-scene-171222662.html
when they brought up his "partner in crime" i thought they were finally gonna mention the lady who agreed to play the scene in the first place, but no, some people are thicker than i can fathom, his partner in crime was the co-produced co-writer whatever.

She's the actress. It's not her responsibility to change the content of the work. Sure, she could have said no to the scene, but they might have replaced her in that case. So it isn't up to her to change the script, it's up to the guy who writes and directs the thing.

Of course, Alice Eve's bra-and-panties scene isn't misogynistic in any sense. It's gratuitous, serving no other purpose than giving male moviegoers a semi, but it's not an expression of hatred or fear of women. It's the sexualization of the franchise. Kirk is also shirtless in his underwear, the article points out.

Why not the cries of misogyny over porn movies or all the sexual scenes in other movies?

Are you serious? You're telling me nobody thinks the porn industry is misogynistic?

Why is the writer who wants to sell tickets to his movie to blame for assigning an acting role to a grown up actress with no mental disabilities who willfully and i'm sure proudly took it?

For the same reason you blame the politicians for war, and not the soldiers. The writer creates the content, the actors are simply doing their jobs. That isn't to say actors don't have any moral stake in the matter, but if they choose to objectify themselves, that's their choice.

Are they saying she's being used? that he's exploiting her need for money like prostitutes are? Or are women morally alright to show off their bodies inappropriately and are not to blame, unless there was a man behind it?

These aren't mutually exclusive. If a woman allows herself to be exploited, that doesn't mean she therefore isn't being exploited, or that the exploiter is absolved of all moral responsibility.

The hypocrisy and sheer stupidity is revolting uke:

Your sheer stupidity certainly is.

 

[TheQueen]

She's the actress. It's not her responsibility to change the content of the work. Sure, she could have said no to the scene, but they might have replaced her in that case. So it isn't up to her to change the script, it's up to the guy who writes and directs the thing.

Of course, Alice Eve's bra-and-panties scene isn't misogynistic in any sense. It's gratuitous, serving no other purpose than giving male moviegoers a semi, but it's not an expression of hatred or fear of women. It's the sexualization of the franchise. Kirk is also shirtless in his underwear, the article points out.



Are you serious? You're telling me nobody thinks the porn industry is misogynistic?



For the same reason you blame the politicians for war, and not the soldiers. The writer creates the content, the actors are simply doing their jobs. That isn't to say actors don't have any moral stake in the matter, but if they choose to objectify themselves, that's their choice.



These aren't mutually exclusive. If a woman allows herself to be exploited, that doesn't mean she therefore isn't being exploited, or that the exploiter is absolved of all moral responsibility.

bravo

 

[scifes]

I'll try to put some order into the unordered;

She's the actress. It's not her responsibility to change the content of the work. Sure, she could have said no to the scene, but they might have replaced her in that case. So it isn't up to her to change the script, it's up to the guy who writes and directs the thing.

Ohhh I see, aha... She's just an actress..

Are you serious? You're telling me nobody thinks the porn industry is misogynistic?

...and porn stars are not actresses?

Of course, Alice Eve's bra-and-panties scene isn't misogynistic in any sense. It's gratuitous, serving no other purpose than giving male moviegoers a semi, but it's not an expression of hatred or fear of women. It's the sexualization of the franchise. Kirk is also shirtless in his underwear, the article points out.

The article says that gratuitous scene was misogynic, you say it isn't. Although you admit the unnecessary scene sexualizes the series, but since only hatred and fear of women is misogynistic(according to you), while sexualizing them is not, then that scene "isn't misogynistic in any sense"..
I see a lot of sense there

For the same reason you blame the politicians for war, and not the soldiers. The writer creates the content, the actors are simply doing their jobs. That isn't to say actors don't have any moral stake in the matter, but if they choose to objectify themselves, that's their choice.

Rules of war are different and incomparable. War happens quick and on a big scale, soldiers can't see the big picture, which is why there's the chain of command.
No such thing exists in movies. It's profit vs. morals, in this case. the writer and the actress are of the same flock.

These aren't mutually exclusive. If a woman allows herself to be exploited, that doesn't mean she therefore isn't being exploited, or that the exploiter is absolved of all moral responsibility.

Consent/opportunity and knowledge are what separate agreement and exploitation. The actress could have very easily walked away.