|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a big fan of the Middle Earth series, I have always thought that the issue of true male friendship was always missunderstood or ignored.
The fellowship is loyal to each other to the core. These are the stories you hear of fast friendships that were forged in combat. The complete and total trust in your fellow man.
The breaking of the Fellowship has always been one of my favorite parts of the book. Boromir's redemption after pursuing Frodo is classic. I think it has always shown that it is never to late to attempt to correct your actions. The loyalty and resposiblity that Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas assume in tracking down the abducted hobbits.
Lastly the greatest part is the devotion that Sam and Frodo have towards each other. Some have read Sam as simply a mindless servant, or reading into it a homosexual relationship. To me, it always shown what true friendship is really about. The sacrifice you will make for the ones that you love. I look forward to how Jackson will develop this character in the next two movies. Indeed, in the whole series, Samwise is my favorite character. The strength of character that he displays is extraordinary. I could argue that he is the true hero of the book. We could all learn a little for Sam the hobbit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I certainly did.
The scene when Boromir died was an extremely beautiful and touching scene.
But, I did read some articles about the movie before it came out. One of them was an analyis of why it was suppose to fail (sorry, couldn't find the link). The article said it would never hit the 200M (ha...245M now) mark. Their reasoning was, it has only 2 female characters, and no sex appeal. So the movie would not interest women, and there fore fail. Accoring to an estimate that I read opening day was virtually male. So, if the movie didn't appeal to women, it certainly does show the power that the male consumer has (by the way, men of 18-35 is the larger demo graphic group). But, however I do know that the movie appeals to women, but most likely for different reason than us guys.
But the thing that I got from the article, was that only women can make something a hit. Which is complete BS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
245 is only the United States total...
I think one thing that people dismiss is the power and strength of the women that are in it. Sure the fellowship has no women, but Tokien put many powerful female characters in his back history.
For those that did not read the book, wait until the last movie (Return of the King), where a woman plays a pivotal role.
I think Tolkein did an excellent job of character balance throughout, and those who read sexism and racism are simply plying their own political agenda.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually Merry and Eowyn together play a big part in making what I think you are thinking of. I just hope they don´t leave out Merrys part of the deed when they get to that part of the movie.
And if the feminists trash it, kick´em in the but!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely, I was not trying to understate Merry's role. In some circle it is beleived that Merry's blow actually lets Eowyn make her's count.
Anyway, I still admire Eowyn for her heroism,strength, duty, and sacrifices. That IS a woman!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, she sure is! To bad there isn´t more (than there is) of her kind today.
This is the most unexpected discussion I´v had at this site, ever! :-)
What I think we need in this world is more valiant men and women that fight back the darkness in our world (not only feminism, there is more "evil" in this world; poverty, starvation...).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 22, @01:25PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"After all, feminists and their homophiliac allies have gone all out to wreck real male comradeship — the former want to outlaw it altogether and the latter to reduce it to unnatural acts"
...this has never occured to me, but there does seem to be some truth behind it...
Does anyone else agree with this? How does instilling homophobic misandry anomgst heterosexual males work?
CJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 22, @02:33PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I went with my 12 y.o. son to see it Friday night, and having read "Spreading Misandry" I went with a somewhat critical eye. As I sit here and read both the review and the comments posted, I realize that somewhere during the movie, I completely forgot about misandry. I can only conclude that the power of the relationships forged in the journey overtook any negative things I might have found. I have to say I agree with the consensus here that it provides an excellent example of friendship among straight males. I was especially moved when Sam walked into the lake and nearly drowned, and caught my breath when I saw Frodo's hand reach down to him. I think this is the sense of mission that may be one of the things that sets women and men apart. Aragon's sacrifice, too, bears mentioning again. These two events demonstrate what I like to think of as being one of the valuable traits of masculinity. Not that women have zero sense of mission, but I think with men, it goes to their very self-definition.
Frank H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 22, @03:21PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
:"After all, feminists and their homophiliac allies have gone all out to wreck real male comradeship — the former want to outlaw it altogether and the latter to reduce it to unnatural acts"
:...this has never occured to me, but there does seem to be some truth behind it...
:Does anyone else agree with this? How does instilling homophobic misandry anomgst heterosexual males work?
I'm going to hang a large answer on your question. Hope you don't mind
=====Begin Rant======
While I don't necessarily think that any concious effort has been made to use homophobia to eliminate male friendship, I can see several processes that tend to reduce male friendship and the associated extension of male support groups, and homophobia is one of them.
- Elimination of male-only groups and organizations
- Reduction and commercialization of male-only sports activities
- Mockery and consequent devaluing of the idea of "Old Men" (not "Old Boys") mentoring younger men/boys in "life" as opposed to profession.
- Devaluing of fatherhood
- Combined emphasis on and mockery of homophobia as a means of devaluing masculinity (Most boys aren't homophobic until they are constantly reminded to be, and then shamed for doing as they are told)
- Setting groups of men into opposition with each other and consequent balkanization of masculinity (Congress vs Fathers, Taxpayers vs "Deadbeat Dads", SNAGs vs "Regular Guys", etc. Even "Real Men Don't Eat Quiche" is divisive.)
I believe that Tolkein experienced unalloyed male friendship and wrote about it from the perspective of someone who knew and valued it. Those of us who were in active military service at one time or another may recall that, for good or ill, you and the other members of your unit shared a bond. I think that bond is one form of the male friendship that Tolkein knew and most of us have seldom (or never) experienced.
Humans evolved to live in bands. Separate them into individuals and they feel lost and begin searching for something to which to belong. Governments, ideologues, religions and advertisers have been taking advantage of that for all of history. The more we are isolated from each other, the easier we are to control. The breakup of the family is just another example of "divide and conquer", IMO. Tolkein may not conciously have considered this, but I believe that he based his story in part on this bond between men that joined them together and let them care for and about each other even when physically separated. I think Tolkein knew how important the "band of brothers" has always been, and so do we - that is one large reason the books and the movie have the impact that they do.
===== End Rant =====
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 22, @03:57PM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Humans evolved to live in bands. Separate them into individuals and they feel lost and begin searching for something to which to belong.
that is an excellent point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To Anonymous Ranter 4:21
Excellent post. Really enjoyed reading it. Great points about the devaluation of fatherhood, male sports, homophobia as a means to divide men and how they may not have been consciously engineered but their cumulative effect is to divide us. This is something we must fight.
I would add that Tolkien's bonds that developed through the fellowship were even more powerful due to the variety of beings; dwarfs, hobbits, humans, etc. and the types of men; wizards, plebes, warriors. Quite a mix and the mix adds power to the bonds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I, too, liked "The Fellowship of the Ring" in part because of the way that it depicted the relationships of the men. In addition to that consideration, I thought the movie was terrific in general. (I've read "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Hobbit" three times each, so I guess I'm a fan.) "Harry Potter" also depicts males well, though I think that the best-developed character is Hermione. (I have no problem with that, though. She may just be the deepest and most complex character because the author is a woman and has more insight into girls than into boys.) Genfems must hate these movies because they show males in a good light.
As far as the devaluation of fatherhood, male sports, homophobia as a means to divide men and how they may not have been consciously engineered but their cumulative effect is to divide us... I think that they have been engineered, at least in part. I'll put here a comment that I posted on another thread, because I think it's germane to our discussion.
While it's very important for women to be involved in our struggle for equality, we need to place special emphasis on being more inclusive of men. One of the slickest and most successful moves by the gender feminists has been keeping us men divided against ourselves by depicting white males as the ultimate oppressors while still depicting males in general as the source of all evil. Somehow we need to get past our antagonisms and work together -- men of color, white men, males of all ages and gay men -- if that last item bothers you, well, take it like a man :)
We need to tear down the walls that stand between us and that are so effectively kept up in large part by the genfem tactic of pointing the finger primarily at heterosexual, white males. Only then will we be able to work together. The gynocracy oppresses us all. We need each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding men working together, maybe fathers' rights organizations are the place to start building bridges. I would guess that many of these are primarily, but not entirely, made up of white men. Organizations of black men and blacks in general are concerned in part with what has happened to their communities as a result of the destruction of their families.
Perhaps the organizations that focus on problems of fathers should start to contact organizations of blacks to see what common ground exists for cooperation. When men complain to legislators and the media about discrimination against them, their words often fall on deaf ears, but if we can show that the war against fathers has especially impacted blacks, legislators and the media might be more likely to listen. In addition, this would make it possible to show the racist aspects of feminism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"When men complain to legislators and the media about discrimination against them, their words often fall on deaf ears, but if we can show that the war against fathers has especially impacted blacks, legislators and the media might be more likely to listen. In addition, this would make it possible to show the racist aspects of feminism."
Y'know Tom, you just gave me a damn good idea. If we pit one sacred cow (blacks) against another (feminism) what would the outcome be? it would be fascinating to see what would happen. Not only would we serve a legitimate purpose, we would also advance our cause at the same time.
What do you folks think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 22, @09:19PM EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Let's not go down that road, Adam. The feminists have allied themselves with the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world and they all seem to have embraced the environmentalists and the socialists into the Democratic Party.
I WOULD very much like to see black men better represented in the men's movement. One area where they ought to be especially interested is in the area of education. If you look at the racial differences and compare them to the gender differences in academic performance, it becomes clear that black men and white men have more in common than black men and black women. I think the black feminists take the position that, if they manage to keep the black men close by, then they have less to deal with when it comes to masculine opposition.
Frank H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok Ok, I guess my scheme was a bit dubious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your scheme does point out what the feminists have done over the years: To align themselves with every victim group possible. Blacks, Gays, Afghans, etc. By doing this they have created a "We are all victims together" idea that acts as protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's not forget some of the greater lessons of Tolkien's myth. Specifically, the capacity of men of strength to display compassion.
We would do well to take these lessons to heart, each of us men, and each of us women. But especially we men of courage. Recall the words of Gandalf to Frodo. Frodo laments it "a pity" that Bilbo did not use the Ring to slay the wicked villain, Gollum. "Pity? It was pity," he says, "that stayed Bilbo's hand." He adds later, "The pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many." Consider also, perhaps more importantly, the choice of the Council to destroy the Ring. If you have the ultimate weapon, a thing of awesome and terrible power, should you use it? The Council's verdict is that no noble aim can be achieved through any tool of evil and oppression. Newly liberated women should take heed of this advice. Their "Ring of Power" could be said to be found in the mass media, abusive court practices, educational thought reform, etc. All ends will be spoiled, no matter how noble or enlightened the person, if they are sought through wicked means.
The ability for men of strength to distinguish between good and evil, to sometimes err, and to recognize their error, is also central. Many newly-empowered women find themselves heady with sanctimoniousness and pride, but their sins are the sins of all us men who have abused our own strength. Compassion, my friends, is the measure of our greatness. Move forward, inch by inch, with patience and goodwill, and hope for a time when we might all learn the humility of Samwise Gamgee, embracing all men and all women of wisdom and bravery.
Finally, I am left to ponder the fact that women's decided lack of unity, their fractured and self-defeating bickering, is a source of woe for many people, particularly the women's movement itself. Much can be learned from the unity so often displayed by men. But when women are united in purpose, we would do well to hear their concerns and realize their own inherent decency and virtuosity, no less and no more than our own. Welcome all women of good faith, and the lessons of Middle Earth will serve us all very well, I am sure.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
