[quote=@tex] It... It is... The brutality and sheer aggression of the main character's actions, even outside of the simple act of murder, is a significant part of her characterization, and by extension, the plot of the movie. It may even be one of the sole impacts on the movie's tone. To deny something like this is to completely disregard a significant portion of the movie's themes, characterization, plot, and tone. I believe this is called [b]cherry picking.[/b] [/quote] And what the hell does any of that have to do with feminism? What exactly is it's relevance to women or men? Again you said 'no self respecting feminist' what exactly is the conflict here? [quote=@tex] I also find it strange that you would assert this ad hominem- [/quote] Which shows you don't understand the meaning of ad hominem [quote=@tex] I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but feminism's origins stem from political activism. It was a movement centered around women's rights, and should still be considered a political body [/quote] No, its origins are in philosophy from Classical Liberal thinkers like Jeremy Bentham the term feminism was coined by Charles Fourier in 1837. The significant feminist movements came after the ideology. I don't know what you mean by 'political body' there is no American Feminist Political Party so you comparing them to the Democratic party is just bizarre. If you're saying that feminism as a movement that has an effect and is affected by politics then, you are pointing out what can be applied to most 'movements'. [quote=@tex] This makes [b]no sense[/b]. You are quite literally saying that a movie that theoretically embodies first wave feminism in its entirety with due accuracy is not a feminist movie. That makes [b]no sense[/b]. [b]That is completely absurd[/b]. I don't think you have any grounds to claim that I'm conflating my personal beliefs on feminism with actual feminist philosophies, when you are clearly demonstrating a severe lack of education on the topic. I will be the first to admit that I am not particularly learned on feminist philosophy, but I don't think I'm ignorant of the core beliefs behind the political movement. [/quote] You saying that things are nonsensical and absurd a lot of times doesn't actually strengthen your argument, but here we go.. You are using strange terms like saying the film 'embodies' feminism. I don't know what that means. The film is ABOUT the suffragette feminist movement in England yes. In the same way Lincoln is about the Presidency during the civil war, but does it 'embody' the subject matter. I'll be clear, Suffragette is a move about a feminist movie, and has characters and a plot about the activists in that movement which are feminists. But that is just setting and characters, themes of the film are separate. Now does suffragette have feminist themes? Yes probably but not the same ones that are explored in Ex-Machina or presented in Kill Bill. All these things are separate. So to be clear [b]Suffragette:[/b] Setting: England During Suffragette Era Genre: Political Drama/Historical Biopic Topic: The Struggles and Rise of the first Feminist Movement [b]Kill Bill:[/b] Setting: Modern Asia and America Genre: Kung-Fu Exploitation Revenge Movie Topic: The Destruction of an Assassins guild by a former member. [b]Ex-Machina[/b] Setting: Near Future Silicon Valley America Genre: Sci-Fi Psychological Thriller Topic: The application of the Turing Test to a Android Now where the themes of the movie come in is the [b]plot[/b] what actually happens in the movie? Feminism is a movement but its also an ideology. While Suffragette is a historical look at one of the founding movements of feminism. Kill Bill and Ex Machina explore parts of feminist ideology though the actual stories. And yes having a strong female lead IS feminism if the female is being portrayed and treated no different to how a man would be treated in terms of narrative. Note that narrative treatment is not the same as the actual character's treatment in-universe. [quote=@tex] If a movie that directly shows what slavery was like is considered a 'slave movie', [/quote] So let me be clear, I don't think 'slave' is a genre. I'm using the term loosely to define movies that[b] depict[/b] slavery as apposed to movies that are intrinsically [b]about[/b] slavery in its narrative. Now it's not the perfect comparison for feminism because slavery isn't an ideology in the same way, its a historical practice. But to make the point that Django Unchained is really a western story about a rescue of a loved one. The fact that the main character is a former slave is important but its just the 'backdrop' to a lot of bounty hunting and character motivation. 12 years a slave's entire focus is about the experience of being a slave. There is no love interest, there is no real 'main villain' its a story entirely about the personal journey of someone trying to live as a slave and everything that happens around him as a result of the institution of slavery. This is why I would say this is fitting of the 'Slave Movie' label even though the genre would technically be 'Historical Drama'. [quote=@tex] Haha, what? Is it because I swore a couple times? Fuck, man. [/quote] No because your tone is overly dismissive and comes across like an angry rant, like you are personally shocked that anyone would even make the arguments that I'm making. Now obviously you have plausible deniability of your intent, but considering you are on a website for creative writing, I would hope your understanding of tone is similar enough to mine to see how that comes across. Your constant dismissing my opinions as inane also implies that arent really trying to discuss as much as you are to dismiss, which is fine if you want to just joust, but I actually happen to find this conversation interesting and want to keep it in the realm of an exchange rather than a back and forth of gotchas. Ive seen you debate with others and it's rarely in this tone, so I can only conclude that this is because feminism is an important issue to you.