By way of Carolyn McCulley I came across an article from a Christian perspective by Beth Spraul about what has been referred to as "chick porn", titled Chick Flicks and the World's Approach to Men and Marriage. While I would guess that some men (and probably women too)would disagree with some of Mrs. Spraul's points in places (feel free to point them out if you wish), I think, on the whole, the article makes some excellent points.
Mrs. Spraul asks,
"Does watching such movies actually affect our understanding of romance or shape how we go about looking for this ideal husband?
I think the answer is yes.
We may think we are savvy enough to detect the subtle lies present in this genre of films. You might be reading this saying, “What’s wrong with a little escapist entertainment every once in a while? It’s just a Hollywood story, and I know it’s just fantasy.” If that’s the case, then why is there still that sigh or even a tear(s) after the 20th viewing of your favorite romantic movie? Something in us is stirred."
This is a point well taken. When something like a book or movie plays on what deeply affects you, such as a woman's emotions, it is undeniable that will have influence over you. Mrs. Spraul compares so-called "chick-flicks" and "chick-lit" to pornography in their ability to create unrealistic expectations.
"In this article, I’d like to discuss briefly what I think are three powerful lies communicated to and believed by women through this genre of “chick-flicks” as well as “chick-lit” (literature). The lies told to women are introduced at the level of women’s emotions (less harmful, right?), in how they dream about men, and in what they long for relationally. Like pornography, chick-flicks take a good gift from God (romance, relational intimacy) that women are created to desire, and distort it by presenting as “normal” an unbiblical and unrealistic picture of men, love and marriage. And just like men who buy into the lies of pornography, women who believe that their husbands and marriages should always be like what they see on the screen will be sinfully dissatisfied with God’s good gift to them of a “normal” husband and marriage."
She then outlines the lies that these sorts of books and movies tell to women.
Lie #1: Men think of romance and relational intimacy exactly like women do!
This one was shocking to me. I mean, who knew that men and women think differently!?!? I would say "duh!" to this one except that often I think both men and women expect the opposite sex to think about things the same way they do. We think they should know what we mean and know what we need from them without telling them and that the other should "understand" without having to explain it.
Lie #2: If I marry the right man, all will be right in my life.
Mrs. Spraul makes some excellent points about the fact that even a great marriage will not, and in fact can not, make all things right.
"If we as women approach our husbands with expectations that he will be the primary source that takes away all our loneliness, insecurities, fears and longings for love, we hold him to a standard no human being is able to meet in this life. We set ourselves up for great disappointment through these unreasonable expectations. When our husband doesn’t deliver such total sweeping happiness to our lives, we can be tempted to blame him when it is our own worldly and idolatrous expectations that are to blame! Such expectations can even lead us to be discontented wives who are unsatisfied with the day to day realities of life and responsibility in marriage. We can become unsatisfied with our husband’s love and service and care because marrying him didn’t cure our deepest emotional struggles."
I wonder how much of the current epidemic of divorce is the result of such thinking?
Lie #3: I will know that a man is right for me by feelings I get when I’m with him.
In a recent post, commenter SA related a story about a woman who rejected a man out of hand without getting to know anything about him. Perhaps this is an example of what Mrs. Spraul was referring to here:
"The dangers of putting all of your stock in emotion are serious. First, you can easily convince yourself that you are experiencing “true love” while having little regard for a man’s faith, character, service or ability to sacrifice himself for others. Second, for women considering a man who initiates a relationship with them, this over-emphasis on the emotional experience and level of attraction/chemistry can influence such women to dismiss possible suitors based on her “intuition.” I’ve seen it happen—a woman doesn’t immediately “feel” that a man is her “type” or the “ideal” that she’s had in her mind for her husband—so the man is simply dismissed without ever having a chance to demonstrate his possible worthiness."
Good points, I think, both for single and for married women.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
32 comments:
Re Lie #1:
As one of my friends would say, "Well, durrrrr."
And Lie #3: women are not the only party who hope and expect to feel that instant "eureka! there he/she is!" moment. Men can be very "romantic" in that way. I have met both men and women who were into their third/fourth/fifth marriages because they expected that initial level of passion and excitement to be the constant in their marriages, and as soon as that level of excitement leveled off with the realness of life and marriage, they figured that meant the love was gone. On to the next one who would be the "real" love of his/her life... until...
..."so the man is simply dismissed without ever having a chance to demonstrate his possible worthiness."
I don't GIVE a flying toss whether or not I'm worthy of some female! My life is better off being single. TGIS!
I have died an gone to blog heaven...
Imagine lil' ol' me getting a front page mention.
;)
These points are very well made, and I also know what it is like to have all of my attributes nullified by some woman's need for 'chemistry' (in many cases this is code for 'lust').
I am not suggesting that women should date me regardless of their interest, but let's take a look at attributes:
Any human has the following things that they will be strong or weak on:
Integrity
Loyalty
Work Ethic
Thoughtfulness
Empathy
Sense of Humor
Aptitudes
Insight
Selflessness
The list can go on forever.
But all of these traits are dismissed as irrelevant by the person who insists on chemistry.
Chemistry FIRST, then the other things are mere cake icing.
There is not even an attempt on the part of these people (male or female) to cultivate in themselves a taste for these higher callings of the human condition.
It just degenerates to baseline lust and attraction.
The problem with this is that much too high value is placed on the most unstable of relationship factors.
Lust eventually dies off. Very few people sustain a high level of it through a long marriage.
So by cultivating a taste for chemistry and excitement, the person is essentially getting the same cheap high that meth gives you.
The high is great at first, then you eventually need more and more of the drug just to feel a small high. Then you need the drug to feel just normal. The high never returns in full force ever again, and you chase it in vain.
This is like the people who crave chemistry and attraction as the major factor.
They are doomed to lead lives that cannot ever be satisfied, because they crave the most perishable things.
MarkyMark
I guess I kind of missed that. My bad. Haha.
Yes, you are right, both people need to be worthy of each other.
The guy, by virtue of asking a girl out demonstrates that he thinks she may be worthy, the least the girl can do is extend the most courtesy possible.
It seems that many women enjoy turning a guy down just to savor the power.
TL,
Re: lie #3, agreed, both men and women look for that "feeling" to their detriment.
Mark,
I had a feeeeling that someone would object to that line!
Learner-
Sorry for the triple post, but I wanted to add a little more detail about that story, since it has found it's way to the fore.
The woman had known him from church, although only very casually, and knew him to be a 'nice guy' (I can vouch for that).
He is somewhat overweight, and has lost most of his hair. So there is an attraction issue as well. Fair enough.
But the way it actually went down is that he was more asking her to attend the event as friends, although he didn't maybe make that clear enough.
So she declines, and he is okay with that. Then, she runs up to him, apparently having reconsidered, but gives the caveat that "you realize that we're never going to date?"
This woman's rejection, IMO, is several orders of magnitude worse than the usual story.
There was no leaving room for this man's dignity.
He was being blindsided by a statement that basically asked him to admit his inferiority prior to any 'friend activities'.
It would have been no different if she had said "You realize that you're too fat for me?"
Or, "You realize that I only date attractive men?"
She might as well have done that.
If this had been done by an unsaved person, then at least I could blame it on that.
But the fact that she was in an evangelical church makes me want to puke.
SA,
You keep writing comments like this one and I'll keep quoting you ;)
You make a very good point that it is not very wise to place the most emphasis on the quality, "chemistry", that is the least likely to last.
SA,
"He was being blindsided by a statement that basically asked him to admit his inferiority prior to any 'friend activities'.
It would have been no different if she had said "You realize that you're too fat for me?"
Or, "You realize that I only date attractive men?" "
Ouch! That was very unkind of her. Yes, being a Christian does not guarantee good manners or humility in either sex.
However I must disagree with the idea that baldness is unattractive!
Right! That's why I said he lost *most* of his hair.
See, he's not quite all the way bald. If he had lost *all* of it, then hey - good to go!
If the rest falls out, I'll give you his ph#.
:P
and
;)
SA,
There is always shaving! ;)
No-one's mentioned it yet, so I'll roll in on #2.
I think that #2 is probably the sneakiest (and therefore most destructive) lie on the list, even more so than #3. The reason is that there is this expectation in love marriages that marrying the right man will make you happy. The implication being of course is that if you are unhappy, you must not be with the right guy. And with modern marriage having been transformed from being a vehicle for spiritual growth and economic efficiency to a vehicle for happiness, when said man fails to deliver on this promise of the happily ever after he is to blame.
Re #3:
MikeT's wife is quoted thusly:
"Telling a woman to follow her heart is like telling a man to follow his penis".
That was a great article. I'm glad to see it's someone other than men and a handful of rare women who call the chick-porn beast by its name.
It totally is porn. And what is worse, women will flat out deny it and so never realize how it affects them. With guy porn, its pretty obvious that the likelihood of finding your own "pornstar" is slim to none, and of course it is acknowledged as porn so there is some mental balancing that goes on.
As for chemistry deciding things, I think it is unfortunately done on far too regular a basis. While there certainly is a need for basic compatibility which I think plays into that chemistry, it is relied upon to the detriment of both sexes. But as a guy who needs someone to look past my oddness, perhaps I am just biased?
EW,
I think you are right that lie # 2 is the most insidious and so the most dangerous in some ways. I have often heard from divorced women "he was not the right man".
MikeT's wife is a wise woman!
Hi Erik,
Thanks for the comment.
I think it is very true that "chick porn" is often not recognized as such and so there is no balance with it as there is with porn. Women don't see it as setting themselves up to be dissatisfied.
I think mutual attraction is necessary as well, but I think often it is too far up on the priority list to the point that too many good people are disregarded on "face value" alone. I don't think you are biased by your "oddness", but perhaps that is my own "oddness" talking :)
If you read say, Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, you see the same things going into play.
A good man, Mr. Darcy, is not very social or sociable or skilled with women. So he earns disdain. While the PUA bad boy, Mr. Wickingham, earns the heroine's undivided lust, until he reveals himself as looking merely for a wealthy bride.
The sexual/marriage marketplace is explicit. Finding a good husband is job #1 for that time and place. The dangers of not choosing wisely are put out in various ways with various characters who don't choose wisely. The heroine, Lizzie, who is a decent and kind woman, finally realizes her mistake before it's too late. Mostly because society has rigid controls on male/female sexuality, that allow small mistakes while preventing huge ones.
And while Austen is beloved today by women, her central message: choose WISELY and not in haste, is thrown over for "romantic feeling pr0n." The Twilight books being the worst example, but Buffy the Vampire Slayer being nearly as bad. Buffy, for example, goes from vampire to vampire, falling in love with her latest one AFTER he rapes her. Then of course there are the Sookie Stackhouse 'True Blood' (by gay Alan Ball, American Beauty and Six Feet Under) which endorses a similar criteria for relationships/marriage: "Is he hot?"
Hi Whiskey,
Thanks for the comment. Choosing wisely on the oart of both men and women was the theme of many of Austen's novels. There is a similar story line in Austen's Sense and Sensibility where Marrianne falls for the "hot" Mr. Willoughby though he is of questionnable character while initially snubbing the older man of fine character, Colonel Brandon. Like Elizabeth Bennett in P&P, she later sees the error of her ways and marries the colonel. Likewise in her novel "Emma" the lead female character initially falls for a man of lesser character (Frand Churchill) before recognizing that she loves Mr. Knightley, the good guy. Of course all of these men were rich so that plays into the "prince" fantasy, though Austen poked fun at that as well.
I have not read the Twilight books as they are not my sort of thing, but I did see the movie with a girlfriend last Fall. It was sappy and awful and actually pretty sick when you think about how the girl wanted him to "suck her blood".
I think we need here to look at so - called "Christian" romance novels.
Agreed NITA
"I think we need here to look at so - called "Christian" romance novels"
I am not sure what is meant here.
Surely there can be no comparison to pornography.
Women engaging in lewd acts with men for the sexual gratification of voyeurs?????(in print and film)
Come on!
Christian romance novels may give women unrealistic notions about romance and love.. but.. they are not pornographic!
They do not encourage women to engage in sinful acts.
I am going to be really blunt here, L, to illustrate a point..
As much as I hate these stupid unrealistic romance novels.. (never read 'em myself)I have never ever encountered a woman who has "jerked off" as a result of reading said novels.
Maybe they have in the emotional sense.
Also, would you consider an issue of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue as porn?
Depends on intent, I would say.
Hi SA.. I had never heard of Sports Illustrated before, so had to google it up.
In my opinion. I would consider it soft core porn. But, that's just me.
"Depends on intent"
True, SA.
"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" Matt 5:28
Kathy,
If I am understanding NITA correctly, I believe he was referring to how some "Christian" romance novels create unrealistic expectations of men in the minds of women who read them. Those expectations can be as damaging to a marriage as the expectations a man may have of his wife due to viewing pornography. Damaging in different ways? Yes, but both create images of men or women that are not accurate portrayals of real men and women and thus are difficult if not impossible to live up to. This then can create dissatisfaction.
"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" Matt 5:28
Totally agree.
I think that we also agree that if a man lusts after an imagined woman, it is just as sinful.
Therefore, I think that women who experience any emotional sensations akin to lust reading these books are as guilty as men are, with regard to cultivating lust in their hearts.
The definition of pornography is much wider than you may realize. In fact, it existed in written form long before the existence of cameras.
So in a sense, certain types of chick-lit is more akin to the original definition of porn.
If a woman reading those books feels a sense of yearning or lust for the experiences or characters in these books, they are as guilty as men.
Or if they lust after seeing a chick-flick leading man. That is looking with lust. Just because no one is naked does not mean it is not sin.
After decades of believing that women were somehow more sexually pure than men, I now realize that both sexes are very, very sinful.
Read all the definitions for "pornography" and you will see what I mean.
"After decades of believing that women were somehow more sexually pure than men, I now realize that both sexes are very, very sinful."
You'll get no arguement from me on that, SA!
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200812/twilight-vampires
or
http://tinyurl.com/5noojs
Very instructive. Hard for an everyday Christian guy who wants a wife to compete with this sort of emotional preparation.
DEAD SERIOUS THOUGH:
All over the world for centuries, young people (boys and girls) have never had access to this sort of solitary fantasy-production.
Think of the young girl growing up on a farm in the 1800s. The men she saw were real guys. She was shopping for men from the catalog of reality.
Now, this type of literature creates REAL EMOTIONS that are based on FICTITIOUS stories.
Only in our modern world (and only in the wealthy western cultures) do young people have the time and wealth and seclusion to cultivate this kind of narcissistic aspect of themselves.
Blessed are the people growing up dirt-poor, who start working hard for sustenance from an early age.
They are not burdened with this great need for the narcotic high of romantic self-actualization. Even though they may live in grass huts, they see THEIR part of the real world with much clearer vision than the typical American who thinks that they should have everything guaranteed to them.
In a way, these poor young boys and girls are being shown the brochure for a lifestyle and romantic partners that actually exists nowhere outside of fiction.
These are the end times.
When I meet someone who is actually interested in pleasing God, I am usually stunned.
Gosh, what trash, SA. I must admit, that although I had heard of "Twilight" I knew nothing much about it. It first came to my attention when my twelve year old daughter said that she wanted to see the movie.Girls at school had recommended it.
"Adolescent vampire/romance" was enough of a hint for me.
Consequently, my daughter did not see the movie.
I am almost happy now,(after reading the synopsis of that novel) that my daughter has little interest in reading, prefering sporty pursuits such as gymnastics cycling and climbing trees!
What is happening in this world today?
When I was a kid I loved reading.
The Famous Five,(Enid Blyton) What Katy Did, Anne of Green Gables, Narnia etc.. By the time I was twelve I was an avid sci-fi reader. My favourites being Ray Bradbury and Brian Aldiss..(my Dad was really into sci-fi)
When I turned fifteen I fell in love with the classics. Jane Austen's novels in particular. Also Thomas Hardy, Dickens, George Elliot, the Bronte sisters.. to name a few..
Sighs..
Young people today are steadily being introduced to a diet of trashy literature, creating unrealistic expectations.
Sadly, it would seem, we've gone from Great Expectations, to unrealistic expectations! :(
You don't know how many people I know and know of who are dating, have dated and marry/married (some folks divorced) nonbelievers! I have fallen into the trap myself so I won't be the pot calling the kettle black. It is very easy to fall into the trap if you are not careful and if you only use your feelings as a litmus test for selecting a suitable partner. I am going to resurrect my blog, probably with a new alias, so hopefully I can expound on this more.
Hi Emily,
Sorry for the delay in responding, I was out of town. You make a good point about how our feelings can steer us toward things, such as a relationship with an unbeliever, that are not good.
The "chick-flick" I must defend is "You've Got Mail" as it is ACTUALLY based on a much older classic story called "The Shop Around the Corner" which came from a play by Miklos Lazlo called Parfumerie or Illatszertar in Hungarian. Also inspired by this play were the musicals "She Loves Me" and "In the Good Ol' Summertime."
But then again, the premise is very different--two people who can't stand each other in real life fall in love through letters that force them to see the person on the inside. And that's why this story has lasted almost a century.
Perhaps I'm not like alot of women, but I find many different types of men attractive. I would happily date a totally bald man who was a few lbs overweight. I've often dated completely out of physical type--of course this has made tall women angry with me. There are some fabulous men who I can't believe are still single, but they haven't expressed interest in me. And after my Seattle fiasco, I'd be hesitant to try it again. He was very gracious to me despite not being interested.
Hi Savvy,
I've seen both "The Shop around the Corner" (gotta love Jimmy Stewart!)and "In the Good Old Summertime" and enjoyed them both. "You've Got Mail" is a sweet movie for the most part :)
I find myself quite attracted to bald men and to different physical types of men as well. I actually feel sorry for people who have such a narrow view of attractiveness that few people fit the bill. I'm sorry things didn't work out with Seattle, I read about it on your blog. But, don't give up Savvy, you never know what or who is right around the corner if you keep your heart open :)
Post a Comment