It's not. National Lampoon was astonishingly sexist even when it came out; my mother bought me a couple when I was in fifth grade and I was shocked by how raunchy it was. Playboy they won't let you buy; surround the full frontal nudity with jokes and marijuana ads and apparently it's no longer pornography. Breakfast Club is three years after Porky's: but fourteen years before American pie: That we've now navigated to a place where we can watch Bender in Molly Ringwald's crotch and go "that ain't right" is progress and long overdue but it's also a comparatively minor transgression for the environment in which it first appeared. I'm all about calling out the transgressions. My kid will watch Breakfast Club some day and she's gonna wonder at the unenlightened era in which it was created. But she will have figured out that it's not an anomaly; it's a piece of art worthy enough to be forgiven its flaws.It’s hard for me to understand how John was able to write with so much sensitivity, and also have such a glaring blind spot.
Yeah, it's a well written piece imo. It's pretty crazy that in Sixteen Candles a group of young boys are propping up the passed out prom queen to take photos with her. Also, apparently they had sex. I guess it was meant to be forgivable because both of them were blacked out, but still... its some fucked up shit. I think it probably gave rise to this, too:
I think her generation will look at that sort of thing the way I look at Looney Tunes. The cartoons can have horrible charictures of black people, but I know that was a representation of the times, wrong then and wrong now, and not a reason to dismiss the art entirely. Sexism is going the same way, happily.My kid will watch Breakfast Club some day and she's gonna wonder at the unenlightened era in which it was created.
I guess I meant I don't see sexism in the eighties as ever being viewed as badly as racial caricatures or characters like Dong. Sorry. I'm in a coffee shop so I can't watch the video. So I really can't grok your point at all. You're agreeing? Still thought I'd clarify. I make vague statements sometimes
This is a great read, and was much more thoughtful than most. Probably my only complaint or criticism is that I really dislike this habit of assuming an author's personality or values based on their work. I mean, it sounds like in Hughes' case it may have been justified (and Molly Ringwald is certainly in a better position than most to say so), but I think we're generally too quick to equate portrayal with lionization.
Agreed. I'd wager that Hughes was practicing a crass humor, both for the commercial effect, and probably because it was darkly funny in its portrayal of an often brutal environment for self discovery. But the dad and the underpants, that's just fucked up, and it betrayed the characters.
I want to see it and discuss with you, guys. I'll do it as soon as possible <3