Women might be able to fake orgasms. But men can fake whole relationships.
-- Sharon Stone --
----------------------------------------
-- Sharon Stone --
----------------------------------------
I've never been able to get into Tolkien. Most of the guys I have dated fall into one of three camps: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe, Monty Python, or Lord of the Rings.
I found Hitchhiker amusing, but not as philosophically rich as some people seem to find it. Monty Python's humor is juvenile. But Rings is (as far as I'm concerned) flat-out self-importantly annoying "fake intellectual" drivel. I have tried many times to read it, but I just can't get very far past the first book. I wasn't even remotely interested in the movie(s).
I may have discovered one additional reason I rejected Rings. I recently read a theory that Tolkien's writing displays an unconscious bias against and suspicion of earthy women, and against sex and heterosexual expression in general. I wasn't aware of it when reading, but now that I think about it, yeah.
And now I have to wonder about the guys who love it - like Ex#2. Perhaps it resonates with some of their own unacknowledged fears and biases. When I think about the guys who were in the Rings camp, yeah, it fits.
I'm too much of a feminist to ignore that slap from Tolkien.
.
1 comment:
I know. The books are dense. But the movies are dear to my heart. The movies, which are very faithful to the books in a good way, show women in great positions of power. Galadriel, Arwen and Eowin (sp?) are not princesses but strong women fighting for their people and what they believe.
And yeah, Xman was ultra big on the Rings. I love me some Holy Grail and I never did get Hitchiker.
Post a Comment