And here I thought there would be no Tiger Beatdown posts today!
Luckily, my friends, there is one thing that can save us all, and that is: people casually insulting (a) women, (b) people of various genders, and (c) women, again, also, but in a different way. In the name, of course, of Feminism!
Let us recap: Kathryn Bigelow, who we like very much over at the Tiger Beatdown, has made a movie. An action movie! And you know who also makes action movies: dudes. Yet this Kathryn Bigelow, she seems to be a lady. And not a dude! Is there any way that you, Martha P. Nochimson at Salon.com, can sum this up in probably the most offensive way possible?
Quentin Tarantino, who should know better, having just directed a piercingly original ironic study of war and blood lust, dubbed Bigelow the “Queen of Directors” when she took the DGA award. I prefer the “Transvestite of Directors.” Looks to me like she’s masquerading as the baddest boy on the block.
Your headline, grateful reader, is as follows:
Kathryn Bigelow: Feminist pioneer or tough guy in drag?
“Hurt Locker” director masquerades as a hyper-macho bad boy to win the respect of a male-dominated industry
Pretending to be a man! Although not a man! But maybe secretly a man! In any case, somehow capable of doing man things! Which are not woman things! Drag king, I tell you! Or possibly trans lady; it really depends on whether you go with the hed or the dek, I suppose. But in both cases with the added connotation that drag kings and/or trans ladies are totally bad! Why can’t Katherine Bigelow, if she is a lady, make films entirely about flower arranging and her own vagina and also scenes of herself gently weeping over a particularly touching Kay Jewelers commercial? WHY? WHY MUST HER GENDER BE MADE THUS UNCLEAR?????? You are scaring Martha P. Nochimson, Kathryn Bigelow. Cuddle a kitten and talk about how you wish it was a baby! Do so at once!
The fun thing is, this isn’t even the first time this headline has happened, in regard to a female director. Remember last summer?
This was about Lynn Shelton. Another lady who somehow, against God and biology, made a movie that was not entirely about ladies. I don’t know how these freakish directresses (directrixes?) keep managing to make movies about things outside of their own experience, I swear to you. It is a worrying trend in our society today.
You know, careful study of this article reveals there to be “points” contained therein. Points about how traditionally feminine or woman-focused modes of filmmaking are devalued, and how we shouldn’t only respect women for being able to do stuff that is traditionally manly, and this and that and hither and yon and so on and so forth. You know: these are not only points with which I agree, they are points which, I do believe, I have made in the past.
Yet I somehow managed to avoid the “that lady director is clearly a weird gender-traitor transvestite and not a real woman because she is doing boy stuff which makes her not a lady” construction. How? I have no idea, I swear. Clearly this was the direction in which to go.