June 2, 2010

"Sex and the City"

I haven't quite gotten around to seeing the savagely-reviewed Sex and the City II, but I must mention that I was already engaging in protracted abuse of Sarah Jessica Parker's looks back in 2008, back when most critics were praising the first movie. Since I never got around to posting my full-length review in The American Conservative of the first movie, here it is for completists:
Sex and the City (2008)

On the last day of May, my younger son was flipping through the movie section of the newspaper when he looked up with sad eyes: "All month, we had good movies -- "Iron Man," "Speed Racer," "Prince Caspian," "Indiana Jones" -- but then … this," he intoned, unable to bring himself to utter the words "Sex and the City." "What happened?"

Indeed, across America, countless guys felt that the Manly Month of May, when the biggest explosion-laden blockbusters are unveiled at the multiplex, was being tainted by the long lines of ladies attending the film version of the 1998-2004 HBO sitcom. "Sex and the City" updates us on a coven of four skanky spinsters who, long ago, moved to Manhattan to find "labels and love" (there apparently being no stores or men in Minnesota or wherever).

Inside the theatre, the palpable affection toward the characters was reminiscent of a 1980s "Star Trek" movie, whose fans couldn't wait to hear Scotty exclaim one more time, "She cannae take any more!" Granted, the movie version of "Sex and the City" isn't as witty as "Star Trek IV." It's also grindingly long at 148 minutes -- the DVD ought to include a "Couples' Cut" with an hour edited out and a few dozen more jokes tossed in. Still, it's certainly no worse than the "Matrix" sequels and "Star Wars" prequels that males turned out to see by the tens of millions.

The stars aren't getting any younger, so sit in the back row. Hollywood has generations of experience lighting actresses of a certain age, though, and the three supporting women look passable, even Cynthia Nixon (who plays the prickly redheaded Miranda), whom I pointed out to my wife in 1998 was an obvious lesbian. (It took Nixon until 2003 to figure it out for herself.)
 
In contrast, "Sex and the City's" leading lady, purported fashion icon Sarah Jessica Parker, who portrays columnist Carrie Bradshaw, looks horrifying, like a bulimic bodybuilder. Evidently fearing matronly upper arms, the 43-year-old with zero percent body fat appears to have spent the last four years bench pressing and not eating, giving her the grotesquely defined arm musculature of Rambo after the Bataan Death March. Her horse chin and witch nose have become even more prominent, making me wonder whether, like Sylvester Stallone, who was recently arrested smuggling Human Growth Hormone into Australia, she's on some muscle-building medicine with head-enlarging side effects.
 
In the climactic scene in which bowlegged Carrie reunites with her true love, the financier Mr. Big (played by an embalmed-looking Chris Noth from Law & Order), Parker's cheesy fur coat and stick insect legs jutting out of her tiny skirt make her resemble a streetwalking crack addict. The sequence is a masterpiece of the memento mori genre, a terrifying depiction of the skull beneath the skin. Unfortunately, it's supposed to be a romantic comedy.
 
As hideous as Parker looks, the "Sex and the City" movie is actually less repugnant than the TV series. Each of the four women is monogamous throughout the year covered in the film. That's typical for rom-com movies these days, which are about living happily ever after. In contrast, the TV show just went on and on for six years, with the bodycounts (and, presumably, STDs) piling up.
 
The 1998 TV series was to Helen Fielding's 1996 novel Bridget Jones's Diary as Dick Wolf's 1990 TV show Law & Order was to Tom Wolfe's 1987 novel Bonfire of the Vanities. Wolf made a fortune by taking Wolfe's sardonic story of New York cops and prosecutors hunting for "the Great White Defendant" and stripping out all the satire. Similarly, the gay male writers behind Sex and the City started with Fielding's spoof of "urban families" of stylish single women who undermine each other's chances of landing a husband by constantly gathering over drinks to nitpick their boyfriends, and turned these mutually-destructive circles into a fantasy about friendship.
 
It was never actually about female solidarity, but about female competition for alpha males like Mr. Big. Nevertheless, women hate to be seen as competitive, so "Sex and the City" displayed the nice side of cliquishness, minus the nasty side: these social X-rays wouldn't be seen dead in the company of 99 percent of their fans.

The trick was to make women viewers feel less awful about the big mistakes they've made in their lives by making their bad decisions feel fashionable. Misery loves company.

Rated R for strong sexual content, graphic nudity and language.

And here's Manohla Dargis mad about how sexist is the response to SatC II.

70 comments:

Anonymous said...

Modern feminism wants to insist that this is acceptable behavior.

But, I refuse.

They're disgusting.

Whiskey said...

Hilarious. Parker is truly hideous. The sequel underperformed, to expectations, it was supposed to make more money than the first. It seems some un-PC stuff (Muslims don't treat the gals real well) got them in hot water. Though one critic called it "gay men playing with Barbies" which seems accurate enough.

What is striking is how many young girls watch this stuff. It runs in eternal reruns all the time on TBS, and middle school and junior high girls race home to watch it, and imitate the characters.

What I find interesting is how high the standards are for romance in the series. Like the Israeli import (which tells you what you need to know about modern Israel) "the Ex List" which ran for one season on CBS, the serial monogamy is frightening.

Someone counted up the partners, with Samantha having 50+ in the series, Carrie in the forties, and "nice(r) girls" played by the Redhead Lesbian and Kristin Davis around 20 each. In "the Ex-List" (which ran in Israel for five years) the protagonist is told by a fortune teller, she will either marry one of her exes within two years or never marry at all. So over around 100 episodes, each one was the same, she hunts up the ex, sleeps with him, and finds him lacking. Instructive on many levels.

Mr. Anon said...

Now here is a real SoCal headline:

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpps/news/porn-actor-stephen-hill-goes-on-rampage-kills-1-dpgonc-20100602-fc_7867441

Mr. Anon said...

If one types in "Sarah Jessica Parker" into Google, the second option offered by the phrase completion feature is "sarah jessica parker looks like a horse", which directs one to sites like this:

http://sarahjessicaparkerlookslikeahorse.com

If Hollywood insists on casting this woman, couldn't they just insert her in digitally, using old footage of her from "Striking Distance". I bet Pixar or ILM could do that.

LaLarson said...

Funny, but I still think Manolo the Shoeblogger had the best review of the first SATC.

He pointed out that Sarah Jessica Parker in her movie wedding dress looked exactly like Dicken's Miss Havisham in hers.

I saw that the bride within the bridal dress had withered like the dress, and like the flowers, and had no brightness left but the brightness of her sunken eyes. I saw that the dress had been put upon the rounded figure of a young woman, and that the figure upon which it now hung loose, had shrunk to skin and bone. Once, I had been taken to see some ghastly waxwork at the Fair, representing I know not what impossible personage lying in state. Once, I had been taken to one of our old marsh churches to see a skeleton in the ashes of a rich dress, that had been dug out of a vault under the church pavement. Now waxwork and skeleton seemed to have dark eyes that moved and looked at me. I should have cried out, if I could.

Now that's a harsh review.

TH said...

Wow, you weren't kidding about the extended abuse. But yes, I saw some episodes of the show, and it always seemed implausible that the Chris Noth character would run after someone like Parker.

Anonymous said...

Very nice evisceration of Sex and the City Steve, with the "friendship" between these women being the prettiest lie of them all.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey, are you the same Whiskey that comments at Deadline Hollywood?

Anonymous said...

Modern feminism wants to insist that this is acceptable behavior. But, I refuse. They're disgusting.

Isn't it just the female version of GAME? Women have as much right to play the field as men do. While it might not be 'acceptable' to you, it's normal behavior. Any female partners you have in their 20's have probably already been with a fair number of males. That is, if you've ever actually HAD a female partner. ;-)

Sometimes it seems like men with little to no sexual experience have an overly idealized and unrealistic view of romance. Also, I can assure you as a college kid, even if you don't like clubbing and partying, going to bars etc most girls do.

Anonymous said...

Also, I lol at the fact that Kathryn Jean Lopez, the staunchly Catholic matriach at NRO, is vitriolic about this series but appears to have watched every episode and seen the last film.

Anonymous said...

I had no idea Scotch-Irishmen watched Israeli romantic comedies. I guess you learn something new each day.

The International Jew said...

Whiskey - "The Ex List" tells you everything to know about Tel Aviv, which is markedly different than the rest of Israel in many respects.

Anonymous said...

I once was dating a girl who mentioned that she watched S&tC religiously.

I knew immediately that nothing would ever come of our relationship.

[You know how you mentally take an imaginary pen and mark a great big "X" through the chick's name, as you remove her from the list?]

There are certain litmus tests in life which you simply cannot ignore.

Anonymous said...

Steve, interesting observations. Your mention of Law and Order at the end also prompts a thought I've had in the past, one which you alone are probably best qualified to answer: has anyone ever done a racial/ethnic analysis of the crooks on Law and Order? It would be especially interesting to see how it shakes out both within the internal continuity of the show itself, and compared with real life crime stats, as well as with the real life ethnic makeup of NYC. One group has always struck me as conspicuous by its absence; others seem overrepresented to me.

Have you ever written on this? Would a double sawbuck entice you to do so?

l said...

Does 'Sex and the City' even have a female audience? The show's written by gays (with a script full of stupid double-entendres and puns), the "star" looks like a tranny and the girls behave like club-hopping homosexuals before the AIDS epidemic hit.

Anonymous said...

While it might not be 'acceptable' to you, it's normal behavior.

It's entirely normal behavior for budding young leftist chicks who aspire to grow up to be Maureen Dowd.

[Insert obligatory Catherine Zeta Jones picture here.]

Now this is a little thought experiment which you can do at home: Compute the real-life total fertility rate of the four actesses who star in SATC.

Here's your data:


Sarah Jessica Parker
imdb.com
nndb.com
en.wikipedia.org
Born: March 25, 1965
WOMB: BARREN
one biological son [James Wilke Broderick]
??? surrogate children ???

Kim Cattrall
imdb.com
nndb.com
en.wikipedia.org
Born: August 21, 1956
WOMB: VERY BARREN
zero children

Kristin Davis
imdb.com
nndb.com
en.wikipedia.org
Born: February 24, 1965
WOMB: BARREN
zero children

Cynthia Nixon
imdb.com
nndb.com
en.wikipedia.org
two biological children [Samantha Mozes, Charles Ezekiel Mozes]
WOMB: BARREN
April 9, 1966


So depending upon whether SJP's two surrogate daughters were conceived of her own eggs, that's either a total fertility rate of

[1 + 0 + 0 + 2] / 4 = 0.75

or a total fertility rate of

[3 + 0 + 0 + 2] / 4 = 1.25

But by either calculation, you're looking at extinction-level demographics.

Anonymous said...

If Hollywood insists on casting this woman

Everyone at iSteve is perfectly well aware of why vile, hideous, talentless hacks like Sarah Jessica Parker are on the agents' rolodexes.

It's no big secret in these parts.

Anonymous said...

"Cynthia Nixon (who plays the prickly redheaded Miranda), whom I pointed out to my wife in 1998 was an obvious lesbian. . ."

By the same token, would you say that Hitler was obviously gay?

Ray Manta said...

Also, I lol at the fact that Kathryn Jean Lopez, the staunchly Catholic matriach at NRO, is vitriolic about this series but appears to have watched every episode and seen the last film.

Not to worry, I've gotten used to ladies in the blogosphere who doth protesteth too much.

Harry Baldwin said...

Steve writes: "Carrie Bradshaw, looks horrifying, like a bulimic bodybuilder.

Madonna has gone for this look too. Michelle Obama seems to have achieved the bodybuilder look without the bulimia. Maybe when the Obama administration is desperately flailing around for funds to cover our staggering deficit, they could have a pay-per-view arm-wrestling competition between the president and the First Lady.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Isn't it just the female version of GAME? Women have as much right to play the field as men do...

And an emoticon at the end. Classic.

For starters, can you give us the ontological basis of this 'right' of women to have sterile, polyandrous sex?

While it might not be 'acceptable' to you, it's normal behavior.

No it's not. It's deviant behavior, and the iron laws of biology punish it with STD's and social atomization.

Sometimes it seems like men with little to no sexual experience have an overly idealized and unrealistic view of romance.

That's what romance is: ideals and fantasy. I suggest you enjoy it while you can, because when your sexual market value starts cliff-diving at, oh, around age 30 and your job is gobbling up 60+ hours/week of your waking life, you'll find romance is in very short supply.

Also, I can assure you as a college kid, even if you don't like clubbing and partying, going to bars etc most girls do.

Me too, with plenty of drinking, smoking and medium-rare steak. But if you want a decent old age with grandchildren and nieces and nephews you need to keep your impulses in check. Also, men interested in starting families tend not to be trolling clubs where you're offering your shopworn wares.

Now, I can already here you spluttering from your Women's Studies textbook, "But what about MEN?" It's a double standard honey, deal with it. We've got millions of sperm and several decades of viability; you've only got roughly a ten year window to gestate healthy fetuses.

Not interested in starting a family? That's fine. Kindly exit the gene pool as soon as possible and quit driving up housing prices for your more forward-thinking peers.

Steve the Conservative Jew said...

I was dragged into that movie by a female friend of mine. Vile, inane and disgusting about sums it up.

Brent Lane said...

Wow, Steve, that's probably the most deliberately vicious article of yours that I've ever read. For a minute I thought Whiskey himself had written it (in this instance, it's a compliment).

Sometimes it seems like men with little to no sexual experience have an overly idealized and unrealistic view of romance. Also, I can assure you as a college kid, even if you don't like clubbing and partying, going to bars etc most girls do.

Yes, and that's working out SO well for Western civilisation, isn't it? I suppose if it were only 'college kids' doing it, it might not be so damaging. When it's women like Carrie and her brood, who were 'college kids' the same time I was (about 30 years ago), perhaps not.

asdfasdfasdf said...

"Though one critic called it "gay men playing with Barbies" which seems accurate enough."

Nah, gay men have better taste.

afadfadsfadsf said...

"In contrast, "Sex and the City's" leading lady, purported fashion icon Sarah Jessica Parker, who portrays columnist Carrie Bradshaw, looks horrifying, like a bulimic bodybuilder. Evidently fearing matronly upper arms, the 43-year-old with zero percent body fat appears to have spent the last four years bench pressing and not eating, giving her the grotesquely defined arm musculature of Rambo after the Bataan Death March."

JOHN SIMON LIVES.

Anonymous said...

Now here is a real SoCal headline:

One that shows his face

Anonymous said...

You just have to consider the numbers.

The average American heterosexual male has 6 to 8 sex partners in his lifetime. The average female heterosexual has 4. The exact figures are disputed but are probably close. This means that women have only about half as many sex partners in their lifetimes as men. Seems plausible to me.

Then consider the number of sex partners of typical male homosexuals. In a recent survey more than a quarter claimed to have had over a 1,000 partners. There don't seem to be many (or even any) male homosexuals who have sex at the low heterosexual rates. By most accounting the sex frequency of male homosexuals is an order of magnitude greater than heterosexuals.

So it's fair to say that the gay male writers of SATC will have had very different experiences with sexual promiscuity than their characters. Real women just aren't very promiscuous(e.g. Catherine the Great only had 12 lovers) unless they are full time prostitutes.

I wonder if the casting of very horsey SJP is also a gay consequence. Many people believe that in the fashion industry the power and influence of gay men has resulted in a generation of female models with mannish features and boyish bodies.

The recent movie Antz was about the life of social insects if they were to act like humans (social mammals) - an entertaining fantasy. Similarly single straight women who act like gay men is an entertaining fantasy.

Albertosaurus

Glossy said...

Steve, that was very funny. Coven of four skanky spinsters, Bataan death march, stick insect legs - one of your best.

Why do women always complement ugly ladies on their beauty? I suspect that it's partly because they tend to look at insincerity as a fun game. Literal-mindedness is boring to women. Just stating obvious facts, without any mischievous spin, without some sort of an emotional subtext - that's just too boring to them.

A second reason would be that they're more susceptible to wishful thinking than men are. If Sarah Jessica isn't ugly, then almost no woman under 50 is ugly. I'm sure that's a comforting thought to millions.

David said...

Gentlemen (and ladies), hang up your spurs in the SATC-bitchy-crit rodeo. Steve - in this review - has surpassed almost anyone's best efforts.

TR said...

SJP is apparently a good practitioner of female Game. Not that pretty, yet managed to propel herself to leading lady status instead of playing the sidekick roles. Also had long term relationships with Robert Downey Jr. & uber-alpha JFK, Jr. & married Ferris Bueller.

The SATC movies are shit, but a lot of actors make shitty movies. I like that she declined to go the plastic surgery/breast implant route so many of her fellow actresses succumb to despite all the abuse over her looks. Also that she lives a fairly quiet life and doesn't make a spectacle of herself in the tabloids.

J said...

This review is memorable.

I enjoyed it.

Anonymous said...

The interesting thing about Sex in the City is that when female writers like Cindy Chupack, Jenny Bicks, and Zuritsky and that other lady largely took over the writing from gay men Darren Star and Michael Patrick King, the show became less about a fantasy of female empowerment and more a critique of how successful women sabotage themselves in relationships by having unrealistic expectations of Mr. Right. It's instructive that the show's two most realistic and sympathetic characters ended up married with kids to an outer boroughs bartender and a physically unattractive divorce lawyer, while the narcissistic Carrie blows up relationship after relationship with good, decent guys in her endless pursuit of Mr. Big.

The movies would have been a lot better (and maybe had something real to say about the power of friendship to help one get through difficult times in one's life) if they had let the show's very talented female writers write and direct them instead of King, who still writes the characters more or less as gay men in drag.

And while I agree that Ms. Parker is not aging well, I defy anyone to go back and watch L.A. Story and not be charmed by her.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HRzloVtUPA

Whiskey said...

Anon -- Yes I'm the same Whiskey who comments on DHD. Second Anon -- I caught about five minutes of the CBS version -- doomed to failure, the more positive thing being that America is not yet Israel (in terms of normalizing that many sex partners for women). Yes I am indeed Scotch-Irish (with some German thrown in).

What I find interesting is how the gossip/tabloids push various folks. Right now, the Kardashians and someone named Kendra are the big figures on the covers of all the magazines at the check-out counter of the supermarkets. Parker has dropped out.

Much of the female fantasy is of perfect, unending youth (no Plan B for when beauty fades) where men always fight over the same few women. A woman of say, 55 has many things to offer. But beauty and sex appeal just isn't one of them. Thus a Plan B of mature adult wisdom and a place for such women ought to be part of that -- but the culture of female pickiness and mutual sabotage over perfectly acceptable men is striking.

Yes, dramatically in the series Carrie and the rest can't settle down -- the gay men writing it want the audience to follow along in an endless gay male sex parade disguised as women. [Gays dominate most of the writing-producing for women's dramas on TV and movies.]

BUT ... the striking thing is how women audiences accept that. They didn't go for "the Ex-List" (hat trick of unquestioning female belief in psychics, concurrent rejection of tradition and traditional religion, serial monogamy in extreme). But they did accept Sex and the City -- preferring an endless series of dates over finding a guy for their heroes.

Which to me speaks of deep dissatisfaction by most White Western women with White Western guys. In Israel, in the US, in Europe. Not manly enough, not dominating enough, not arousing enough.

Steve's Affordable Family Formation is partially an explanation, but Mexican women dispense with husbands even in high-priced real estate to have many, many kids. I think Sex and the City unwittingly reveal (and the Ex List and all those vampire things) how unhappy most women are with beta male guys who go to work everyday but fail to be exciting and dominating.

Hence the appeal of the Kardashians or "Kendra" all of whom have Black boyfriends and some have babies with them. Hank Baskett, or Lamar Odom, or Reggie Bush are not boring beta White guys, hence IMHO the innate appeal of these women (and their lives) to the female readers.

You can't push something on someone they don't already want. So women must want this stuff.

More Anon said...

"Isn't it just the female version of GAME?"

The shows' and movies' co-producers, at least one of whom co-wrote, are gay men.

I suspect female fantasies about acting like gay men are unique to our time, and shouldn't be taken as representative of women in general. These fantasies might even be an invention of gay men.

For instance, Hollywood generally doesn't cater to fantasies of motherhood, even though girls play with dolls since childhood, many women squeal with joy to find themselves pregnant, and mothers of a certain age constantly press for grandchildren.

Anonymous said...

SATC appeals to the female fantasy of being in-demand by alpha males well into your 30s and 40s. Like a wealthy heiress would be, perhaps. In reality women over the age of 27 find it increasingly difficult to compete with younger women for the attention of any man with a working penis.

Anonymous said...

Steve, just interested...tell me just what was it about the character Miranda (other than that she was driven to succeed in her field, law, and that she felt she ought to be able to "make it" in life w/out relying on men) that convinced you the actress herself was a lesbian?

Just wondering because, as a woman, I certainly missed any "clues." Of course, I knew nothing about Nixon's life outside of her character, but I just attributed Miranda's quirks/characteristics to good acting. I am wondering what I might have missed, or if you knew more about her outside of her role on SATC.

Steve Sailer said...

"By the same token, would you say that Hitler was obviously gay?"

That was the impression of some of his foreign visitors. His aides would explain to them that you had to see him on stage, making a speech, to see him at his most impressive.

heavenly creature said...

Two wonderings

First: Is Whiskey a gay man with a thing about dark skinned guys?

Second: I had friends who watched SAC religiously and it gave me insight to them--that they liked that ghastly show. I couldn't stand it and I did not see it as a story of friends. Scr#wing like an automoton for years and years and then expecting to settle down with Mr. Right for a happy-ever-after is insane and sort of sick. It does happen on rare occasions, but to tout it as something four women in one small, geographic space, are expecting to do is just weird and creepy and against statistical reality.
Like you'll be healthy if you live on whipped cream and gummy bears and anti-freeze.

I didn't realize it was created and partly written by gay men. Now I get it.

As for those ladies looking good, I just went to meet-up where there was a lady of 43 who everyone thought was about 30 and she needed no lighting or special effects. She was a nurse and good to the core. I was a little jealous of her good looks but I am glad she exists and that I met her. She impressed and inspired me. God. There are young girls inspired by the four horseladies of the apocalypse? God help us and save us.

Those show business people need to get their heads out of their Y-fronts and look at the life in front of their eyes.

SGOTI said...

And while I agree that Ms. Parker is not aging well, I defy anyone to go back and watch L.A. Story and not be charmed by her.

That's funny. During a rather bizarre series of events I actually went to an event with her during that timeframe. I walked in with her, then as luck had it was seated next to her at the table later. She was actually very witty and sweet, and not bad looking with just a great bod.

It's a shame she started looking like a shoe.

dafadfdfsdf said...

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/08_01/sarah1SPL0808_468x640.jpg

Godzilla would run from her.

Harry Baldwin said...

Steve Sailer said...

"By the same token, would you say that Hitler was obviously gay?"

That was the impression of some of his foreign visitors. His aides would explain to them that you had to see him on stage, making a speech, to see him at his most impressive.


Not unlike a certain president we could name.

Anonymous said...

A wise person once said:

A matter of aesthetics, even superficialities? No, SJP goes way, WAY beyond that. She is metaphysically hideous; a ghastly challenge to all that
is decent in this world.

She is grotesque down to the subatomic level. She is an irreparable flaw in
the basic fabric of the Universe--her mere being ties String Theory in knots. The laws of gravity and entropy are suspended in her presence--all matter flees from her appearance. A black hole would vomit her up, gladly.

On a moral plane, her existence alone causes any rational man to doubt the existence of a just, omnipotent god--there is seemingly no theodicy that can account for her. To see her is to despair, to lose all hope. At such times,
the thought of suicide is a man's only consolation.

A blurry photo of a reflection of a shadow of her visage can produce a reaction reminiscent of the "Is There In Truth No Beauty?" episode of Star Trek. It has happened to many a poor soul not adequately prepared for such an encounter. A trail of shattered minds and horribly mutated optic nerves
follows in her wake--blindness is balm and death a blessing to such
unfortunates.

Stated more colloquially. and as we used to say back in the dorm, she's fugly, man: a creature feature, a horror show, a fucking ghoul. There is no even theoretical amount of beer that would make her doable--according to the laws of thermodynamics, the entire Universe could not contain such a stein.

BamaGirl said...

"For instance, Hollywood generally doesn't cater to fantasies of motherhood, even though girls play with dolls since childhood, many women squeal with joy to find themselves pregnant, and mothers of a certain age constantly press for grandchildren."

Have you watched tv lately? There are PLENTY of shows about motherhood, many of them depressingly focusing on teenage and single motherhood though. The entire TLC channel is pretty much about babies. The latest JLo movie was a weird fantasy about motherhood. There have been plenty of movies revolving around pregnancy too....Juno, Waitress, 9 months, etc. There's that stupid show on ABC family called "Secret Life of the American Teenager" in which 3 or 4 characters have unrealistically gotten pregnant. I'm afraid your comment is totally inaccurate.
And btw, playing with dolls doesn't really have anything to do with motherhood. Most little girls preferred barbie dolls to baby dolls. Its more fun to pretend to be glamorous (as a 9 year old girl) than to pretend to be a mom.

BamaGirl said...

"Now, I can already here you spluttering from your Women's Studies textbook, "But what about MEN?" It's a double standard honey, deal with it. We've got millions of sperm and several decades of viability; you've only got roughly a ten year window to gestate healthy fetuses"

I'm not defending "anonymous" because I think the club-hopping lifestyle is not something to aspire to or excuse, but I take issue with your statement that women only have a ten year window to gestate healthy fetuses. I hate to break it to you, but its more like 20-35. My great-grandmother had her last child at 48, and that was 50 years ago in an age before fertility treatments. My grandmother was almost 36 when my Dad was born, and she had little trouble with the birth. Women have always had been able to conceive children past your ridiculous figure of a "ten-year window". It might be rarer than a woman in her mid to early 20s bearing children, but it has always occurred since the middle ages and probably before(see Eleanor of Aquitaine). I'm not saying its optimal to wait later, but to suggest its impossible or even rare to have a healthy kid past 30 is ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

It's entirely normal behavior for budding young leftist chicks who aspire to grow up to be Maureen Dowd.

You will find that 'conservative' and 'Christian' girls in Southern and Mid-Western college towns get up to much worse.

Yes, and that's working out SO well for Western civilisation, isn't it?

I wondered how long it would take for 'Western civilization' to be brought up.


Not interested in starting a family? That's fine. Kindly exit the gene pool as soon as possible and quit driving up housing prices for your more forward-thinking peers.

Lol, you don't get it, do you? Men like to think that the women they end up marrying were waiting for them in a state of virginal sobriety. They like to differenciate between 'good girls' and 'bad girls'. The lines are more blurred than they realize. The nice girls they're marrying were very likely blowing frat guys every Spring Break while drinking themselves into comas, it's just that their guys tend not to find out about it. The perception of their wives as 'nice girls' is where the problems arise. If the husbands treat them like some kind of mother figure then, as Whiskey has pointed out, they're going to have an affair with the first Alpha capable of unleashing her inner slut. :-)

I'm just directing that to all men at the romantic relationship stage of their development. Some, I realize, aren't quite there yet. ;-)

David said...

>she lives a fairly quiet life and doesn't make a spectacle of herself<

Do as I propagandize, not as I do.

Daddy Warbucks said...

As bad as Sarah Jessica Parker looks today, image what she would look like without all the makeup, hair dye, photo edits and retouches as well as plastic surgery (shudder). She used to look like Tony Danza's fugly cousin or scrawny hippy little brother

I realized the MSM in general and elites in particular hated me well before the 2008 misinformation campaign. When I repeatedly saw SJP sold as a sex symbol on the cover of Vogue, Elle, and fronting various beauty/fashion industry products, I knew they hated our innate aesthetic sensibilities.

Will SJP become the Chuck Norris-like meme to plumb the depths of ugliness?

Anonymous said...

I'm a bit surprised at the level of hate for Parker here - her show is certainly morally toxic, but so is most Hollywood product these days, and she seems affable enough in interviews, more so than her three co-stars.

Anonymous said...

What's with all the "Why is she so famous despite the fact that I don't want to bang her?!!" confusion in these comments?

Her fanbase is mostly female. She doesn't have to be sexy to men. She was the star of a show hugely popular with women, she's a style icon who is all over fashion magazines constantly (not Maxim-style mags, but magazines aimed at women), she has a pleasant, approachable personality that goes over well with fans, and she's the not so cute, not so rich girl who made it big anyway and enjoyed a glamorous career and love life.

Enough women like her that casting her makes sense. Whoever said that for a long career, actresses must be liked by their own sex could have been talking about Parker.

Although I think the rage here at Parker is less about her personally than about the series and lifestyle she was the face of. If she were a star of Lost or Grey's Anatomy or something, I imagine people would be less enraged that a none-hot woman was cast as a romantic lead.

rob said...

Cynthia Nixon...two biological children...

Huh, the homosexual outbred the straight ones. So many women declare themselves lesbians in late middle age, do they really take 30+ years to figure out that they're interested in chicks?

Some researchers think women don't have fixed orientations. If that's true, maybe only masculinized bull dykes hit on middle aged women, so they decide that they're gay?

Truth said...

"I'm a bit surprised at the level of hate for Parker here -"

Really? She is, after all...a woman; and this is, after all...a board for not-by-choice celibates.

Ray Sawhill said...

Funny review from Steve.

Can I venture a point that I think is being under-recognized in this commentsthread? "Sex In the City" is a fantasy. You may or may not like the fantasy the show is selling (a lot of guys here obviously don't), but "SATC" isn't trying to be a documentary, or a morally instructive or uplifting show. It's a fantasy, and in that sense it resembles high-fashion magazines, which selling everyday sensible clothes for real women, they're selling giddy fluff that gives women a thrill. Anything wrong with that? Before you say Yes, consider the fact that Rambo movies and Jerry Bruckheimer movies are selling male fantasies -- blood, sweat, action, hot girls, guns ... Are these fantasies admirable? Uplifting? Morally justifiable? Or are these movies basically there to feed the male appetite for heroism, action, and excitement. OK: shouldn't girls be entitled to have their fantasies catered to similarly?

So here's my theory: chicks love imagining a life that's all giddy romantic complications and glamor and that nonetheless winds up delivering Mr. Right to them. That's the basic structure of many romance novels, and it's there in "SATC" too.

Here's the mystery and the moral problem: Why do so many women seem to have taken "SATC" not as silly fun but as a model to emulate? Hey, ladies: it's a fantasy, and even a bit of a satire. You aren't really supposed to go imitate these ladies.

One of my main beefs about Americans: we take our fantasies 'way too seriously ...

(Incidentally, I haven't seen the movies, and I've only watched a couple of episodes of the show. So I may be way off here.)

Ray Sawhill said...

Oh, I lost track of my main point: I think some of the anger in men's reactions to SATC may largely be anger at what some women's fantasies are like. Some guys are very, very displeased when they find out what women really enjoy thinking and daydreaming about -- what really tickles them.

I'm no feminist, but I think this is unfair. Women are very used to indulging guys for our dumbass enthusiasms, fantasies and passions. They routinely sit through action-adventure movies, for instance, without complaining too much about the sketchily drawn female characters, or the sicko love the guys onscreen have for their bombs and guns. They understand that this is just shit guys enjoy daydreaming about and imagining.

Seems to me that we ought to be more indulgent where women and their fantasies go. Not that that requires us to enjoy them ourselves...

Porn and action movies: that's how guys enjoy imagining life. Fashion magazines and romance novels (and SATC): how galz enjoy imagining life. Amazing any of us manage to mate up, isn't it?

(My Game tip for the day: More men ought to go read a half a dozen romance novels. It's like opening up women's brains and seeing what's really going on there.)

BamaGirl said...

I agree with Ray Sawhill. Seems kinda strange that some frivolous fantasy riles up all the commentators on here so much. I mean, I'm sure there are some impressionable teenagers who want to emulate that lifestyle, but its not like the majority of them will succeed anyway. And Sarah Jessica Parker snaring Chris Noth in the series is no different than the lovable geek in every single male-oriented action/comedy movie winning the affection of the hot girl.

jimbo said...

What I always find interesting: I actually read the original "Sex and The City" book, before it was made into a show. (I picked it up off the shelf in the bookstore becauese of the title and couldn't put it down. So sue me.)

THe fascinating thing: the book was a very, very dark comedy: it showed the undercurrent of desperation in the urban single girl lifestyle. I was frankly amazed when I heard the show had become such a hit, until I realized that it had taken the premise and taken out all the darkness.

"has anyone ever done a racial/ethnic analysis of the crooks on Law and Order?"

There was a funny bit on "30 Rock" this year where Tracy is theorizing that the election of Obama has been a catastrophe for blacks because it has made whites feel less guilty. One of his entourage agrees, saying "Last week, I saw a white judge on 'Law and Order'!"

Mercer said...

"I'm a bit surprised at the level of hate for Parker here -"

Really? She is, after all...a woman; and this is, after all...a board for not-by-choice celibates."

LOL

All the venom directed at Parker could make someone think she is man hating lesbian not a married mother. I think she is attractive for someone her age. If she is so ugly how did she marry a successful actor?

I think her looks are on a par with Ann Coulter but the personality Coulter displays on TV is one of the most unfeminine I have ever seen unlike the girlish Parker. I am not surprised that Coulter has never married. It is a mystery to me that so many conservatives adore her.

Ray Sawhill said...

I had a hard time watching the show because the four main characters were so much like the media women I spent my work days with. (Or so much like the media women liked to imagine themselves to be.) I thought the show was pretty well-done, I liked the actresses, I could see that some satire was intended. But at the end of the day I wanted a break from these people, not another half-hour in their company.

Anonymous said...

Ray Sawhill's got it right.

Fantasies aren't reality, guys, get a grip. You've got yours--we've got ours. Each of the SATC gals reflected at least one FANTASY of most American women.

Example: some women would like just one day in which they could toss aside guilt and their hard-wired tendencies and be like Samantha-- indulgent and adventurous in her sex life, self-absorbed, AND non-emotionally involved with her partners(like men in their 20s....and 30s....and?????) It's tough being so darned responsible, monogamous, emotionally attached. Samantha provides some respite from that.

Mouse-a-tronix said...

this is, after all...a board for not-by-choice celibates.

Now that's the one PC term that I'm sure will be welcomed in these parts.

Pissed Off Chinaman said...

Well, I liked the show but did not want it to be made into a movie, so I have not seen either film. The show is a fantasy and a well written and acted one for what its worth. Incidentally, Cynthia Nixon is my favorite as she is the most intelligent and best actress of the four (it helps that our politics align and I have chanced to meet her at a fundraiser once). I also like her character on the show the best too.

Nine-of-Diamonds said...

""I'm a bit surprised at the level of hate for Parker here -"

Really? She is, after all...a woman; and this is, after all...a board for not-by-choice celibates"

Yeah, like a certain troof seeker whining about a year ago over some blonde chick who wouldn't have anything to do with him. The whole thing reminded me of Frank Nomura's & Frank Cho's sexual complexes WRT white women (google them, if you don't read comics).

$0.50 says we can get a "Sport" or two out of him before the thread's dead.

" It's tough being so darned responsible, monogamous, emotionally attached. "

Many women nowadays don't seem to be that way. STD rates amongst NAM females, if I remember correctly, are between 35-45 % - thus indicating many partners. Likewise, my White and Asian female friends seem to average at least 2-3 relationships a year. That's a lot of coupling between the ages of 15 - 30. Not to mention that after a breakup there's often "comfort sex" with multiple partners for a month or two. And these are generally well-educated upper middle class or wealthy types who know the risks of promiscuity. Not to say that males are paragons of virtue - just throwing it out there. I'd be interested in what other people's experiences are.

Any links to the 4-partner-per woman stat, or similar studies?

Nine-of-Diamonds said...

Frank Nomura = Ted Nomura.

Truth said...

"Yeah, like a certain troof seeker whining about a year ago over some blonde chick who wouldn't have anything to do with him. "

Either you, or one of these other clowns brought that up before and I have no idea what you are talking about; then I go to look up your comic book, no such thing exists, then you get the guy's name wrong, and I still can't find anything.

Face it SPORT, you are a complete disaster, and an utter and and total blight to your family name.

Anonymous said...

I personally think that there is some male personality type that delights in "revealing" womens' promiscuity. Blandishing it as a 'cruel fact of life' to wake the listener from a supposed romantic dream he has fallen into about female purity. They do this, it seems, to paint a picture of a world where women are adventuresome whores, yet pretend not to be. It is always implied that "I have seen so much crazy shit, stuff you wouldn't believe" - and the person listening is simply naive to this deviousness of women.

Completely aside from the actual phenomenon of women's promiscuity, for myself I like to notice the steadfastness with which this viewpoint is emphasized by those who adhere to it. I also notice the delight they take in 'revealing womens' dirty side'. Then I notice the ambiguous nature of most of the evidence, and the fact that it generalizes the behavior of the 12-20% of women who I know are genuinely promiscuous and slutty, to the totality of women (or would like to).

I personally think it is a way for these men to justify to themselves neglecting emotional development, by "revealing" women not to be worthy of an emotionally developed man. According to these guys, its all just a game, and we are all just lying to each other: women are whores - with this premise one sidesteps all the questions about emotional commitment, trust, and intimacy which otherwise crop up.

I write this only because I have now encountered 4+ men giving me these kind of assurances about the devious sexual lives of women, all with the same tonality and emphasis, all pointing to the same understanding. Each of them was also unhappy in their relationships, I may note by the by.

Templar said...

Yeah, like a certain troof seeker whining about a year ago over some blonde chick who wouldn't have anything to do with him. The whole thing reminded me of Frank Nomura's & Frank Cho's sexual complexes WRT white women (google them, if you don't read comics).

I do read comics (albeit less and less frequently, especially after "Civil War" and the whole "Spider-Man selling his soul, erm, I mean, marriage to the Devil" bit), but I don't Google. Do you have links handy?

Nine-of-Diamonds said...

"you are a complete disaster, and an utter and and total blight to your family name."

Oooh! MELTDOWN! Where my fitty cent???

And you DO know what I'm talking about. No need to get worked up, pal. Sorry I offended you - here's hoping you do find yourself a nice "coal burner", as OJ Simpson would put it. Although in my neck of the woods they tend to be 40-50 pounds overweight, & no white man will touch 'em.

Anyway, I was just trying to make a minor point - I should have explained that Ted Nomura is a comic book artist (Luftwaffe 1946) and Frank Cho does (or did) Sunday funnies. Both are Asians with an unhealthy fixation on strapping young Aryan lasses - in Nomura's case, complete with Nazi SS regalia. Asian males in their comics are heavily-caricatured or animalistic - Frank Cho actually represents himself as an anthropomorphic chimpanzee, kinda like one of those "furry" characters.

Come to think of it, they're both a bit like the gay "Sex and the City" creators, in that women are pedestalized beings far superior to hetero "Beta Males" (I hate using that terminology) who flaunt their sexuality with no consequences.

I'm not one to agree with radical Asian activists, but it does seem like some minority artists have serious complexes when it comes to white females & self image.

Nine-of-Diamonds said...

"I personally think that there is some male personality type that delights in "revealing" womens' promiscuity."

How is it revealing when often the women themselves reveal it to anyone who will listen?

" I also notice the delight they take in 'revealing womens' dirty side'."

Delight? Hardly. Plus, women are not uniquely "dirty", so that's irrelevant. They are simply trying to maximize personal pleasure now that certain behavioral constraints have been lifted - a wholly rational response. Whether this makes them "evil" or "slutty" is besides the point - why are you so fixated on perceptions of sluttiness?

"I personally think it is a way for these men to justify to themselves neglecting emotional development, by "revealing" women not to be worthy of an emotionally developed man."

Wha?? You lost me there. Are these dastardly men emotionally developed or undeveloped?

"According to these guys, its all just a game, and we are all just lying to each other: women are whores - with this premise one sidesteps all the questions about emotional commitment, trust, and intimacy which otherwise crop up."

...so this is all an elaborate way of whining about women being whores? Truth be told, some misogynists believe this, but I have noticed a larger number of them making the more nuanced point described above. Whether woman are being "sinful" or "whores" is irrelevant - what does matter is how this behavior will affect women and others in the future (increase or decrease in fertility rates, stable families, regional demographics, and so on).

"Each of them was also unhappy in their relationships, I may note by the by."

Is this intended to be feminist shaming language of some kind? i.e. "you must be gay/have no woman/have a tiny penis/live with mommy"??

It's cool - most of us have been there before. I love the homophobic variants - fascinating how quickly pee-cee liberal wo(men) will call you a faggot, etc if you don't back down from them.

Vibrators said...

thanks for a wonderful post :) I'm always watching "Sex in the City" :)

ejaz14357 said...

find interesting is how high the standards are for romance in the series.

the-rabbit said...

My partner and I watched the first sex in the city movie, and I was quite surprised - I enjoyed it. I was expecting to be rolling my eyes, sighing, and day dreaming while a bunch of women discussed their favourite rabbit vibrators and cried at each other. We haven't seen the second movie yet. *I* want to see it but my partner isn't keen. What a role reversal, lol. Thanks for sharing!