Michael Moore's view of women/relationships

Post Reply New Topic

I just flicked thru Michael Moore's book Stupid White Men, and he has a chapter on relationships and how men can make things better for women.

He seems to have a very stereotyped view of gender IMO and see all relationships as a loud, overbearing man with a timid, gentle cowed woman.

For example he says all the way thru the chapter, "Men, listen to what your wife is saying, just because she's not as loud as you doesn't mean she doesnt have something worthy to say, she might have some very new ideas, you might find your mind opened if you just stop shouting over her, shut up and let her talk".

Well pretty much every woman I have ever dated has been louder and more outspoke than me, (or at least as much), I don't see this stereotype in my life.

He also says at one point, "you need to learn to eat dantily like women do if you dont want a heart attack, you've never seen your wife attacking food ravenously like its her last meal have you?" Which I thought was stupid as all my girlfriends and female friends have loved food and not been dainty eaters.

He seems to see all women as dainty, sensible, quiet and men as loud, stupid, and greedy.

TBH when I read it back 03, it made me feel bad as I felt that I wasnt manly enough for having loud girlfriends and not being greedier and more aggressive than them. I know angry conservatives all say "oh white men are the persecuted group nowdays" which is stupid, but I didn't think that chapter was helpful. IE a man can be a prick without being those things (For example, a shy quiet CEO of a company who wont hire women, or a passive agressive boyfriend). I know I can be.

I know men have too much over women in this world, IE more likely to abuse, have better wages and more positions of power. But I didn't think a book chapter making ordinary men feel stereotyped helps that. I would be interested if anyone else has read it and what they thought.

Redacted

Ah I never really thought of it as him talking about his own flaws. I had found him really smug and self righteous in that chapter, but looking at it that way puts him in a better light. I really enjoyed the book and thought it had vital things to say about racism and poverty, but that chapter was wrong IMO. I think things to improve gender relations need to be positive not condemning.

Michael Moore disgusts me. He is for the left what Ann Coulter is for the right. But while Coulter is smarter than she lets off and might secretly be a liberal who merely spouts racist right-wing crap because it pays well, Moore is a lot more dull-witted than he tries to come across as and might be a secret conservative.

I hate it that I often find myself in agreement with this man, which is only because he's a populist. As a person, I find him utterly appalling. He's a pseudo-intellectual, loud-mouthed, primitive fat slob with no self-control or fashion sense. On top of that, he's a hell of a hypocrite, a Catholic multi-millionaire who poses as a liberal and gets $40,000 for a speaking gig. One of the 1% who pretends to speak for the 99%.

It would never occur to me to take relationship advice from this man. I mean, look at him if you can bring yourself to do that. Does he look like a man who knows anything about women? Or about eating daintily, for that matter Not that I would deride a person for their looks alone. It's the whole package that makes him so disgusting. His sloppy clothing that looks as if he just came out of a baseball stadium where he had five beers and ten hot dogs, his loudmouthed and impolite "look at me!" attitude, everything about him is nauseating. He has also been known to bend the facts a little, so I would take everything that he says or writes with a grain of salt.

I always found him very softly spoken on TV.

He's a lot older than I thought he was! I thought he was about 30 in the TV nation days, and 40 in the "farenheit" days. But actually he was 40 on TV Nation and about 60 now.

I think a lot of populist left wing writers come across as sketchy and simplified because they're writing to persuade the masses, not people who already into politics. Thats for another board tho.

A blog friend of mine who likes him, says he thinks his films are dececptive, and use tricky editing to make issues simpler than they are, but he (my friend) thinks thats ok, because the films are for "average joe" to get him on the side of the cause, not meant to be detailed even handed discussions but simple "recruitment" to make joe public not agree with war or guns.

Maybe, the fact is, that the vast majority of relationships in the USA are very old fashioned with the guy as the lord, and he just wants to balance that... It did make me feel worse and more bitter when I read it tho (which was back in 03 when i had just fallen out with quite a sharp female). It was the very last thing i needed to read to be honest.

I shall have to keep the thread on his relationship views tho and not his socialism (or possible hypocritical lack of).

from s clayton review of stupid white men

"Another faintly bizarre rumination is the chapter called "The End of Men." I'm not sure whether it's a celebration of women or an indictment of men or both but it is a pretty hit-and-miss effort hypothesizing that men are in danger of becoming extinct. To be fair, though, this is where Moore first printed one of his favorite ideas (Oprah For President!) and I really can't completely fault a chapter that ends with a list of vibrator retail outlets."

Michael Moore's intentions are good, his delivery can leave a lot to be desired at times and his films and books are intended to be digested and discussed by the masses. This can only be a good thing. Not everyone's going to pick up a Chomsky, Hitchens or Finklestein book.

You know a good lesson you can learn from Michael Moore? He has a wife, despite being Michael Moore. I mean seriously. That should make you optimistic. Too much more said would put this into the PRR arena, but like...why would anyone care to listen to Michael Moore about...anything?

Michael moore is an idiot. I dont know why anyone would ever pay him any mind. Id just ignore the book if I were you.