wordsmithlind

I finally got around to seeing the Sex and the City movie. I hadn’t really put this on my things to do list, but a free copy presented itself, so I took a couple of hours to see indulge myself in the hype. I’ve only seen the show a handful of times, never particularly liking it, nor understanding why so many people identity with it, so my enthusiasm for the movie was not very great.

After seeing Sex and the City, I question why so many educated women that I know personally view this show as the mouthpiece of emancipation and liberation when it is filled with so many clichés and gender stereotypes. Carrie’s obsession with shoes, clothes and labels, all of the girl’s obsession with fashion, the fairy tale wedding, the all women want to be a princess syndrome, Prince Charming and the perfect love, etc. etc. etc.

My first thought every time I saw the show, and thus the movie, is that it was written and created by a man (though based on a book by a woman). No matter how realistic the conversations and situations may appear, they are still from the point of view of a man, the characters are idealized versions of women speaking idealized conversations that men wish to think that women are having all the time.

The women in Sex and the City never once speak of politics, the environment, social issues, or even equality. They speak only of gossip and superficial inanities (which we all do), but this is hardly emancipation. Women talking about sex and partners in private conversation is hardly a new thing. (Maybe this was for TV, but HBO can hardly be considered regular TV.) Women were talking about sex in private conversations long before Carrie Bradshaw and the gang came along. Now, if these women are so emancipated and free, then why do most of their conversations, and their lives, revolve around men? Even in depicting emancipation, women are still enchained by the centuries old social structure of women as second-class citizen.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS