The Night Crew

[ria 75]

She's not big on cuddling, unless she's just recently woken up. Even then, she'll cuddle with you. You can't cuddle back or she runs away.

Sorry, I was tending my plants and making lunch.

I had a cat like that once, when I lived at my parents'. A one-eyed solid grey tomcat from outside. He was wild and unapproachable at first. I tamed him over a couple of years. He also tamed himself because he wanted in the house. But he was a food thief who woud open the fridge door so he seldom slept in. He would do the rubbing himself. He didn't like to see a hand coming towards his head. One thing that made him redouble his affections was my singing in lower tones and not too avangardistic melodies. Our old siamese cat, for all her own discordant voice, would meow to show how she was annoyed when I sang. Each one to his own...

Better not let my lunch burn now.

 

[Hermiod]

What's that a reference to?

You really don't know ?

Histoire d'O.

 

[Philo]

Well, I hear things, but no, I didn't know.

 

[Hermiod]

Well, I hear things, but no, I didn't know.

It is a somewhat controversial film, our film classification board the BBFC refused to give it a certificate until 1999.

 

[Philo]

I wasn't alive at the time. There are some things I just haven't caught up on yet.

 

[Hermiod]

I wasn't alive at the time. There are some things I just haven't caught up on yet.

I was born in 1978 so neither was I. I wasn't born in time for Star Wars, 2001: A Space Odyssey, many of the Bond films, Bullitt or hundreds of other films either.

I imagine that if they made a new version today, especially if it was a British or American production, there'd be even more uproar.

 

[Philo]

I know, I said some things. It's not like my store of cultural knowledge only goes back to 1983. In fact, sadly I know more than most people my age.

It's kind of hard to speculate, since I don't think they'd ever make something like that now. Certainly not that or anything like Behind The Green Door, or Deep Throat, both of which received theatrical exhibition and a certain amount of mainstream popularity (although that had a lot to do with the controversy surrounding the very issue of them receiving mainstream popularity). Id love to hear the portions of the Nixon tapes where he talks about that.

 

[Hermiod]

^There's a difference in that it was the story that was the problem here, there's no suggestion that the actors were doing anything other than acting.

 

[Philo]

Neither was there in Last Tango in Paris, but in all of these examples, the objection was obscenity. They were all lumped together no matter what the type and severity of that perceived obscenity.

I mean, I'm agreeing with you. There is a difference, but not really in the minds of those objecting to it.

Anyway, as to your original question, I think something like that (or any of these) could be made today, but I'm not sure there would be a huge controversy because they would be left in a niche and not receive a lot of attention. Look at Shortbus.

 

[ria 75]

"Boogie Nights", "Intimacy"?

 

[Hermiod]

Anyway, as to your original question, I think something like that (or any of these) could be made today, but I'm not sure there would be a huge controversy because they would be left in a niche and not receive a lot of attention. Look at Shortbus.

I think a lot of people, wrongly IMHO, would have trouble with the content - specifically the idea of a sexually submissive woman. The idea of a woman who draws pleasure from giving pleasure to others and being controlled by them is somewhat against what the Sex and the City generation thinks, i.e. that sex is about their pleasure and that they must be "independent" at all times.

 

[Philo]

Well, no, people would probably forgive it because it's based on a fairly well known and old book. The same way they accept the sexism in Mad Men because it takes place in the past. Of course, you can make the argument, too, that by forgiving it, they're also showing somewhat of an acceptance of it. It gives an excuse to accept it, even though it's against the conventional, as you put it, "Sex in the City" wisdom.

 

[Hermiod]

Well, no, people would probably forgive it because it's based on a fairly well known and old book. The same way they accept the sexism in Mad Men because it takes place in the past. Of course, you can make the argument, too, that by forgiving it, they're also showing somewhat of an acceptance of it as well. It's gives an excuse to accept it, even though it's against popular thought.

I'm not familiar with Mad Men.

However, I don't consider The Story of O to be sexist in the slightest. O chooses to exercise her own sexuality the way she wants to. IMHO, it's more sexist for the book/film's critics to say she's not allowed to do that, that she has to conform to their views.

 

[Philo]

If you read the way I worded it, I wasn't suggesting it was sexist. I was just using an example of something that was similar but different to illustrate the point about acceptance.

If I remember what I know about the novel correctly, it's about the objectification and dominance of women, not the kind of workplace sexism demonstrated in Mad Men. And when I say objectification, I don't mean it pejoratively, for the sake of your argument.

EDIT: While we're beating around the bush, and since I haven't provided my own view on the subject yet, I will. I don't pretend to make generalities across society for any of this (ie. Women/Men/people should be/are this or that, etc.). I think our sexual roles should be defined on an individual basis. Isn't that what true gender equality looks like, anyway?

You seem to be holding on to an extreme, which is fine, because the extremes need to be voiced so that there can be any kind of spectrum at all. Just don't try to pretend that those opposing absolutes are the only thing that exist.

 

[Hermiod]

If you read the way I worded it, I wasn't suggesting it was sexist. I was just using an example of something that was similar but different to illustrate the point about acceptance.

If I remember what I know about the novel correctly, it's about the objectification and dominance of women, not the kind of workplace sexism demonstrated in Mad Men. And when I say objectification, I don't mean it pejoratively, for the sake of your argument.

I get that, no problem.

EDIT: While we're beating around the bush, and since I haven't provided my own view on the subject yet, I will. I don't pretend to make generalities across society for any of this (ie. Women/Men/people should be/are this or that, etc.). I think our sexual roles should be defined on an individual basis. Isn't that what true gender equality looks like, anyway?

Absolutely.

You seem to be holding on to an extreme, which is fine, because the extremes need to be voiced so that there can be any kind of spectrum at all. Just don't try to pretend that those opposing absolutes are the only thing that exist.

Sure, I'm picturing the type of people who will object to such a film. Those people tend to shout very loudly and override the majority who don't give a crap.

 

[Philo]

^ That's true, and it's a shame that the fringe gets such a disproportionate voice, because that's where the rest of people get the idea that it's only those opposing absolutes that exist.

 

[Skywalker]

Whee, nothing like forcing yourself to only get a few hours of sleep so you can go into work early, only to find out after you get there that you're actually not needed.

 

[Philo]

So a reverse "I'm not even supposed to be here today!"? That sucks.

I haven't slept yet. This is still the same night for me. Just a little bit longer and I can get some precious sleep.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Where is everybody?

 

[RoJoHen]

I'm here!

I'm watching "Chuck," which I just bought on Blu-Ray. I am also washing my bed sheets and trying to figure out what to eat.