A new film opens this Friday called "The Proposal," about an overbearing boss (Sandra Bullock) who cajoles her much younger male assistant (Ryan Reynolds) to marry her so she can avoid immigration problems (she's from Canada). The young man is anything but interested in marrying her but plays along to save his job. Ms. Bullock is 45 and Mr. Reynolds is 32.
Note that if the genders were reversed, this arrangement would be considered severely politically incorrect; some gender feminists would classify it is a kind of rape.
But since the oppressed party is a male, it's not rape -- it's a romantic comedy.
On the comment section for this film at the Internet Movie Database, the following appears:
I Love the age difference!
by celine285 1 day ago (Sat Jun 13 2009 23:07:59)
UPDATED Sat Jun 13 2009 23:09:37
I know theres a few debates on the board here, but i think its awesome theres 13 years between the grown actors. She's turning 45 next month, he's 32 (and married to a 24 years old!) I'm tired of seeing old men with younger hotter women. Have you guys seen NEXT? Jessica Biel was 25 and Nicolas Cage was 43, can you say ew? But no one blinks an eye? But what i really love about the age difference: at 45, she's playing roles that are usually reserve for girls 20 years younger than she is. Not since Kate Hepburn can an actress play a romantic comedy to a younger man without it being a part of the plot. Cameron Diaz is 34 and she's playing a mom to a teenager in her latest movie. It's just a good image, or counter-image coming out of hollywood - So, I say, go sandra!
Read it again to catch the full flavor of it.
Did you get it? When the male is older, there is an "ew" factor (this is so despite the logical reasons why older men hook up with younger women all the time: men can produce sperm long after women have left their child-bearing years; women often look for financial security from men and older men are generally far more financially secure (and, yes, some of the women are gold-diggers); and young women often believe that men their own age lack maturity).
But when the genders are reversed and the female is older, that doesn't carry an "ew" factor; that's empowerment.
It's a "you go, girlfriend!" moment.
The older women doesn't need to financially rely on a man, so we applaud her for having her very own "boy toy" that she can toss away when she tires of him or realizes that she has nothing in common with an early-20s-something guy who'd rather play video games than paint the nursery.
Older man-younger women: disgusting; older woman-younger man: a sign of progress.
The object of disgust for an older man-younger woman tryst is usually not the young woman who, truth be told, might just be a gold-digger. Gold-digging is perfectly acceptable. The object of the disgust is usually the middle-aged man, who is disgusting precisely because he's a middle-aged man.
Now let's be clear. Adults should be able find love at any age. But why not leave it at that? Why can't we just say "it's great that older women and younger men can hook up!"
Why must we always take that extra step to slam males? Here is the bottom line: male sexuality that women don't approve of is regarded as disgusting, depraved or evil. And neither women nor men hold women to the same standard.
This is symptomatic of a larger, nefarious trend.
Adult males having sex with children are viewed as the lowest form of life. In contrast, adult females who molest boys are seen as "mixed up" and emotionally immature. They are given notoriously light sentences because their disorders are seen as more pathetic than evil. (But a female teacher's callow male lover is lucky if the teacher doesn't sacrifice him to save her skin by accusing him of raping her -- one such teacher recently tried that to no avail.) Reverse the genders and assume a girl accuses an adult male teacher of rape -- he will be sent away for years, without question.
But it doesn't stop there. Who, for example, is considered the greater criminal, the hard-working, saintly prostitute or the evil businessman who frequents her? The question scarcely survives its statement.
Strip clubs are viewed as places frequented by dirty old disgusting men who objectify women. Civic groups want to impose "sin" taxes on them, and nobody complains except the strip club owners. But enjoying naked male dancers and explicit penis cakes that depict ejaculation at raunchy bachelorette parties is viewed as "empowerment" for the liberated young women in attendance.
The rape of a woman or a child is second only to murder on the scale of acts considered to be evil. In contrast, the rape of a man in prison is a punchline. And sometimes the men who are raped are only in prison because they were falsely accused of rape or some other sexual offense -- the ultimate tragic irony.
Men who suffer from premature ejaculation are "selfish." They, too, are a punchline. Or worse: after her arrest for mutilating her husband with an 8-inch knife, Lorna Bobbitt told police: "He always have [sic] [an] orgasm and he doesn't wait for me to have [an] orgasm. He's selfish." Mrs. Bobbitt was hailed as a feminist heroine.
Men who don't wear condoms are "pigs" in TV ads. Some feminist legal scholars want to go so far as to subject any male who has intercourse without a condom to be jailed as a kind of lesser form of rape (the burden would be on the male to prove that the woman consented to sex without a condom). Never mind that a woman can see if the guy is wearing a condom and that she can say "no." In contrast, when a female lies to a male that she's on the pill -- he has no way of knowing that, nor does he know that she intends to get pregnant without the man's knowledge. Guy not wearing condom: selfish pig. Woman who lies about being on the pill: not selfish in any manner because, you see, it's her right to do as she pleases with her body. The fact that she will saddle the guy for child support for 18 years because of a lie is neither here nor there.
When two underage teenagers have consensual sex, usually only one is considered a statutory rapist, and only one will be classified as a "sex offender," possibly for the rest of his life. Can you guess his gender?
Feminists tout the glories of the "hook up" culture -- except if any obligations are expected of the female. If both the guy and the girl purposefully get drunk intending to have sex, she's a rape victim who retains her anonymity. He, on the other hand, is a rapist who goes to prison for years, his name is splashed all over the news, and his reputation is destroyed forever. And in prison, he'll probably have done to him what he did NOT do to her.
And it goes on and on and on. Women believe this nonsense, and men are taught to "take it like a man" because they, too, have been brainwashed by the feminist urban myth that there are sex double standards that favor men and boys.
It's time to inject some balance, some fairness, some facts into the discourse. Because right now, men are regarded as pigs, and women are regarded as oppressed, regardless of the circumstances, and usually when it's simply not so. And some of us have grown mighty weary of it.