Unconscious Sexism For The Fail

[omorka]

So, last night after the movie, had an interesting conversation with cheshirebast about which characters we identify with. I have a "Venkman" patch on my uniform, but that's because it's brown. I don't identify with movie!Peter at all, and in point of fact think he needs a good kick in the ass most of the time - but the moments when he pulls out the heroism

Comments

[awbryan]

But you're _supposed_ to want to slap Venkman. He _is_ annoying. He's cute-annoying as opposed to the just-plain-annoying of his nemesis-foil, Walter Peck. His heart ultimately is in the right place -- but he's still a jerk, and not even Dana could civilize him.

I agree that Patricia is not going to look very good. Consider the "I've quit better jobs than this" conversation as Patricia/Janine -- can we say catfight? Or Patricia/Wendy Peck...

Rachel Stantz, on the other hand, could be saved by body language and facial expressions: looking like less of a 'doughboy' than Aykroyd. (He hadn't ballooned yet the way he did later in life, but he already is starting to get chubby cheeks in the eighties there.) Without changing a line of dialogue, Rachel could be more assertive in her delivery and posture -- especially towards Peter -- and that would change the dynamic of the scenes you're worried about. Think about the business plan scene -- "I've worked in the private sector. They expect _results_" -- and you'll see something of what I

[omorka]

The contrast just between Elwood Blues and Ray Stantz, physically, is rather startling. It's not helped by him standing next to Belushi in the one film and Ramis in the other, to be sure, but yeah, their faces are distinctly different despite both being Aykroyd. Cartoon!Ray is actually plumper than Aykroyd was at the time, but they clearly caught the direction he was going. (I actually prefer Aykroyd plump to gangly, but that's just me.)

"I've quit better jobs than this" is actually funnier to me if it's between Patricia Venkman and Jason Melnitz than it is in the film as it stands. With them both female, though, it just sounds bitchy.

[scarfman]

I may be wrong, but I don't think I'd feel any different about Rae than I do about Ray. I agree about Pete and Rae, though, and about Pat.

[northwall]

it was my understanding, based on some of egon's dialogue, that zuul was male or genderless and simply happened to incarnate as a female this time. confirm or deny?

[omorka]

Dana refers to Zuul as "it" consistently until it possesses her. Egon never mentions it at all (although he refers to Gozer as male until the rooftop scene, and Vinz refers to one of Gozer's previous incarnations as male). Peter's reference (which he reads out loud) doesn't give it a gender. Zuul never refers to itself as either gender

Re: Long comment is long 1/2

[omorka]

I found the Watchmen scene disturbing enough as it stood. The part about that particular set of gender expectations that gets to me is that if a girl isn't interested, it doesn't make her less feminine - in some eyes, it makes her more so - but she's generally expected to have sex anyway, despite not being interested. With guys, the reverse is true - not being able to get it up is a blot on his masculinity, but it excuses him from pressure to perform, despite him still having fingers and a tongue

Re: Long comment is long 2/2

[omorka]

Actually, my assumption based on the (scanty) evidence presented in the films is that while Louis is completely socially inept and not a very good lawyer, he's a pretty good accountant. At the very least, he has a reasonably large client base.

I don't have a problem with Jason Melnitz putting the make on Louise Tully in the sequel, except that the intro to that scene would have to be different. (Well, that and being annoyed at Harriet Ramis for breaking up the UST between Jason and Enid, the bitch.)

. . . I have thought about this too long and am now getting genderswap plot bunnies. I'm going to go work on the ten stories I have going before I end up starting a new one.