FranzKafkaOverrated

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Tuesday, 12 February 2013

the "Paperman" problem

Posted on 20:55 by Unknown


This short, "Paperman," which originally preceded Disney's summer feature Wreck It Ralph, has earned a lot of praise, including an Oscar nomination. It is, indeed, a lovely short. But it's also a problem.

It's interesting that Alyssa Rosenberg cites "Paperman" in contrast to most romantic comedies, because I see in "Paperman" a perfect example of a basic problem with the genre. This problem was defined perfectly by The Onion: "Romantic Comedy Behavior Gets Real-Life Man Arrested." Think about the behavior here. The protagonist is very forward in pursuing a woman who he hasn't talked to at all. We know that there's mutual attraction, thanks to the nonverbal clues that we (as a disconnected audience) observe. In a Disney short, that's perfectly sufficient, and internal to the world of the movie, I find it sweet. In the real world, I think it's exactly the kind of behavior a lot of women are justifiably tired of. But our culture and media keep reinforcing it, and that contributes to unhappiness.

We are, I hope, slowly but surely moving out of a culture of routine street harassment and justification of rape. Part of that is redefining when it is and isn't okay to approach someone you're attracted to whom you don't know. At this point, I pretty much have a personal policy of not talking to any women who I don't know in some professional or social context. I wouldn't do what the guy from "Paperman" does, obviously, but I also wouldn't have asked for her number. Is that an overreaction to these changes? I don't know. I do know that I have read far too many women complaining about the obliviousness (and frequently, obnoxiousness) of men who approach them in public to want to risk being guilty of that sort of thing. So for me personally, it's out.

I'm not trying to speak for anyone else, and I recognize that this stance of mine is extreme. I'm too much of a romantic to say that a cold approach of this kind is always impermissible. What I want to point out is that the (I hope) increasing recognition that men are often far too aggressive and forward with women is necessarily going to lead to men being less likely to approach women who would actually like to be approached. Because we lack and will always lack perfect information about who is attracted to us. And as I will keep saying, it is precisely the awkwardness and lack of social graces that makes some men unattractive to some women that makes those self-same men incapable of correctly reading interest. Again, the manner in which we know, as the audience, that the female character is attracted to the guy is through a shared smile, a nervous laugh, a gaze-- all the sorts of things that socially awkward men have a very hard time reading, and can invent when it suits them. Indeed, what makes socially awkward men socially awkward-- and, in part, considered undesirable-- is exactly their inability to parse social cues and nonverbal messages. The notion that men who approach women who are "out of their league" or otherwise uninterested necessarily know that what they are doing is unappreciated is deeply wrongheaded in large part because it makes the problem seem easier than it is. If men always knew when women didn't want them to approach, we could at least speak about education and social norming against that behavior. But the problem is a bigger one because it stems from genuine ignorance.

And while we are of course responsible for our own behavior, and while there is a clear line between awkward or unfortunate approaches and outright harassment, I do have this sympathy for clueless men: our culture tells them incessantly that dogged pursuit is the key to romantic success. The importance of persistence as a key to romantic success as a heterosexual male is drilled into you by your culture pretty much constantly. Added to that is the common notion that what women want in a world of changing gender expectations is aggressive men-- a notion that can be hard to combat, because it is true of some women some of the time. The problem is that the sleazy, reductive world of sexual conquest advice speaks in universals and absolutes. Like any particular sexual or romantic preference, the desire to be pursued aggressively depends on the perceived attractiveness of the individual man. What we all want, at the end of the day, is to be approached by people we're attracted to and not by people we aren't. We also recognize this as an impossible request.

Moving towards a less sexually aggressive and more equitable social landscape is going to have consequences, and not all of them pleasant. That's adult life. For me, it seems as though the current reality of street harassment, the culture of rape, and assumed privilege of heterosexual men to approach any women makes it clear that we need to be far more careful about approaching strangers, and to require far more in the way of demonstrations of attraction before we decide to talk to women we don't know, particularly when they're alone. Perhaps that means that women who are interested in being approached will have to be somewhat more demonstrative of that in this future culture. I'm sure, though, that it will result in people not approaching and not being approached when they'd very much like that to happen. But like I said, progress always has difficult consequences.

I think I need the opinion of Phoebe Maltz Bovy on this.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • addendum
    If I was unclear about this, my point yesterday was not to say "everything in our culture is so trivial, man." I don't know w...
  • If yule excuse me...
    Well, the holiday season is upon us, and like a lot of you I'll be traveling and merrymaking and cavorting and such for the next couple ...
  • do Muslims deserve human rights?
    From today's big speech: When a U.S. citizen goes abroad to wage war against America – and is actively plotting to kill U.S. citizens; a...
  • a little additional info
    A few people have asked for a bit more about the situation with Moi-- not Muy, as I incorrectly put it in the original post. We had stopped ...
  • drones and election 2012
    I would never ever ever ever ever vote for Gary Johnson, being a socialist and all. But I do have to point out that if you're trying to ...
  • In greatest travesty of the 21st century, a pretty white lady is denied a golden trophy
    I'm glad the world has people like Scott Mendelson , to tell us who the real victims of the post-9/11 world are: millionaire Hollywood i...
  • structural change requires new structures
    As I've said, it's hard to think of any academics or scholars I know who are opposed in principle to open access of scholarly resear...
  • actual fascism
    It seems to me-- just spitballing here-- that enforcing a regime of joblessness and national humiliation, as is happening with austerity mea...
  • the forest for the trees
    Hamilton Nolan's work for Gawker, from the past several years, is a truly mixed bag. Nolan has always been a talented and perceptive wri...
  • the perfect piece for our times
    I think this Tim Parks piece is an absolutely perfect encapsulation of what it means to be a writer of commentary today. Your job is simple...

Categories

  • I'm mostly kidding (1)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (218)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (42)
    • ►  April (39)
    • ►  March (37)
    • ▼  February (35)
      • no reasons for pride
      • getting epistolary
      • bullshit social climber faux-antiracism
      • actually, the Onion's Tweet and McFarlane's jokes ...
      • pretty basic question re: Buzzfeed
      • there's lots of production in the post-work economy
      • Skyfall
      • ball's in your court, Erik
      • good question
      • an open letter to my Democrat friends
      • no thinking person should ever listen to what Will...
      • why we can't fix anything
      • Is Jacobin a political magazine?
      • the Pet Gazette
      • maybe everybody shouldn't abandon professionalism ...
      • links and such
      • jobs is spending is jobs
      • real talk about real talk
      • what people are made of
      • gating comments for awhile
      • ethical concerns make it really, really hard to do...
      • the "Paperman" problem
      • always try to be the talent
      • real and virtual
      • what I mean when I talk about empiricism and self-...
      • I'm not feeling reassured here
      • actual fascism
      • where the fuck is the IT department
      • the backwards causation
      • Randy Moss's unforgivable blackness
      • still tinkering
      • Thanks, Dr. K
      • the lobby goes looking for another scalp
      • liberating just one
      • a few addenda to the Bloggingheads talk
    • ►  January (43)
  • ►  2012 (139)
    • ►  December (26)
    • ►  November (26)
    • ►  October (15)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  June (13)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (7)
    • ►  February (11)
    • ►  January (14)
  • ►  2011 (143)
    • ►  December (9)
    • ►  November (12)
    • ►  October (18)
    • ►  September (11)
    • ►  August (23)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (12)
    • ►  May (21)
    • ►  April (27)
    • ►  March (7)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile