The New York Times Discovers a New Crisis: Men Don't Want to See New "Little Women" Movie, and That's Not Okay

Oh no!

From the New York Times, as quoted by Twitchy:

While the box office numbers following its release on Wednesday suggest the movie has found a decent audience -- it placed third, behind the new "Star Wars" and the latest "Jumanji," on opening day -- that unconscious bias has seemed to trickle down to the casual male viewer as well, if Twitter is any indication. The New York Times critic Janet Maslin recently tweeted her surprise at the "active hostility about 'Little Women' from men I know, love and respect."

She also described the movie's "problem with men" as "very real." Someone tweeted in response: "It's not a 'problem.' We just don't care."

Well, it just so happens that I have the perfect solution to this crisis -- a solution proposed and enforced by the Social Justice Warriors currently complaining that men don't want to see movies made for women.

In the past six or so years, whenever Social Justice Warriors and feminists decided that there aren't "enough women" going to see male-starring action movies, the SJWs/feminists always prescribed the same cure: that we entice women by putting more women into the movies.

Make 007 a woman. Make the Ghostbusters all-female. Make the hero in five of the six Disney Star Wars movies a progressive white woman.

So, applying this same solution to "Little Women" -- if the producers of the film wanted men to come, they should have offered more Male Representation in their films, and perhaps have gender-bent most of the female characters to male?

See, if women don't See Themselves on the Screen, they're not being represented, and a great crime is being committed.

So why aren't people outraged that Men Can't See Themselves on Screen in Little Women?

Also, the SJWs always demand more "diversity" in casting. That is both good for business and a necessary virtue signal, they tell us.

So I need to know: Why are there not more black women in Little Women? Where are the transwomen, for that matter?

Or is it that leftwing feminist white women are excluded from the same demands of Gender and Racial Representation they impose on all male-skewing entertainments?

By the way: I don't want any women to think I actually want Little Women to be turned into a mixed-race British version of the Dukes of Hazzard.

I think women should be entitled to have the sorts of entertainments that appeal to them, without being adulterated and distorted by bizarre racial-and-gender bean-counting identity politics.

I'm just asking: Why can't men have the same thing?

I also hope I haven't offended anyone by speaking of white women feminists. Note the "Feminists" at the end.

I like white women, obviously. But White Women Feminists are playing a devious and cynical game in always championing diversity for others, while branding themselves as "diverse" (despite being white, and despite being women, who are the majority of the population) and then just taking most of the Diversity Slots they themselves demanded.

A lot of nonwhite feminists notice this double game, too, and criticize White Women Feminists for using the rhetoric of diversity to get quotas and set-asides for themselves.

None of that applies to white women (or any other women) who are not feminists, of course. It's just White Women Feminists, specifically, who use a lot of black faces in their PR advertisements for diversity, and then fill up the top slots with their own white faces.

&bodytext=Oh no! From the New York Times, as quoted by Twitchy: While the box office numbers following its release on Wednesday suggest the movie has found a decent audience -- it placed third, behind the new "Star Wars" and the...&topic=world_news"> posted by Ace at 05:29 PM

| Access Comments