A lively discussion is taking place about the portrayal of women in what is likely to be one of the most popular films of the year: The Social Network. Since readers may not have time to follow all the dialogue about the movie, which will resonate with millions of young Facebook users, I’d like to summarize it here in a useful way.
The Background
The Social Network is a film about the founding of the now world-bestriding online service, Facebook. The main character is a brilliant, deeply flawed young man at Harvard, based on the real founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg. Numerous other well-developed male characters play active, creative roles in the formation, funding, and growth of the Facebook website and business.
Only three female characters grace the story. There’s Erica, a student at nearby Boston University, who dumps Mark in the very first scene (he deserves it). Christy, another character’s girlfriend, becomes increasingly parasitic, unstable, and pyromaniacal as the movie progresses. A third “character” is simply an amalgamation of all the other female roles in the movie — drunken, drug-using, opportunistic women who are viewed only as potential sex partners by the male characters. I exclude a fourth woman character, a lawyer who plays a somewhat redemptive role in the last scene, because her gender is irrelevant to her minor part.
Mark’s objectification of, disregard for, and yet ultimate obsession with these female characters drives the creation of Facebook in The Social Network.
The Discussion
To begin, let’s look at screenwriter Aaron Sorkin’s explanation of his decisions in writing the film. In his apology (it feels like an apology, anyway) he talks about recreating the way he believes a specific group of men feels about women. Sorkin says, “I was writing about a very angry and deeply misogynistic group of people. These aren’t the cuddly nerds we made movies about in the 80s. They’re very angry that the cheerleader still wants to go out with the quarterback instead of the men (boys) who are running the universe right now. The women they surround themselves with aren’t women who challenge them.”
Here, then, is a response to Sorkin’s apology, written by Entertainment Weekly’s Jennifer Armstrong. Her insight is that “we pretend feminism has advanced so much that we barely need it anymore, and yet in many of the most important places (technology, religion, finance) men still not only call the shots, but they also surround themselves with women who do the opposite of challenging them.”
Rebecca Davis O’Brien at the Daily Beast, noting that The Social Network has been heralded as the Citizen Kane of our time, writes: “What is the state of things if a film that keeps women on the outer circles of male innovation enjoys such critical acclaim; indeed, is heralded as the ‘defining’ story of our age? What are we to do with a great film that makes women look so awful?”
My Thoughts
The Social Network is a brilliant and well-executed movie about some college guys who steal an idea and do something stupendous with it. These boys have very unhealthy attitudes toward women and surround themselves with women who reinforce those feelings. These attitudes and experiences drive the characters further from maturity and happiness. Indeed, The Social Network is a tragedy. This story does not define my generation — it is a morality tale, grounded in college mores and aptly designed for the men and women of my generation.
Aaron Sorkin has been on and watching Entourage too much.
I just saw the movie (before reading this article). I agree with the author’s comments and criticisms. Since I’m about a generation and a half older than the characters, I can’t really say how realistic they are in the college and young-social media-entrepeneur worlds of the last few years. But it’s firghtening to think that they might be typical of at least some of their real-life counterparts. I’m especially disturbed by the portrayal of the women who give up their judgement and dignity to party and try to link up with undeserving but powerful men. This seems to be a real step backwards in the social progress we have tried to create.
Incidentally, there are quite a few powerful women in the high-tech world today. In general, it’s been my experience that tech companies, with their younger executives, are more welcoming and less inclined to discriminate on the basis of sex versus ability, then some of the industries that have been established longer. It might have been worthwhile to include examples of capable and successful women in the movie – there are models of them all over the silicon valley landscape.
This is an important discussion. I agree we have not progressed..as a society…as much as we need to with regard to how women are seen or function.
I see the “silly” women candidates differently, however. There are so many “silly” men candidates (or just plain irresponsible male candidates), that this is perverted progress.
We have progressed to the point where women can be seen as less than “perfect” and still get voters’ and media attention.
Too bad equality has to run in both directions…toward positive achievement and toward negative social consequences, e.g. more violence reported among women, especially young ones.
I have personally known some of those “objectified” women described in the social milieu of the men in the movie. Not those specific ones, but others over the last couple of decades. I know young women who also now objectify males in a similar fashion.
I guess the challenge, then, is how we encourage families to counter this depersonalization as they raise their children and how all of us counter the depersonalization glorified in a lot of our movies and TV entertainment.
I disagree that the lawyer’s gender is irrelevant to her part. She is able to get through to Zuckerberg because she is a smart woman who is kind to him. I don’t think he would have listened to a smart man who said the same things — she has his attention because she is attractive, and she is able to show him how he looks to the rest of the world.
I loved the girlfriend, who appeared not only in the first scene but later in the movie as a strong, smart, and self-respecting woman. Think of how many women might have given Zuckerberg a chance to plead his case when he encountered her at the bar — in so many other movies, the whole plot centers around the female character’s willingness to overlook bad treatment by the male character.
Most of the rest of the women in the movie are treated as one-dimensional sexual objects, and I do think that’s a flaw in the film. Their presence in the movie is a clumsy way of showing the irresponsibility and immaturity of the male characters.
Particularly welcome since I plan to see the movie this week. It is pretty obvious in this election season that there is a gross preponderance of male candidates and a surfeit of “silly” female participants (eg ODonnell in Delaware). To summarize: We have not progressed as much as many of us (women) would like to see!