Michael Moore's view of women/relationships

[Mutie]

I just flicked thru Michael Moore's book Stupid White Men, and he has a chapter on relationships and how men can make things better for women.

He seems to have a very stereotyped view of gender IMO and see all relationships as a loud, overbearing man with a timid, gentle cowed woman.

For example he says all the way thru the chapter, "Men, listen to what your wife is saying, just because she's not as loud as you doesn't mean she doesnt have something worthy to say, she might have some very new ideas, you might find your mind opened if you just stop shouting over her, shut up and let her talk".

Well pretty much every woman I have ever dated has been louder and more outspoked than me, (or at least as much), I don't see this stereotype in my life.

He also says at one point, "you need to learn to eat dantily like women do if you dont want a heart attack, you've never seen your wife attacking food ravenously like its her last meal have you?" Which I thought was stupid as all my girlfriends and female friends have loved food and not been dainty eaters.

He seems to see all women as dainty, sensible, quiet and men as loud, stupid, and greedy.

TBH when I read it back 03, it made me feel bad as I felt that I wasnt manly enough for having loud girlfriends and not being greedier and more aggressive than them. I know angry conservatives all say "oh white men are the persecuted group nowdays" which is stupid, but I didn't think that chapter was helpful. IE a man can be a prick without being those things (For example, a shy quiet CEO of a company who wont hire women, or a passive agressive boyfriend). I know I can be.

I know men have too much over women in this world, IE more likely to abuse, have better wages and more positions of power. But I didn't think a book chapter making ordinary men feel stereotyped helps that. I would be interested if anyone else has read it and what they thought.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

While I agree with a lot of what I hear Michael Moore say, he's an idiot. He gives liberals a bad name, and often just helps conservatives by giving them an easy whipping post. Plus, his writing sounds awful.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Is there any chance that Moore is employing a little irony?

[MarkBastable]

Is there any chance that Moore is employing a little irony?

No. He doesn't have the imagination for irony, except of the most brutal sort. ("Oh yeah - that's true.")

Also, like a lot of unimaginative egoists, he works on the principle that his nature is comprehensively representative of all human nature, so he can generalise about anything and everything by extrapolating from himself.

[tonywalt]

I love sensible dainty women, but not too quiet.

[Darcy88]

Moore is all right I guess. He is a millionaire but puts on the attire of a mechanic or trucker and that seems to me fake. At the end of his last movie he went to Wall Street and stretched crime scene tape all up and down it. He called upon others to join him in opposing the oligarchic Wall Street-centric rule in the states. The occupy movement came not long after. I found that kind of cool.

[Mutie]

I dont think its so much irony as much as him thinking thats the most common type of gender issue in the USA so thats the one that needed to be dealt with. As a bitter non agressive guy however it was the last thing i needed.

[Darcy88]

Whether its an act or not, Moore does look and talk like a regular Joe and has by virtue of that an easier path to the hearts and minds of the working class, more so than other left-wing activists/talking heads, such as Naomi Klein, Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, ect.

Those quotes don't seem that off the mark to me. A lot of men do talk over their spouses and do eat like dogs.

[BienvenuJDC]

I wouldn't waste my time with someone like Moore. He's an idiot.

[Mutie]

Yeah but I'l admit. Im some of my relationships I've been the quiet dainty unhungry one. It made me feel bad about my masculinity (lol).

[Alexander III]

Whether its an act or not, Moore does look and talk like a regular Joe and has by virtue of that an easier path to the hearts and minds of the working class, more so than other left-wing activists/talking heads, such as Naomi Klein, Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, ect.

Those quotes don't seem that off the mark to me. A lot of men do talk over their spouses and do eat like dogs.

That does not reflect very well upon the working classes, and also upon their ability to vote within a democracy. Rather than the man who appears the best for the job, they prefer the one who is like them. Ofcourse this is true of all people, not just the working class. But yes, Michael Moore is a populist whom I have little respect for, on account that from his work he cares more about appealing to working class steryotypes of the big bad rich men, than the truth which involves them as well.

I am not a huge fan of chomsky eaither, But I respect him, we have diverse opinions but I respect him for he has his opinions, not mere felxible affectations to win the respect of the common people like michael moore.

/Rant Over.

P.s in my experiance the women are the dominat ones in the majority of relationships, the men for the most part tend to be opressed not the opressors. He was probably basing his assumption of women on prostitutes. I am guessing that is his main source on matters of women. I mean look at him, hear him speak - that is clearly a men relies upon prostitution to fufil sexual desire.

[Mutie]

i heard he has a wife who busts his balls. i expect hes quite submissive and jealous of dominant men.

[BienvenuJDC]

Yeah but I'l admit. Im some of my relationships I've been the quiet dainty unhungry one. It made me feel bad about my masculinity (lol).

I have an average sized stomach. In my last marriage, my wife always ate larger portions than me. (and it was obvious too) I'm more of a "constant eater" than one who eats large portions at a time.

[Pierre Menard]

Moore is an average writer with little intellectual depth.

I'm surprised people still take him seriously.

[JuniperWoolf]

I hate him solely for his cheap, uninformative filming techniques. For example, he'll ask in a voice over: "and what do the republicans have to say about this?" Then he'll cut to a scene of a random republican struggling to come up with an answer to a question that you don't get to hear. For all you know, a reporter asked him if he remembered the name of his childhood dog. Also, I saw one of his films (I think it was the one on healthcare) in which he paid for a surgery for the wife of one of his biggest critics anonymously, then revealed his actions on the documentary and said "you're welcome." How immature.