If Feminists Ruled The Earth

Nina Bahadur at Huffpoop:

Try Doubting Everyday Sexism After Watching This Video

Wolf-whistles, “hey baby” and “keep smiling honey!” are the types of things you’d expect to hear directed at a woman walking down the street. But what would the world look like if gender roles were reversed? A new short film seeks to answer that question — and the result is chilling.

“Oppressed Majority,” a short film by French actress and director Éléonore Pourriat, depicts a world where women and men have switched places.

In it the male protagonist takes his son to daycare, encountering sexist remarks and catcalls along the way. He’s cornered and sexually assaulted by a group of aggressive young women in broad daylight, intimidated by the police and slut-shamed by his partner. Women run shirtless through the streets, pee in public spaces and objectify male employees and passersby.

“I dress the way I want,” the main character tells his wife, who criticizes his “provocative” choice of over-the-knee shorts and revealing flip-flops. Her response? “Don’t you dare complain, then!”

Other gender swap videos, like the “Flip Side” series by Jay Diaz, take a more humorous look at male and female roles in society. What makes Pourriat’s video so powerful is that it addresses the very serious topics of assault and victim-blaming — something both men and women experience.

Anyone watching this short film will be struck at how “wrong” it all seems. So why do we stand for it in everyday life?

To answer that final question: “We don’t.”

This movie is bad feminist propaganda. Yes, sexism, sexual harassment and sexual assault really do exist. There should be a zero tolerance policy for all of them.

But not all men are rapists or rapist enablers. Not all men sexually harass women. Not all men are sexist pigs. Not all women are victims. The characters in the movie are caricatures based on stereotypes.

The guys who are a problem will not change because of this video. The guys who aren’t a problem don’t need to change. This movie isn’t intended for either one of those two groups. What this movie is intended to do is convince women that men are predators and women are prey.

The worst part is the ending. It shows the man being victimized despite all his efforts to assert himself. What kind of message is that sending?

Meanwhile, the worst misogynists are progressive men.

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Feminism, Feminists Gone Wild and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

110 Responses to If Feminists Ruled The Earth

  1. Lulu says:

    I have written about four comments and all of them certain to offend. Which is not my intent so I will try again. Basically this is a ugly little snippet of how privileged snots like a filmmaker views the lower class. She switched the gender roles to make it about feminism but it is really about class. Her class would never act like this. Look at how awful ignorant angry poor people act. But Hollande, her prezzy, screws and switches out women like her (actress/filmmaker) at a whim while paying lip service and fake respect to her milieu. I doubt she realizes that she is a hypocrite and/or a bigot. Her audience of like minded artistes (French for creative class) will lap it up. And yes it is propaganda to “other” people she disapproves of and takes enormous creative license to shock and demean.

    • DeniseVB says:

      I prefer movies like Mr. Mom where role reversal was more realistic and funnier. 😉 Otherwise, unless “feminists” want to take their “art” to Iran, put burkas on the men and treat them like feral animals, I’m really not interested in how they fantasize and whine about inequalities that aren’t there.

      Where’s the fauxrage about Woody Allen? As that family drama plays out very publicly in the NYT, who’s going to take Dylan’s side?

      • The Klown says:

        Woody is a prestigious member of the creative class. He can do no wrong in their eyes. Besides, Hollywood has been a feeding ground for sexual predators since the beginning. It’s the price we pay for great art.

        It’s not like he supported Mitt Romney or something really bad.

        • The Klown says:

          I find it difficult to comment on cases like this. If I start expressing how I really feel I tend to go into a rage and post long spittle-flecked rants.

          In self-defense I either say nothing or retreat into sarcasm.

        • Lulu says:

          I get tired of the made up shit too. This is made like it is a documentary and fact based. It isn’t. And I am starting to skip over the feminist’s stated complaints and see everything as class superiority cloaked in gender.

      • The Klown says:
      • The Klown says:
      • NewOrleans says:

        Barbara Walters certainly won’t take Dylan’s side. She sided with Woody this week on ‘The View’ when she declared: ‘I have rarely seen a father as loving and as caring.’

        In Baba Wawa World, Woody sexually abusing a child wasn’t ‘rape rape’. I suppose, after all their time together, Whoopi’s stupidity has rubbed off on her.

  2. The Klown says:

    I’m bringing these up from below:

    (Definitely third, not fourth!)

    That girl is more flexible than a Chinese acrobat.

    • The Klown says:

      All the talking in these Olympics is annoying and rude. It’s one thing to talk between performances/events, but the NBC people act like everyone is tuning in to listen to THEM!

      Especially Bob “Evil Eye” Costas

      • votermom says:

        I don’t much mind Tara Lipinski & Johnny Weir commenting during the live coverage (watching now on NBC Sports Network) – they say informative things; identifying “triple axle double toe” etc, and they don’t babble.
        But whoever the dimwits are during the primetime version are so annoying.

      • NewOrleans says:

        NBC has always thought their ‘personalities’ were the star of the show. Costas is one of the worst.

        During Princess Diana’s funeral, as her casket was lead through the streets of London towards Westminster Abbey, Bob Costas yammered on. Non-stop. As her casket was being carried into Westminster Abbey, Bob Costas continued to yammer on. Non-stop. He only stopped blabbering when the funeral guests were actually speaking. I’ve refused to listen to him cover ANY event since then.

      • DeniseVB says:

        I was lucky to be living in Upstate NY during the Atlanta Olympics (’96) and watched on the Canadian channel. Real time coverage, covered every athlete in every sport and no announcing until after the event. It was very enjoyable and must admit, I’ve hated how the US covers it ever since.

        • Constance says:

          The Canadian coverage is always way better than NBC. I just don’t like any of their channels and I started feeling that way at least 5 years ago.

    • DeniseVB says:

      See if this video works:

    • votermom says:

      Gracie Gold just did really well.

  3. elliesmom says:

    Feminism has done a lot of good for women, but it’s also done some bad things. I think we may be approaching the place where the good has been overshadowed by the bad if we haven’t passed it already. Back in the early 70’s when I was a young woman hellbent on getting women an equal place at the table, I didn’t imagine 55 million dead babies, so many kids born and raised by single mothers, the hookup culture, and women thinking a lifetime of living on the dole was a goal. And banning catcalls from a construction site wasn’t even on the agenda.

    • 1539days says:

      That’s because interest groups weren’t going to support feminism for free. They decided they could take their cut by asking for more government money. If any issue requires government money to fix it, you can be sure at least 60% of it won’t go anywhere near actually addressing it.

    • The Klown says:

      Actually, I was thinking that video would have been more appropriate if it was set in 1970. Things have changed since then.

      • elliesmom says:

        A lot of things have changed for the better. My husband had a greater day to day role in raising his children than my father did, and my son-in-law a greater one still. That’s good for everyone. Women were 1% of the student population in my engineering school in 1969. Now they’re about 1/3. Pregnant girls aren’t kicked out of high school anymore. Women can buy houses and have credit cards in their own name – unless they’re SAHM s. We made them chattel again.

        • DeniseVB says:

          Growing up in the 50’s was definitely different. I remember my mom wanted to take art classes at the local night school and my dad saying “fine, as long as you have my martini ready by 5pm, dinner on the table at 5:30pm and the kids in bed before you leave”. I think the modern feminists want people to think that’s what it’s like today. It’s not.

        • Propertius says:

          Women were 1% of the student population in my engineering school in 1969. Now they’re about 1/3.

          In STEM fields overall, female graduates have outnumbered males since 2000.

        • Propertius says:

          When I was growing up in the 50’s, my widowed, single-parent mom was in graduate school. 😉 But then, she was always a bit of an iconoclast.

      • DandyTIger says:

        Kind of fits with the the over the top racism is everywhere we’ve been seeing. I think progressives in general not jus think we’re still in the 50’s, but they kind of wish we were.

    • Constance says:

      I consider myself feminist (although not by modern day standards) and I have to say I miss the good old days of walking by construction sites and hearing all the men’s appreciation/harassment, they sure as hell don’t notice me these days! But maybe they just developed better manners, it couldn’t be that I look like someones mother. Of course on the good side I have developed a motherly demeanor so that when I clap my hands and yell “BOYS!” I can make 40 year old men reflexively yell “I didn’t do it”.

  4. 1539days says:

    There was a movie called “White Man’s Burden” where Black and White roles in America were reversed. It was made in 1995, however, and a lot of it had to be amplified to create drama. The problem is that special snowflakes can’t accept the fact that life sucks sometimes and have to blame their hurt feelings on a global conspiracy that is directed at them personally.

  5. The Klown says:
  6. The Klown says:

  7. votermom says:


  8. DeniseVB says:


    • DeniseVB says:

      Clarify: It’s a parody site. I think it started during the London Olympics when we missed and moaned about already knowing the results by the time the prime time over-hyped performances were shown ?

      • 1539days says:

        I think American networks should start paying less for the rights to games shown half a day off prime time. It might encourage the IOC to put the games in North America more often.

  9. votermom says:

    Interesting – the dance pair representing Japan are Americans siblings from New Jersey.

  10. helenk3 says:

    I worked in mostly male dominated industries. news paper and railroad. I had to work and earn respect. and sometimes it was not easy. I was lucky enough to be married to a man that did help with the kids and the house. It saddens me to watch many women of today throw all of that away and think and act like their only importance is from the waist down. They fulfill the expectations of the oldtime male dream of a hooker and not a woman of importance.

  11. votermom says:

    • DeniseVB says:

      This will explain my “reply” to you 😀

      Oksana won the Gold that year, hence the trend to training boobless/hipless wind-up toys. Bless their hearts, but it was the year my dd grew boobies and hips and her coach wanted to put her on a starvation diet and weed. I pulled her from the Lake Placid program that year, coach’s name, I won’t mention, but rhymed with Bomby Fitz. 😀

    • DeniseVB says:

      One more, Oksana’s gold medal routine…..literally, the Black Swan 😀

  12. wmcb says:

    These type of “demonstrations” are stupid on another level besides being overblown exaggerations: They assume from the outset no differences in the sexes, therefore any sense of “oddness” one feels at portrayed role reversals MUST be rooted in societal unfairness.

    Which is bullshit. You know why these things feel odd and uncomfortable? Is it SOLELY because evil stereotype? No. Because even in reverse-world, men would not generally get ogled, and women would not generally catcall. Because we’re wired differently. Women can buy porn all the livelong day NOW. And we largely don’t. And men do. Why? Because DIFFERENT. A man walking around naked in public never has and never WILL have the same effect on women as the reverse might on men. Because we’re different, morons. In ways that have nothing to do with “rules imposed by society.”

    The feminists make this false equivalency: “A man doing the whole TV ad “sex kitten” pouting thing feels weird and wrong, therefore it must be weird and wrong for a woman to do it.” Which is utterly laughable to anyone who thinks about it for more than ten seconds. You know why it feels weird to see a man do that, but not a woman? Well, obviously because Patriarchy!. Nope. Because one is behavior designed to appeal to the opposite sex, and the other is behavior that would naturally be repulsive the opposite sex.. Because men and women don’t find the same things sexually interesting. And a vision of society behaving in a way that looks to be designed to REPEL possible mates strikes a perfectly normal “that’s weird and wouldn’t work” chord in perfectly normal people. DUH.

    And BTW, before anyone brings up GLBT people, it’s irrelevant, because a minority. The reason why most sane people accept and have no problem with nor revulsion for gay and lesbian peeps is that we rightly conclude that you are outliers, not “the majority norm”. Always been around, always been a minority of the gene pool for whatever reason, no threat at all, not gonna extinguish our species, go be happy. A gay man exhibiting behaviors that might appeal to a gay man is not “weird”, because he’s obviously not doing that to appeal to women. The thing that feels “wrong” is men behaving in ways that are the way a woman might appeal to a man, with the intent of appealing to women.

    Shorter me: When sex kitten Suzie behaves that way in the TV ad, would most men be inspired to fuck her given the chance? YES. When sex kitten Sam pouts and writhes and does the same things, would most women be inspired to fuck him? NO. There you have it folks. It really is that simple. And all the “re-education” in the world ain’t changing biology.

    • wmcb says:

      Progressive feminists make the critical mistake of assuming that societal gender roles preceded and *cause* gender differences. They never for one minute entertain the MUCH more likely scenario that societal gender roles evolved as the most efficient, least chaotic and safest way to navigate gender differences that already existed.

      Can those rules and norms be tweaked to keep up with society? Sure. But attempting throw them out entirely is one of the most ill-advised, anti-science, backward, childish, STUPID, counterproductive embarkations ever.

      You’ve basically announced to the world: WE INTEND TO COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY CHANGE WHOM THE SPECIES DESIRES TO FUCK. If that ain’t laughable hubris, nothing is. You may as well announce that “We have decreed that all peahens will henceforth find gaudy peacock feather displays repulsive.” Good luck with that.

    • 1539days says:

      Everyone knows, a man in his underwear on TV is funny. A woman in her underwear on TV is sexy. It’s not always 100% true, but it takes a lot of effort to not make that the case.

      • wmcb says:

        It truly blows my mind that people who supposedly believe in science, evolution, mating patterns, etc, can utterly and completely ignore it where their own species is concerned. Are we more than animals? Of course. But “more than animals” does not equal “not animals at all.”

        I’m not saying “go be thoughtless animals”. I’m saying accept that our general mammalian nature (including binary sexes for the most part) is real, exists, and is not going to be eradicated.

        • 1539days says:

          I’m just waiting for someone who thinks conservatives don’t believe in evolution to explain if they know the difference between evolution and natural selection.

      • Constance says:

        Men do seem to have some weird obsession with women’s underwear. However I would say that there is no representation of women’s primal view of men and sex in media because everything in media is only through male eyes. So take a “women’s movie” like “Girl with the Dragon tattoo”…the story was thought up and written by a man, the script was written by a man, cast, not costumed, directed, and edited by men and women largely ignored the movie. So on what level was that “women’s content”? Women’s fantasies are not represented in media, when media tries to direct fantasy programing at women they merely try to sell women their part in male fantasies. Men can be photographed to look hot but the men behind the camera can’t bring themselves to do it. There is one split second scene in Thor 2 which comes to mind of Thor standing there shirtless, if it was a shirtless woman it would be a thirty second scene with the camera scanning her but since it was a male character the men who make the film made sure we looked away as quickly as they could. So my point is in media you only see the male view of the world and on a primal level women find that “off”. If they developed pornography through women’s eyes based on women’s fantasies it would sell. But few women are interested in how they can better assume their position in male fantasies.

        • wmcb says:

          If they developed pornography through women’s eyes based on women’s fantasies it would sell.

          They have, and it does sell. It’s called novels, and various romantic films. But porn as a category? Mostly visual, mostly sex-centered porn geared at women will never, ever, sell, because the entire category is not a female thing. Female producers have tried over and over to produce female-centric pure porn. It never sells beyond a tiny market.

          Women as a whole just do not get off on looking at sex in isolation. Not that we can’t, ever, (of course we can) but it’s really not our primary driver. At all. It’s not something we are going to seek out as a consumer item. I don’t care how “female centric” it is.

        • wmcb says:

          Mr. Darcy coming out of the lake in that wet shirt is female porn. But because of the entire context of the film, not because of his studliness. And women would not have responded more to that film if we’d gotten lots of butt naked Mr. Darcy sexing it up in great detail. In fact, we’d have responded less. Because women are not men with vaginas.

          There IS female porn. It’s all over the place. We just fail to recognize or label it as such, because we all (even you in your comment) are still locked into a “women are just like men except in an opposite way” fallacy.

        • Propertius says:

          Actually, when the Nixon administration organized their big pornography study, they did indeed classify romance novels as “female pornography”.

        • Constance says:

          I say women read “romantic novels” because they can image those stories in their own minds according to their own primal drivers. Bring the same story into a media manufacturer and run it through male script writer, costumer or non costumer in the case of female characters, camera men, directors, editors etc and you have a piece of media that is unrecognizable to women consumers and no longer appeals to the primal sensibility. It is not that women are not visual or as visual as men it is that they do not respond to male imagery which is seen in the media industry as normal imagery, or the only correct imagery. Even when women do make media the only women who succeed in the male media system are the women who ape male behavior, and kiss the hairy ass directly in front of them. There are no innovative women in media. Male imagery pollutes media and women see it as “off” and don’t respond to it.
          On that note I can’t wait to see what is done with the current production of “Outlander” I would guess the men involved in making it see it as a war story. Since to this point it has only been a book for 20 years millions of women are in love with Jamie Frasier, Ian, Roger, Dougal etc. based on their own imagery.

        • wmcb says:

          I’m curious to see what they do with Outlander as well. That series was definitely female porn. And BTW, the whole martial/war aspect of it is not unappealing to women, per se. Women have been going weak-kneed over warriors defending their civilization (and hence their children) for many centuries. It just depends on how they present it. 😉

        • wmcb says:

          There are no innovative women in media. Male imagery pollutes media and women see it as “off” and don’t respond to it.

          Baloney. There are long long lists of extremely successful films that women, and almost exclusively women, flock to see. So unless you want to fall back on “But they all need their consciousness raised, and are too dumb to know what they (ought to) like”, that statement is patently false.

        • Constance says:

          “How many of those men you are talking about are gay?”

          Very true, in media world the fabulously fake feminine perspective of gay men is more valued than the perspective of actual women.

        • Constance says:

          “Baloney. There are long long lists of extremely successful films that women, and almost exclusively women, flock to see.”

          There are some films that women, and almost exclusively women, flock to see but by no means long lists. As a percentage of total films made there are very few. Some of that is just male view casting. I remember being excited that “The da Vinci code” was being made into a movie because I always pictured Josh Bernstein of “Digging for the Truth” playing Robert Langdon. No one walks away from a camera like Josh Bernstein. Instead we got Tom Hanks, No, just no. The funny thing is media men can still not figure out why “Digging for the Truth” was by far the most watched series on History channel for many years. It can’t be Josh’s bum because women aren’t sexually visual. Right? Didn’t a committee of all men decide that based on the fact that women don’t look at them?

        • wmcb says:

          I never said that women aren’t sexually visual at all. I said that it’s not our primary driver, to the extent that it is for men. But then, you knew that.

      • wmcb says:

        Interesting, Propertius. And likely correct. A lot of the vampire/shape-shifting etc fantasy novels and films are also female porn. As I said, we just don’t label it as such in general conversation or the media.

        • 1539days says:

          We are animals with a soul. That’s why the story of Christ being the Son of God made into a human animal is such a compelling one. We strive to be our better selves, but we are also driven by certain ancient instincts.

        • wmcb says:

          Yes. This is why my faith leans much more toward the whole “theosis” and transformation bent of the early Church fathers, rather than the very judicial/legalistic view of the Incarnation that has so infected American Christianity. It’s such a mean, petty view. Think bigger, American Christians. Your theology is paltry and small. 🙂

        • Constance says:

          And speaking of Twilight look at how male directors totally screwed the last Twilight films by applying “normal” male perspective to them. The make up was horrible and seemed calculated to make the young men icky looking. They seemed to think the story line was war preparation rather than human relationships under stress. And the last two films had gory attack scenes that were not in the books but were “dreams” so that the films could more closely conform to male concepts of what makes a good movie. The first two Twilight films were the only good ones. And only the first Twilight film by Catherine made up the male characters to look hot and allowed the camera to linger over them. Even though that film was a huge success with girls the studio had to hand over direction to males so they could force it into conformity. Sure women still went to see it but mostly because they had no other films to see at the time.

    • threewickets says:

      Makes sense, wmcb. But a lot of evo psych is also bs science exploited by misogynist progs who worship Richard Dawkins.

  13. SHV says:

    “Oksana won the Gold that year, hence the trend to training boobless/hipless wind-up toys. Bless their hearts, but it was the year my dd grew boobies and hips and her coach wanted to put her on a starvation diet and weed.”
    I asked my wife last night how it it possible that most (all?) of the female skaters are flat chested despite the fact that most have a reasonable amount of body fat. Back in the old days, female gymnasts starved and stripped body fat below a level where estrogen production was shut down; that is no longer permitted.

    • DeniseVB says:

      I think Cathy Rigby started the gymnast revolution in ’72 ?

      • Propertius says:

        Gymnasts, skaters, and ballet dancers are constantly dealing with conservation of angular momentum. Physics, alas, tend to favor less well-endowed women in these enterprises – it’s just easier for them to do any physical maneuver that requires spinning, and easier for them to maintain balance.

        • DeniseVB says:

          My girl gave up her “competitive” sports dreams when she grew ta-ta’s at 13. I wish the “feminists” would acknowledge that, but no, they have to keep beating up on men.

        • Constance says:

          All of the hip and boob growing changes center of balance and they have to keep making adjustments to their new bodies. It is easier to keep the same form and the same center you have been used to for all your years of practice.

    • foxyladi14 says:

      That is a good thing too. 🙂

  14. helenk3 says:

    now this is feminism I could believe in

  15. lorac1 says:

    I wonder why they filmed it in French if they wanted to reach English speaking, middle-aged, middle class professionals in America?

    Or could it be that some people still experience sexist behavior – in France – even in America?

    This video was well done. Why does criticizing it feel so good to some people? (serious question) Are you so certain that everyone is living the life and having the same wonderful, (middle-aged), nonsexist experiences that you are? And let’s not forget, no one here is still a youthful, sexy teenager or 20-something – experiences change as we get older, people treat us differently – and it’s not always because all of society has changed for the better.

    Do you criticize and discount every issue that you are lucky enough not to have to deal with? Why don’t we make fun of commercials that try to elicit help for poverty stricken Africans? After all, there’s no poverty in MY neighborhood.

    And isn’t it rather arrogant to assume that young women in France have the same environment as women in America?

    Shouldn’t we be glad that someone cares enough to try to reach the women and men who still need to learn these lessons?

    • The Klown says:

      Or could it be that some people still experience sexist behavior – in France

      Nah, the French are so much more evolved than us.

      Why don’t we make fun of commercials that try to elicit help for poverty stricken Africans?

      We do.

      Shouldn’t we be glad that someone cares enough to try to reach the women and men who still need to learn these lessons?

      If you really want to reach those men and women, do some videos in Arabic about why honor killings, FGM and sharia law are wrong.

    • wmcb says:

      I’m curious as to why you would assume, when people say “Feminists are fundamentally misidentifying the problem.” that what they really mean is “Lalala, never happens to me, so I don’t care.”

      So long as you continue to operate from the erroneous idea that the root of the problem is how men normally view women sexually, you will never, ever, EVER solve the problem of feral, vicious, asshole men. Ever. What you will get, taking that approach, is a fuckload of backlash, and an even worse problem. Because you are making the underlying requirement for your “solution” the idea that men need to basically sexually exterminate themselves. Good luck with that.

    • Propertius says:

      no one here is still a youthful, sexy teenager or 20-something

      I am. I can’t figure out how I got trapped in this 50-something body, though.

      • wmcb says:

        I’m not, but I have kids and nieces and grandkids, etc. It’s not like I’m sitting over here in a 50-something clueless bubble.

        I’m kind of weary of any statement I make of I disagree, and here’s why being automatically re-translated to I am clueless/uncaring/unenlightened/haven’t even thought deeply about my position.. Argue your fucking case, don’t unperson me as not worthy of an opinion for this or that reason.

        Know what’s utterly and shockingly subversive in 2014? Insisting on honest debate.

      • lyn says:

        ROFLMAO! I never was sexy, but this 50-something body sucks!

    • helenk3 says:

      I am 21 and look like Linda Darnell

  16. votermom says:

    Speaking of gender reversals in fiction, one of my favorite authors did a gender reversal western romance a while back. It was a fun read.

    Sample chapter

  17. wmcb says:

    Also amusing to me: That a woman as loud-mouthed, assertive, take-no-shit, obviously not a shrinking violet like myself can get labeled anti-feminist by some, simply because I refuse to buy their entire narrative unquestioned. That’s fucking hilarious.

  18. wmcb says:

    Lying Liars Who Lie For Power, installment number 4872:

  19. SHV says:

    “Gymnasts, skaters, and ballet dancers are constantly dealing with conservation of angular momentum. Physics, alas, tend to favor less well-endowed women in these enterprises ”
    40 years ago I was friends with a women who was seriously committed to ballet; solved the angular momentum problem with bilateral subcutaneous mastectomies. Eventually gave up ballet and went to medical school. I wonder how many athletes resort to the same solution?

  20. helenk3 says:

    off topic this is the most awesome video on gun control laws

  21. The Klown says:


    These announcers didn’t speak ONE WORD during her performance.

  22. Propertius says:

    Meanwhile, the worst misogynists are progressive men.

    Well, the progressive womyn who were wearing “Sarah Palin is a c***” t-shirts back in ’08 were pretty damned close, too.

Comments are closed.