In conversation with former film student at the University of Melbourne, and lover of feminism at the University of Obviously, Silvi Vann-Wall.
Silvi Vann-Wall is an aspiring audio-video journalist herself.
We talk about sexism and the old fashion of not giving women strong characters in films.
Click play to giggle at male ego with us.
Dilpreet Kaur:Hello and welcome to Lights, Camera and Patriarchy! We talk about patriarchy in films, TV, pop culture – but, we are specifically going to talk about patriarchy in films.
And that’s why we have Silvi Vann-Wall who is a film buff and a feminist in the studio sharing her precious thoughts!
Silvi Vann-Wall: Hey Dilpreet!
DK: Let’s start with romcoms, shall we?
SVW: It’s funny that you bring up romcoms because I did watch one recently. It’s failry old, I think it is from 2011. You know, in the grand scheme of cinema it is actually quite new. It’s called What’s Your Number and it stars the lovely Chirs Havens and Anna Farris. It is quite sexist for 2011.
I found it really strange that the whole concept of the film is that you have a woman who is worried that she won’t be able to find the one because she has had sex with too many men. I think the number is 20.
So, she is worried about that in women’s magazine and that if your number is past this you’re bit of a floozy. And well, that’s the whole plot! So she has to go back to all her ex-boyfriends and she see if anyone is marriage material because she doesn’t want her number to go higher.
DK: That’s pretty f***ing sexist. Because, if I had to reverse the roles, if a guy had slept with 20 women, he would be a playboy. He would be someone to sleep with because he is so sexy.
SVW: And that’s the role Chri Havens plays in the film.
DK: Is it? Surprising.
SVW: Patriarchy is just there. It permeates everything. We have just decided things are how they are – you know men to be protective and women to be protected. We just decided that one day and reinforced it until the end of time.
The fact that we even classify films starring women as chick flicks should be enough of an indication that there is a problem. You don’t have dick flicksfor example.
We are treated as objects, not people. It’s like racism has evolved. It’s not so direct anymore. It’s like under the surface, whch can be even worse. Because it grows like a mould and then everything starts crumbling. You’re like “why is everything is so bad”, and “Oh, look at this mould here. It’s been here all along.”
DK: Have you seen Love Actually?
SVW: I have not!
SVW: People kept saying “you gotta see it, you gotta see it!”. People have started to realise it’s not a good film. It is kinda sexist.
DK: But you know about that scene where Andrew Lincoln is standing outside Keira Knightly’s house with giant love cards?
SVW: I have seen that scene, actually.
DK: So creepy! why is this guy outside this woman’s front door? She is married, her husband is inside! There is something called personal space.
SVW: It’s not cute anymore.
DK: It’s not! And we reverse the roles and if she was the one outside his door, she would be a housebreaker.
SVW: Hmm, crazy!
DK: Like what is up with her? Get your shit together.
My favourite thing from this podcast is – why do we have chick flicks but not dick flicks?
Thank you so much, Silvi.
SVW: No problem at all.
DK: Hope you guys enjoyed it. Comment below if you have any suggestions and sayonara!