The Social Network
Ok, fully disclosing at the beginning of this collection of ramblings that I haven’t seen the film yet. I have to admit that the words “Justin Timberlake - actor” and “Facebook” initially inspired my derision, and questioning of just what the hell Fincher was doing in his later years. But obviously it has Sorkin, amazing buzz, and by all accounts is more a thoughtful and at times bleak look at just what motivates and defines “my” generation.
So now, it’s on my list of “must see when mercifully no longer insanely busy.” Then the next thing I’ve been following about it is the accusations of misogyny against Sorkin, and his portrayal of women in the film. Again, I haven’t seen the film, but from reviews I’ve gleaned that, with the exception of the characters played by Rooney Mara and Rashida Jones, most of the women are objectified, naked, and seen only as conquests for the budding entrepreneur Zuckerberg.
Sorkin’s defense is that he is trying to portray the world view of Zuckerberg and his crew, and that in their desperate need for acceptance, power, and greed - they see women as just another prize to win by being “successful”. Which on the one hand I can totally see that - Sorkin is trying to portray a group of people, and naturally he cannot “pretend” that they are respectful to women when they are not. I certainly don’t think films need to include “strong women” just to have them - because then that isn’t good writing, it’s simply political correctness. But, there are two reasons why his argument doesn’t sit right with me.
Please note that I think Sorkin is an extremely talented writer, and certainly don’t think he is a blatant misogynist or anything of the sort. And yet - I just don’t buy his defense. The first issue I have is that he has clearly stated that his film is not a documentary, and is not to be taken as “THE” story of Facebook and the ensuing lawsuits after it’s creation. So if you admit to taking artistic liberties with some of the “characters”, and since no one can claim to be truly inside the real Zuckerberg’s head, then surely you need to take some responsibility for creating these female characters who are all too happy to have their only value be their youth, looks, and sexuality. You made them up. They are not simply “documented” versions of real life people.
Secondly, I find it somewhat unbelievable that in the time that Zuckerberg was at Harvard, creating things like Facemash (comparing women to each other on looks alone, and comparing their looks to animals) that not a single female classmate of his challenged him or his views against women. I just have a hard time believing that a. Zuckerberg never came in contact with any women of substance at all in 4 years at college, and even more unbelievable that b. there were no intelligent, driven and political women at Harvard AT ALL. I don’t think that they need to be major characters, but to just have maybe one girl challenge him or argue with him for a second in a class or SOMETHING would seem to be more realistic. Is it just supposed to show that Zuckerberg preferred to delete events like this from his memory?
I’m fully looking forward to seeing this film to see if the outcry has been legitimate. I think the thing it has made me think about the most is that sadly, many men of our generation DO think that way, and that many women DO feel that their only worth or ability is defined by their sexual desirability/compliance. I don’t even think I can be mad at Sorkin. Yes, it would be nice to see more women portrayed intelligently in movies and television. The saddest thing to me is that this really IS a mirror to our generation, that this really is the college experience ( I certainly saw it when I was in college) that these ARE our values. It’s depressing that the majority of people my age still see women this way in 2010. As Sorkin pointed out, Stuff like the “Fuck Truck” is real - he didn’t make that up. That’s more upsetting than anything in a movie.
