Yet, not surprisingly, these three gals conveniently chuck feminism aside in regards to three others gals (Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin and Margaret Thatcher, respectively) whose political views differ from their own. Somehow, I must’ve missed the asterisk providing an exception to the feminist cause:  ‘Thou must support thy sisters – unless, of course, said sisters disagree with you politically.”

Barkin v. Bachmann: Barkin’s Twitter feed (which rivals that of Alec Baldwin’s in its unrestrained slamming of the right) repeatedly attacks conservative female figures. During the December 15th GOP debate, her vicious tweets revealed this actress is a feminist in name only. Blasting even Fox News’ gorgeous Megyn Kelly, a superstar network anchor and successful working mom (“This Megyn Kelley has more Botox in her f*ckin face than a 57 year old actress, Just sayin.”), Barkin saved her best sneer for Bachmann: “Don’t u just love when Bachmann says “When I am president…”? That’s like me saying… “When I am performing my next heart transplant….”  Odd, one would think Ms. Barkin, political-views aside, would have more respect for a woman who:  is a sitting member of Congress and presidential candidate, successfully raised 5 children and fostered a whopping 23 children. If Bachmann isn’t a poster girl for strong female women, I don’t know who is.

Moore v. Palin: Only a few days later, four-time Oscar nominee Moore, while interviewed about her upcoming hatchet job on Sarah Palin (the HBO mini-series “Game Change”), was asked if she’d developed a new-found respect for Palin after researching the former governor. The actress curtly answered, “No.” Again, how odd for a feminist to find absolutely nothing to admire in Palin. Politics aside, this is a working mother with five children who became governor of Alaska, a vice-presidential candidate and a superstar in the political world. Yet Moore found not one thing that impressed her about Palin? Though Moore does not tweet often, she did, curiously enough, find time to retweet Barkin’s sneer about Bachmann. One can almost hear the high-school-style giggling between these two so-called feminists.

Streep v. Thatcher:  Perhaps most shocking of all is the lack of respect by Streep towards Margaret Thatcher. Surely, one would assume that, at the very least, every feminist would have some kind words to say about the grocer’s daughter who rose to become one of the world’s sole female leaders and the UK’s first female prime minister? Think again. In press interviews for her Thatcher biopic, “The Iron Lady,” Streep bestowed no praise on her protagonist. On the contrary, she remarked the film was about a life in “decay” and touched upon the “cruelty that was there and how she [Thatcher] came to pay a price for it,” giving no examples, of course, of said “cruelty.”

Unbelievable.

These Hollywood mean girls either need to step out of their snickering clique long enough to give credit where credit is due or turn in their feminist card.

What do you all think?  Any other examples of so-called feminists attacking strong women of the right?

Thanks to political correctness, ours is a rough day for masculinity. Strong men are painted as tyrants, heroic men as ego-centrists, and moral standard bearers as bigots, or worse. This is particularly true in Hollywood, where a purposeful revisionism toward manhood has been under way for decades.

—–

Not surprisingly, big screen super heroes and mythic figures of valor – male figures – have been among the hardest hit by this revisionism. As a result, the mighty have learned to cry, the powerful to admit vulnerability, and the brave to second-guess themselves, all in an effort to win over the effeminized masses. And this is what makes the screenplay for the upcoming feature film, “THOR,” so wonderful: not because it carries on the ridiculous revisionism, but because it shatters it with a hammer blow from Thor himself.

Through its clear portrayal of an unapologetically strong male who comes to the rescue of female characters, risks his life in the defense of right and wrong, and loves his world (his realm) in an undying fashion, “THOR” promises to revitalize masculinity in 2011 the way “The Expendables” did in 2010.

Early in the screenplay we see Thor as a young man, and a citizen of the realm of Asgard, about to be crowned king of that realm by his father, Odin, who had been King of Asgard for some time. In that moment of passage, Odin’s words to Thor set the tone for the rest of the film — a speech about how responsibility, duty, and honor” are central to the charge Odin gives Thor, and as the screenplay unfolds, they are central to all that Thor does.

Yes, there are moments when a young Thor demonstrates the brashness of youth and launches attacks against other realms (particularly Jotunheim) that threaten the peace of which his father spoke. (Yet even in attacking another realm Thor never seeks his own glory but the defense of his people.)  Nevertheless, Thor’s father banishes him to earth for having “betrayed the throne” via his brash attack on Jotunheim, and in casting him to earth strips Thor of both his immortality and the powers that attended that immortality.

Once banished, Thor’s mortality is represented by the fact that he and his famous hammer are separated. From there the rest of the screenplay is ultimately the outworking of Thor doing what he must to recover his hammer, and thereby his powers. The catch is that the hammer can only be lifted by “one who is worthy.”

While on earth, Thor is befriended by a group of scientists, among which is Jane Foster: a female who never becomes a romantic love interest yet who loves Thor nonetheless (and by the end of the screenplay is loved by him in return). It is for Jane that Thor risks his mortal life more than once, and in risking himself learns what “responsibility, duty, [and] honor” really mean.

Moreover, through these risks Thor unknowingly proves himself worthy to lift the hammer once more.

As the screenplay approaches its final, climatic pages, Thor learns that his hammer had fallen to earth when he had fallen from Asgard. Thus he determines to retrieve it.

If the screenplay remains as it is, suffice it to say that Thor’s efforts to retrieve the hammer will provide movie goers with an excellent display of things like focused aggression, righteous indignation, and a proper use of one’s fists: for these things are all on display in Thor’s character, as he uses brute force, cunning, and unbending determination to break through a small army of men who are dedicated to keeping him from the hammer.

I will neither tell you that he reaches the hammer nor that he doesn’t: Nor will I provide the details of the many battles he wages along the way.

What I will tell you is that “THOR,” as presently scripted, promises to hit us the way “Rocky” hit us in 1976. In other words, it could be a movie that men who shun political correctness will enjoy for generations to come.

But when we look at the leading actresses of 2010, the dearth of great performances and great parts is stunning.  The Golden Globe nominees for best actress this year were Halle Berry in the anonymous flick Frankie and Alice, playing a crazy person in her usual over-the-top style; Nicole Kidman in the anonymous flick Rabbit Hole, playing a grieving mother in her usual cold and remote style; Jennifer Lawrence in Winter’s Bone, playing a teenage girl looking for her meth-making dad; Natalie Portman in Black Swan, playing a crazy person with a constipated look plastered on her mug; and Michelle Williams in Blue Valentine, playing a spoiled girl who gets knocked up, married, and presumably divorced.  Has anyone seen any of these women in any of these films?  And if the disastrous Natalie Portman – Queen Amidala masturbating, anyone? – is the frontrunner for Best Actress at the Oscars, how far have female figures fallen?

Far.  Quick, think of the ten greatest living film actors.  It’s not that tough – we have iconic male film stars all the time.  Now think of the ten greatest living film actresses.  Now take away all women over 50.  Still thinking, aren’t you?

The simple truth is that actresses were far more iconic fifty years ago than they are now.  We may want to shtup most of the actresses we see on screen today, but we don’t show up to see them because of their standout screen personas.  That isn’t because today’s actresses are less talented than their predecessors – we have many talented actresses on the scene.  It’s because screen executives have decided that truly feminine women, with both brains and looks, are no longer in keeping with the times.  Instead, film execs have cut a sharp dichotomy between “sexy” women and “smart” women – it’s either Megan Fox or Kate Winslet.  Charlize Theron can’t play a strong, graceful, beautiful woman – she’s got to be either a lesbian serial killer or a piece of eye candy.

The feminism embraced by most of today’s execs is antiquated.  They still think that women must act like men in order to promote equality of the sexes.  Make Natalie Portman’s character a man in Black Swan and take away Darren Aronofsky’s idiotic and self-centered camera movements and you’ve got an oversexed Ronald Colman in A Double Life.  There’s nothing feminine about Ellen Page in Juno – she’s more of a dude than Michael Cera in the same film.  What ever happened to Bette Davis, to Vivien Leigh, to the old-school, unmannered Meryl Streep?  They’re gone, replaced with pale imitations starring in angst-filled nonsense glorifying aberrant behavior.

Ironically enough, the feminism of today’s Hollywood has killed the female movie star.  If Hollywood wants to restore that luster, they’ll need to embrace femininity, in all of its three-dimensional glory, once again.

Barbara Billingsley, who died last Saturday, was June Cleaver, the wife of Ward Cleaver, played by Hugh Beaumont, and the mother of two boys, Wally (Tony Dow) and Theodore (Jerry Mathers), nicknamed “the Beaver.”

The Cleaver family on ‘Leave it to Beaver’: (from left) Wally, Mom, Dad and ‘The Beav’ (AP)

June Cleaver was a stay-at-home mom who was always there for her kids, with love, sage motherly advice, and good cooking. This model of motherhood was scorned by feminists in the decades to come as the product over oppressive, abusive men who wanted to keep their wives in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.

Like many obituaries, the NY Times obituary was a bit snarky:

“Along with the mothers played by Harriet Nelson (“The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet”), Donna Reed (“The Donna Reed Show”) and others, Ms. Billingsley’s role became a cultural standard, one that may have been too good to be true but produced fan mail and nostalgia for decades afterward, from the same generation whose counterculture derided the see-no-evil suburbia June’s character represented.”

However, as I said when I appeared in Stephen Bannon’s movie, Generation Zero, almost nobody today understands what was going on in the 1950s.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, the 1950s was a Recovery Era where the country was excitedly celebrating its victories over the Great Depression and the Nazis in World War II.

A 1950s mother would have grown up during the Great Depression, surrounded by homelessness, starvation and bankruptcy. If she herself hadn’t been forced to live under a bridge and depend on soup kitchens for food, then she undoubtedly had many friends who had been forced to do so.

Then, as the Great Depression ended, she saw her brothers, father and uncles tortured and maimed on the Bataan Death March, and then shot down like fish in a barrel on the beaches of Normandy. Out of patriotism, she had been forced to take “Rosie the Riveter” type jobs that she hated.

So when the 1950s arrived, a home with a white picket fence where a mother could stay at home with the kids and be safe and dry and warm and reliably supported by a working husband was a gift from heaven. This was a gift that mothers of the 1950s wanted to give to their daughters. They had suffered through starvation, homelessness and slaughter, and they had won, and they wanted to give their daughters the gift of the fruits of that victory.

Unfortunately, their daughters didn’t want those gifts. Their scorn and contempt for those gifts gave rise to the women’s lib and feminist movements of the 60s and beyond.

But there’s an ironic twist to all this. The pendulum is swinging back, and young women today are not only choosing to stay at home again with the kids (see “‘It’s going to be the 1950s all over again’”), but they’re also becoming much more reserved in terms of style and behavior (see “Victoria’s Secret changes from ‘too sexy’ to ‘ultra-feminine’”).

So Barbara Billingsley’s character, June Cleaver, did not represent an obsolete era after all. Don’t be surprised if, in the next decade, there’s a new “Leave it to Beaver” type show on, with mothers who are only too happy to stay at home and bake cookies for the kids.

The activist left, which denigrated the previous president in a merciless fashion, took the reins of power with reckless abandon and shoved its brand of poisonous hope and change down the throats of the American people. So we the people, the reawakening silent majority, responded in the form of a grassroots movement that is turning into a juggernaut set to roll past November 2nd and become something transcendent and long-lasting. Our Founding Fathers would be proud that we have rediscovered the spirit and the essence of their ideas.

While the Tea Party has not been specifically partisan–many Republican carcasses lie in its rubble–this conservative and constitutional checks and balances has created a rejuvenated GOP, chastened and wiser.

This weekend I have the honor of sharing the stage with one of the Tea Party’s and Republican Party’s fearless leaders, Sarah Palin. Since her arrival on the national stage, the Democratic Party has recognized her potential as a political powerhouse and has worked in tandem with its partners in crime, the mainstream media, to wage an unprecedented personal campaign against her and her family. The Tea Party can relate.

But the power of Alinsky and the politics of personal destruction vis a vis the Democrat Media Complex has reverse effects when the object of the hate bravely stands up to the bullies and thugs. The Tea Party and Sarah Palin have given America a great lesson in standing up to the bullies who have co-opted the Democratic Party and the American media.

As we head into the home stretch, Sarah Palin will be in California to draw attention to a state in economic shambles. After a generation of nanny-state and Ponzi scheme policies, Californians and Americans want a radical change. This is the Republican Party’s chance to win back one of the bluest states, and what better way to usher in that change than with a dynamic female leader like Sarah Palin cheering on fellow free market, limited government feminist success stories Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina.

Michael Steele, “American Heart” singer/songwriter Jon David, other California GOP candidates and I will join Palin on stage to cheer on a new era of hope and change in the pursuit of helping California avert economic disaster.

I invite all of our readers to come down to have a rollicking and patriotic time. I’ll be hanging out to meet and greet one and all well after the bunting has been taken down.

Palin FACT SHEET – CA 9.29.10-1 –

Still, what I have to say about feminism and popular culture will probably shock conservative, right-wingish folks. (I can literally see the angry comments now — heck I could practically write them myself). But in the name of tolerance, keep in mind that I was born and raised in Europe, Germany for the most part. We don’t have the same relationship with sex and sexual content Americans have. I grew up seeing boobies and penises on television shows (even commercials) and in magazines; none of them X-rated and none of them were ever attacked by what we call “clean content organizations.” 

As a result, I don’t instantly associate nudity with sex the way many Americans do. When Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction became this country’s most talked about crisis, I thought we were being punked…until I realized that people were seriously offended. And that’s their right… but really? 

Furthermore, when I came of age and my mother realized I liked boys and they liked me back, I got “the talk.” But I am very certain that the talk I got was nothing like the talk most American kids get. I’ll spare you the details, but let’s just say my mother was less concerned about me having sex than explaining all options of birth control to me in detail, before she gave me a long speech about the difference between a kind and considerate lover and a wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am kind of guy. 

I will be forever grateful for her wisdom, and her courage to accept the fact that a teenager’s hormones will almost always win against the voice of reason, no matter how hard you try to hammer it into your kid.

Now, having said all that, despite my “progressive” European upbringing, I have a huge problem with the society girls, reality stars and partying starlets mentioned in the MacLean’s article that inspired this series. Obviously, no matter what your politics or beliefs are, these women don’t inspire pride in your gender, quite the contrary.

But I’m less offended by their sluttiness and blatant sexuality; I’m offended because they are just straight out dumb. My first thought always goes to their parents. Where are they? What are they saying to these girls? Didn’t they teach their daughters that life is about leaving a legacy? Because right now their legacy is an embarrassment, a joke, a shame. In medieval days they would have been referred to as court buffoons. 

My next thought goes to the people who watch this trash. Because isn’t that what it’s really about? None of these networks would green-light shows about humane train wrecks and none of the gossip magazines would put them on the cover, if there wasn’t an AUDIENCE! 

I was once introduced to a reality show producer and being one never to miss an opportunity, right after he revealed that he was a fan of my work I casually mentioned my reality show idea. Having no other choice, he asked me what it was: 

Me: “The show is called NOT THE HILLS and it’s about five strong, intelligent and independent girls who share a house as they compete for an all-financed spot in an Ivy League college. While they are all amazing girls, they would come from totally different backgrounds and beliefs, which results in a lot of tension as they decide when to stand their ground and when to admit that another opinion might have trumped their own. Picture a young Ellen DeGeneres, joined by a young Sarah Palin, a young Oprah, etc.” 

Producer: “People want to see teens in relationships–“ 

Me: “They can date. As a matter of fact they do date, just like any normal girls that age, they just do it with integrity.“ 

Producer: “There are no numbers in integrity.” 

And that was that. I never mentioned the show again. Sure he was a scumbag, but the scumbag was right, wasn’t he? How many of you watch The Bachelorette rather than an intelligent episode of Masterpiece Theater on PBS? Be honest.

The few American ladies I know who were around during the golden age of feminism have shared with me that it was also a time of sexual revolution and evolution. Women realized they didn’t need to marry and have sex as if it was one of their housewife chores.  Instead, they started to enjoy sex and many opted for lovers over husbands. So, I’m confused on how  today’s sexuality interferes with feminism. 

I think ignorance and stupidity does affect feminism … badly, but I think a hot woman should be able to wear a mini skirt without having her professionalism or accomplishments questioned. If I had the legs, I’d wear one every day. 

One woman who has positively contributed to feminism and equality is Angelina Jolie. Think of her what you want, but the fact that she accepted the lead role in a film (“Salt”) that was written for a male star (Tom Cruise was attached at one time), was — trust me —  a major, major milestone in this business. Not only did she flawlessly deliver the same amount of action a man would, resting on her shoulders alone, the film was a box-office success. 

The bottom line is: sexuality is not the force destroying feminism — stupidity and ignorance is.  Let’s raise smart and sophisticated girls who, when given a choice, pick up a book rather than watch trashy television. 

So to all those mothers who blame Paris, Snooki, Lindsay and co., I suggest you stop whining and take responsibility. Firstly, it’s the right thing to do and secondly, it would set a great example for your daughter.

I love the way the Palins navigate Sarah’s fame. I watched Todd and Sarah at the Searchlight and Boston events this year. They looked like they were on a date. He had his arm around her protectively as they slinked through the column of bodyguards worming their way to the stage, where he watched her shine and then embraced her back into the SUV of safety. That is Feminism. A feminine woman achieving goals with the blessing of her man, while she simultaneously supports his career endeavors and celebrates his masculinity. I read her book. They are in love and enjoy mutual respect with a splash of sexiness. There is a fire there. You gotta love it.        
        
Now, I watch other women bragging about their single parenting. They “don’t need a man.” They can buy a baby. They can do anything a man can do. Well, they look stupid and desperate to me. First of all, women and men are very different and personally, when I’m being chased by a murderer/rapist/what-have-you, I’d rather have a big, strong man protecting me than a woman. I had a cop once, who came to the site of my car accident. She had long, blonde hair blowin’ in the wind, and two inch long, bright pink, fake nails. I mean, really. How do you get your finger through that hole to pull the trigger? I can’t even button my blouse with fake nails. Yeesh!

I’ve struggled with the career/family thing my whole life. I only came to Hollywood in 1980 because I  was single, and I knew that it would be the only time in my life when I could chase a whim. I gave up an engagement ring for it and my true love married someone else. I got the career, but I gave up something. When I got reunited with my true love ten years later, I had to choose again, between career and husband. His job was across the country. This time I chose the husband. It was so painful to give up the career I loved, that I got a tattoo. It was a permanent, physical symbol of the emotional pain I was going through. What was the tattoo? My husband’s initials. P.W. The tattoo artist said, “You want a P.U. on your butt?!” I said, “NO! P.W.!!”      
      
The joy of motherhood and the hot, husband time gradually dulled the
absence of the cheering crowds, and the creative stimulation, but the career monster lurked in the shadows ready to seduce me given the chance. 15 long years went by.

When one daughter got married, the ambitious monster popped out again and my long-suffering husband commuted from FL to LA for three years, keeping his job, financially supporting me and letting me give it a shot. I lived in LA with my teenager and she tried not to miss her friends and family back home.

I got a few roles. ..even at age 50. I got a great part playing the wife of Jeff Fahey in a Pureflix film called Marriage Retreat. Ironically, my lines all reflected my personal struggle.

My character had to look deep into Jeff’s intensely ice blue eyes, and reply to his question about moving. He said, “… what do you want to do?” My character’s line was, “You are my home.” Hmm. I guess I took the part home with me because I promptly told my family I’d leave my beloved friends and adventures in LA and move back to Florida to be the Grandma to my upcoming first grandchild due Jan. 1, 2011. That’s what they all wanted.  So, you see I understand the Feminist Dilemma.      
        
I see ambitious women splattered about naked, and well, pornographic on TV, in movies, in magazines, on billboards and everywhere.        

—–

I see women falling for the lie, even Baptists like me. I used to get asked to play nudity a lot in my twenties. Strangely, that isn’t a problem anymore! No one asks! But, my daughters see and feel the emphasis our society places on sexuality. My teenager’s behavior changed when I transferred her from a secular school, to a Bible based school. Her clothes and her conversations changed. Her face brightened. When her daily MTV watching and junk food changed to cheer practice on a team that included prayer and Bible study, her face began to glow with health and joy and she quit asking for piercings and drawing magic marker tattoos all over her arms and legs.  (I know, I’m a bad example.)      
        
Now that women have the opportunity to have it all, (excluding Muslim women who have no freedom), we have difficult choices. Back a few years, I took my small kids to LA for an experimental year to see if I could get some acting work. Daddy commuted. I got one episode of The X Files. ( I did get to kiss David Duchovny, well, my character did, but maybe I should say I “had to” kiss David, instead of I “got to”….now that they say he’s a sex addict!…you know… germs…) We had a family meeting of sorts. On a balancing scale, I held one X Files episode in one hand, and missing Daddy/Husband for a year in the other hand. I chose to go back to Florida and be The Housewife. The kids were happier.        
        
The last month of my LA leased apartment, I got a pilot with Sofia Vergara, Joey Lawrence, and Jon Lovitz. (It ultimately landed in the garbage can but I got a nice check.). My family was back in Florida so I wrote this sad song;       
        
Two Weeks Away        
        
There’s a cat litter box with no kitty poop in it.      
There is silence in every room.       
There are toys here and there,       
But no laughter anywhere.        
Shadows dance as I wade through the gloom.        
        
I stop and stare at pictures on the wall.        
They seem to caaaaalll out my name.        
But when I touch their precious faces        
It’s just paper and glass in a frame.        
        
I tell myself I’m not sad, this is good, it’s not bad.        
I must work, they are safe, I’m just an airplane away.        
But after a while, I just can’t fake a smile,        
I’ll go back, I’ll go back, I’ll go back.        
        
One’s at the computer.        
One watches cartoons.        
Mommy’s cooking spinach,        
Daddy vacuums.        
        
Just to know they’re nearby       
Is the joy of a home.        
In the corner of my eye watching them play,       
Is the bliss that I miss at a moment like this,       
So I cry, so I cry, so I cry;       
        
You are my sunshine, my only sunshine        
You make me happy when skies are gray        
You’ll never know dear how much I love you        
Please don’t take my sunshine away.        
       
Feminism. Such a strange word. When I hear it I first think of the most
masculine and angry women, women with not a shred of femininity. Funny
how words are. Then, I think of the meaning they want it to hold. And
that word is Sarah Palin.

After Aniston’s ill-advised political posturing, Bill O’Reilly picked up on the quote and riffed off it on his FoxNews show.  Key quote:

Aniston can hire a battery of people to help her, but she cannot hire a dad, OK? And Dads bring a psychology to children that is, in this society, I believe, underemphasized. I think men get hosed all day long in the parental arena.

This is, of course, right on the money.  Since the right to abort a fetus was dubbed “a woman’s right to choose,” feminists, the welfare state, and deadbeat dads across America have done their level best to marginalize the role a father plays in a child’s life.  And finally, in 2010, Jennifer Aniston proclaims that men are officially unnecessary for child rearing.

So, Aniston billed the Switch as a tale of 21st Century girl power and was rewarded with nightmare-ish press from America’s number one cable news show.  Lo and behold, the movie takes an abysmal seventh place at its opening weekend box office behind “Julia Roberts Eats Gelato on a Park Bench” as well as movies called “Lottery Ticket” and “Vampire Sucks” which I first heard of just now.

**MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD**

Before we go any further, I’d like to suggest you stop reading this post right now because I am about to give away the plot of one of the best films of the year.  No kidding.  But if you need your culture war fix, read on.

Kassie, played by Aniston, is a successful, man-less career woman whose child-bearing years are numbered.  So, she decides to do what any 21st century progressive feminist would do and get artificially inseminated, bringing another child into the world who won’t get the benefit of the unique qualities only a father can provide.  She plans to do so at a soirée celebrating this act of supreme narcissism.  So far it sounds like required viewing for new NOW membership.  But not so fast…

At the party, we first meet the sperm-donating hunk Roland (played by the talented Patrick Wilson), donning a ridiculous Viking helmet.  Meanwhile, the doctor who will perform the insemination is preparing for the procedure by partying as hard as anyone.  Then comes the Switch’s riotous kid-humps-a-pie-iconic scene where Aniston’s jealous best friend Wally (a top-notch Jason Bateman) switches The Viking’s semen with his own.  The switch is made unbeknownst to Kassie (and even Wally, who was inebriated at the time), and the end result is Sebastian (played unforgettably by Thomas Robinson).  Later on we’ll learn that instead of taking after the upbeat Adonis Roland, Sebastian is the spitting image of hyper-analytical, hyper-cynical, hand-wringer Wally.  By the end of the party it’s clear the single-mom getting artificially inseminated idea is being mocked.  Here’s more proof:

Yup, Ms. Aniston, it’s satire, and the joke’s on feministas like you.

Aniston moves away and years later she returns for the second act.  It’s in this act that we learn the film isn’t about feminism at all, and it isn’t even about Kassie.  The Switch ultimately is about the relationship that develops between Wally and his biological son Sebastian who he’s just now meeting for the first time at age seven.  Their union is blissful; the kindred spirits fill obvious voids in each others’ lives, and contrary to everything you’re taught in college about fathers, Sebastian needs Wally.  For example, Sebastian begins to gravitate towards his new adult male role model, not his mother, when he’s getting bullied at school.

In the final act, Wally drunkenly stumbles to his friend Leonard’s house at 4am, miserable after finally spilling the beans about the switch to Kassie and fearing he’s lost her and Sebastian forever.  Leonard, played by a very funny Jeff Goldblum, implores him to “go home.”  To that Wally says, “they are my home.”

As you could guess by now, the traditional family is united in the end and it’s smiles all around.

I saw the Switch against my will.  Between Aniston’s insistence this was a film that was culturally relevant in it’s rejection of the traditional family and an ad campaign that centered on billboards of Jason Bateman staring into a cup of male ejaculate, I came into it expecting something akin to an Enhanced Interrogation Technique.  As it turns out, the Switch has a clever plot executed with brisk pacing, complete with memorable performances, and an optimism in the traditional family structure that rises above the chaos of 21st century progressive foolishness.

Aniston’s assessment that the film was a revelation about how men are unnecessary was 180-degrees off the mark.  It’s as if she didn’t see the movie herself.  And that’s sad, not because she cost the film money, but because she deterred a lot of people from a real 21st century novelty: a deep and deeply funny movie-going experience.

—–

Tonight!

Andy Levy guest hosts.

SE Cupp does the ombuds-woman-ing.

Also: Ann Coulter, Marc Lamont Hill, and Rick Leventhal!