Movie: Ma Vie En Rose
I am glad to make "Ma Vie En Rose" ( My Life in Pink) my first foreign language movie blog. Directed by Alain Berliner, "Rose" stars Georges Du Fresne as Ludovic Fabre. Seven year old Ludo is convinced that he was mistakenly born a boy. Positive that the mistake will be remedied soon, Ludo sets out to live the life he was intended to have. Ludo parents dismisses his cross-dressing, refusal to cut his hair and general effeminate behavior as harmless childhood play. His parents are forced to cave to societal and social pressure when Ludo's gender confusion becomes public knowlege, threatening their family both socially and financially. Folding to societal pressure, Ludo's parents sends him to a psychologist in an attempt to end his confusion. Aware of the disruption his behavior is causing his family, Ludo tries to conform to a gender role that is against his very nature.
Ludovic is an endearing character. He announces to his mother that he will marry the boy next door. After his mother tells him that boys don't marry boys, Ludo is like, duh. He explains that he will grow up to be a woman.
After being called a faggot, Ludo asks his parents what faggot means. His father is incensed that someone called his son a faggot. Exasperated, his mother snaps, "boys who like other boys, like you!" Interestingly enough, it is not Ludo's behavior per se that frustrates his parents. It is the outside pressure that makes them try to get Ludo to conform. This is an endearing film that should not be missed, that's why I'm proud to make it my first foreign language film blog. There are many more to come, so be on the look out. Peace--Happy viewing.
posted by Simrose @ 4:58 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
I usually leave it up to my commentators to start discussions, however, I can't help but start one today. Ascribing to the nurture verses nature argument, feminists declared sex natural and gender environmental. I believe that transgenderism and transsexuality challenges this view. It seems to me that sex is biological and gender is phychological, both of which are products of nature. How should a person like Ludovic be classified? Should he be classified at all? Is he transsexual--does he struggle as a girl trapped in a boy's body, or struggle as a transgendered person, a boy who is pyschologically feminine? What really is Ludovic's view of himself? Is he more concerned about his sex conforming to his gender, or his gender conforming to his sex? The character of Ludovic is clearly too young to articulate his mental state, but in my opinion Ludovic's struggled more with societal views of what his gender should be, than with his feelings of what his sexual organ should look like. His sexual organ only became an issue when he realized that only people with virginas were allowed to be feminine and like boys. Therefore, he was not so much trapped in a boy's body, as trapped by societal gender roles. This is why the difference between transgenderism and transsexuality can be so confusing. Although most people believe they are synonyns, I argue that they are not.
In "Transamerica," for example, the character of Bree had two issues, one of which could only be solved with an operation. She was biologically male yet psychologically female--clearly a woman trapped in a man's body. But her issues ran even deeper, she was so uncomfortable with her penis-her maleness-that she couldn't even stand to look at it. So deeply rooted was her need for biological and psychological unity--her penis disgusted her and masculinity was unnatural to her. For transsexual people, the struggle is both biological and psychological. Transgendered individuals don't need a sex change operation to feel complete. They don't have any deeply rooted problem that can only be solved by an operation. Not everyone who feels their sex does not conform with their gender, want to change their sex or their gender. For the transgendered, the stuggle is societal problematical view of their gender non-conformity. Interestingly enough, the T in GLBTstands of transgendered, not transsexual. The GLBT community is made up of individuals who are sexually attracted to individuals of their same-sex. Transgendered people can be gay, lesbian, bi or straight. However transgendered people generally describe their orientation according to their gender. Similarly, transsexual can be either gay or straight. Some people believe that a person becomes transsexual after surgery. I disagree, a transsexual is a transsexual whether or not they can afford hormones or an operation. No matter how you look at it, it is clear that gender is just as natural as sex. This might tick some feminist off, but ironically the nuture argument only serves to highlight their underline belief that masculinity deserves more respect than femininity. Even feminists are products of a sexist society.
I saw "Mi Vi En Rose" and wonder about our need to accept, classify, and change. Our need to categorize maybe apart of the problem. We set up rules as a society and we all accept those rules. The other day Morgan Freeman was on "60 Minutes." Mike Wallace asked Freeman's advise on eliminating racism. Freeman said he suggests that we stop talking about race.
Not talking about race to eliminate racism is contrary to the rules. Maybe we should try it. The reason why I brought up racism is because it seems to me that sexuality and race and the -ism that plague the members of the respective groups are analogous. Let's stop making rules and boxes for humans.
This is maybe asking too much. The biggest impediment that we all will likely have is fear -- fear of being oppressed. If we have the boxes, then maybe we feel a certain amount of protection.
Freeman certainly has an interesting and controversial suggestion. I'm always up for trying new things, but you have to be mindful of history to know your future. If history has taught us anything it is that power does not yield without a fight, and "silence in the face of evil denotes consent." What would the world look like today if the abolitionists remained silent, if the suffragist remained silent, if civil rights activists remained silent. If homosexuals were silent about sodomy laws. In my humble opinion dialogue is essencial for change.
Maybe Freeman's class privilege has placed him in a position to ignore race. While he might not be able to catch a cab in NY, his class will certainly open many more doors.
The -ist people are here because at several (okay a gazillion) points in history folks pointed to race, gay, or women as scapegoats for society's evils and problems -- fear. Folks created structures (e.g. church) and social norms (e.g. marriage) to oppress us all -- I mean to oppress us all.
Were the doors open because of his class or his own perception of who he is? I personally have more confidence when I'm not worried about whether people are hating me because of my gender and race -- when I am just me, nappy hair, flat nose, breast, and all.
I submit that his perception changed because of his class.
Happiness can only be obtained at an individual level, because it is a wholly individual quest. Happiness can be attained and mentained in the most egregious of circumstances. I certainly don't worry about people hating me, because my consciousness, as well as yours, have evolved beyond that state. It is the haters' karma, not mine.
I totally agree that -ist people were created to combat opression and oppressor. Where would we be without -ist people--thank god for them.
Post a Comment
<< Home