~ archived since 2018 ~

“Ghostbusters” (2016) and the Myth of the Disposable Woman

Billy Pratt
May 19, 2016

Someone working deep inside the Clinton campaign must really fucking hate her guts. Old Hillary is gearing up for an appearance on the Ellen show alongside the entire cast of the smelly-like-farts “Ghostbusters” (2016) re-make.  I am praying to Jesus that she comes out with the stupid uniform on, personalized with CLINTON across the left breast; she can have her own proton pack, maybe some impromptu CG will be employed. Please God, make her the honorary fifth Ghostbuster.

Don’t just finger me, God; I want it all the way in.

This stupid movie has the stink of death, and for Clinton to attach herself to it almost certainly means that someone working for her is either certifiably retarded or absolutely insane… but why is this movie so particularly hated?

After all, “Ghostbusters” is a movie and movies are bad.

After Hollywood dissolved the girl movie/boy movie formula and no one really seemed to notice, they got greedy and pushed so hard that the same internet nerds who cheered wildly for two-hours of a girl beating up Storm Troopers helped give “Ghostbusters” a historic million billion YouTube downvotes.

There was something different about “Ghostbusters,” and whether people had the language to verbalize it or not, the trailer managed to create a kind of subconscious irritation so profound that the same body which developed a heavy tolerance for trash and bullshit was able to successfully reject the damaged organ.

While this may happen automatically for the average person, someone who obsesses over bullshit- as I do- can pinpoint where this transition in the trailer occurs; when the body decides no mas, and a mind eager to move past the whole wretched thing forces an angry downvote.

It was when the fat one casually mentions how the girls had “dedicated [their] whole lives to studying the paranormal,” that we go off the rails.

Dedicated their whole lives, implying to the exclusion of everything else; the exclusion of socialization or romantic entanglement; the exclusion of comfort and fun.

Their whole lives, implying that women are as disposable as men… And I’d put a hefty sum of peanuts on this being the point where people check out of the trailer and click the misogynistic “thumbs down.”

And as the girls in grey go on to slug it out with pesky poltergeists it only feels increasingly ridiculous seeing women with laser guns risking their lives on the front line of a paranormal war; because women aren’t disposable. What kind of men inhabit this fictional New York City, anyway, letting women fight their battles?

Women aren’t forgoing social lives in the pursuit of science, nor are they acting as the first line of defense when shit gets real. These are masculine traits, and men realize both positive benefits and negative consequences of this reality.

We understand the inherent value of women and the disposability of men as cultural memes.

The disposability of men dictates that a man must either prove his value or understand he’ll be cast aside in favor of the more valuable; this idea is what maintains the stability of Civilization.

In a world full of animals who want to fuck, men are worthless monkeys dying to stick it in practically anything, and women are coveted selectors who only allow the most valuable monkeys to get their dicks wet; this is ultimately the reason why you have an iPhone, or really anything else for that matter.

Existing with inherent value creates an environment of entitlement and expectation, where a woman doesn’t have to work as hard to meet her needs. Women receive effortless attention and perpetual praise; with this foundation a woman may exert effort to further create an identity for herself- a doctor or lawyer- but it seems as though scientist has a quality of diminishing return; the amount of effort required exceeds the net high-fives received for even bothering. A scientist may spend their entire career as an anonymous link in a chain; hard work and long hours for results only other scientists might appreciate- this is hardly sexy, glamorous, or as effective a tool for identity building as the immediately recognizable Dr. Female Pediatrician would create.

Beyond existing as an unnecessary movie filled with awful comedy, this memetic rejection is why the majority audience will have an inherent distaste for “Ghostbusters,” while a small minority will angrily see it with frozen smiles painted on their faces.

Hillary Clinton catering to this hardcore Social Justice crowd is a misstep for someone already so easy to dislike. She senses this, and is responding by hedging all bets on the idea that voters will feel obligated to vote for a woman. While this is probably her best bet right now, using “Ghostbusters” as a vehicle for this pronouncement is the same kind of detached arrogance that Hollywood had in thinking that an all-girl “Ghostbusters” would work in the first place.

And this will be Hillary’s tank moment; the one misstep that sinks the Clinton bid for 2016.

All hail President Trump.

Follow me on Twitter @ KillToParty


TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the blog KillToParty.

KillToParty archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title “Ghostbusters” (2016) and the Myth of the Disposable Woman
Author Billy Pratt
Date May 19, 2016 8:46 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Blog KillToParty
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/blog/KillToParty/ghostbusters-2016-and-the-myth-of-the.29067
Original Link https://killtoparty.com/2016/05/19/ghostbusters-2016-and-the-myth-of-the-disposable-woman/
Red Pill terms in post
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2022. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter