~ archived since 2018 ~

Margot Robbie won The Wolf of Wall Street role after awkward audition moment

qemist

June 6, 2021

14 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Margot Robbie won The Wolf of Wall Street role after awkward audition moment
Author	qemist
Upvotes	14
Comments	15
Date	June 6, 2021 5:52 AM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ntev3a/margot_robbie_won_the_wolf_of_wall_street_role/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/margot-robbie-won-the-wolf-of-wall-street-role.826791 https://theredarchive.com/post/826791

Comments

[–]qemist[S] 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jostler57 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lion_amongst_gods 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]jostler57 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lion_amongst_gods 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]jostler57 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Input_output_error 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I get your intention, but it's misplaced here.

It really isn't, flipping genders often makes ingrained sexism stick out like s sore thumb.

Their given circumstances includes their relationship and character traits. You cannot just flip a written story and ask what would happen. You're asking a non-question, because that situation doesn't exist.

This is ignoring the obvious, that these circumstances that they are given are okay because of the idea that 'women can't hurt men'. If the roles were reversed the man would never slap a woman like that, not without it being discussed beforehand.

In real life, do men slap women? Sometimes. What're the given
circumstances? In real life, do women slap men? Sometimes. What're the
given circumstances?

Do you really believe this matters? Women are never asked if she had a 'good reason' to hit the guy as it is assumed she has one. Men are never asked if he had a 'good reason' to hit her as it is always assumed that he has not.

The problem is that these circumstances never matter in real life as a man can't have a good enough reason and women really don't need a reason.

I assure you, there are plenty of auditions where a man would act violently to a woman and the auditors would think it's great for the scene.

Sure, there are plenty of auditions where a man would act violently to a woman for a role. But how many of them start to get 'violent' without it being discussed beforehand? My guess would be none of them, they wouldn't start to slap their female counterparts without informing them beforehand.

[–]jostler57 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Input_output_error 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Not all art reflects life, not by a long shot. One point of art can be that it reflect life, but that doesn't mean that all art reflects life. I would even argue that most art doesn't reflect life. Often art reflects our desires or even just our imagination.

I mean... sure, we can ask those types of questions, but with your intentions, they're fruitless.

My intentions are pointing out the raging sexism against men in acting, you might find it fruitless, but that doesn't mean that it isn't needed. Just look at all the movies and shows that have come out this last decade and tell me that men in general aren't depicted as useless asses. That doesn't reflect life either, but that somehow doesn't seem to bother anyone in 'the business'.

In our world, women slap men with impunity. So, she is reflecting real
life and that's why it worked. You cannot flip this scenario, because
you're asking for the opposite of reality in art.

So that would make Vincent van Gogh's art 'wrong' right!? As he isn't depicting reality in his art, neither is Pablo Picasso or Asscher for that matter. It would make Star Wars some how 'not art' same as The Holy Grail, Pulp Fiction, Fight club and this list goes on and on.

The only reason women in acting can slap men with impunity is because they can do it in real life with impunity. That is not a stereo type we should embrace as far as im concerned.

[–]jostler57 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Who said we're embracing it? I'm saying it's just a fact of reality and that's why art follows life. It's called Mimesis and it's an idea as far back as Plato. Sure, there are arguments for anti-mimesis, but I'd argue that art mostly reflects life, while only a small minority of life reflects art.

Since I've also studied art history, I can tell you that, in fact, Van Gogh was imitating reality in his art. Everything you've mentioned is a reflection of life, and come on -- especially Fight Club.

The fact is, the vast majority of art is a reflection of life, and while maybe it's true some life mimics art, we know that women hitting men in a movie is a reflection of our current reality.

I'm not saying we want women hitting men; I'm saying depicting it in art gets a pass, because it generates conversations. The purpose of art is to hold a mirror up to the world, so that we can reflect on it ourselves, and change for the better.

[–]Input_output_error 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Who said we're embracing it?

You did by having it be part of your routine, you are doing nothing but perpetuating the sexist falsehood that it is okay to hit a man.

I'm saying it's just a fact of reality and that's why art follows life. It's called Mimesis and it's an idea as far back as Plato. Sure, there are arguments for anti-mimesis, but I'd argue that art mostly reflects life, while only a small minority of life reflects art.

Again, art almost never follows reality, i have never heard music follow reality and the last 200 movies i've seen have been very far from reality. There is absolutely no reason what so ever that this hitting men somehow can't be done without.

That only a small minority of life reflects art doesn't mean that all off a sudden art reflects life.

Since I've also studied art history, I can tell you that, in fact, Van Gogh was imitating reality in his art.

Yea no, that is a nice opt out but he was doing exactly what you said that 'isn't what art does', his art is the exact opposite of reality.

Oh, and an appeal to authority doesn't really help your case.

Everything you've mentioned is a reflection of life, and come on -- especially Fight Club.

When was the last time you have seen a bunch of people kicking each others head in the name of salvation only to start a terrorist group? Personally i have not seen one lately..

Now, if that is reflecting reality then there is nothing wrong with not hitting a man. It doesn't make a scene 'less real', the only thing it does is not perpetuating the complete disregard for male physical abuse.

I'm not saying we want women hitting men; I'm saying depicting it in art gets a pass, because it generates conversations.

No it doesn't, not when it concerns men. There isn't some big discussion going on because you were 'brave' enough to let you get hit on stage. The only thing it perpetuates is the complete lack of fucks anyone gives when men get hit.

The purpose of art is to hold a mirror up to the world, so that we can reflect on it ourselves, and change for the better.

That only holds true if the revelation of the story is shocking, a woman hitting a man isn't shocking. If you want to really stimulate thinking in the audience then there should be severe consequences to the female character raising her hand against the male character in your story. That is something that almost never happens while still 'keeping it real'. If its not that then you are simply betting on the violence giving a shock effect, it has nothing to do with art or thinking about anything at that point.

[–]Lion_amongst_gods 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Nah nah nah nah nah nah nah mate. I can flip a story, I did and I will. And my question isn't a "non-question" (whatever that is) because you gave me a perfectly sensible non-non-answer to it.

What I did is called hypothesis. It's very common in engineering and philosophy. Make a fairly common sense statement and test it at its ends to refine the statement until it is idiot-proof.

Coming to the subject, the essence of our arguments is that within a particular area of work (specially the arts) people tend to brush off certain behaviors, which the same people might consider offensive or take action on, if only the field is broadened. I'm sure psychologists have documented this phenomenon. But until I learn about it from an over enthusiastic redditor, I'm gonna call it "The jostler effect" after you.

[–]jostler57 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thanks for the Batman theme song at the beginning, there. It really helped to set the tone.

Your "hypothesis" argument isn't new or original; that's precisely the argument I'm saying doesn't work in this situation.

To understand it, you must first realize that art imitates reality. In reality, can we find women smacking men during arguments? Yes, we can. This is why I said you have posed a "non-question." Art reflects reality, so can we pervert the art to not-reflect reality? Doesn't work that way -- like a chicken and the egg paradox. While swapping genders to fit a narrative can work in other situations, swapping the roles doesn't work with this scenario because it's a moment in art, reflecting society as it is; not as we want it to be. We know from the article that the situation was an argument that ended with the man asking for a kiss, and the woman slapping him. Asking to swap the genders of the scene is like asking to rewrite a story -- it just won't produce the same results.

Can we ask what happens when we swap the genders of a real-life slap situation? Sure. Does it make the same sense to rewrite a story to swap the genders of a slap situation? I say it doesn't, because it changes the story; it perverts the art.

The next step is to understand how auditions work:

In a comical and absurd way, this video can help you get the gist of what I'm going to bring up.

The point is -- auditors (the people holding auditions) do not usually intervene during an audition. Whatever happens in the scene is just a story. The other side of that coin is that the actors take things as the character in the story, to an extent.

I mean that in an audition if something isn't too dangerous or horrible, then it's relatively acceptable. Being smacked during an audition might not be something one looks forwards to, but it's not out of the realm of safety. DiCaprio probably didn't feel threatened, and likely only hurt a small amount, but endured it because he was in the middle of acting out a scene as another character.

The artistic value outweighed his dislike of being physically slapped, so it was acceptable and likely even made him feel great for being part of that moment in art.

[–]Lion_amongst_gods 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]qemist[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link