Why It's Hot to Rag on Jurassic Park, Chris Pratt and Sexism in Hollywood

So, some so-called feminist wrote a “scathing” review of Jurassic World in the Daily Beast, accusing the film of being overtly sexist because it features a corporate bitch who discovers her mothering instinct in the midst of rescuing her two nephews from an onslaught of wild dinosaurs. Let’s make one thing clear: If that woman existed in real life and pulled a car off her child, as women have the innate power to do when their child’s life is in danger, she’d be a hero. If she’s a Hollywood character, however, she’s just a figment — oh, sorry, “construct” — of the sexist male imagination. Pardon me while I hit the snooze button and roll over.

Before you get your anti-feminist panties in a bunch, here’s the bottom line: It’s sexy for American feminists (contemporary feminists, Western feminists — whatever we want to call the non-Paglia, non-Hoff Sommers crowd) to criticize Hollywood’s portrayal of women. Why? Because 90% of the mainstream audience doesn’t listen to a word these critics say about sexism, stereotypes or constructs. They do, however, get easily distracted by pop culture like children (or dogs) staring at shiny objects.

Case in point: Put Ayaan Hirsi Ali in front of a crowd to talk FGM and see how long it takes them to whip out their smartphones to see what Kim Kardashian is up to. Feminism has to be a First World Problem if it wants to get ratings on this side of the globe. Yazidis jumping from cliffs to avoid forced marriages and sex slavery at the hands of ISIS? Too heady. Too political. Too scary. Chris Pratt getting a woman hot and bothered for motherhood? Now that’s something people will click on. In fact, most women will click on it in the hopes of seeing, well, Chris Pratt.

What the Daily Beast feminists and their compatriots willfully choose to ignore time and time again is that Hollywood is a business. Action franchises are the only vehicles making money at the box office. What is Jurassic World but Indiana Jones meets dinosaurs? And why not? It is a Spielberg piece, after all. Notice the well-timed buzz regarding Indy’s resurrection with Pratt at the helm, a rumor started just as Jurassic World was about to be released? Indiana Jones, the franchise all about the guy going on an adventure and rescuing the girl. Why not use one guaranteed blockbuster as a vehicle to market another beloved formulaic action series to a built-in audience? 


Oh, but the feminist critics are too smart for that. Which is probably why most of them are growing ivy in academia’s moldy halls where ideas, like Hemingway, go to drink their last and blow some brains out before retiring to the dust-filled libraries across campus. They like to say everything is political and they try to make it so. But, they can’t fight business and they know it. Everything is a commodity, including thought, which is why they’re so ready and willing to dumb down their highly held beliefs for the highest clicker.

The real irony, and perhaps the only irony in all of this, has nothing to do with the concept of gender being a construct and everything to do with the fact that these feminists are guilty of committing Hollywood’s so-called most heinous crime: selling themselves out at the expense of the women who need them the most.