Well, no - that would be churlish.

"Someone has not read their..." is a mighty confident way to start off an argument on English-language usage. Sort of the equivalent of dropping the gloves, sticking your chin out, and giving up the first shot. Sporting.

Registering my total support for this project and its noble goals.

the snippet "it's classist implication" communicates more than you could possibly imagine.

That last sentence might be the single most un-true line about literature ever written.

"Last year, Krawcheck was willing to throw her career away for a principle: She believed Citigroup should pay restitution to some clients who lost money on the bank's auction-rate securities and hedge-fund investments" - from NY mag ('09) link

When an article on Sallie K (one of the most influential women in finance) gets four comments and a paltry 1K views, a Jez "chamber of commerce" seems a little premature, alas.

Cricket bat moves through a vertical plane, not horizontal - but Harry's relatively quiet hips here and lack of weight shift forward look very cricket batsman-like to me.

I got the point. It works if there's an analogous body part that's treated differently across the two sexes (i.e., sexualized for women but not for men).

Balls aren't generally considered a secondary-sexual characteristic... and in fact, there's not a great analog to boobs for men, so I'm not sure there's a great thought experiment to be had here.

Agreed. Best thing of MD's I can recall reading. It was like a demented mix of Gatsby and the gay-est parts of "Brideshead Revisited."

I'll check it out. I did read the "New Yorker" summary earlier this month, and tried to anticipate part of his "cinema is neglected" critique w/the "artistic cachet" hedge.

There's a recent paper called "Jordan Baker, Gender Dissent, and Homosexual Passing in The Great Gatsby" that makes the case pretty well.

Gotta agree with that last point. It's weird... especially in contrast to the WWII-era propaganda portrayals of Japanese men as slavering, ravenous psychos.

Seriously?! You do realise there's four fucking studios headed or co-headed by women, including Universal, Sony, Dreamworks, and Lucasfilm?

As far as the actual roles, that'd take more effort to figure out than either of us should exert...

Neither did a generation of little dudes who read her stuff... and maybe nothing else!

Sweatpants are extremely underrated for casual aesthetic/slink appeal, especially cut-off versions... at least to me.

I know you're probably indulging in a little hyperbole, but there are plenty of women producers w/the power to get a film like this made — and there are plenty of women running prestige film festivals who could've selected this film (where it might have got an indie distribution deal).

I'm surprised Judy Blume didn't do more movie deals back in the Seventies and Eighties, when she was a big cultural force.