It’s so much worse in the book that the movie’s problems scarcely register with me.
2 Likes
I have no clue.
1 Like
Interesting, as in my critique not being intersectional enough, or interesting because Fleming idolized Somerset Maugham?
This must have flown over my head when I watched it. This does not jive with how I recall the film…
I’m speaking of the books. I don’t recall the film all that well myself.
Interesting as in I find it mildly vexing that of all the myriad examples of sexism in Fleming’s writing you pick one of the most obviously homophobic and ignore that aspect of it in your critique.
Virtually everyone who’s consumed a piece of Bond media (whether as a film or a book) can see Fleming’s sexism and racism, but his homophobia is much less well known, and I feel like people pulling up one of the most concrete examples of it and going “Look, sexism!” is a contributing factor to that.
I mean, why is it that you picked that letter, of all his writings, which most clearly shows his opinion of homosexuality as a mental disorder, and presented it with no more comment than “Ian Fleming was quite the sexist pig.”? Did you think there were likely to be a lot of people here surprised to learn that Fleming was a misogynist?
A mental disorder that can be “treated” with a coerced roll in the hay? I thought it highlighted Flemming’s disrespect for a woman’s agency more than anything else…
(There is a rather depressing similarity between Fleming’s treatment of Pussy Galore with the “ex-gay conversion” racket, though.)
… you thought that the key takeaway from a letter pathologising homosexuality and advocating corrective rape was “Fleming doesn’t respect women’s agency”?
Like, no offense, but that letter is pretty much the gold standard for Shitty Opinions About Queer People, and it’s super weird to me that this aspect of it appears to be totally unremarkable to you.
food for thought?
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
