Still Misogyny

[Content Note: Misogyny.]

This is something that came up in comments here, as well as in a conversation I was having with friends elsewhere: The men who object to the all-female Ghostbusters remake on some principle ostensibly other than misogyny.

Generally, their stated objections are something along the lines of the entertainment industry's creative bankruptcy for doing another remake (even though this isn't a remake), or how any reboot, no matter who's starring in it, negates the original Ghostbusters universe.

Or it's this or it's that, but whatever it is, it's definitely not about female Ghostbusters.

Except: It really is about female Ghostbusters.

Creative bankruptcy is a relevant argument when a film is being remade without meaningfully changing or improving it. That is not something that can said about a remake which elevates marginalized characters to central roles.

Well, it can be said—but only if you erase all cultural meaning regarding visibility and inclusion.

Leaving aside altogether arguments about whether reboots actually do "negate" preexisting iterations, the original Ghostbusters universe was one that contained no women in central heroic roles. Maybe that's a universe that needs negating.

It's hard to see how wishing to uphold a universe devoid of heroic women is anything but misogyny.

Passive, if not active.

Naturally, it's possible to express bigotry unconsciously, because of the internalized biases with which we're all socialized, but I haven't personally seen a whole lot of that with regard to negative reactions to this movie. Instead, I'm seeing a lot of men expressing pretty evident misogyny, wrapped in thin claims of objecting for some other reason.

But at the root of all these allegedly not misogynistic reasons lies misogyny.

It may be unexamined misogyny, but it's misogyny all the same.