Leftist Writer Says Patriotic War Movies are Just “Masculine Nonsense.” [VIDEO]

Leftist Writer Says Patriotic War Movies are Just “Masculine Nonsense.” [VIDEO]

Leftist Writer Says Patriotic War Movies are Just “Masculine Nonsense.” [VIDEO]

I don’t care much about the Oscars, but I was happy to see that “Dunkirk” received eight Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture. Not everyone I know liked it — the film was pretty artsy, its timeline not exactly linear. But my husband and I loved it, anyway.

This exchange in the film between two British officers choked me up:

Commander Bolton: You can practically see it from here.
Captain Winnant: What?
Commander Bolton: Home.

However, not everyone appreciates patriotic tales like “Dunkirk.” In fact, one particular writer doesn’t like traditional war movies at all. Peter Maass at The Intercept writes:

The time has come for Hollywood to turn away from war movies that, while satisfying to both a studio’s bottom line and a flag-waving concept of patriotism, perpetuate a model of masculinity that does violence to us all.

Maass especially doesn’t like the new film “12 Strong,” about the Special Forces team that fought the Afghan Taliban shortly after 9/11. Nor does he like “American Sniper,” “Zero Dark Thirty,” or “13 Hours.” Why? Because they’re also about über-masculine Special Forces. “Toxic masculinity,” you know.

And Maass isn’t the only one who despises images of fearless men in films. “Darkest Hour,” the film which tells how Winston Churchill boldly faced the Dunkirk crisis, was criticized by the New York Times. No, it wasn’t because of less-than-stellar filmmaking. It was because of “hero worship:”

“. . .the filmmakers promote passivity and hero-worship, offering not so much a Great Man Theory as a great man fetish.”

Never mind that British audiences stood in theaters to applaud this film. Certainly if any people would appreciate how Churchill saved their nation from total disaster, it’s the Brits.

No, we can’t have brave men in our movies anymore, our elites tell us. No more tales of manly valor. As Maass tells us, that’s “masculine nonsense,” and an “artificial and harmful construct.”

These snobs have their heads so far up their asses they could chew their food again on the way down. They don’t mind it when Hollywood makes movies about women kicking men in the balls, do they? But a “model of masculinity does violence to us all,” according to Maass.

Hypocrites.

Maybe these girly men need to be lectured by ‘Col. Jessup,’ the tough Marine officer in “A Few Good Men.”

However, the good news is that patriotic films about brave men facing long odds are pretty popular among American audiences. I guess it’s because they’re just knuckle-dragging rubes who aren’t fully woke. Or perhaps Americans know that they “sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” And they’re thankful for them.

Written by

Kim is a pint-sized patriot who packs some big contradictions. She is a Baby Boomer who never became a hippie, an active Republican who first registered as a Democrat (okay, it was to help a sorority sister's father in his run for sheriff), and a devout Lutheran who practices yoga. Growing up in small-town Indiana, now living in the Kansas City metro, Kim is a conservative Midwestern gal whose heart is also in the Seattle area, where her eldest daughter, son-in-law, and grandson live. Kim is a working speech pathologist who left school system employment behind to subcontract to an agency, and has never looked back. She describes her conservatism as falling in the mold of Russell Kirk's Ten Conservative Principles. Don't know what they are? Google them!

20 Comments
  • Dana says:

    With 97.7% of American women being heterosexual (the CDC figures are that 1.6% are homosexual and another 0.7% bisexual), one wonders just how many of them are going to be attracted to girly-men like Mr Maass.

    Mr Maass is married, to a woman. Would it be wrong of me to speculate that she might have a real man somewhere on the side?

  • George V says:

    So, Mr. Maass does not like war movies with a patriotic theme. Well, I don’t like wimpy socialist hive-minded critics who try to remove everything that is fun out of life. I guess we’re even.

  • Jim says:

    “… perpetuate a model of masculinity that does violence to us all.”

    It is my impression that there are very few ‘masculine’ men amongst those SJWs of the Left. There are violent thugs and bullies, e.g. Antifa and mobs of bullying undergraduates [or those of whatever age who still think and behave like self-opinionated social studies undergraduates]. Having worked in the welfare sector for 40 years I met few men who were masculine: strong and having the integrity and courage to take an independent stand. Most were emasculated clones who toed the party-line and could only operate in a committee of like-minded [sheep-like] individuals so their backs [and career prospects] were always covered. They were never around when things got risky or dangerous – I worked with very high risk and often violent clients – but they were always ready to make judgement after the fact. Masculinity is foreign to modern trendy and politically ambitious males; they are ‘grey clones. Masculinity is not about being violent.

    • GWB says:

      My thought was “real masculinity protects you from violence, and the only thing making me prone to more violence is your idiotic, sociopathic caterwauling.”

  • Johnny says:

    Maass sounds a little light in the loafers.
    Methinks he doth protest too much.

  • Nicki says:

    Maass has a massive case of penis envy. Apparently his micro peen just doesn’t measure up, so he wants to rid the world of all men bigger and more virile than him. That way he will be swinging the biggest one by default.

  • David says:

    These kinds of movies always make a man look inward to himself and ask if he could do that? Would he measure up if he was asked or had to?

    My hope is always that I would but there is a chance I may fail. But I don’t turn away from that fact.

    These people seem to ran away from even the question.

    • Jim says:

      “My hope is always that I would but there is a chance I may fail. But I don’t turn away from that fact.”

      Better to have tried and failed with honour and self-respect. Honour and self-respect are not characteristics I see in any of the social-engineering left.

      • David says:

        Honour and self-respect, character and integrity.

        It’s because these qualities are so rare and held to so little regard today is exactly why men find these movies appealing.

        They call to something essential in us. And it means they still do exist.

    • Synova says:

      Anyone who studies self defense, male or female, knows that the first thing you need to do is *imagine* that you can. If you don’t take that first step and meet the challenge in your mind-space there’s no chance that you will be able to meet the challenge if it happens in real-space.

      If we want to talk about “harmful” things, we can talk about the insistence that we not tell stories about heroes.

  • David Lentz says:

    When we no longer have people who rush towards the sound of gun fire, we will not longer be a nation. The reason we should honor past heroes is that in the world in which we do live, we still need heroes.

  • Timmy says:

    You would think feminist’s would like this. Many men die in these kind of movies. They are snuff films.

  • GWB says:

    I *LOVED* Darkest Hour. Only thing I wasn’t happy with was that it ended where it did (I wanted more).

    an “artificial and harmful construct.”
    Oy vey. The only “artificial and harmful construct” here is the idiocy that is modern feminism and intersectionality. Oh, and the current trans fetish – no, you are not what you “feel like”.

    As to Col Jessup, no. He was NOT a good example, except of a man who believes (like the progs do) that only he is good enough, pure enough, to save all of us from ourselves. Sorry, no. He is exactly why we have rules and laws, and especially a Constitution. (Mattis is no Jessup, thank heavens.)

  • Micha Elyi says:

    Kim… packs some big contradictions. She is a Baby Boomer who never became a hippie…

    Very few Baby Boomers ever “became a hippie”. Kim is no contrarian, she’s a conformist.

    Hint: Anyone who was 20 years old (the typical age of a college sophomore) during the Summer of Love is too old to be a Baby Boomer. The “never trust anyone over 30” guy is also too old to be a Boomer. The list of notorious people of the 1960s who are associated in the public’s major media-formed mind with Baby Boomers who aren’t Boomers is quite long. Someone could catalogue ’em in a book. It would be a big, thick book.

    • Scott says:

      Sorry Micha, you need to do a bit more research, you’re way off on your assumptions.. for your convenience, I’ve attached a list of the generational distinctions, and the dates to which they apply. Happy reading!

      The Lost Generation –
      The Generation of 1914 1890 1915
      The Interbellum Generation 1901 1913
      The Greatest Generation 1910 1924
      The Silent Generation 1925 1945
      Baby Boomer Generation 1946 1964
      Generation X (Baby Bust) 1965 1979
      Xennials – 1975 1985
      Generation Y –
      The Millennials – Gen Next 1980 1994
      iGen / Gen Z 1995 2012
      Gen Alpha 2013 2025

      • GWB says:

        Huh? Formatting makes that… gibberish, it seems.

        • Scott says:

          Yes, the formatting came across very poorly, but bottom line is that the numbers after each name are the first and last years to be considered part of that generation, ie; Baby Boomers ran from 1946-1964, etc… Adding to the confusion is that some generations had / have multiple names, so there are some without numbers. I hope that clarifies

          • Kim Quade says:

            Hmm, well Micha does make one erroneous assumption, and that’s of my age. I was nowhere near 20 during the ‘Summer of Love.’ I was of junior high age. That being said, I certainly remember stuff that happened then, like the Vietnam War, Woodstock, college radicals, the Cold War, and race riots. I also remember the JFK assassination, although I was pretty young. Still, those are hallmark events for those of us Boomers born between the years Scott listed above, even if we didn’t go to Haight-Ashbury or Woodstock.
            Plus, I wore bell bottoms, love beads, and had a righteous Nehru shirt. Don’t hate me.

  • David says:

    Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? … I would rather you just said “thank you” and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a *damn* what you think …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram
Instagram has returned invalid data.