Well, this is boring. I mostly agree with Uncle Orson about Noah. The added details are of little relevance to the story itself, which is one of moral dilemma. It illuminates what kind of man Noah probably was, what kind of an experience he would have had, and the failure he likely felt. And though I didn’t mention it, the whole killing babies thing felt a lot like Jacob and Isaac to me as well.
The issue of “feminism” comes up in his review as well.
“How many screenwriters would have dared to depict such a patriarchal character as Noah in Noah without giving us little feminist sermons; instead, the female characters are fully creatures of their time and culture, which, however it might annoy diehard feminists, is historically accurate.”
So, I complained about the movie not being “feminist” and he noted how irritated feminists would be. But we don’t actually disagree.
I wasn’t bothered how Noah’s wife or adopted daughter acted. They were strong women. I agree with Card that liberal feminists would be bothered by them.
But in the world where every woman was as good as those two, they don’t seem remarkable, do they?
Do you imagine for one moment that Noah would not be married to a remarkable woman?
The wickedness of women would mirror that of men, who would wickedly express their sexuality freely with any woman (or object of unnatural affections) they want, bully others into getting their way because they’re physically strong, lie, neglect their chidlren for their own desires, etc. And unbalance in the environment would be a symptom of this disregard for others, not the primary sin.
It seems rather odd for me that such a big part of the feminist movement is to fight for the same biological freedom and cultural acceptance to be promiscious as men appear to have, when really it should be to have men be chaste as well and feel shame when they sleep around. It should be thought of as so dishonerable for a man to leave a woman in the “family way” with no support that a) he wouldn’t dream of putting her at risk for that and b) If they did happen to mess up he wouldn’t dream of not taking responsibility. The nine months a woman is pregnant is the same nine months her husband is supporting her with all his strength.
Why are these worse sins than destroying the environment? Because the kind of people born from unions that are unstable are the kind of people that are more likely to do harm both to people and the planet. As Sagan once said, “We are a way for the universe to be aware of itself” (paraphrased) This is no small designation. When we are evil towards human beings, we are evil towards the universe.
When we destroy the social foundation for strong families, we are being evil towards the children of our race, the next generation of those who will be the universe’s self awareness.
Chastity of both men and women strengthen families. Families strengthen children. Strong children who have been well cared for and educated grow up to care for every human, every creature, and our planet Earth.
So the liberals have their priorities all backwards.
I am very much in favor of gender equality. There are many things that I think are oppressive towards females because of certain male attitudes towards them (and the females that support those attitudes) both in our culture and in others. We should get rid of these attitudes and traditions. For a while, I used to think this meant I should take on the label of feminist. But I’m not a feminist. I believe in sexual chastity – not freedom. I believe that life is sacred and it’s continuence or termination should be left up to God. I believe in caring for children more than ourselves, in being willing to give up a career, financial comfort and self fulfillment or gratification for those children, and in being obedient to God no matter how unpopular his commandments are.
In the face of our society today, with its loads of media mocking my stance and even telling me I’m evil, I suppose that means I’m a strong woman.