It’s been said that one of the crowning achievements of Aaron Sorkin’s critically-acclaimed feature The Social Network, is that he manages to endow his main character with an irresistible charm despite numerous repulsive character flaws. And it’s true. In the film, Mark Zuckerberg, played by Jesse Eisenberg, is a smug, narcissistic, Machiavellian, socially oblivious smartass, and yet you can’t help but cheer for the guy. One particular scene, where I’m sure the character won over a few fans, was a variation of the clichéd nerd-gets-hot-girl trope. But just to spice things up I suppose, in this case the hot girl is Asian, and the “gets” in “nerd-gets-hot-girl…” is short for “gets-hot-girl-to-go-down-on-him-in-a-bathroom-stall-hours-after-meeting her”.
This certainly isn’t the first time that a filmmaker has featured underdeveloped female characters as objectified, sexual props in crass, over-the-top sex scenes. I suppose, given the sordid history of this recurring Hollywood theme, one could even argue that Sorkin’s portrayal of this peripheral character, “Christy” as he calls her, is actually progressive by comparison. Despite (or perhaps because of) putting out on the first date, Christy eventually becomes the girlfriend of Zuckerberg’s erstwhile besty, Eduardo. She appears in multiple scenes and is even given a smattering of lines. On the flipside, in a film about smart kids, she isn’t one of them. Instead, she’s depicted as irrational and vindictive. Sorkin’s version of the woman scorned archetype perhaps.
However, the mere fact that this character is given a name and is ascribed any emotions at all, albeit stereotypical ones, is an upgrade from many female characters who’ve occupied similar roles in other movies. For examples, we needn’t look beyond 2010. In The Fighter, also loosely based on true events, the main character’s crack-addicted brother maintains a kind of on-again-off-again relationship with a young Cambodian woman. Despite appearing in multiple scenes, she’s given little to no lines and is only once referred to by name (It’s “Karen”, and I’d challenge anyone leaving the theatre to remember it). However, what she lacks in character development, she makes up for in sexual compliance, as she dutifully walks the streets to turn tricks and earn money for her much older, much less attractive male companion. In one particularly lewd scene, viewers are shown a middle-aged man in a suit sitting in his car in some dimly-lit back alley. His facial expression is one of either agony or intense pleasure (we’re not yet sure which), and he is unaware of the cop car that has pulled up behind him. Then the camera slowly pans down to reveal the source of his ecstasy. Karen is hunched over fellating him from the passenger seat.
Like Karen and Christy, a disproportionate number of these characters tend to be from racialized groups. I recall my indignation after watching Scorcese’s Gangs of New York and realizing that the sole black female in the movie was a prostitute, who had zero lines and was topless for duration of her minute-long appearance on screen. But my favourite example comes from 2001’s Swordfish. I won’t attempt to describe the scene because words couldn’t begin to capture the absurdity. Just watch…
These types of characters generally serve two purposes. The first is to provide red meat for unsophisticated male audiences. And the second is to establish the masculine bona fides of male protagonists. The fact that these women aren’t bequeathed the requisite layers needed to for audiences to empathize with a character (i.e. emotions, intelligence, familial relationships), the message is that they are mere automatons that exist only for male pleasure. Also, it’s no coincidence that fellatio features so prominently in these characters’ on-screen lives. The asymmetry of the act establishes a power relationship in which the woman is at the bottom.
The portrayal of women as sex objects in film has long been considered a frontline for feminists in their struggle for gender equity, and the porn industry has understandably been a major target within some feminist circles. For this reason there lies an ironic truth behind the experiences of the countless actresses forced to play Karen-type roles in hopes of eventually achieving movie stardom. Had they pursued a career in high-end porn, not only would they be getting paid more than their male counterparts, but they’d probably have a lot more lines as well.
i heard sorkin was trying to reflect the actual culture of harvard with all the asian girls / white guy coupling. that's reflected in the movie by the socially awkward jewish guys that acknowledge that asian girls are willing to look past their deficiencies because they're white, and that gives them cache.
also, while Zuckerberg has had the same asian girlfriend for years, he kept a blog re his asian woman fetish since high school - so there's something there.
Because an Asian girl has never done down on a guy in a bathroom before. Watch something else.
Racialicious had a blog ripping Sorkin for his portrayal of Christy. He actually tried to defend himself on Ken Levine's blog but his rationalizations were pretty weak. He basically said the same thing Anthony is saying (i.e. that he was trying to show it from the nerds' perspective). I find this defense ridiculous. Just because some of your characters are sexist, doesn't mean the director has to be.
Interestingly enough, Sorkin admitted that the character is made up. So basically he created a fake character who was a stereotype, and omitted real people who could have made for much more positive portrayals.
my problem with the film isn't with the coupling, but the perspective. you can do what sorkin was going for but it would have to be clear that this was a subjective film completely from zuck's perspective, but SN had the esthetics's of a neutral/objective film.
that being said, i don't doubt that there is some truth in harvard's culture with what was portrayed. (not necessarily the christy character, just the broad strokes)
Even if it's coming from Zuckerberg's perspective that doesn't justify presenting characters as racist or sexist archetypes. You could argue that a similar film from a slave owner's perspective might show blacks acting as racial caricatures, but the filmmakers don't have to reinforce those perceptions. They should be challenging them.
And Zuckerberg keeping a blog on his Asian fetish only confirms the filmmakers' decision not only to ignore his racism, but even supports it by creating a fictionalized character to act out his very desire.
Ha ha... That's brilliant.
What's also frustrating about the social network is in reality Zuckerberg has had the same Asian girlfriend since Harvard, and she's a doctor! so it was like the producers were going out of their way to portray Asian women as subservient.