Wednesday, August 30, 2006

GLOW - again

I'm now regretting my restraint a few days ago - on Thursday's post, to be precise. I think my resisting the urge to enlarge on precisely why GLOW: the Movie is "patronising claptrap" may have lead the hapless Anonymous into his/her unfortunate leap into the comments page, so I shall now make myself even clearer.

GLOW, by using such a foolish film as its publicity vehicle for the profession, has chosen to ignore the work that I and countless others have done over the years to teach all our pupils about equality, about typecasting, about gender stereotyping .... and to allow this movie to star (if you can call it starring) a pretty young woman in a fetching red dress as the hapless ignoramus, and a masterful man in a glowing white suit as the saviour who can do technology. There. At bottom, it's as simple as that. Never mind what the film is trying to tell us; what it does tell us, right away, is that women are useless at this stuff, will never be at the cutting edge with technology, and that they will always be rescued by - wait for it - a knight in shining armour.

I'm sorry - but I don't buy into that. So if I were in a meeting watching this, it wouldn't be just the rotten acting that would have a negative effect: I could at least have a good laugh. But I couldn't be bothered with an organisation that appeared to relegate women to such a pathetic role. And that would be a pity.

8 comments:

  1. I don't think you can say that the film reflects the organisations - there are several involved in Glow. None of them practice any kind of discrimination - the new Director of Glow is a woman.

    Rather, what we have is, at worst, a cliché to help simplify what might be a complex idea for some teachers.

    Unfortunately, the demographic of the teaching profession is, these days, mostly female. Perhaps the film is merely reflecting the average sex of the profession, especially that in its largest sector: Primary.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, I'm glad to hear that there's no discrimination - but you wouldn't know it from the movie. And do you think Ready-Brek man will attract more men into the profession?
    On second thoughts - maybe guys will think they could have a career as knights in shining white?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with Chris...quite appalling stereotyping and very twee.

    I had been hoping that teachers might be thought of as adult and intelligent and therefore capable of absorbing a fairly complex message!

    ReplyDelete
  4. When I was about 11 I went to primary school in Crief
    every thursday afternoon all the boys in my class had to go to a hand craft teacher to me then she looked about 100 and she was completely insane she was very abusive she would scream at us hysterically as we sat around a big table trying to make a table mat which none of us ever finished we were all terrified of her and would leave her dingy room in a traumatized state
    probably all the children in the school had to spend an hour in her company each week

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jimmy, you paint a dismal picture indeed. Not much of an advert for education - either as a career or for the customers!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I had a teacher in Oban her name was Mel Mackenzie she was a wonderful woman and a dedicated and gifted teacher nothing dismal about her or her profession at all.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ok I'm fairly computer literate, but I felt it was patronising. I'm afraid I lost interest after about five minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I watched the film because I wanted to see what all this was about. I have to agree with Don. I found it incredibly patronising and have to agree with you about the (beautifully put) 'Ready-Brek' man.

    Was this produced to make the learning process easier for teachers? Or was it to suggest that women wear the attractive red dress to work, and for men to forever be the heros? Forgive me for having my toungue glued to my cheek :-)

    ReplyDelete