Han Solo Doesn’t Pedestalize the Princess

Part I:  A New Hope

Han Solo is a charming scoundrel who loves money and saving his own neck.  He kills bounty hunters with guns trained on him and isn’t afraid to argue with feisty princesses. But somewhere along the line, an underlying loyalty didn’t allow him to abandon his new-found friends to the Death Star and eventually he fell in love with Leia.

Han is a great example of many effective ways to act around women.  Through video and transcript we’ll analyze his moves and, more importantly, his underlying attitudes.  I’ll add my commentary and also point out how the timid “beta” pleaser would act instead and ruin things.

Han Meets Leia

Let’s meet the self-centered scoundrel now, alongside the idealistic Luke.  View up to about 1:35 to get the New Hope parts and then pause.  Make sure to take special notice of Han’s smiling reaction around the 1:15-1:16 mark.  (Okay, watch the whole thing if you want but we’ll come back to Empire Strike Back where things get even better in my next post.)

Notice how Luke is an idealistic white knight who wants to risk his life to rescue Leia and Luke has to appeal to Han’s lust for wealth.  From the transcript:

LUKE                        But they're going to kill her!
HAN                         Better her than me...[not quite bros 
                                                  bf hoes but certainly me before she]
LUKE                        She's rich.
HAN                         Rich? [I love how this catches his 
                                                  attention.]

Han Doesn’t Pedestalize the Princess

Once they’ve gotten her out and she starts sassing off, he just barks right back at her, not cowed by her prince-ess-ly status nor her beauty:

LEIA                     Looks like you managed to cut off 
                         our only escape route.
HAN (sarcastically)     Maybe you'd like it back in your 
                         cell, Your Highness.

The timid beta would have pleaded, “I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to cut off our escape route.  What do you want to do tonight?”

Han doesn’t pedestalize women and the clash of egos continues (notice how he calls her that delightful title that so gets under her skin, “Your Worshipfulness”):

HAN                     If we can just avoid any more female 
                         advice, we ought to be able to get 
                         out of here.
LEIA                     Listen. I don't know who you are, or 
                         where you came from, but from now 
                         on, you do as I tell you. Okay?
 HAN                     Look, Your Worshipfulness, let's get 
                         one thing straight! I take orders 
                         from one person! Me! [The needy beta would 
  have accepted to do as she tells him, "Okay, whatever you want, let's just not argue."]

Don’t Make a Woman Your Mission

Later, aboard the Millenium Falcon, Han explains that he’s in it for the money (his mission at that moment) and not her:

HAN                      It['s over] for me, sister! Look, I ain't 
                         in this for your revolution, and I'm 
                         not in it for you, Princess. I expect 
                         to be well paid. I'm in it for the 
                         money!

To see what the pedestalizing beta would do, let’s turn to Luke:

LEIA                     Your friend is quite a mercenary. I 
                         wonder if he really cares about 
                         anything... or anyone.
LUKE                     I care!

Don’t Take Women So Seriously

The conversation turns to Leia:

LUKE                    So... what do you think of her, Han?
HAN                     I'm trying not to, kid!
LUKE(under his breath)  Good...
HAN                     Still, she's got a lot of spirit. I 
                         don't know, what do you think? Do 
                         you think a princess and a guy like 
                         me...
LUKE                    No!

Luke has a crush on her and is already possessively trying to dissuade a possible rival.

Go back to 1:10-1:16 in the video above and look at Han’s facial reaction to Luke’s “no.” This is huge. This is the attitude we need to have as men. Not placing our entire ego on the outcome of getting a girl, not approaching a woman with our whole soul in our outstretched hands and thinking our life will have no meaning if she rejects us. Approaching women with such an attitude creates a ton of tension in a guy and will often come across and make the girl feel the magnitude that we’re giving to the moment and she’ll tense up as well. And, yes, I know it’s hard-wired into a lot of us and compounded by cultural conditioning so it’s not easy but it’s doable. Work on your inner game to not place so much investment in any one girl. Let her earn your affection, after all, that’s how she wants it.

Just remember that carefree-scoundrel Han Solo smile and don’t take interactions with women so seriously. Internalize that smile to counteract the needy Luke within. Have fun with it. Don’t invest your entire ego (or even 25% of it) in the outcome. And read this post on antigame for more on this topic.

In my next post we get to Empire Strikes Back, the best Star Wars movie ever, and how Han escalates to the kiss.

73 thoughts on “Han Solo Doesn’t Pedestalize the Princess

  1. 1

    “Your Worshipfulness” haha.

    The real thing that defines Han Solo is that he doesn’t kowtow to authority in general, including the hierarchy of their social system. When he meets the Princess, she’s just another chick, not “royalty” worthy of special treatment.

    Never mind a physically attractive woman in the street, how many guys would have the same attitude towards, say, a Megan Fox or a Cindy Crawford?

    The social status aspect is huge with these two characters.

    Of course despite his bad ass and scoundrel qualities, he still has a heart in their somewhere. If he was just a scoundrel without a heart, then he would just be… well, Jabba the Hutt.

  2. 2

    It’s also noteworthy that as the movies go along, Han leaves behind his scoundrel past and becomes more “wholesome” so to speak, embracing the mission, while Leia descends from her prim-and-proper pedestal and becomes more down-to-earth and laid back. They affect each other as much as the surrounding events affect them.

  3. 3
    jf12 says:

    “Just remember that carefree-scoundrel Han Solo smile” How about the retarded “Duh?” look at 0:18?

  4. 4
    Liz says:

    Great writeup on Han Solo, Han Solo. :-)

    I love that character. That cocky arrogance, with soft underbelly. Like an intergalactic Rhett Butler.

  5. 5
    jf12 says:

    Hiya pedestal, how ya doin. Leia and Luke meet at age 19. Her personal Force is uniquely cloaked; it is possible her midichlorians evolved protective countermeasures since there is no way for others to shield her Force for her and she received no Force training.

    Luke’s burgeoning and dangerously sensable Force expresses itself in his “abilities”, such as accurately shooting womp rats and not crashing much. He isn’t much use on his family moisture ranch, and wastes a lot of time moping, failing to properly fix things, and not making the cut for training as an Imperial pilot.

    Princess Leia, meanwhile, is the heir to the throne of Alderaan, the jewel of and most important of the Core planets, and cultural soul of the entire Galaxy. She had also become the youngest ever elected Imperial Senator and was already its most outspoken critical and reflective voice and most influential ordinary member, being both the spokesperson and go-between of two large factions. In addition she was a *founding* member of the Rebel Alliance, and by virtue of being the *only* rebel leader originally unknown to the Emperor, she was also the most important spy. The Emporer’s decision to destroy Alderaan, specifically to punish Leia after uncovering a small portion of her involvement, is what finally reveals his shocking evil to the world at large, and provides the casus belli of the rest of the Galactic Civil War.

  6. 6
    deti says:

    Men reading this post should take note that masculine behavior or “Game” works on all kinds of women in all sorts of situations.

    This is particularly relevant in light of the reddit thread yesterday, where certain folks repeatedly insisted that masculine behavior or “Game” doesn’t work on all girls, and not all girls “are like that”. No, we are told, masculinity or “Game” works only on sluts and irreparably damaged low-self-esteem girls. Healthy, well-adjusted girls don’t much care about masculine behavior.

    Or so we’re told.

    Au contraire.

    Princess Leia isn’t a bar skank who’s become accustomed to using men and being used by men. She’s not an LSE girl. She’s a princess, presented as a tough as nails, capable, competent, get shit done, don’t need no maaayyunnn kind of woman we’re all told are completely impervious to masculinity. Yet in the end, Han Solo – a man displaying unapologetic, self-interested masculinity — wins her heart.

    Masculinity works on all sorts of women. Christian girls, nonChristian girls, capable professional girls, high-status wealthy girls of privilege, working-class girls from the rough side of town, lawyers, nurses, physicians, paralegals, girls on their first boyfriend; girls on their 20th boyfriend, virgins, and sluts.

  7. 7
    deti says:

    And relevant to the reddit thread yesterday, how masculinity “works” depends on what we all mean by “work”.

    Critics of game always say its sole purpose is to get girls into bed, so if you didn’t sleep with the girl you’re “gaming”, then it didn’t “work” or it won’t “work”.

    Well, no. Game’s object depends on what the wielder wishes for it to do.

    Han Solo’s masculine behavior/game is intended to keep him alive, preserve his independence, and get him paid. Nothing, not even a princess, is going to stand in the way of that. Han isn’t trying to get Leia into bed. At best, Leia is an amusing distraction at best; at worst she’s someone who could get them all killed. He’s determined not to let her lead him and to keep HIS objectives at the forefront, and he succeeds at it.

  8. 8
    JoeyWheels says:

    Long-time lurker, first-time commenter….

    As cool and such that Han is, consider deconstruction John Wayne in “The Quiet Man” Alpha male masculinity all the way.

  9. 9
    Farm Boy says:

    Your worshipfulness

    Leia wasn’t really a princess, as she was adopted.

  10. 10
    Farm Boy says:

    midichlorians

    I wonder what effect they have on hamsters…

  11. 11
    Morpheus says:

    Masculinity works on all sorts of women. Christian girls, nonChristian girls, capable professional girls, high-status wealthy girls of privilege, working-class girls from the rough side of town, lawyers, nurses, physicians, paralegals, girls on their first boyfriend; girls on their 20th boyfriend, virgins, and sluts.

    I do believe there is a small minority of women where masculinity “doesn’t work”. I have seen some evidence to support this. And I think these women actually prefer much more feminine men as long-term mates/husbands. Whether or not they actually feel strong desire I have no idea, and I am not a mind reader, but I believe women who fit this bill select first and foremost for absolute safety. Their primary concern is does this man have the potential to wrong me in anyway. For example, say you grew up in a culture where the majority of men were cheaters and philanderers, and male physical violence was rampant….essentially the worst of masculinity totally unrestrained by any moral code or self-control. Seeing that, you would probably grow up with an intense distrust of masculinity and seeing it as inherently bad. When looking for a husband, you might look for an extremely feminine man, perhaps one that even disavows his own masculinity and plays up his feminine traits. This might also be a man who has demonstrated very little in the way of options. He is the ultra-safe pick. It would be interesting to observe the day to day dynamics…I suspect the couple would almost seem like a couple of girl BFFs.

  12. 12

    Han’s character should be in the Alpha textbook – Han (until the end of Return of the Jedi) was the last true Alpha character. I should point out the interesting ‘progress’ feminization has made (especially in science fiction) from the sexual revolution going forward.

    That ‘progress’ went from Capt. James T. Kirk to Jean Luc Picard to Capt. Janeway. Any peripheral Trek fan is aware of how these captains personify the social attitudes of their era. In fact I can’t think of a better allegory for how feminization has insaturated itself into our cultural awareness since James Kirk (brash, unapologetic Alpha masculinity) was captain in the 60’s – to the beta intelectualized, masculine apologist, gender-equalist Picard – to the ‘we can’t rely on men anymore’, Kirk with tits, Janeway in the 90’s.

    It’s an indictment of the culture when our idealized future is characterized by whom we believe should lead us into it. I wont ruin Han’s (the author) breakdown of Empire (and probably Jedi), but it’s hard not to notice the taming of the Alpha scoundrel as the movies progress from 1977 to 1983. It’s a statement on how feminization altered our masculine heroes in less than a 7 year span. Also keep in mind it was about this time the Disney was transitioning from helpless princesses to ‘who needs a prince’ strong independent® princesses.

  13. 13
    Farm Boy says:

    No, we are told, masculinity or “Game” works only on sluts and irreparably damaged low-self-esteem girls

    Only the flavor of the game is different. But it is rationalized into “no-game” vs. “game”.

  14. 14
    q-rex says:

    Part of that “do you think her and me” speach also seemed to be to tease Luke’s beta rather than as a serious question. Han’s yanking Luke’s chain a bit.

    “Leia wasn’t really a princess, as she was adopted.” – but Amadala was a queen, too…

  15. 15
    Farm Boy says:

    ‘we can’t rely on men anymore’, Kirk with tits, Janeway in the 90′s.

    Janeway did the dumbest things, all in the name of Political Correctness. Of course, they were not shown as silly, but as the very approach that got them out of their current pickle. It is difficult to believe that anybody bought into all of that, but people surely did.

  16. 16
    Farm Boy says:

    but Amadala was a queen, too

    Not any more. She gave that up

  17. 17
    deti says:

    Morpheus 11:

    A woman selecting for an effeminate, nonmasculine man would have to be a severely emotionally damaged woman.

    It’s not normal for a woman to seek a nonmasculine man for safety reasons. I’d argue that something went seriously wrong somewhere with such a woman. One would also wonder what sort of relationship they would have. It’s hard to believe there would be attraction in the conventional way we consider it; the union or marriage would be of convenience or to serve mutual financial or social interests, rather than based on affection or affinity.

    The woman seeking the very effeminate man would be an outlier and exception. The vast, vast majority of women are not going to want or be attracted to such a man.

  18. 18
    Nekros says:

    Great write up! One thing to inquire about though. maybe it is just me, but isn’t the reason Han is so Alpha because he has something of much value to the rest of the team, namely the trust of Jedi as well as the millennium Falcon. for a newer analogy, the reason Tony Stark, aka iron man, is so alpha is because he has the iron man suit, a genius mind, and more money than most countries. Hence the I don’t give a shit attitude that women love.

    So for pedestalization to not occur, one must have something of more worth that the female is offering ( freedom via the ship, money/status from Tony ). in other words, they are Alpha because they have more value than the vast majority of the population.

    So a average run of the mill guy can not pedestalize all he wants, but that will not be of much use in this goal, unless he has the sort of value the vast majority of women want. maybe I’m all wrong in this regard, but I felt it a valid point to be made. great article again!

  19. 19
    Jimmy says:

    Damn good post.

    A side by side comparison of Han & Luke is as good of an illustration of alpha vs beta as I’ve seen.

    Really good stuff here.

  20. 20
    deti says:

    “ So a average run of the mill guy can not pedestalize all he wants, but that will not be of much use in this goal, unless he has the sort of value the vast majority of women want.”

    An average run of the mill guy still has something the vast majority of women want – his approval and acceptance.

    The vast majority of women want approval, validation, and acceptance.

    The main problem such a man has is demonstrating enough value such that she will notice him. That value can’t be only desirable traits like kindness, affability, agreeableness, industriousness, fidelity, etc. It should be attraction traits like his looks, physical strength, confidence/dominance, and status. The attraction traits are what get him noticed and pull her to him.

  21. 21
    Han Solo says:

    @Rollo 12

    Good points. Maybe you should write a post on Star Trek’s evolution.

    Taking the Star Wars narrative even further, look at how awful the “game” presented in the new Star Wars (the prequels) was. Attack of the Clones was utterly cringe inducing omega game, no doubt since George Lucas had complete control of every detail. No doubt he was somewhat of a lame feminist and ham-handed omega back in the original trilogy but he didn’t have as much control. He also probably drank more of the filthy waters of feminism in the 15 or so years between the two trilogies.

    When Anakin and Padme are on Naboo, his lines are so lame. I’ll probably do a post on the antigame in the new trilogy as well. And then Anakin’s fall to save Padme from her death was just an entirely gratuitous low blow to a life-long fan. Darth Vader’s Noooooooo!!!!!! was just kicking a fan while he’s down. Definitely gonna do a post on the new trilogy’s terrible fall from game-grace.

  22. 22
    Jimmy says:

    I’ve found it isn’t difficult at all to maintain an alpha frame like Han’s when dealing with outwardly bitchy girls like the princess. But they’re really of no interest to me.

    The problem I always had was when dealing with “nice girls” it was too easy to get a false sense of security and backslide into beta behavior and pedastalizing.

    I’ve improved a lot in that regard, but it’s still something I have to consciously remind myself of in order not to relapse into bad habits.

  23. 23
    jf12 says:

    #20 “An average run of the mill guy still has something the vast majority of women want – his approval and acceptance.” You’ve got to be kidding. “The main problem such a man has is demonstrating enough value such that she will [want – his approval and acceptance.]” Better.

  24. 24
    jf12 says:

    #22 Good point. I think I too am more pedastalizing of nice girls.

  25. 25
    Tasmin says:

    Lets not forget: be attractive.

    Han was not just masculine, but he was an intergalactic “bad boy”. A smuggler with a bounty on his head (for debts unpaid). He kills without hesitation or emotion (other than a wry smile) when confronted. He runs a black-market business, upheld through violence according to a code of his own determination. He has no universal allegiance thus acknowledges no authority over his domain. He seeks personal profit and freedom from attachments that do not directly benefit him economically.

    While he claims to value a low profile, he’s quick to brag about his record of “achievement”, be it the speed of his ship, his ability to smuggle (get one over on the “man”), and even the bounty on his head. He worships his freedom and his money. He is straight up “cocky”. He is irreverent. He is charismatic. Plus he has a big dog that only he can understand. See, he is loyal, and he can love!

    Of course his flaws are quickly recast as endearing through some convenient contextual framing. The really dangerous edges are honed down by a kind of moral relativism and his cold indifference is split open with well-timed glimpses of his sweet inner nougat. He is a bad-boy alpha with enough chinks in his armor to allow the alpha female to break him. Of course, only a woman of her caliber could do so. Albeit, slowly and in ways that allow his ego to remain intact.

    We all know deep down that he must value something besides money. Otherwise he’s just a good-looking criminal. What could it be? Ah, the (potential) love of a woman. Of course! Why fly off with the Falcon full of loot when you can risk life and limb in a suicide mission to take on the most powerful weaponized compound of the Imperial forces. A man, transformed. By the carrot of love. Maybe she is the one who can finally understand him, love him for who he is.

    The Princess has daddy issues. Her loving, but adoptive parents have no doubt surrounded her with more than she could ever want. Yet there is. Something missing…

    She’s a S.I.W., a princess that grew up riding ponies who has taken up “the cause”. Her political upbringing, the power and position, the civil war, the loss of her people. She will give this rogue Alpha the purpose he his has most assuredly been looking for. He will prove a (finally) worthy Alpha in a vast sea of men beneath her station in life. Galactic hypergamy is a bitch.

    A princess with no handsome royals sitting in adjacent kingdoms to take her to the galactic drive-in. She wants to be courted like a regular girl, but can’t understand why the guys aren’t interested in her; they either put her on a pedestal (being a Princess this is only natural) or they treat her like one of the guys. Perhaps her take-charge, gun-toting swagger, her constant sarcasm, her double-masters in galactic diplomacy and communications and her “feisty” disposition just intimidate those soft royal boys.

    She has spent many evenings back on Aldaran wistfully staring at the sunset: one day my prince will come. Until then its just her and her BFF’s: a super-gay gold-plated boy-butler and a brazen but too-short-and-robotic for her three-wheeling jack-of-all-trades. Like good orbiters they cock-block, fix stuff, get her out of jams, and make her look good and strong and independent.

    As the war destroys her home world, and with it her fortune and station, “the cause” is strong in her but does not make her “haaaaappy”. The galaxy is more dangerous than ever, diplomacy and the soft, civil arts of man are weak and futile; it is time to fight. She needs a man built for these times. A Real Man. A thug with a disarming smile and heart of gold. Enter: Han.

  26. 26
    Han Solo says:

    @IP 1

    Yeah, good point, he doesn’t kowtow to authority, neither the Empire nor the Fempire lol.

    @Liz 4 Thanks.

    @jf12 5 You raise a good point that I was thinking about and will delve into more in part II, that Leia has a lot of substance is fighting a “good” cause and is in many ways “out of his league,” being around many of the top men in the galaxy. She has a hoth-load of icy barriers that Han will have to blast through if he ever has any hope of reaching her heart.

    @deti 6-7 I think that referring to “game” as masculinity might be a good thing at times to remove the mind-numbing debates about what game is and focus more on the traits and behaviors that simply work with women.

    Good point about how masculinity/game works on all sorts of women, including high value and good women like Leia (though she is bossy and somewhat bitchy).

  27. 27
    Han Solo says:

    @JoeyW

    Welcome and thanks for the suggestion. I’ll have to put it on my list to watch. If you’d like to write a guest post on the movie, let me know. You can reach me by email in the Contact Us page.

  28. 28
    Nekros says:

    But doesn’t my point still stand? That in order for her to be attracted to you, you need something of better value then she has and that other men in the area lack? This could be looks, status, money, etc, but the basic premise is you have more _____ then she and the competition have. so she goes to the highest bidder so to speak. Then use that damn hamster to rationalize it all away retroactively. Hence why Han and Stark get the girl, they have the attractive traits that the women want. but those traits are in the form of something they acquired or were born with naturally.

    (PS. if it weren’t revealed that Luke and lea were blood related, Luke would have won lea. who has more worth, a rogue pilot or the guy that can throw numerous troops back with an invisible power and a sword that can cut through virtually anything? )

  29. 29
    Morpheus says:

    @deti 6-7 I think that referring to “game” as masculinity might be a good thing at times to remove the mind-numbing debates about what game is and focus more on the traits and behaviors that simply work with women.

    I’ve often thought it was unfortunate that the term “Game” is what was settled on. Because of the other meanings and connections we get lost in debates about what Game is and isn’t rather then simply understanding that it is masculine traits like boldness, assertiveness, indifference to outcome that are what is attractive. Instead, critics reduce Game to awkward and inept attempts to neg. Sure, Game does NOT work if the totality of it amounts to guys delivering insults.

  30. 30
    Morpheus says:

    Great analysis Tasmin. Why do you think the character of Leia was written the way she was?

  31. 31
    Han Solo says:

    @Nekros 18

    Thanks.

    One thing to inquire about though. maybe it is just me, but isn’t the reason Han is so Alpha because he has something of much value to the rest of the team, namely the trust of Jedi as well as the millennium Falcon. …
    in other words, they are Alpha because they have more value than the vast majority of the population.

    Situational alphahood (having ships, money, trust of others, etc.) certainly helps in attracting women but I would say it’s really more the personality of Han that is the driving force behind things. In that moment where he first meets Leia he really has no ship and is most likely about to be captured (the only reason they get away is because Tarkin and Vader plant a tracking device on the M. Falcon to find the rebel base). But he maintains his masculine courage and frame (“alpha”) personality. In fact, we will see this in Empire Strikes Back (he starts shooting at Vader) and in Return of the Jedi (doesn’t cower to Jabba as he’s about to be fed to the Sarlac).

    So the biggest takeaway from Han is that he is his own man, he is genuinely masculine and courageous, he doesn’t pedestalize women.

    Regardless of his outward trappings or lack thereof, his inner core is what is most attractive about him. That’s the biggest lesson.

  32. 32

    Jesus, look at Solo’s epic grin—the private victory smile of a professional mercenary/gambler who has reached C. megalodon levels of permanent, smug self-satisfaction. I’d forgotten what a badass he was.

    Tasmin, hilarious-yet-insightful notes about Chewie being like Solo’s enormous, viciously protective Mastiff sidekick. The beloved duo live together in a Man-Cave so committed to ideals of personal freedom that they can planet-hop if necessary.

  33. 33
    BuenaVista says:

    #30: I see their relationship as following the pre-1960 romcom conventions: feisty dame, rogue actor: Stewart/Hepburn (Philly Story), Bogart/Hepburn (African Queen), Bogart/Bacall (To Have or Have Not). The latter two seem to be better models, given their ‘romance inside action pic’ frame.

    In thinking about the original romcoms, we can see how dramatically the genre has changed now that the genre requires a supplicating, deferring male in the lead.

  34. 34
    Han Solo says:

    @Jimmy 19 & 22

    Thanks. I don’t want to be too hard on Luke but he sure is more “beta” and idealistic about women and everything. He does become an alpha himself eventually, though a different version than Han.

    Jimmy: “The problem I always had was when dealing with “nice girls” it was too easy to get a false sense of security and backslide into beta behavior and pedastalizing.”

    I think we’re more likely to backslide with the women we really like because the power of infatuation can be overwhelming. Additionally, since nice girls are nice to be around it’s easier to forget that even though they may not have their bitch-shield generators on that going too far into supplicating behavior will kill their attraction too. Sure, they may have a higher tolerance for needy or pedestalizing behavior but they’re not immune to it.

    Especially in the early phases it’s better to be less fawning and mix up the two steps forward one step back, push pull and so forth so that she’s not put into flight mode but gets a bit of a taste of your interest when you pull her in and then misses it and can “delightfully” wonder if it will ever come back when you push her away slightly.

  35. 35
    Han Solo says:

    @Tasmin 25 Good Stuff! :)

    @Nekros 28 “in order for her to be attracted to you, you need something of better value then she has and that other men in the area lack?”

    Yes, you need to have high value in her eyes but I would say that the personality traits are the most important in generating attraction. Of course, having real success or their trappings are important (look at rock stars) but there are many men with the outer trappings who have no game at all and quickly kill the attraction that women are feeling for what they imagine them to be from afar.

    Now, if you want to get to the highest level of women then you usually need to have some outer success as well.

  36. 36
    Badpainter says:

    Nekros says:

    “But doesn’t my point still stand? That in order for her to be attracted to you, you need something of better value then she has and that other men in the area lack?”

    Sort of, and perhaps that’s exactly enough at times. But I think that ideally the man needs to have something that he feel is more valuable the she is. She must compete for attention with that which he values more then her, be it his business, faith, other women, or other ambitions.

  37. 37

    @Han 21, I’ll save you the trouble: The prequel trilogy essentially amounts to the devastating galaxy-wide consequences when a young boy (raised by a single mother) with unlimited potential and power is never instructed in how to deal with women, be masculine and stumbles through his average frustrated existence founded on false romantic ideals.

    Anakin never kills the beta, it kills him.

  38. 38
    Tasmin says:

    @Morpheus
    IDK. Lucas came to the idea in the late ’60’s early 70’s. So we get a mix of tradition, in the romanticized historical sense, including knighthood, chivalry, duty; things that are essentially the “good” parts of the patriarchy and Feminist, gender-role busting takes on leadership and moral policing.

    Leia was the vehicle to both acknowledge this old-guard system of chivalry and servitude while also delivering the morality and “rightness”; the sense of purpose, harnessing the raw (and misguided) male energy – prone to destruction, for the purpose of protection, resistance to Oppression, and creation of a new utopian way-of-things.

    Throw in some new-agey co-opting of religion (the “Force”) that “binds everything together” but is also humanist in that the actual Power is not spiritual in the personal sense, but rather something channeled by an individual to manifest in the physical world, essentially a tool that can be used For “good” or “evil” and we get the higher-order message: nature is feminine, thus it takes a woman to show men the “way”, else they be “Tempted to the Dark Side.”

    Its appealing to the traditionalists because it passes the good v. evil religious test (and includes the fundamental premise that humans ((primarily men)) are flawed) and its appealing to the NewAge types because the power is vested in the Self and not some “God”. In any case, it makes sense that the catalyst of “goodness” needs to be a woman. The patriarchy has demonstrated that it cannot be trusted with the power of the Force.

    But obviously men are deeply flawed at their nature, susceptible to corruption and great harm to others. Anti-war sentiments from the 60’s – the military industrial complex, cold-war proxy conflicts, and exportation of imperialist power were powerful themes. Since these things are creations of Men, the antidote comes from men being taught/led/guided by women to use their energy for “Good”, which is to her cause as in the case of Han or to a higher cause in the case of Luke. Both male transformations required her intervention.

    This ties with the humanist leanings: it’s mother-nature not father nature. IDK how much of the characters Lucas had penned out in advance vs how much he worked through on the fly, but like all of the characters, there were some changes down the line that were rather interesting. See: Leia morph from a kind of divine royalty to a kind of go-girl badass sex object (Bikini chained to Jabba).

  39. 39
    Tam the Bam says:

    jf12 ;” heir to the throne of Alderaan, … youngest ever elected Imperial Senator … most outspoken critical and reflective voice and most influential ordinary member, being both the spokesperson and go-between of two large factions … *founding* member of the Rebel Alliance… most important spy. The Emperor’s decision to destroy Alderaan, specifically to punish Leia after uncovering a small portion of her involvement, is what finally reveals his shocking evil ..”
    .. bang to rights I’d say, if I ruled the galaxy. Narcissistic twat never took into account who’d get the blowback. Because she never had to. Like a chesty Tymoshenko, with the weird hairthings on her ears instead. Partisans are like that. “We’re the fish, and the fuckin water can boil dry, for all we care”.

    Jabba was the only character I ever felt was less than a cartoon. Even Maul was a ponce, urgently prosecuting a mission he didn’t fully understand.

    Yep. Jabba all the way. Only thing the gobby cow was any good for was as a slavegirl and petfood. Whereas Jabs kinda liked Han, saw his potential, if he had only stopped with the pussybegging already.

  40. 40
    Han Solo says:

    @Morpheus 29

    I agree. It irks me how game critics focus on the neg when that’s really a more advanced technique that’s incredibly easy to fuck up. Most guys should stay away from negs because they’re totally ham-handed in how they deliver them and are actually only insulting the woman instead of tickling her hamster into delighted contortions wondering if this guy has some secret entrance to her mind and heart that bipasses her bitch shield.

    Most men would do well to focus on teasing women and being funny (with a little cocky thrown in from time to time). David DeAngelo said that he almost regretted coining (or popularizing) the phrase cocky funny because so many guys latched onto the cocky part and did that way too much and the funny not enough.

  41. 41
    Han Solo says:

    @Bastiat 32

    I love one of Han’s sly grins in Empire Strikes Back and will analyze that on Monday.

    I like the idea of the Millenium Falcon being a portable, anywhere-you-want-to-go-in-the-Galaxy man cave.

  42. 42
    Tasmin says:

    @Bastiat
    “The beloved duo live together in a Man-Cave so committed to ideals of personal freedom that they can planet-hop if necessary.”

    Yeah kind of sovereign-man meets ‘Heat': “Don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner.” Easier when your house can fly.

    Despite all that, Han still got into a bit of “lets you and him fight”.

  43. 43
    Morpheus says:

    Yeah kind of sovereign-man meets ‘Heat’: “Don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner.” Easier when your house can fly.

    Heat. One of my top 5 favorite movies of all-time. Love the scene with DeNiro and Pacino sitting across from each other at the restaurant table. And to this day, I don’t think there is a movie with a better shoot-out scene.

  44. 44
    Han Solo says:

    On reddit,

    http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1zstvq/han_solo_doesnt_pedestalize_the_princess/

    christiefrontdrive left a link to Weird Al’s video, Yoda (this one has lyrics):

  45. 45
    Alpha says:

    @ Rollo: “but it’s hard not to notice the taming of the Alpha scoundrel as the movies progress from 1977 to 1983″

    You’re wrong. He starts to care for others and grows from being a loner who has probably had no close relationships besides Chewie to being accepted as part of a group.

    Remember he comes back at the end of ANH to save Luke’s ass – an act of friendship that has nothing to do with women.

  46. 46
    Mr. Toes says:

    One point in support of Morpheus@11 and against Deti@17 is that the forced sex/rape studies show a strong correlation between sexual confidence and the desire for rougher sex. It’s the prudes that don’t have the forced sex fantasies. This is somewhat contrary to the stereotypes of bored housewives being the main consumers of trashy bodice-ripping romance novels but it’s very clear in the statistics.

    So the more sexually restricted a woman is, the more betatude she appreciates in a man. It’s the alpha mares who have an unquenchable appetite for being dominated. Such a meme fits my personal experience almost exactly. It’s just too bad the hot girls aren’t usually restricted (i.e. unicorn-territory).

    Also, hilarity (just read the link URL for an inkling):

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/why-death-threats-wont-keep-the-duke-porn-star-from-doing-what-she-needs-to-pay-tuition/article17362601/

  47. 47
    Escoffier says:

    My (formerly) liberal mother, God bless her, inadvertently taught me about game using just this example. Girls like guys like Han, not Luke. She always loved the scene where Leia says “I love you” and he says “I know.”

    Sadly for me, my natural personality is such that I could never be a Han. However, at least I wasn’t lied to. I figured out where I fit fairly early.

  48. 48
    Morpheus says:

    So the more sexually restricted a woman is, the more betatude she appreciates in a man. It’s the alpha mares who have an unquenchable appetite for being dominated. Such a meme fits my personal experience almost exactly. It’s just too bad the hot girls aren’t usually restricted (i.e. unicorn-territory).

    Also, hilarity (just read the link URL for an inkling):

    I haven’t entirely figured out the primary driver, if it is the restricted vs unrestricted thing or if there are other factors at play, but I believe different women enjoy very diffferent “types” of sex, at least that has to be the case if I take at face value some of what I read. From what I read, there are women for whom sex is primarily about the “emotional connection” and “emotional intimacy”. And I can tell you from firsthand experience that there are women that like to be FUCKED, and FUCKED HARD. They enjoy and get much more turned on from being FUCKED than being MADE LOVE to. They like their asses smacked, their hair pulled (but not too hard) and even the feeling of their hands being pinned. I think for them it is primarily a physical experience of being dominated and ravished. The reason I say I’m not sure if it is entirely restricted vs unrestricted because based on my personal experience of a low N woman who primarily enjoys that physical component.

  49. 49
    Han Solo says:

    From my experience, I think that there is some correlation with unrestricteds liking rough sex more and restricteds liking to make love more but there’s also a lot of women who like both and it depends on the moment. Some like to start out gentle and then go wild later. Of course, some like to just go rough and raw right from the start.

    I also think there are some restricteds who once they feel safe in a loving relationship definitely let their wild side out and will be her man’s personal “slut.”

  50. 50
    Jimmy says:

    It’s just too bad the hot girls aren’t usually restricted (i.e. unicorn-territory).

    I actually disagree with this… My experience has been that there really isn’t any correlation between attractiveness & restrictedness… Plenty of variation in both all over the board.

    But it bears repeating that there are relatively few people who are on the extreme ends of restricted or unrestricted… The great majority are in the mushy middle and have aspects of both at different times

  51. 51

    @Alpha, you’re only outlining The Script:

    http://therationalmale.com/2013/07/29/the-script/

    An avowed Alpha bachelor for life questions the existence and nature of love, the sincerity of women, the illogic of not living just for his own self-importance, certainly the institution of marriage and lives, according to his rules, a satisfying life. He rationally observes the “madness” of his friends and fellow men when they fall in love, and out of it. He either mocks their foolishness or is analytical to the core in understanding their madnesses. He is an elemental force of one – a captain controlling the course of his own ship. He’s not wrong in his estimations; they all add up, they all make deductive, provable sense.

    That is until he meets her. The ONE special woman who miraculously, alone amongst billions, has the unique power to bring the facade of all that he thinks he is into stark, insightful self-realization. He’s bit by the bug, smitten by the only woman who could fatefully tame the arrogance of his otherwise cruel rationalism. It’s akin to a religious conversion; he’s seen the light, he’s in love and all of his former concerns are proven to be falsehoods – it’s the triumph of true love! The one thing he was missing (the one thing only a woman can possess of course), the last piece to a puzzle he didn’t know he was putting together, has been added and now he is complete. And they live happily ever after,…

  52. 52
    Morpheus says:

    I actually disagree with this… My experience has been that there really isn’t any correlation between attractiveness & restrictedness… Plenty of variation in both all over the board.

    I think what happens is maybe the combination of “orientation” meeting opportunity. It stands to reason that the highly attractive unrestricted man is going to have more sexual opportunities than the extremely unattractive unrestricted man which might give the impression that unrestricted is linked to attractiveness. I can’t find the link now, but there was a paper basically explaining how you had to break up the sociosexual analysis into attitude versus behavior and score each separately to really get anything meaningful. I did some digging and reading, and the more I saw the more indicated that the binary restricted versus unrestricted is way too simplistic. Of course, to the man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail

  53. 53

    […] Part I: A New Hope Han Solo is a charming scoundrel who loves money and saving his own neck. He kills bounty hunters with guns trained on him and isn’t afraid to argue with feisty princesses.  […]

  54. 54
    OffTheCuff says:

    The SOI-R quiz? One of my last polite disagreements with HUS before banning.

    In HUS-land, everyone is 100% restricted or unrestricted, as the unrestricted people theoretically keep entirely to themselves in a closed system of fluid exchange. Plus, if you are a male, then a single unrestricted activity makes you unrestricted for life. If you’re female, you can switch back and forth as much as you like, while claiming you were restricted the whole time. :)

    How restricted do you wanna be today? I feel like being… like totes monogamous for the next 17 hours!

  55. 55
    A Definite Beta Guy says:

    Not much love for the Luke-ster here.
    Luke was whisked away to a planet on the far side of the Galaxy, so uncivilized basic laws like “you can’t own slaves” did not apply. Unlike Anakin, and many of other Jedi, who are trained from birth to be Heroes, Luke had the masculinity and idealism kicked out of him by his anti-Jedi aunt and uncle.
    Luke was constructed to be the perfect Beta because that’s what his aunt and uncle wanted. Play Nice! Can you imagine saying that to Mace Windu?
    Right, Luke was told that his entire life.
    So give the kid some credit. It only takes him a couple movies to go from whiny idealistic farm boy to confident warrior. In the end he’s going toe to toe with a General. Think of the wimpiest Beta Boy you can imagine.
    Now think of him in a knife-fight with a mix between Jon Jones, Colin Powell, and Jesus.
    Now picture him winning.
    The Beta Wimps you see before you are FI-enforced Character Studies. They are not genetic predispositions, and they are not “real” anymore than Urkel was real.
    And on the other spectrum, half of Being Han Solo is Thinking You’re Han Solo and you have the Right to be Solo. Or as I repeatedly tell everyone I meet, “irrational self-confidence and a sense of entitlement are highly underrated.”

    Off to find apartments and fight a stomach virus! This oughta be an AWESOME day. At some point I want to relay the fun stories from PreCana…

  56. 56
    Obsidian says:

    @OTC 54:
    LOL. Yea, you-know-who’s “theory” of human sexuality is beyond absurd.

    Let’s count the ways, shall we?

    1. She would have to explain how and why Humanity evolved into two distinct camps in terms of mating strategies – one utilizing, exclusively, long(er) term mating, and the other devoloping short(er) mating, again, EXCLUSIVELY. To date, she has NOT presented any such theory, to say nothing of evidence.

    2. You-know-who also has not explained how or why Humanity would have evolved specific behaviors and indeed biology (especially Women!) that can indeed lend itself toward “lane switching” – for example, Womens’ ovulation schedules are inherently cryptic to males. Men on the other hand, have evolved “software” to “mate down” when circumstances warrant., Both sexes can and will switch up their mating effort and strategies if either perceives and abundance or dearth of potential mates of the opposite sex (Effective Sex Ratio). Indeed, the demo that you-know-who myopically focuses on, the Women on college campuses more or less have to “hookup” in large part, due to the very real imbalance of sex ratios of Men to Women there – something that is not only well-documented, but which you-know-who has herself freely acknowedged(!). If indeed Humanity was divvied up into two fixed, invariant “camps” of mating strategies, the Women on the college campuses would NEVER “hookup” regardles as to the imbalance of sex ratio, because they would be locked into the “LTR” camp and the whole “hookup” discussion would be a nonstarter. That leads me to the next point:

    3. You-know-who’s “theory” lacks universal explanatory power: in other words, her “theory” doesn’t scale out to the entire USA population at large, to say nothing of the world’s. For her “theory” to hold up, it would have to be seen in evidence throughout the world’s cultures and climes, as well as being consistent down through the Ages; this is NOT the case. No segment of the USA population has the corner on either LTR or STR mating, and when it comes to you-know-who’s favored demo, it is well known thtat short(er) term mating, which would include affairs and cheating, is not at all unusual or uncommon. This brings us to:

    4. You-know-who’s “theory” also lacks predictive power – in order for you-know-who’s “theory” to be workable, it would have to be able to document testable predictions. Of course, she does not do this, and as you have rightly pointed out, anyone, especially if they also happen to be male (sexist!), runs a very high risk of being banned from the forum.

    All of which, is the very anthesis of the Scientific Method.

    As Buss has noted in his excellent work The Evolution of Desire, Humanity evolved a whole panopoly of behaviors specifically designed for the human capacity to “switch lanes” matingwise – for example, if there is a such thing as a group of Men being “restricted” into the LTR camp, there would be no need for them to get jealous of their mates – right? Because their mates, like them, would also be “restricted”.

    Alright then, Ms. You-Know-Who, please show us all the males who aren’t touched by jealousy in the least bit? We’ll wait…

    SMH…

    O.

  57. 57
    Han Solo says:

    @ADBG

    I agree we shouldn’t be too hard on Luke (see my #34).

    Good point about how Luke’s uncle feared he’d become like Anakin/Vader and so he did everything he could to keep him away from that path.

    Kind of reminds me of Ted D and how his mom and others feared he’d turn into a jerk and so they really piled on the “be nice” teaching.

    So, Luke is a great example of how a lot of parents (especially mothers) may fear their sons will turn into assholes so they overdo the be nice, never make a woman feel uncomfortable teachings which end up causing a lot of the follow-the-rules guys to go overboard in “niceness.”

  58. 58
    Farm Boy says:

    It only takes him a couple movies to go from whiny idealistic farm boy to confident warrior.

    So it would seem to be more about attitudes than deeds.

  59. 59

    Long post warning!

    Re: Solo and the Bro Code. In simpler times, chivalry or some variation thereof provided a “plata o plomo” system for channeling male masculinity. Chivalry was, of course, a system that provided both entitlements and attendant responsibilities.

    The widespread hatred of male entitlements among political leftists has large been successful in removing them, but with an equal and matching elimination of responsibilities. Men enjoy having reward/punishment systems in place, so we have have filled the vacuum with the “Bro Code.” We might quibble about what exactly the Bro Code entails, but generally speaking it has a carrot—social status particularly useful for gaining casual sex—and a responsibility: Bro Before Ho.

    The Code is reinforced because of the later age of marriage: a man may well have ten years of Bro Code indoctrination before he approaches the average marriage age, at which point his romantic relationships will be competing for attentional resources with four others: his relationship with himself (self-development), his relationship with his family, his relationship with the Fellowship of the Bro, and, of course, his relationship with porn (I do not believe that many women realize how much this porn romance is affecting the overall mating system, because, frankly, we tend not to disclose the truth about how much we really are fapping to porn, and because the vast majority of women do not understand its appeal to us).

    I’ve listened to a couple of interesting observations about the Bro Code recently:

    1. The observations that there are women who seem to be loved by Men (using the capitalization to denote their almost universal appeal to guys and the respect they are shown). They are usually very attractive females, sure, but equally important is that they seem to love Men for the reasons that we ourselves love about being guys.

    Once again, it is true that many of these women are really hot and thus get away with a lot, but there is something else going on, something that makes them both lusted after AND respected: the women not only approve of the Bro Code, but they find it beautiful in some ways and they encourage it, even when it may occasionally foray into darker, more misogynistic territory.

    They are able to position themselves socially *within* the Bro Code and to successfully infiltrate traditionally male bastions, but we enjoy having them around because, rather than trying to destroy the sanctity of our secret caves and treehouse Honeycomb Hideouts with sociology-spawned pablum and pro-feminist rhetoric, they serve as sort of pretty and articulate cheerleaders for the visions of masculinity that we particularly enjoy.

    The women on the outside of this seem to invariably hate the women who are brought into the Bro Code ranks. So I assume that someone who is generally revered by all the boys like, say, our Liz or Starlight or a few other female regulars here, would be the object of much jealousy and pop-psychoanalysis from other women.

    2. The Bro Code is, like so many male social constructs, ultimately rooted in the threat of violent physical retaliation. Donovan has written some very articulate pieces on this. When a quasi-chivalric construct was more appreciated, men were expected to grant exceptions to females under a “Women and Children First” lifeboat dynamic that, yes, did patronize women a bit by equating femininity with a kind of physical vulnerability and childish emotional instability/solipsistic quality. Whatever its problems, this condescending attitude did normally free women from expectations that they be able to fight their ways out of trouble, and it did afford them the use of passive-aggressive social tactics without fear of being thrown off balconies into fire hydrants or into traffic or whatever.

    The young men who are steeped in Bro culture do not really feel that these exceptions need to be granted; they’ve been told that the only gender differences which are allowed to exist are the ones that make women “better” than men.

    If you actually work in or around an academic social sciences department, you know that it’s become very hard to even get funded for a study which *may* reveal serious gender differences; these may be variously termed “potentially embarrassing results” and “inappropriate for a climate of progressive research”…the editorial censorship/controls starts that early in the process! In some departments, they will even micromanage to the point of vetoing survey design protocols that do not provide “sufficient transparency” for socially-correct answers. This is showing up big-time when it comes to assessing the underlying realities about sexuality patterns among college students, and how these will shape gender relations down the road (just ask Roy Baumeister).

    The unintended result of this is that a single standard of Bro behavior is the only one respected. Sex-positive feminists are by and large ok with a society that features far more casual sex if it means gaining more gender-related economic equality and independence in return; this of course means that the economic price of transactional sex must plummet, a phenomenon we have seen everywhere from the campus to the strip club.

    Just to add an anecdote for local color: my gender studies academic buddy believes that this is a very dangerous state of affairs for women because women did traditionally enjoy exception from the combative aspects of masculine behavioral constraints. Women are—Ronda Rousey and Brienne types excepted—less psychologically and physically built for this game (they may also be less built for the casual sex game, but that is a bluff that will take many years to call).

    My friend feels that the Bro Code culture, with its generally straightforward “don’t write checks with your mouth that your body can’t cash” internal policing structure, leaves the vast majority of women in a position where they either have to be extremely polite during debates, or they risk being treated like a man would be and physically threatened/dominated.

    You all can say where this is going: it gives a semi-moralistic top-cover to a range of tactics that Bro Code-following men would be widely condemned for using: the poison-dwarf, backstabbing, talk-behind-the-person’s-back-and-get-away-with-it, hide-behind-the-big-protective-man stuff was in her mind, a kind of necessary evil. According to this argument, women more or less *have* to be allowed to get away with interpersonal toxicity, insidious reputation attacks, and psychological violence-type stuff without physical retaliation being used against them because, if they couldn’t, a group of guys could basically say, “Just shut the fuck up, bitch” and there would not be a whole lot that most women could do about it.

    She admits that this places men in a position where they cannot go “out of bounds” on the field without penalty (chivalry, Bro Code, whatever), while women are allowed to go out of bounds, and she admits that feminism doesn’t know how to deal with the unfairness of this except by continually talking about oppression, intersectionality, etc. and having martyrdom/victimhood competitions.

    It’s important to note here that she is not saying that Bro Code guys actually beat women up—it’s more that she thinks that we ignore people who don’t subscribe to the BC because we don’t consider opinions to be legit for the high table unless the speaker has the goods (and the goods are defined by the Code in ways that make it less likely for *most* women to have them).

    My friend thinks that men are becoming more and more dismissive of a range of female opinions and even male opinions unless said opinions come from within the Bro Code construct—i.e., from men or “vetted” alpha-type women, and that the alpha women have been instrumental in this process. She fears that the final step in a “alphas do as they wish, everyone else suffers what they must” social environment would be the placing of women in infantry or even specwar combat positions, as this would remove one of the last existing cultural safeguards—a chivalric legacy—protecting women from being held physically accountable.

  60. 60
    Yesod says:

    The prequel trilogy essentially amounts to the devastating galaxy-wide consequences when a young boy (raised by a single mother) with unlimited potential and power is never instructed in how to deal with women, be masculine and stumbles through his average frustrated existence founded on false romantic ideals.

    Rollo is right here. Actually the story behind Anakin Skywalker is much deeper because it’s also about the duality of good and evil within us. Anakin Skywalker taken over by hatred, progressively assumes the form of his evil master, is burned, disfigured…

    That’s what feminism does with men. Teaching boys false romantic ideals and shaming their masculinity is the source of rising violence against women. Feminism breeds the so feared “psychopaths”, because they (feminists) are so incompetent in educating boys, as ultimately feminism indicates an existential failure of the feminine which the ancient associated with the demon Lilith.

    Evil breeds evil. How can frustrated women teach anything good and valuable to men? They have to fix themselves first. It’s ironic that by following the scum manifesto they have become themselves the scum of the world.

  61. 61

    #60

    Violence against women isn’t rising.

  62. 62
    jf12 says:

    #25 “sweet inner nougat” The velvet fist in the iron glove.

  63. 63
    Liz says:

    #25: What does S.I.W. mean?
    Seriously Interesting Woman? Spouse In the Waiting?
    I swear, there seem to be more acronyms in the sphere than even the military.
    And I still don’t even know that alphabet. Sierra. India. Whiskey (had to look that up)

  64. 64
    jf12 says:

    The three men and George Lucas’s inner demons. Although the prequel made it clear that Anakin/Darth’s dedemption *became* the driving force of the series (empowered by a love of life-force brought on by knowing he still had a son), that concept changed well after the first movie or two (it is unsettled). Originally it a was build-a-better-beta white knight bildungsroman, in which Luke grew up from a hick to a hero. But note who gets the girl, and especially note how especially cocky and how unusually bitchy she is always towards Han. George doesn’t identify with Anakin or Luke (nor Leia …). George is a wannabe Han.

    All smoke screens and chaff and deflector shields aside, George exhibits his innermost vulnerability right here: the inexplicable cockiness of some girl towards George made him invent this entire revenge fantasy in which her bitchiness was explained by her *attraction* instead of her repulsion.

    Do I win an award?

  65. 65
    Badpainter says:

    jf12,

    Could you do the same analysis in the context of THX1138 and American Graffiti?

  66. 66
    Han Solo says:

    @Yesod 60

    Do you have a source that there is rising violence against women?

    This link shows rape has decreased by about 70% and sexual assault by 58%.

    http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvsv9410.pdf

    So I don’t think there is rising violence against women in the US or the Western world. Can’t speak to other places.

    @Liz 63 I think SIW means strong independent woman.

    @jf12 64 Interesting.

  67. 67
    Escoffier says:

    My dad went to high school with George Lucas.

  68. 68
    jf12 says:

    For those in the hinterlands, I thought I’d explain. The chivalric ideal man/leader had “an iron fist in a velvet glove”. He was outwardly genteel and comforting, but inwardly hard. The new feminist ideal man has “a velvet fist in an iron glove”. He is outwardly hard and frightening, but soft and gooey inwardly.

  69. 69
    jf12 says:

    #65 I haven’t seen either. According to synopses, THX 1138 is clearly an inversion of “boy meets girl”. Girl lives with boy, girl awakens boy, girl gets pregnant, girl unmeets boy as girl is sacrificed to techno-control. The rest of the running around is meaningless, and even the black guy hologram seems to live a fuller life than THX and SEN. Maybe George is expressing his sense that girls (and black guys) are realer than boys.

    In American Graffiti, George is too clearly Curt. He is driven here and there by other people, hampered from his dreams by his relationships and lack of techno-control (cars, money).

  70. 70

    @Obsidian, all you have to do is read through @Tinderfessions on Twitter for 20 minutes and you’ll read every hopeful theory Aunt Giggles ever had put to the bullshit it really is.

  71. 71
  72. 72

    […] Han Solo Doesn’t Pedestalize the Princess […]

  73. 73
    dude says:

    list is incomplete without Han’s single strongest, most badass non-pedestalizing moment.

    Leia: “I love you.”
    Han: “I know.”

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>