Aaron Sorkin on 'The Social Network's' problematic depiction of women

There's been a lot of talk on the Web that, all of its rave reviews notwithstanding, "The Social Network" offers a crude, often misogynistic portrayal of nearly every women featured in the movie. (Or as one particularly acerbic post at Jezebel.com put it: " 'The Social Network': Where Women Never Have Ideas.") And hey, when you think about it, it's true. Mark Zuckerberg and his 2004-era Harvard cohorts treat women in almost exactly the same way that Jimmy Page and his Led Zeppelin cohorts treated their female fans in 1969 -- like groupies.

Veteran TV scribe and blogger Ken Levine loved the movie (after all, he's a guy), but one of his female readers posted a comment, saying that as good as "The Social Network" was, with the exception of one or two women, everyone else was "basically sex objects/stupid groupies." What a letdown, she wrote, especially from the guy who created "The West Wing's" C.J. Cregg! The critique must have hit home, because Aaron Sorkin has now responded with a lengthy defense, in which he acknowledges that "it's not hard to understand how bright women could be appalled by what they saw in the movie."

But -- and isn't there always a but -- Sorkin says he was simply offering an all-too-accurate portrayal of Zuckerberg's own actions toward women. Here's what Sorkin has to say:

I used Mark's blog verbatim. ... Facebook was born during a night of incredible misogyny. The idea of comparing women to farm animals, and then to each other, based on their looks, and then publicly ranking them. It was a revenge stunt ... I was writing about a very angry and deeply misogynistic group of people. These aren't the cuddly nerds we made movies about in the 80's. They're very angry that the cheerleader still wants to go out with the quarterback instead of the men (boys) who are running the universe right now.

Sorkin adds that the woman portrayed as happily lining up to take the bus to the hot final clubs parties and taking their tops off to dance for the boys once they arrived, were "real, I mean REALLY real." So all this disturbing misogyny and willingness on the part of women to play the role of sex objects is, to hear Sorkin tell it, not exaggerated at all, but totally authentic. I guess I'm willing to believe him, even though I still have some nagging doubts, since Sorkin has been quick to admit that when it came to Zuckerberg, he had no problem with exaggerating or inventing some of the Facebook founder's actions. 

Still, I don't know what's more depressing -- that the men at Harvard (just a few short years ago) acted like such crude misogynists or that the equally well-educated women hanging around them acted like they'd spent a hell of a lot more time watching Britney Spears videos than reading Germaine Greer.   

Photo: Aaron Sorkin, left, with Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield and Justin Timberlake in London, promoting "The Social Network." Credit: Kieran Doherty / Reuters

Comments

[Nix]

Then walked in Sheryl Sandberg. :)

[Muffy]

Anyone who claims the film is sexist is full of crap! Women are not saints! No one in the film is a saint! Women are not brain dead, they have their own minds, no female character was forced to do anything in the film. I love the hypocrisy of it all. None you of have problem with the men behaving badly, doing drugs, having lots of sex. But how dare they show women doing those things! The film hates women because it doesn't portray them as saints.

[ohirider]

Why do people apologize for the truth? I think it's interesting that people are offended by the truth. Why do you care if some women act like whores and some men take advantage of them? Go out and lead your own life (with morals) or just get one. I raised four girls and they don't act like the girls in the movie.

[fyi]

As a female senior at Harvard, I can say that the depiction of girls at finals clubs was definitely exaggerated. Yes, the clubs are all male (at least the ones with clubhouses...there are also some female finals clubs, though, one of which does have a house) and yes, they're much more likely to let you in to party if you're a hot girl than if you're some random guy, but there are no busloads of bimbos trucked in, and the interiors are not one big strip tease. They're just like any other booze-fueled college parties, and the gender objectification may be rampant but it definitely goes both ways.

[The Dating Diva]

I think an important point that the film- and Sorkin- bring up- is that intellectualism and emotional maturity aren't related. No matter how intellectually bright- and even brilliant- the men, or women, at a place like Harvard may be, it doesn't mean that they are devoid of the jealousies, the insecurities, and the desires to impress their peers that most young people endure.

Women don't dance on tables or sleep with men because "they are whores" (wow is that a vapid statement)- they do it to exercise their sexual and feminine freedom and because those actions are applauded and encouraged by men. And it attests nothing to their intelligence level. And the men aren't misogynists- they are just expressing their anger at, as one of you said, "the women who still go for the quarterbacks instead of the men who are running the world." That's their own issue, and has nothing to do with the women they are attacking.

Personally, I think that this kind of gender debate is healthy, and rather than generalize, we need to examine what causes behaviors instead of judging the behaviors themselves. And we need to recognize that, Harvard or state school or community college, people mature emotionally at all different ages- that IQ level has nothing to do with emotional maturity and acting as though they are one and the same will only cause confusion.