(Published Saturday, October 29, 2016)
(This post has been edited below, July 12, 2017)
Outline for this series of posts:
Several different topics are discussed below, including but not limited to, O’Dowd’s apparent misunderstanding of characters in the ‘Bridesmaids’ movie, his Tweeting of a photo of his wife wearing her lingerie, and more
Part 3. Actor Chris O’Dowd’s misunderstanding of the Annie character
Because O’Dowd seems to totally misunderstand the Annie Walker character from the movie ‘Bridesmaids,’ he (and guys like him) very much needs to read my other post located here: Why Women Date or Marry Jerks.
The more I Google this O’Dowd guy, the more disappointed I become. And I was already plenty disappointed from what I found when I Googled him however many months ago.
By the way, based upon what I’ve seen of this guy’s personality, should O’Dowd find this blog and read any of my posts about him, he would probably find most to all of this amusing.
Which he should not. He should wipe the grin off his face while he’s reading these posts and take them seriously. I’m not joking around. I don’t find any of this funny.
As I was saying at the bottom of this other post on my blog (this post), O’Dowd is one of those guys who annoyingly acts as though life is one big stand up comedy routine. The sort of guy you cannot have a serious conversation with.
I have not even made my main post about why I am bummed out by this guy yet. (Edit: As of April 2017 that post is now finished, and you can read it here if you like. But please stick around to finish reading this one first.)
At any rate…
Even though O’Dowd says in an interview or two that he’s seen the ‘Bridesmaids’ movie, I wonder if he did. Or I wonder if he slept through it? Maybe he sat through a completely different movie of the same title.
In some interviews I’ve read or seen (in televised interviews that were uploaded to You Tube), O’Dowd said he comes from a family where his mother was a neo-feminist, and he has 2 or 3 older sisters who ruled his childhome home.
So, presumably, O’Dowd should not be sexist and, rather, we’d expect him to be sensitive to comments or actions that can be perceived as sexist and would try to avoid such.
However, I think the guy has arguably said or done a few sexist things.
O’Dowd probably considers himself supportive of women on some level, or at least generally speaking. I am not suggesting that the guy is a sexist in the traditional sense, or that he beats his wife or anything of that nature.
However, I think O’Dowd is guilty of something called ‘Benevolent Sexism.’ A lot of men are, and they are absolutely blind to it.
Some men even think Benevolent Sexist habits and comments are good and complimentary towards women, but they are not.
Never heard of that phrase, Benevolent Sexism? Please see the following pages about it:
-Via Scientific American:
The Problem When Sexism Sounds So Darn Friendly
-Via Huffington Post:
Men Don’t Recognize ‘Benevolent’ Sexism: Study
-(Related): Via: New Republic:
Why Aren’t Women Advancing At Work? Ask a Transgender Person.
Men do remain blind to their own sexist assumptions and actions, and at times confuse sexism with good or admirable actions or traits.
For example, while most women hate being “cat-called” on the streets and find it sexist, demeaning, and even threatening, most men cannot understand this and think women should feel “flattered” to have men they don’t know cat-call them, wolf whistle at them, and shout sexually suggestive phrases at them as they go about their business in public.
In this April 2014 article, O’Dowd mentions his wife Dawn Porter is a feminist (he also gets into what I feel is a weird rant about how it annoys him when other celebrities don’t prepare speeches for awards shows and so on.).
In an interview with someone named Gross on NPR (source; date: May 2015) regarding his television show “Moone Boy,” O’Dowd says:
GROSS: Do you think your father was intimidated by you and your siblings?
O’DOWD: It was a very maternal house. So – or a very matriarchal house, I suppose. It was – I had three sisters. It’s incredibly close to the show. My father is a sign-writer, like the guy in the show. And my mother was a Weight Watchers instructor, as my mother was at the time. And I have three older sisters. So I feel like he – he definitely felt out of place as a man.
GROSS: Did you feel out of place as a boy?
O’DOWD: I like to think that it was how I learned the mysterious ways of the woman.
In light of all that, and a few other interviews of his I’ve seen or read, O’Dowd seems to think of himself as being a feminist, or at least as being supportive of women. If so, I find that a little problematic in light of the following…
CHRIS O’DOWD REFERS TO THE ANNIE WALKER CHARACTER AS “SLUTTY”
In an interview or two about his role as state trooper Nathan Rhodes in the ‘Bridesmaids’ movie, Chris O’Dowd’s comments about the Annie Walker character were published on many sites, and I didn’t find them very respectful of women, as represented by the Annie character.
Here are a few sites carrying his comments (I have further comments below all these excerpts and links, so please keep reading):
O’Dowd rules out Bridesmaids sequel role (December 2014)
Chris O’Dowd doesn’t think he’d be in a ‘Bridesmaids’ sequel.
The Irish actor portrayed Officer Nathan Rhodes in the 2011 comedy and though his character ended the movie with Kristen Wiig’s Annie Walker, he thinks his on-screen love interest was too “slutty” to have stayed with him and so doesn’t think he’d be needed for another movie as he’d expect Jon Hamm to return for the romantic scenes instead.
Asked if he would be interested in appearing in a sequel, he said: “I always imagined that if they did another one, Kristen Wiig’s character would have moved on from me. She was pretty slutty.
“I think she would have left me in the dust and moved back with Jon Hamm [who played Annie’s boyfriend Ted].”
-Movie Room Reviews:
Chris O’Dowd not expecting “Bridesmaids” sequel role
Asked if he [Chris O’Dowd] would be interested in appearing in a [Bridesmaids] sequel, he said: ”I always imagined that if they did another one, Kristen Wiig’s character [Annie] would have moved on from me [the Nathan Rhodes character]. She was pretty slutty.
”I think she would have left me in the dust and moved back with Jon Hamm [who played Annie’s boyfriend Ted].”
‘Bridesmaids’ traffic cop Chris O’Dowd talks about being a heartthrob (kind of)
Here are pertinent excerpts from the EW page:
by Maggie Pehanick, May 2011
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: So, how was your weekend? The big opening weekend?
CHRIS O’DOWD: What fun! What fromicking we had at the box office! It was wonderful. Yeah, I was just really delighted for everybody. I went to see it in Hollywood on Saturday night. Got my head low, it was really fun. People were really enjoying it and hittin’ the right moments and ohhing and ahhing and laughing and crying and everything that you would want and more.
[EW asked] And I know this is really early, but has there been any talk about a sequel for Bridesmaids?
There hasn’t. I can’t imagine that would be something that would happen unless Kristen and Paul and Judd felt like they could do a movie that was better than this. I can’t see it happening. But if it got to the stage, I’d be up for it. Cause it would have to be something really special.
[EW said ] I’d imagine she could come up with another great script.
If it’s a new take on it, I’m sure it’d be great. I guess it would have to be our wedding, if it were to happen.
[EW asked] If it were to happen though, you’d want to be a part of it?
I don’t know… maybe she’ll have moved on. She’s pretty slutty.
[EW said] That’s a fair point.
She’d [Annie Walker character would] drag me [the Nathan Rhodes character] along for a couple months then break my heart.
Perhaps O’Dowd didn’t seriously mean that the Annie character from ‘Bridesmaids’ was slutty. Perhaps he was only joking around about that. I still take issue with it, as I will explain.
I know from having read other interviews this actor gave, and from observing him on Twitter a few times, that O’Dowd is a far left wing liberal and definitely favors American Democrats to the Republicans.
As he’s originally from Europe and not the United States, maybe O’Dowd doesn’t fully grasp how American liberalism works, but by referring to Annie as “slutty,” (even if it was only meant jokingly!), he’s bound to offend 99% of left wing, American women.
American feminists have this concept they refer to as “slut shaming.” This liberal, feminist concept conveys the notion that it is wrong to judge any woman’s sexual choices or sexual behavior. To judge a woman’s sexual behavior or condemn her for it is to be sexist (again, this is according to American, liberal, feminist logic).
I am surprised that O’Dowd did not get an avalanche of hatred online, via his Twitter account, for saying that the Annie character was “slutty” in interviews (or maybe he did, and I missed it).
I know the “sex positive” feminist woman at the movie review blog, FlickFilosopher, who reviewed ‘Bridesmaids,” (that I wrote about earlier), would not be happy with O’Dowd negatively judging Annie’s sexual behavior.
Why, “slut shaming” is just about one of the biggest sins a person, especially a man, can commit, in American feminist purview.
I myself have more traditional values and am right wing.
In my view, ideally, people would wait until marriage to have sex – and on a lesser level, at the very least be in a steady, long term relationship with a person before having sex (which means, no sex on the first or second or even third date).
I believe in equality for women, but I shrink from the “feminist” label myself because it comes with associations I don’t want (e.g., Democrat, liberal, pro- abortion, etc).
WHY O’DOWD REFERRING TO ANNIE AS ‘SLUTTY’ BOTHERS ME
My reason for taking issue with O’Dowd referring to Annie Walker as being “slutty” differs somewhat from the rationale liberal feminists may have.
While I do not agree with the practice of “casual sex,” I do understand the motivations of the Annie Walker character, that it’s not due to “sluttiness,” and I am sympathetic, to a point, as to why she is sleeping with a jerk such as Ted.
As I explained in a previous post, the ‘Bridesmaids’ film made it extremely clear that the only reasons Annie was having sex at all with the piggish Ted character (played by Jon Hamm) is because she was depressed, had no self esteem, and believed that if she gave Ted the weird, kinky sex he wanted, he would not break up with her.
And Annie very much wanted a steady boyfriend.
Annie would not risk refusing Ted any and all sex he wanted, nor would she admit to him straight up that she wanted him to be her steady boyfriend, or else he might break up with her. Almost any woman watching that movie would grasp that (except for the weirdo feminist movie reviewer at FlickFilosopher).
The vast majority of hetero women who watch ‘Bridesmaids’ would instantly grasp WHY Annie was participating in one night stands of wild sex for Ted, and being ‘slutty’ was the exact opposite reason for it – this doesn’t even have to be explicitly spelled out for female viewers.
I wouldn’t think it would have to be made explicit for male viewers, but maybe it has to, because O’Dowd sure as hell doesn’t seem to understand why Annie was boinking Ted.
The Annie Walker character was not having wild sex with Ted because she is a slut or is slutty.
Annie was being sexually exploited by the Ted character. She was not even enjoying the sex they were having.
Annie was using sex to try to get her emotional and relationship needs met by Ted – but it wasn’t working because Ted was selfish.
The cop character, Rhodes, who was played by O’Dowd, was the male foil to the Ted character: he was the genuine Nice Guy. Rhodes sincerely liked Annie and cared about her, unlike Ted.
Rhodes wanted to have a relationship with Annie, not only a roll in the hay. I would assume that Rhodes was not a selfish jerk in the sack but cared about pleasing Annie sexually, unlike Ted.
I have no idea how in the hell the actor who played Rhodes in this movie cannot understand any of this.
O’Dowd has said in other interviews that the Ted character is “repulsive.” So, he does understand on some level that Ted is a jerk, and most women aren’t going to find Ted’s personality or behavior attractive. So, that much is good.
But he apparently doesn’t understand why women do what they do. At all.
O’Dowd says he viewed the movie, he saw it in a theater. Did he really? Annie’s best friend, Lillian, explains early in the film WHY Annie is having sex with Ted, and it’s not because Annie is “slutty.”
As Lillian says to Annie in the film, near the opening (I’m paraphrasing here):
“You always feel bad after you spend the night with Ted. It’s almost as though you’re sleeping with him to punish yourself, because you feel bad about yourself. Why don’t you hold out for a guy who will treat you well instead?”
And right there, in the first 20 minutes of the film, the film itself, through the Lillian character, tells us Annie’s motivations for sleeping with the creep Ted. (And once more, her motivation does not include sluttiness.) Was O’Dowd asleep during that part of the movie and missed it?
It is just sad to me and utterly amazing that the actor who played the Nice Guy in the movie, Rhodes, turns around in real-life interviews and trash-talks the character (Annie) that his character has feelings for in the movie.
I have more to say about some of these things regarding O’Dowd in a future post or two but will leave that for later.
I want to repeat this idea again to make it very, very clear:
The Annie character was not sleeping with Ted because she was slutty. She was sleeping with Ted because she was depressed, her life was at a low point, and she didn’t believe she deserved a guy who would treat her well.
O’DOWD’S TWEETING OF HIS WIFE’S PHOTO
I came across this some time ago and wish I had not seen it:
via Daily Mail:
‘There are times to boast about your sexy new wife’: Newlywed Chris O‘Dowd tweets stunning pic of lingerie-clad Dawn Porter (September 2012)
“The Bridesmaids actor treated his 186,000 Twitter followers to a saucy snap of the 33-year-old journalist looking super-sexy in satin and lace underwear.”
..The 32-year-old actor wrote alongside the intimate snap: ‘There are times for restraint and there are times to boast about your sexy new wife! LOOK WHAT I GOT!!! @hotpatooties.’
But it would seem Dawn was less than happy at the picture being posted on the internet.
She joked on her Twitter page: ‘That wasn’t the wedding photo I was planning to release. #husbands!!!!’
Yes, there is a photo on there of Porter in her skimpy underwear standing, in what appears to be a hotel room, that O’Dowd took and Tweeted to the public.
A lot of men (and some women) consider this behavior acceptable and consider it “flattering.”
Why do I have a problem with this? Because it’s sexist. He’s objectifying his wife.
I find it odd that O’Dowd would engage in this behavior, as he is an anti-theist atheist.
Well, a lot of Protestant, evangelical Christian men (you know, the total opposite of Richard Dawkins fan boys) have the habit of going on Facebook and Twitter, publishing photos of THEIR wives, and declaring, “Look at my Smokin’ Hot Wife!!”
This tendency of Christian husbands or Christian preachers to refer to their wives as “Smoking Hot,” or to post photos of their wives on social media with hash tags such as “Smokin’ Hot Wife,” finally got some much-needed push-back from other Christians – both men and women – who realize how sexist and repugnant it is.
Here are a few of the editorials Christians have written in opposition to the Christian “Smokin’ Hot Wife” habit (I feel many to most of their points are equally applicable to an atheist man who also does this same thing to his wife):
Smokin’ Hot Wives and Water to the Soul by Z. Hoag
I’m Sick Of Hearing About Your Smoking Hot Wife by Mary Demuth
I’d really like to know why a self-professing atheist (who is also VERY condescending and obnoxious about his atheism – read more about that in this other post on my blog) such as actor Chris O’Dowd – is emulating Christian men on this score?
I would assume an atheist who feels so negatively towards people of faith as O’Dowd does would be doing his best to distance himself from most to anything Christian husbands do, say, or believe. But that is not the case here.
How peculiar O’Dowd is no different from some Christian men who also like posting photos of their wives in various states of un-dress for the world to gawk at.
When you men do this sort of thing (post sexy photos of your wife online or publicly brag about her physical appearance), you are indicating that the primary quality you value in your wife is her physical appearance – which is not flattering. It’s sexist and rather demeaning or degrading.
Why would you want other men, strangers to you, to check your wife out?
Any time you publicly go on and on about what a Sexy Thang your wife is, or post photos of her in her stiletto heels and so forth, you are basically inviting other men out there to look upon your wife as a sex object and possibly to have sexual fantasies about her, which is completely revolting.
You’re over 30 years of age, not a 15 year old high school boy – this type of behavior is unseemly and immature.
Television, movies, and advertisements already tell women that their only values are in their looks, sex appeal, and baby-making ability – even in the year 2016.
Why do we not see husbands tweeting things like, “My wife is funny,” “My wife is really caring and thoughtful,” or “My wife is talented,” or “My wife is smart”? No, it’s almost always some comment on the wife’s sex appeal or looks. It’s very Donald Trump-like behavior.
And knowing what an extreme liberal O’Dowd is, does he really want to run around behaving like sexist Donald Trump, who is currently running for President as a Republican?
(Side note regarding my views on Trump: while I do believe Trump is sexist, and I abhor sexism, I do not have a rabid, irrational hatred or fear of the man as so many left wingers do.
I am a right winger who did not like any of the candidates who ran in the 2016 election, but I am willing to be open minded and give Trump a chance to see how he handles the office.)
I could totally picture Donald Trump tweeting a photo of his wife Melania half-nude saying, “Hey everyone, look what I got! My wife is so smoking hot.”
Men of the world: If you find your wife attractive, that is all well and good, but tell her in private.
Broadcasting this attitude in public is more for you to impress other men. You are inviting other men to lust and leer at your wife and treat her like a piece of meat.
I cannot picture the character O’Dowd played in ‘Bridesmaids’ doing something like this.
The Nathan Rhodes character from ‘Bridesmaids’ would never Tweet a photo of his girlfriend or a wife in skimpy underwear and brag about her sex appeal – he’d most likely be appalled by men who do this, which is one reason of a few so many women liked that character, hello.
Edit, Feb. 2017. I came across this (I haven’t watched the video it describes):
Back in 2012, actor and funnyman Chris O’Dowd was checking out near naked ladies in a sweaty sports hall.
It’s not quite what you think.
The vintage video that has been making a comeback online was actually a tongue-in-cheek sketch creating to highlight male breast cancer.
Created by the charity Coppafeel, the footage sees Chris play the part of Lars Larson – a topless trampolining health and safety officer.
A bevy of beauties are seen limbering up and stripping off in preparation for the topless trampoline world championships.
The athletes don tiny pink knickers and knee high socks – and nothing else – to show off some energetic moves on the trampoline.
Lars is on hand when things get a bit tense to provide stretching exercises and soothing massages.
He also has some expert guidance for the bouncy babes.
“It’s my job to make sure that they’re ok,” Lars tells the camera.
But as the clip ends it becomes clear what the true message of the video is about, as Lars says: “Men can get breast cancer too.
“But there is good news because early detection can save lives.”
Yes, I realize the stunt was intended for charity (to draw attention to male breast cancer), but still, no. I don’t find it appropriate or very “feminist.”
And again, I have zippo desire to see the guy who played a gentleman in 2011’s “Bridesmaids” film in a 2012 commercial exploiting women by having them jump around topless and so forth. Good lord.
O’DOWD, MEGAN FOX, AND FEMINISM
A few years ago, the media carried quotes by O’Dowd, where he ostensibly dressed down movie director Michael Bay for his sexist treatment of Megan Fox during filming of some movie or some such.
However, O’Dowd later issued an apology to Bay, which Bay put on his blog (I’m not clear if O’Dowd e-mailed it to Bay, snail mailed it to him, or what).
The fact that O’Dowd walked back his defense of Fox did not sit well with the liberal feminists at this site:
Via Think Progress:
The Fleeting Hollywood Feminism of Chris O’Dowd by Alyssa Rosenberg
That blog post discusses an apology that O’Dowd sent to Bay, which appears on Bay’s blog here (date of post: March 16, 2012)
Excerpt from apology as it appears on Bay’s blog:
Anyway, I [Chris O’Dowd] genuinely feel bad if this has hurt your [Bay’s] feelings. It was always unlikely we’d ever work together given our differing genres and my own general physical ineptitude. But I hate the idea of offending anyone unnecessarily, that’s really not me. So please accept this apology with the sincerity from which it comes.
I will probably be using that quote in another, future post on my blog.
Getting back to the page at Think Progress, (by Alyssa Rosenberg):
What my pals at The Mary Sue neglect to mention, however, is that O’Dowd almost immediately took back his remarks, making it clear that he wasn’t calling out one of the most sexist directors in Hollywood for being sexist — he wanted to be clear that it’s the mean ol’ press that’s to blame
…As Teju Cole writes, “we agree that there is rampant misogyny, but misogynists are nowhere to be found; homophobia is a problem but no one is homophobic.”
—(end quote by Cole)–
Particularly not when they’re in charge of billion dollar franchises, and might be in a position to kick some of that money in your direction.
—(end Think Progress excerpt)—
In other words, and if I am understanding Rosenberg’s take on this correctly, she’s suggesting that O’Dowd is more concerned with being black-listed in Hollywood, in not receiving movie roles from Bay in particular, or from others in general, if he did not apologize to Bay, and getting more movie parts is more important to O’Dowd than speaking up on behalf of women. That may be true. I’m not sure. But there it is.
Here is another article about this story:
Transformed! Bridesmaids‘ Chris O’Dowd Apologizes to Michael Bay for Potty-Mouthed Rant (March 2012, E! News site)
CHILDREN’S BOOKS AND GIRLS
I read somewhere months ago that O’Dowd wrote a book or two for children, which are based on some TV show he made in Ireland (or Britain?) called Moone Boy. (I’ve never seen this show.)
I then headed over to book sites to see if there was any information about these books – and there is.
Here is a review or two parents left for one of the books on Amazon, the book is entitled “Moone Boy: The Blunder Years” (book published in 2015, I think) – some of the reviewers found the attitudes in the book towards little girls troubling.
Assuming that these reviews are conveying the book’s content accurately, I too find some of the treatment of female characters troubling or sexist.
Remember what I said above in this post about Benevolent Sexism? It may be at work in this book by O’Dowd and his co-author.
(I have some concluding comments below these review excerpts.)
Book Reviews by Readers from Amazon’s Site Regarding Chris O’Dowd’s Books For Children
Review by EpiLady, May 2015 (on Amazon’s book site):
Ok book for kids, but a fair amount of anti-girl sentiment is expressed
…Martin Moone (“Moone Boy” is 11, and has an imaginary friend because he lives in a household with 3 sisters and he and his dad feel like small potatoes.
….Martin expresses a lot of anti-female opinion, so girls are unlikely to find this a really compelling read. It’s not well balanced in that sense, and Martin doesn’t really grow as a character.
It’s based on a TV show, which this reader has not watched.
Review by A in B, June 2015:
—(end review by A in B)—
Review by Bluerose’s Heart:
…Next, while I’m not naive in the world of sibling rivalry (I had a sister and a brother, and I have 3 boys of my own….plenty of rivalry experience), I didn’t really care for some of the remarks in here.
At one point Martin struggles to get the image of his sister’s weird mole, back acne, and tufts of shoulder hair out of his mind. Turning to physical issues for humor typically bugs me. I’ve worked hard with my little ones to not laugh or point out physical things/issues about people. Sometimes it’s a live and learn kind of thing, but I wouldn’t hand over a book like this to them.
I stopped reading about halfway through, but from scanning through, Martin even offers his sister’s boobs as bait for a bully problem at one point.
Due to the female “disrespect” within the book, I wouldn’t recommend this to girls (at least).
There’s also gross stuff. At one point, a man holds one of his nostrils, sucks snot back into his nose, and then hocks and spits it on the ground. ((gag)) The books almost lost me completely right there.
Showing it to my husband, he just shrugged in a carefree manner, so that kind of thing apparently doesn’t bother the male gender as much as it does me (even as a young child). He didn’t find it funny, though, thankfully.
Lastly, I didn’t care for the profanity in the book. It seems like it’s getting more and more common in middle grade books. I even have a few middle grade favorites with some here and there.
Between the profanity and the slang and even some more mature things within the book, though, I was just surprised with this being in the middle grade realm.
So, if none of that bothers you, sure, give it a try. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t laugh several times! Still, I won’t be adding to my sons’ bookshelf, nor could I comfortably recommend it.
—(end review by Bluerose’s Heart)—
Review by Kim L. Roberts, August 2015:
I’m not sure who this book is aimed at.
I read it with the idea of giving it to my 7 year old nephew to read. I am so glad I chose to read it first. This book contains themes that are not appropriate for young readers; boob feeling, a father drunk on gin, very derogatory views of women.
Apart from that, its just not very funny. I was unsure who the main protagonist was. Is it 11 year old Martin or the 30-something imaginary friend. You certainly don’t feel for Martin, as the writers describe him as an idiot and useless.
This book is written without love by people who think they are funny (they’re not!)
Review by Guitar Guy Tim, July 2015:
Being a fan of the show on Hulu, I found the book very humorous. That being said, I was reading it to see if it was appropriate for my 8-year-old son, and there’s no way I’d let him read it…
I was hoping Moone Boy would be the Irish equivalent of Diary of a Wimpy Kid, but it’s not. The target demographic is definitely older than elementary school children.
…Okay, so if you’ve seen the show, the plot is very similar to the first episode, including the bullies payment getting to feel Martin’s sister’s boobs (they use several additional terms to describe her chest, some of which you may consider vulgar). I’m not sure this is elementary school appropriate (at least not for my kid).
There is a bit of language, nothing beyond a PG rating (damn, hell, God). They also use several other semi-crude phrases. So yeah, Chris O’Dowd is a very funny man. For me, being 35, I laughed a lot… For my son, he needs a few more years.
Review by B. McCarthy, May 2015:
I was a little disappointed in this book. I have both daughters and a son, and I didn’t realize quite how derogatory it would be to the girls. I always try to get them to get along well, so I am not too big a fan of anything that really exaggerates a bad relationship between the two of them.
There were a few other issues. I felt that some of the things in it were a little older, especially for the youngest ages this is recommended for.
— (end review by McCarthy)—–
Review by Loves Those Books, May 2015:
When I picked out this book for my 11 year old daughter and I to read I did not know it was based on a TV show.
My daughter found it to be a quick and easy read and really enjoyed the illustrations.
However we were both turned off by how derogatory the book was towards girls. If you are a fan of the show I have no doubt you will be a fan of this book.
— (end review by Loves Those Books)—–
Review by Connie (She Who Hikes With Dogs), May 2015:
I must admit that this is an interestingly humorous read, especially since it’s geared toward younger readers.
While the graphics and the narrative look and read like that of a younger male, the content is a little bit older, and there is definitely a “foreign” (Irish) feel to this, a more mature and more serious attitude about relationships that many American families may find offensive.
There are a lot of footnotes in this book, but most of them are there for added sarcasm, like “machismo – a manly strength some men gain by drinking Italian coffee” or for explaining the many strange Irish customs or lingo.
Bullying, by either Martin’s three sisters or his school classmates come up a lot. Martin is the youngest child in a family of three other girls. Both Martin and his father Liam feel usurped by the women in the home, and part of the story is Martin’s attitude about living with all these women and their “feminine needs.”
He wants a strong dad, so his imaginary friend is an adult with a beard, a stronger character than his own father. Local boy and bully Declan Mannion convinces Martin to let his sister Trisha met him so that he, Declan can fondle her boobs. While the event doesn’t go quite so calmly, it does change Declan.
— (end review by Connie)—–
Review by Alan, Sept 2016:
It’s as “child appropriate” as the show. I opened to the first random page to “boobs” and decided this would not be an appropriate book for a parent to hand his 14-year-old son (let alone his younger brother). Don’t let the Diary of a Wimpy kid page design fool you.
— (end review by Alan)—–
Review by Kids Reads, 2015 (excerpt):
… However, there are also a few things that I didn’t like about MOONE BOY [book]. I thought there was just a wee bit too much mention of female body parts, especially for boys in this age group.
Of course, there were several reviewers who left glowing reviews, who said they found this book wonderful and so on, but look at the reviews I’ve included here above.
Notice the themes in those reviews I presented? How some of the reviewers point out how little girls are insulted and objectified by O’Dowd and his co-writer in this book?
I find that troubling. I read that O’Dowd and his wife, Dawn Porter, had a baby son in 2015.
I wonder, if O’Dowd and his wife have a baby girl, would O’Dowd continue to objectify little girls in books or other media? Probably not.
WOMEN: NOT JUST DAUGHTERS, MOTHERS, WIVES
Although it should not take a man having a daughter of his own to realize that using insults of teen girls or little girls, or sexualizing them, in books for laughs is rather sexist and distasteful. This should be self-evident. I should not have to explain this in a blog post.
A lot of men miss this point, however. I’ve read online where some men say they didn’t realize how terrible and common sexism is until they had a daughter of their own.
Please read more on that subject at the following pages (I have some concluding remarks below this set of links, so please keep reading):
Related (written by a father of daughters):
From satire site The Onion (yes, it’s satire, but it makes the point nicely):
——Edit, July 12, 2017.
I just saw a headline go through my Twitter today that O’Dowd and his wife, Dawn, had their second kid today (okay, the article says they had the kid on July 1, 2017), and I was dismayed to see they have a second son.
I really think O’Dowd needs to have a daughter.
Unfortunately, too many men (such as him) remain blind to how pervasive sexism is in culture, and remain blind to their own sexism, until they have a daughter of their own:
From The Sun’s site:
The presenter and her comedian partner have welcomed a second son
By Nola Ojomu, Showbiz Reporter
DAWN O’Porter has given birth to her second child after welcoming another son with her husband, Chris O’Dowd.
The TV presenter shared the happy news with her fans on Instagram as she revealed they had named their son, Valentine.
Taking to social media to share a snap of their newborn, Dawn gushed: “Happy to announce I am the proud owner of this chirpy little chap.
“Born July 1st, his name is Valentine O’Porter, and he is so delicious. Two sons, my goodness #soinlove”.
The star opted to cut her child’s face out of the shot as she showed off his cute duck baby gro.
(end news excerpts)
I guess the name “Valentine” is a slight step up from their first kid’s name, “Art.”
But really, Dawn needs to pop out a baby girl so, as liberals would put it, her husband can be “woke” to the realities of sexism.
I had really wanted to like O’Dowd in real life, as his character from ‘Bridesmaids’ was so sweet and likable, but in real life, the guy makes me want to Barf. A few reasons why:
O’Dowd is a little on the smug side; he’s very disrespectful, rude, and arrogant concerning religion and politics in interviews and on social media (and has not to this day apologized for any of this, even when give the chance by a journalist a few years ago); he finds it funny he’s possibly disappointed women who liked him from ‘Bridesmaids’ for playing a jerk in subsequent films (no loyalty there to his audience); and he is a little sexist. (I wrote more about all that in another post located here).
Cannot figure out why O’Porter married the guy.
And there you have it. The guy who played Rhodes, who was respectful towards Annie in ‘Bridesmaids,’ in real life consistently displays sexism of the ‘benevolent,’ or mildly old-fashioned, variety.
And O’Dowd actually ascribes Annie’s bedroom antics with Ted – which was brought on by her depression and low self esteem – as being due to nothing but plain old sluttiness, which shows a lack of compassion and an understanding of women and the Annie character specifically.
All of which again, makes it rather difficult for me to enjoy repeated viewings of ‘Bridesmaids,’ which served, at one time, to be one of my movies of choice when I was feeling down and need cheering up. (I have more to say in a future post or two about all this, such as this one.)