Lyssa Beyer

“Sleepless in Seattle.” “Kate and Leopold.” “Joe vs. the Volcano.” What do all of these movies have in common (other than starring Meg Ryan)? They are part of a group of unfairly maligned movies dubbed “chick flicks.”

We need to put this idiotic term to rest. No, I am not some feminazi, but we really do need to stop maligning any movie that might cause an emotional reaction as being only suitable for women. Also, if we are going to continue to use this arcane and sexist term then it’s only fair that we create an equally sexist term for “guy movies.” How about “glorified testosterone flick?”

I’m guessing that when most (but not necessarily all) people hear a movie referred to as a “chick flick” negative connotations come to mind. Some of these include but are not limited to movies with a thin plot, generally perpetuating gender stereotypes and that no macho guy should be caught dead seeing them, at least without his buddies finding out.

The term “chick flick” does a disservice to both sexes. For women, it implies that they are only capable of appreciating a movie that is fluffy in the plot department or a movie that induces any sort of emotional reaction and has romance in it. There is also a disservice to men in the use of this term that often goes unaddressed. No doubt we have all heard the expression “boys don’t cry.” The term “chick flick” also implies that men need to conform to this stereotype. Why is it so wrong for men to show emotion? To me, that shows someone who is secure in their masculinity and is emotionally stable. What’s wrong with that?

Is there also a problem with women who enjoy “guy movies?” I hope not, because many “guy movies” are high on my list of top films. “Die Hard” and “Fight Club” are prime examples. I can enjoy “Joe vs. the Volcano” (which is also generally overlooked for its greatness, but that’s another story) and another night “Die Hard.” Just because I’m female doesn’t mean I don’t like, as film critic Roger Ebert often says, “seeing stuff get blowed up real good.”

I thought about this a lot the other night while watching Ridley Scott’s “Alien.” That movie has one of the best female characters in cinema history. Ripley, played brilliantly by Sigourney Weaver, is smart, tough, and a survivor. Interestingly enough, the Internet Movie Database notes in its trivia section on the movie that the part was originally written for a man. “Alien” is probably considered to be more of a “guy movie;” that does a great disservice to all the female moviegoers out there who appreciate the rapidly disappearing strong female lead character.

Here’s a radical idea – how about referring to a great movie as just a “great movie” instead of downgrading it for its perceived target audience? The other problem with the term “chick flick” is that since it has a generally negative connotation, people are missing out on the few good movies out there that could be considered this type of flick. As an example, I will use “The Notebook.” When the movie came out, all I heard was that it was a tearjerker and it was based on a Nicholas Sparks novel and, oh yes, it was a “chick flick.” I avoided it in the theaters because it sounded like an overdone pandering melodrama about Alzheimer’s. Later, at the behest of one of my best friends, I rented it. To my amazement, I found it to be one of the most thoughtful, well-acted movies I’d seen in a long time. Just because a movie contains romance and deep emotions does not mean it should be intended for one gender instead of the other. These days the pool of good movies is pretty shallow, so we need to take advantage of the good ones that come along.

Whether a film’s climax involves people finding out they truly love each other or a high rise getting blown up by terrorists on Christmas Eve, the movie should be appreciated for its cultural value instead of getting slapped with a destructive label. Putting an end to the term “chick flick” certainly won’t cease the continued sexism in our society, but it would certainly be a good start. So the next time you go to the movie theater and you see a guy tearing up, don’t chastise him – offer him a Kleenex, instead.

Sitzman is a senior print journalism major and guest columnist for The Spectator.