For years, I have always loved the movie Love & Basketball (2000) because of
the female strength that it features, as well as, of course, the passionate
love between the main characters. This film tells the story of two childhood
friends, Quincy (Omar Epps) and Monica (Sanaa Lathan), whose relationship
evolves as they both grow up and pursue professional basketball careers. The struggle
between love and basketball forces the characters to negotiate, within
themselves and each other, the values and priorities in their lives. Q and
Monica begin as friends at age 11 but Q immediately feels threatened by her desire to play basketball with the boys. Nonetheless, he tries to start a young
romance with Monica but soon realizes that she is not going to be an easy
catch. Monica is strong-willed and refuses to let any boy tell her what to do,
a common theme within the film. Throughout grade school, Q’s cocky attitude
and Monica’s uptight demeanor result in the two being in a sort of love-hate relationship.
When they both choose to attend the same college to play ball, their platonic
relationship turns romantic. Eventually, as life's conflicts get in the way, the
couple splits. Several years later, the two reunite and leave the future of
their relationship up to a game of one-on-one, where love wins all and Q and
Monica go on to get married and have children.
Scene 1: The first scene I analyzed takes place when Q and Monica are young kids and Q thinks that it is time for the pair to become boyfriend and girlfriend. When Monica asks what she has to do to be his “girl”, he responds by saying that they could play ball, and she’ll get mad at him and he’ll by her flowers, or twinkies at her request. Furthermore, Q insists that Monica rides on his bike because that is what his parents do. Monica wants no part of this, refusing to ride on his bike instead of her own. Q effectively dumps her and calls her “stupid”.
This scene portrays the idea that men, when they feel like
it’s the right time, should make the move to start a relationship, similar to
Kim et al.’s (2007) male courtship strategy that states that men should take the
first initiative in dating (p. 148). Q’s belief that he should buy Monica
flowers, or twinkies, also parallels Kim et al.’s (2007) male courtship
strategy of asserting courting power through buying gifts (p. 148). Finally, two
of Holz Ivory’s (2009) dominant codes are seen when Q immediately dumps Monica
for not riding his bike. The codes seen are “makes decisions” (with little
hesitation), and “drives motor vehicle” (p. 181). In this scene, it is clear
that the male should follow typical gender scripts by taking initiative, making
decisions in a relationship, and showing their overall strength.
As for the way women should act, this scene shows that
should stand up for what they want and not let men make their decisions. Monica
acts as a counterscript to several of the codes we have seen in class. For
example, both Ward’s (1995) and Kim et al.’s (2007) code of passivity is
refuted here. Monica is anything but passive as she puts her foot down firmly.
Monica also portrays some of Holz Ivory’s (2009) dominant codes, such as “showing
physical violence” when the pair wrestle after Q dumps her (p. 182). Typically,
these dominant codes are prevalent in male characters. Monica strongly defies
these stereotypes in this scene.
I also find the entire nature of the scene, (the fact that
two young kids are trying work out a relationship) rather humorous and telling,
as it shows the absurdity of some of society’s beliefs about relationships - as
in, the list of things that Q says Monica should do as his “girl”. Hearing what
a relationship is supposed to be so flat out, spoken by young kids, sheds light
on how these norms are kind of ridiculous, yet no one thinks that when grown-ups
are doing these things.
Scene 2: In the next chosen scene, Monica and Q return home
from a school dance to which they attended with different dates. They both reveal
that they did not enjoy their time with their dates - Q did not sleep with his
date even though Monica thought he did, and Monica did not enjoy her date
feeling her up even though Q assumed she did. Next, the two reveal that they
will be attending the same college in the following year. Out of excitement,
Monica kisses Q. As they continue kissing, Monica pulls away, but then eventually
stands up and invites him over and they end up having sex for the first time
together.
(I couldn’t find a clip of this one! But it’s the one I showed
in class!)
This scene is interesting as it shows audiences what the
stereotypes, or gender roles, are supposed to be - but then it quickly shows
that these two characters in particular, are not following these norms. Q was
supposed to go home with his date and sleep with her, but he does not, a counterscript
to Kim et al.’s (2007) male code of Sex as Masculinity which assumes that men
will go great lengths for sex (p. 147).
Similarly, Monica was supposed to sit back and enjoy while
her date felt her up in the car, but she states that she actively kicked him in
the balls… multiple times. This is a counterscript to the common code of women
being passive.
Monica also defies Ward’s (1995) code of women as being
passive and men being initiators when she initiates the kiss with Q and invites
him to go inside (p. 600). When Monica pauses for a second, she reverts back to
Ward’s (2005) script of passivity and setting limits, but that does not last
long, as she continues to defy the norms throughout the movie.
Overall, this scene shows that these two characters did not
fit typical gender norms, and they desired each other because of that, seeing as how they did not enjoy their time with their more stereotypical dates.This
sends a message that breaking norms and being yourself may benefit you, instead
of trying to fit in to the gender roles we are reading about.
Scene 3: The final scene that I analyzed is a fight between
Q and Monica. Q went on a date with another girl and Monica is very angry. Q
claims he did it because Monica was putting her basketball first when she
failed to support him through his family issues. Monica begins by defending
herself and her career, demonstrating her strength. But eventually, Monica gets
very emotional as she tries to reconcile the situation. Q ultimately leaves
her, ending their relationship.
Monica and Q, in this scene, align with typical gender
norms more than in any other scene. The fact that Q sees another woman because Monica
is not there for him shows that he is devaluing the relationship, expecting her
to not have a career, and is overall, dominating (Holz Ivory, 2007, p. 181). Monica, similarly, follows Holz Ivory’s (2007)
codes of submissiveness as she apologizes, tries to fix the relationship, and
begins crying (p. 182). Q has no emotion when he decides to leave her,
exhibiting his lack of caring about the relationship and his tendency to make decisions with little hesitation. The contrast between Monica trying to fix the relationship and Q
quickly ending it exemplifies Kim et al.’s (2007) codes of Female and Masculine
commitment.
Overall, this movie actively refutes typical gender norms,
most notably those of females. Monica’s character is a tom-boy, a basketball
star, strong-willed, and motivated. She shows no sign of passivity, little
emotion, and she rarely objectifies herself (except for when her mother and
sister insisted on her wearing a dress to prom). The notion of the strong
female who strives for an independent career contrasts many ideas that women
should be taken care of, and that men should be the strong partner in the
relationship. This film not only contrasts many gender norms, but it explicitly
shows them and almost mocks them. In the end, the truest love that prevails is based on friendship and connection, not appearance or sex.
References
Holz Ivory, A., Gibson R., & Ivory, J. D. (2009). Gendered
relationships on television: Portrayals of
same-sex and heterosexual couples. Mass Communications & Society, 12(2), 170-192.
Kim, J. L., Sorsoli, C. L., Collins, K., Zylbergold, B. A.,
Schooler, D., & Tolman, D. L. (2007).
From sex
to sexuality: Exposing the heterosexual scripts on primetime network television. Journal of Sex Research, 44(2), 145-157.
Ward, L. M. (1995). Talking about sex: Common themes about sexuality in
the prime-time television programs children and adolescents view most. Journal of Youth and Adolescence
No comments:
Post a Comment