There have been "Hollywood" franchises featuring female leading action characters going back as far as 1904, in movies where the actress handled guns, rode broncos, played doctors, found treasure, fought wild animals and adventured in wild, heathen lands.
These movies, some of them series, were wildly popular.
And since those early days, there was never a time in the American cinema that treated women only as dependent sex symbols except, I should say, perhaps the 1960s...the supposedly liberated era
As usual with most modern debates, people are talking on subjects they know nothing about.
I am sure that many of the people opining on these matters have never seen a movie pre-1990.
The "Hollywood " period 1900-1960 was FULL of major female stars who opened movies on their own names and in a wide range of roles, Barbara Stanwyck, Joan Crawford, Ida Lupino, Susan Hayward, Marie Windsor...we could go on all day.
As on most topics, the commie view of this history is bullshit.
Anyone interested in a good account of the early days of Hollywood that rebuts this commie viewpoint of the history of women in Hollywood could do worse than reading
"Col. William N. Selig: The Man Who Invented Hollywood"
by
Andrew A. Erish
There have been "Hollywood" franchises featuring female leading action characters going back as far as 1904, in movies where the actress handled guns, rode broncos, played doctors, found treasure, fought wild animals and adventured in wild, heathen lands.
These movies, some of them series, were wildly popular.
And since those early days, there was never a time in the American cinema treated women only as dependent sex symbols except, I should say, perhaps the 1960s.
As usual with most modern debates, people are talking on subjects they know nothing about.
I am sure that many of the people opining on these matters have never seen a movie pre-1990.
The "Hollywood " period 1900-1960 was FULL of major female stars who opened movies on their own names and in a wide range of roles, Barbara Stanwyck, Joan Crawford, Ida Lupino, Susan Hayward, Marie Windsor...we could go on all day.
As on most topics, the commie view of this history is bullshit.
Anyone interested in a good account of the early days of Hollywood that rebuts this commie viewpoint of the history of women in Hollywood could do worse than reading
"Col. William N. Selig: The Man Who Invented Hollywood"
by
Andrew A. Erish
There have been "Hollywood" franchises featuring female leading action characters going back as far as 1904, in movies where the actress handled guns, rode broncos, played doctors, found treasure, fought wild animals and adventured in wild, heathen lands.
These movies, some of them series, were wildly popular.
And since those early days, there was never a time in the American cinema treated women only as dependent sex symbols except, I should say, perhaps the 1960s.
As usual with most modern debates, people are talking on subjects they know nothing about.
I am sure that many of the people opining on these matters have never seen a movie pre-1990.
The "Hollywood " period 1900-1960 was FULL of major female stars who opened movies on their own names and in a wide range of roles, Bette Davis, Susan Hayward, Marie Windsor...we could go on all day.
As on most topics, the commie view of this history is bullshit.
Anyone interested in a good account of the early days of Hollywood that rebuts this commie viewpoint of the history of women in Hollywood could do worse than reading
"Col. William N. Selig: The Man Who Invented Hollywood"
by
Andrew A. Erish