What's with the sexist anti-male generalizations at the end of the film?

::sigh:: How come sticking up for women's proven abilities to do things well constitutes "a hateful note"? Sorry, but your post is a complete non sequitur to me. In fact, I wonder if you're telling the truth about how you feel about the movie when you say you like his "ideology" and calling it "socialist," a buzzword used by people on the right to discredit people on the left, usually without any evidence. Like in your post, for example.

—
"How was the war, sir?"
"As any war, ma'am, a waste of good men." (Poldark)

Og, so you're one of those idiots who thinks feminism is being anti-men 

Men's greediness was responsible for the financial crisis, that's a fact.




If I don't reply, you're most likely on my ignore list

I don't think many white males in the U S have suffered sexism or discrimination or oppression. Pointing out that females and minorities and white males are all equal human beings isn't being sexist to white men. Michael Moore has reiterated that in his work and he happens to be a white male himself. He also is not a socialist but points out how such programs are successful in other nations without a huge tax burden on its citizens.

Men were responsible for the financial crisis, men are responsible for war, only women can save the world, risk-taking is always bad, authoritarian quotas who force organizations to hire based on gender not merit are A-OK and so on.

What happened to Moore's argument for equality and equality of opportunity (NOT equality of outcome since one cancels the other) during the rest of the movie? Why did he have to and it on such a hateful note?

It's a shame, I really liked the movie and, honestly, I fully agree with the rest of Moore's ideology which isn't just socialist but also anti-authoritarian.

I did not like Moore's appeasement of "hardcore feminism" in the movie, it was one of the weak points. I'm all for equality, but the statement that women could save the world from further crisis and financial crashes because they have the common well-being in mind (which was exactly what the Icelandic feminists said) is a very preposterous one to make. Women can be *beep* people just like men can. I also did not like his allegation that it was a good thing that there's a parliament with a majority of women in it - so now suddenly, equality doesn't matter anymore? Weak, Moore. But overall I liked the film.

I agree it was a bit too much. I don't think there is any evidence women would have done better and I certainly did not agree with the gender differences they asserted but to be fair, men have indeed been ruling the world and have cause all this. If you want to be in charge you have to take responsibility for it.

The women-run bank in Iceland that did not go under in 2008 was due to the women's careful investing.

She said - they did not invest in anything they did not understand. (ie: credit default swaps, and such)

It seemed to be a quest to get 'bigger' no matter the risk...ie: a 'big penis competition'.

And she was right.

I'm 100% with you. I was really enjoying this documentary until it got to the "women will save the world part". It painted men as greedy, selfish, uncaring and women as sensitive, loving, more intelligent. There are *beep* men and there are *beep* women. I'm a woman myself and I don't believe one gender is superior to the other.

Really ruined the doc for me. I get enough feminist propaganda shoved in my face on a daily basis. I watch movies to escape that, FFS.