Somebody's Watching You: Can Movies Make Stalking Romantic?

It is always refreshing to watch a movie that, armed with a dedicated cast and miniscule budget, reinvents a genre. Marianna Palka’s directorial debut Good Dick is one such movie. The title is misleading because while it does include its fair share of adult content, the movie is most importantly an authentic and hopeful film that challenges all the predictable romantic comedy stereotypes.

The basic plot is this; a “man” (he is never named in the film) who works in a video rental store becomes interested in a troubled “woman” who comes in every day to rent erotic videos. He gets her address from the rental directory and begins an incredibly bizarre courtship, one that involves him attempting to win her affections while slowly becoming a permanent part of her life.

What makes this movie so fascinating is the dynamic between the lead characters, played by Marianna Palka and Jason Ritter (who are also a couple off-camera). Their interaction is both heartwarming and heartbreaking to watch. The “man” does everything he can to win the “woman’s” trust despite the fact that she continually ignores or rejects him. Most of the time she is blatantly abusive. The fact that he sticks around, living amidst a constant strain of belittling insults, borders on masochist (in one of the more comic moments of the film, Ritter's character ends a heated argument by nonchalantly stating, "I love you. This fight is over.").

Yet stick around he does. He visits her at her apartment, starts spending the night, and eventually moves in with her. At which point you have to ask yourself…when did stalking become an acceptable form of courtship? I then realized that some of my other favorite movies also involve stalking. The follow-you-home-and-watch-you-through-your-window kind of stalking. For example:

Bed of Roses. A florist sees a woman crying in her window and follows her to work the next morning. Surely he wants to strangle her and wear her skin as a coat….no, he just wants to show her his elaborate rooftop garden.

50 First Dates. A marine biologist falls in love with a woman who suffers from short-term memory loss so he memorizes her schedule and “accidentally” runs into her every day…because come on, is it really stalking if she can’t remember it?

Untamed Heart. A shy busboy follows a waitress home every night to make sure she makes it there safely. Oh yeah, and he also climbs into her room and watches her sleep…isn’t breaking and entering cute?

Apparently one person’s creepy is my adorable. Blind romanticism and willful suspension of disbelief only got me so far before I had a “WTF???” moment of enlightenment. In reality I am fairly certain these women would have reacted much less favorably than they did in these movies, responses ranging from concerned to terrified.

Now my friend says ‘it’s only stalking if you don’t like the guy.’ True, but I think this explanation is too simplistic and one that gives the concept of initial attraction way too much credit. The female characters in Good Dick and 50 First Dates certainly didn’t like the male characters initially but over time they became interested. Time that was entirely facilitated by stalking.

‘It’s only stalking if he’s not a nice guy’ may be more accurate? These guys are sweet, caring, and most importantly harmless. At times they may be shy or awkward but serial killers they are not. But I believe the romance of it all has more to do with the dedication of these particular male characters and what that says about their masculinity. When asked by Chris Wilkinson of Eye for Film whether Ritter’s character was justified in his actions, Palka responded:

“What makes his character a hero is that he is very consistent. He has a very quiet strength and a real patience, which is an interesting thing to include in an illustration of masculinity.”

The women in these films have some deeply rooted issues. Whether it’s a history of abuse or a physical brain disorder they have some understandable difficulties trusting people. The fact that these men end up stalking the object of their affection may seem over the top but it may also be the only way to prove to these women that they aren’t going anywhere. Actions speak louder than words, especially when 90% of the population is relationship ADD. These guys are real people who see other real people, people who are different but deserve to be loved, and they are patient enough to stick around and prove it to them.

Gentle, patient, dedicated, and consistent is a far cry from the traditional masculine image of powerful, confrontational, and charismatic. Some may read “gentle and patient” as “pushover” but that is not the case. These men are confident even if in some cases it is a subdued confidence. After all, you have to be confident to be a stalker don‘t you? What would be the point if you didn’t honestly believe that you were charming enough to win them over if you just hang around them long enough?

This form of courtship is not a new concept. Chivalry, still frequently referenced as the model for polite male behavior, was built around unhealthy and unrealistic obsessions. A chivalrous knight defined his masculinity by dedicating his entire existence to a worthy lady of status. This poor man would write sonnets, fight battles, and possibly even die defending the honor of some woman that in all likelihood he would never even meet. This level of dedication seems unnecessary. If I am going to die defending the honor of a man he better buy me dinner first.

Stalking is also unnecessary and certainly not the romantic standard I would hold someone to, but I wouldn’t mind seeing that level of dedication and patience more often. Just remember, its all fun and games until someone gets a restraining order.

Read the entire Eye for Film interview with Marianna Palka and Jason Ritter here.

Quite A Catch...

This is what happens when a guy badgers a girl into giving him her number. The first voicemail was kind of funny, in a wow this is pathetic kind of way. But the second message? This guy needs to pray to his Greek gods for a clue.

http://melodymaker.posterous.com/the-reason-some-girls-stay-single-very-funny

The Self-Respect Wars: A Call for Women to Boycott the Commitment-Phobic "Friend"

Recently I have encountered a scenario, both through personal experience and through the experiences of friends, that weighs heavily on my heart. It’s a classic scenario in the same league as the guy-who-isn’t-over-his-ex and the guy-who-verbally-abuses-you-because-he-cares.

It’s the guy-who-is-dating-you-but-isn‘t-ACTUALLY-dating-you.

He tells everyone you are “just friends.” He never wants you to meet his friends, let alone hang out with them. He texts you more than he calls you. Any time you meet it is just the two of you and kept secret, because why have people talk? Heaven forbid your friends and his friends actually talk about the untraditional nature of your quasi-relationship.

It is hard to adequately express my frustration with these boys. What I’m desperate to know is this: exactly WHERE did they learn that this sort of thing is acceptable?

Who, for pete's sake, is rounding all the men up and telling them they are entitled to have all the benefits of a romantic relationship, emotional and/or physical, without having to actually commit to a relationship? Whoever this person is, they need to be stopped. And shipped to Sweden immediately. Preferably in pieces.

At least they used to date you for a few weeks before they dumped you for not putting out. Now they don’t even respect you enough to let you claim ownership of a simple label for an unknown period of time, usually to be determined by them. No, they would rather do whatever they need to do to keep the “friendship“ intact, feeding us any number of excuses to keep us just interested enough to not cut them off completely.

And why not? They get to have their cake and eat it too. They get all the emotional fulfillment, the female companionship, and in some cases physical benefits without any of the accountability. They can date other girls (or you know, be “just friends” with another girl like they are “just friends” with you). It’s a sweet deal, and not one they are willing to relinquish without a fight.

In all fairness some men are not even aware they are doing this. Most women have at some point had that male friend that is flirtatious, spends lots of time with you alone, treats you like a princess…but still only sees you as a friend. Meanwhile you’re becoming completely smitten with the guy, getting emotionally attached, and he is none the wiser. If it isn’t intentional, if he is unaware of how his treatment of us is read, then is he really at fault? I keep convincing myself that surely they SHOULD know better…but sometimes they honest to goodness don’t. Sometimes they ARE that oblivious, so we can’t justifiably be angry when they show up with another girl on their arm.

My point then is this. It doesn’t matter if there isn’t a concrete definition or label attached to your relationship. Who cares if he isn’t willing to publicly commit to you; if your relationship with the guy entails anything more than what a strictly platonic friendship includes (ie. extended periods of time spent together, constant communication, and/or physical benefits) then you need to claim that definition for YOURSELF. Don’t let what your friends define as a “relationship” alter your perspective on what a relationship REALLY is. Labels be damned.

If it looks like a relationship, acts like a relationship, and smells like bullshit….

Maybe you decide you are alright with the status-quo, for whatever reason. I am pretty sure every woman has done this. I know I have. The reasons vary of course. Maybe you DON’T need the label. Maybe you just care about him too much to lose him and are willing to settle for whatever you can get. Maybe you hold out hope that if you continue on the path you are currently on, he’ll come to his senses and finally commit to you.

Rationally we understand that in some cases we might be kidding ourselves, but our rational minds and our emotional hearts don’t often see eye to eye. Inevitably our emotional heart usually wins out and we do what we want to do, regardless of what our friends, our brains, or our past experience tells us.

That being said, it is up to every individual woman to figure out what her threshold is. How long are you willing to put up with a quasi-relationship status before putting your foot down? Before establishing boundaries? If he wants to be more than friends, and if he actually does respect you, he should be willing to commit to a dating relationship with you. End. Of. Story.

I implore my gender to stop putting up with the guy-who-wants-all-the-benefits-but-none-of-the-responsibility. We keep letting them get away with it. Until women universally choose to acknowledge that they deserve better, the sorry-excuse-for-a-man in question will simply find another woman with low self-esteem and daddy issues to string along for a while.

I don’t want to be that next woman. They don’t want to relinquish this sweet deal without a fight?

Let’s give them that fight.

Video Killed the Romance: Why Facebook is an Epic Fail in Building Relationships

Relationship etiquette is an art form. It used to be if you met someone you were kind of/possibly interested in, the first thing you would do was grill a common friend for information. Is he single? Is he employed? Is he literate?

Now when you meet someone the first thing you do is add them as a friend on Facebook.

If they accept your request you now have access to the holy grail of personal information about this individual. Too much information. Not only do you know their current relationship status but you also know their taste in music, how photogenic they are, and what Grey’s Anatomy character they most resemble.

Way to kill the mystery.

You used to work for this information. You would go on three or four dates before you started discussing bands you have seen play live or what pizza toppings are non-negotiable. Grey’s Anatomy references wouldn’t come up until at least date #10. Isn’t that the point of dating? To get to know the other person?

We are taking the fun out of getting to know individuals for who they are by making the personal virtual. People can not be summed up in a neat little package of pictures, quotes, and interests. You might be surprised by how much you like a person that, according to their profile, you don’t have much in common with. The expression “opposites attract” didn’t come out of thin air. Someone somewhere understood that a genuine connection is more about how someone laughs, how someone speaks to you, how someone treats their waiter than whether they like the same movies as you.

Also, there is a fine line between stalking and research. Anyone who has had a “facebook stalker” knows exactly what I am talking about. You will know who that person is because the next time you see them they’ll make some completely random reference to a picture you posted 32 seconds ago. These people are probably just bored but it doesn’t remove the creep factor. Tell them to take up scrapbooking or something.

Honestly I am most concerned about the generation born after us, the generation that has grown up with computer technology as an unquestioned element of their day-to-day life. These individuals are more likely to send you a Facebook message than actually pick up the phone and call you. How are they going to survive a face-to-face interview, or a conversation with a grieving friend, let alone a date?

In the long run we end up doing more harm than good because most of us make a much better impression in person than in writing. For example, I might come off as scary in print but in reality I’m quite merciful.

It just takes way too much effort to be this sassy in person.

The Pursuit of Happiness: But Who Pursues Who?

Sixty years ago there was a formula to dating that was simple and straightforward. Boy meets girl, boy asks girl out for a milkshake, boy and girl drink milkshakes, boy takes girl home, then boy decides whether he enjoyed girl’s company enough to buy her another milkshake at a later time. If he did, he would call her again. He would "pursue" her.

This is somewhat archaic terminology glorifying the fact that men love the chase. Evolution will never get rid of this hunter/gatherer mentality. Yet somehow, this formula has not stood the test of time. It’s now unclear who is supposed to be pursuing who.

Putting yourself out there first is scary and rejection sucks. The benefit of the old formula was that this unfortunate responsibility was squarely on the man’s shoulders. A lot of women, including myself, selfishly wish it would stay this way but that is nothing more than reverse sexism. Equal rights means equal opportunity for rejection.

However the dilemma is this; women in general get a lot more attached a lot earlier on than men do. Even more dangerous, women tend to project feelings onto a potential relationship that are not even there. We convince ourselves that this “amazing guy” we met 10 days ago could be the one. Sure you haven’t gone on an honest-to-goodness date yet, but his text messages are SO sincere.

Then there are all the go-to excuses we use as to why a guy we feel a connection with WON‘T pursue us:
“He’s shy.”
“He’s intimidated by my professional success.”
“He’s intimidated by my ability to name all 50 states in alphabetical order. That’s why we went dutch on the bill, because he likes me but was intimidated and all.”

Obviously.

How do we avoid these inevitable justifications? We go on the defense. We choose to take the, “If he likes me he’ll pursue me” approach. Sit back, relax, and let them do all the work. Not necessarily the wrong decision, but is it the fair one?

Not really, but men are not great about asserting themselves if there isn’t anything in it for them. Within minutes of meeting you they have probably already decided whether you are friend-material or relationship-material, but they won’t come out and say which one you are because they don’t want to hurt your feelings. So, their actions end up speaking louder than words. We depend on them to make the first move so we know there is mutual interest and that our feelings are not a convoluted attempt to make something out of nothing.

Also if they aren’t man enough to ask you out, they may not be man enough to date you. Just putting that out there.

Unfortunately there is not a perfect solution to this problem, which is why I miss the “formulaic” 1950’s boy asks out girl approach. But, IDEALLY, I think we should get over ourselves, stop fearing rejection, and pursue someone if we are interested in them. Stop letting the boys have all the fun. If the attention isn’t immediately reciprocated, drop it and move on. If it’s meant to be, aggressive pursuit by either party should be pretty unnecessary. No rocket science involved, no endless re-readings of the Facebook message he sent you last week… "Is this a I’m-teasing-you-because-you’re-like-a-little-sister-to-me message or a -I’m-flirting-with-you-because-I-want-to-suck-face message?”

It’s a you-really-need-a-therapist-so-I-don’t-have-to-listen-to-you’re-unhealthy-obsessing message.