Films from the Horror Age: Ms.45

Abell Ferrara’s Ms.45 (1981) presents a vivid and modern take on the theme of the horrific “phallic female”. The gothic image of the corrupt nun combined with the modern trope of the psycho killer closely allies Ms.45 with the characteristics of the horror film. A rarity for the genre, Ms.45 can be read as a having a feminist political philosophy even though its reliance on exploitation makes a contrary argument easy.

The men in Ms.45 are portrayed as unequivocal swine and the mute heroine, Thana, clearly symbolizes the voiceless woman victimized by chauvinism and the patriarchy. On her way home one day Thana is raped in an alley in an uncomfortably realistic rape scene that leaves little to the imagination. When she reaches home she is confronted with another potential rapist who she ends up killing and chopping to pieces. Literally unable to “find her voice”, Thana continues to fall deeper into depressed anger and insanity until the climactic finale. In this unforgettable scene, Thana goes to a Halloween party dressed as a nun and opens up with handgun on a room full of unwanted suitors. Though much of the film echoes Polanski's horror classic Repulsion (about a lonely woman who loses her mind and becomes homicidal) Ms.45 feels more like a feminist Dirty Harry or Death Wish.

In many ways the politics of Ms.45 reflects the 80’s backlash to the feminist movement. While we can sympathize with Thana’s plight, the film intends to create discomfort and fear from the idea of the phallic woman. While we are given the space to cheer Thana as she adopts the masculine traits of vengeance and violence we are meant to be shocked by her as well. Portraying Thana as a source of fear hints that there is nothing scarier than an empowered woman willing to deal death to her detractors. The film’s original poster further belies its feminist reading with its frankly exploitative nature, showing Thana in an up-skirt shot standing in front of a soon-to-be shot thug framed squarely between her legs. The film is marketed as a sexy revenge flick, not a feminist reading of the vigilante genre.

I find it hard, however, to dismiss the film outright as cheap exploitation not worthy of analytical consideration. When Thana makes her final violent statement dressed as a nun adds a theological element to the film’s complex social commentary. The Catholic (and more broadly Christian) doctrine that encourages the acceptance of suffering is directly assaulted by the stunning imagery of the film’s climax. The notion that wrongs against us are to be tolerated as God’s will and that our tormentors are to be forgiven is thrown out in place of a cathartic call for justice. Unable to express her trauma in any other way, Thana violently lashes out at the men who would seek to continue her subjugation and soundly rejects the societal pressures that would keep her a silent victim. By sharing in Thana’s experience the audience is invited to make their own rejection of oppression at a psychological level. In this light, Ms.45 is a prime example of a genre film that though conservative in nature, contains subversive content that confronts forces of control that stifle progress and perpetuates suffering.

**This post was inspired by my good friend and excellent artist Alex Holden’s take on Ms.45 (displayed on top). Check out his very cool site Salty Weepings (link under Friends to right).**

Fear of a Female Planet

I’m excited to be voting tomorrow. The choice is between two angels compared to what we’ve been forced to grow accustomed to, but I’m voting for Obama because I trust his judgment and character more. He’s the best choice to purge the crimes committed in our name over the past seven years from our system. With our current tyrannical executive branch and weak legislative branch, Obama’s tabula rasa message is an attractive approach to a system badly crippled by its own bad habits. I’d like to see a Democrat who can inspire and motivate people, who can rally the political will to take broad strokes that will uplift the national culture as well as the quality of its government. While Hillary may offer the safe bet of experience there’s a strong chance that not a whole lot will get done. Obama is the longshot that can bring about the sea change needed for the U.S. to improve its status with the world. Bill’s right, this election is a crap-shoot, I just think he got the odds wrong.

Out of respect to my mother (a national feminist leader in her own humble right) I can’t make the decision to vote against Hillary without a great deal of introspection. Is my aversion to Sen. Clinton really my own internalized chauvinism making me unable to accept a woman as Commander-in-Chief? Am I willing to choose over the more qualified candidate for the younger less experienced man simply because of gender? Do I have my own threshold, an internal glass ceiling I impose on the hierarchy of my political allegiance? The message that women are unfit to lead has been encouraged by Western culture, so it's conceivable that I am so brainwashed by fictional stories that portray women as evil and men as good, from the bible to Milton to my beloved horror films, that I am unconsciously unwilling to throw my support behind a Matriarchy. After all, I do have a hard time arguing that men as a whole have handled their time in history that well. The World Wars and the threat of nuclear devastation should be enough for a failing grade, isn’t it time to let the ladies take a try? In the LA debate last week Hillary played Kim Gordon to Barack’s Chuck D. “Hey, Kool Thing, Fear of a Female Planet?”

Maybe Senator Clinton is naturally a hawk on defiance, lot of Democrats are. I have a hard time believing, however, that she would not have voted for the war in Iraq if she had not thought it was the most politically useful move to make, especially if she is as experienced and qualified as she claims. Kerry voted for the bill and hurt his argument against W. in 2004, and why any of them didn’t demand more solid intelligence is unforgivable. Hillary’s tough stance shows she is able to wield masculine force and condone aggression as tool of intimidation and control. In her NYT Op-ed, Gloria Steinham wrote bluntly that the senator does not need to “prove her masculinity”, a blanket statement I find hard to swallow. I find it more likely that a President H. Clinton would have to constantly prove she is “hard” enough to make the tough decisions in the situation room to the point of overcompensation, causing an inability to successfully realign the priorities of our foreign policy. It makes sense that MoveOn would endorse Obama; on foreign affairs, Hillary often stakes out positions to the right of center. If elected, Hillary will have to give something to her base on foreign affairs, but her history says she’ll take their support for granted while trying to placate the right with saber rattling and big-stick diplomacy.

If she does win tomorrow, Hillary will continue to contend with a fear of female masculinity and the temptation to prove her legitimacy through forceful and possibly ill-conceived action. If she truly is to become the Phallic Mother, with one hand rocking the crib while the other lays on the button, she will need to navigate a minefield of complex gender issues no president has ever had to before. I think it would be a good for thing for our nation to join her on this journey, I just wish it was a woman I felt I could trust. I find it too bad Hillary is the only woman we can put forward, one who rose to power on her husband’s back, one who has failed to make sound moral choices when they mattered. Perhaps she really will lead the way to a new matriarchy based on empathy instead of self-interest, but I find it unlikely. Another Clinton administration will no doubt be better than W’s, but I’m afraid it would ultimately be more of the same old divisive and cynical politics, just dressed up differently. Why not take a chance on a leader who will demand we rise above? If I am to judge the sexes equally I must vote for whom I find to be the best candidate, despite the problem of his gender.

(For more on Hillary’s dubious record and campaign tactics check out Frank Rich’s NYT Op Eds from last month. (link in Horror Age News & Politics). Poster on top from Hammer’s The Gorgon (1964), a film that makes no bones about exploiting the fear of the archetypal phallic woman.