Introduction
The film, “If these Walls Could Talk,” is a compilation of three generational segments of stories that exonerate the plight of women in the society against the general view of the dominant sex. This film was released in 1996, and it exclusively discusses the controversial issue of abortion, which seeps in three distinct generations. The three segments of the film entail different generations and decades, but the setup for the entire story transpires in the same house. The first story is a widow, whose husband was killed on the battlefield (Stuart, 2008). Demi Moore is the woman in the first story that gets pregnant and doubts the credibility of having this child, and thus considers an abortion. Her attempt to secure an abortion is discredited by the social order that illegalizes the practice. The second story mainstreams Sissy Spacek, who struggles to raise her children out of her meager income. Spacek, however, attempts to abort her fifth born. The last episode of this film entails a young lady who gets pregnant with her professor and solicits for an abortion at the hospital (Palladino, 2013). These are the three segments of the film that entails the controversial issue of abortion in three different generational sets.
Thesis Statement
This film focuses on abortion, and it complements a high-budget feature based on its structure and the general composition. The main c characters are the three women, who exhibit the general notion of the society regarding abortion to women, who have to do it either in secrecy or face the legal arms of the society. That is the maxim of the social order that envisaged restrictions against women. Ideally, the target audience for this film is the general mass, which incorporates both the male and female gender sexes. This film thus reinforces the stereotypical issue of abortion as it inflicted fear and precaution on women in three different generations. Therefore, the thesis of this essay focuses on the stereotypical issues regarding abortion, and how it best propagated the feminists’ viewpoints in the three distinct sets of generations. Thus, the mainstream focus of this essay is on abortion as a feminist element of prejudice and discrimination against women in the society.
Abortion and Feminist Theory
The mainstream focus of this film is about the feminist’s viewpoints and the struggles that females undergo to shine their personal identity amidst archaic cultural predispositions. Indeed, the social culture prohibits abortion, and the film is quick to reaffirm that the society is absolutely against the notion of abortion in the society. However, the personal struggles of women to gain independence and freedom becomes apparent in the three distinct generations in which the film is produced. The issue of abortion generates stereotype against women, who are under the mandate to exhibit loyalty to the social laws and rules (Jackson, & Jones, 1998). It is thus, a case of personal struggle that women in the society undergo to retain their viability and credibility in the society that undermines their status in all respect.
This film reverberates about the intimate nature invoked by inducing an abortion. On the other hand, women feel disgraced to have illicit children because of fear of embarrassment. Such children are a disgrace to the society, which has not yet embraced the freedom for women. Thus, the feminist viewpoint advocating for equality is slowly deciphered in this film as a result of the archaic positions taken by the society against women. In this context, the overall viewpoint of women about the society is discriminative and biased. Indeed, men who are responsible for such pregnancies are never taken to task and reprimanded for their actions. However, the whole burden of disgrace and embarrassment rests solely on women, who now consider inducing an abortion that is a still outlawed by the society.
Gender Stereotypes versus the Social Predispositions
Equality between the sexes is a status that is ideal according to this film. The fight for equal power and representation is automatically repudiated by the biased lens of the masculine and feminine gender. In this context, the film exonerates inequality as a factor that subjects most women to consider an abortion. If rearing a child outside a conventional paternal care is a taboo, then women could resort to an abortion with the view of a countering this act and perceived disgrace to the society (Stuart, 2008). On the other hand, the social order did not consider the masculine contributions to such pregnancies but instead took the issue on women.
Principally, the gravity of abortion as a social offense is eminent when Claire disguises her intention to procure an abortion by pretending to be championing her friend’s intent. The reception and the overall attitude of the medical staffs become so hostile. Even when Claire procures an abortion, she surely understands that having a child outside marriage is considered a potential pitfall to a woman in the 1950’s America.
Indeed, the context of abortion is secretly applied in this film to alienate and discriminate women against the society. The precept of equality as enlisted in the feminist theory becomes the illusion in this film since women are never granted an opportunity to deliver and rear their children; the main issue here refers to the retrogressive traditions imposed against the inalienable will of women to have children freely in the society. Moreover, there is a very strong attachment to social order and presaged demands on women. This case clearly illustrates the manifestation of prejudice against the females. Even, the equality advocated by the feminists’ theory becomes undermined amidst intense demands of strict morality on women.
Validity of the Film to the Normalized Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality
This film reinforces the normalized assumptions about gender and sexuality. Indeed, the themes that are developed in each segment of the film triggers shame and the morally abhorrent act of the society on its female gender. Indeed, the general view that triggers stereotypical lens on women is that the society is self-driven, and puts a huge obligation and bestowment on its female gender. Moreover, the burden of pregnancy rests solely on women, who might not have made the decision to get one. Pragmatically, the biased lens on sexuality brands an obligation on women to bear, especially on abortion and pregnancy (Stuart, 2008). The secret of the struggles that women underwent in the pre-liberation movement period could only be testified by the walls that stood for generations. On the other hand, the film does not support the practice of abortion but discredits the social view and the rules imposed against women who secure an illicit pregnancy. With all these facets of sexuality, I would complement this film as strongly reinforcing the normalized views on sexuality and gender stereotype.
Conclusion
This film could be said to have greater significance in discussing the issue of sexuality and how gender stereotypes manifest in the society. One aspect of its strength relates to the wide coverage of three generations on the same issue of pregnancy and abortion. This paradigm gives a clear distinction in the social belief and predispositions on women regarding abortion and pregnancy. Moreover, this article invokes its strength from the fact that it addresses the primary issue of gender imbalance, thereby reinforcing the illusion precept of the feminist theory. On the other hand, this film could be misinterpreted to be for abortion by advocating for the freedom of women.
References
Jackson, S., & Jones, J. (1998). Contemporary feminist theories. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. Press.
Palladino, E. (2013). If these walls could talk: Stories from the New York Giants' sidelines, locker room, and press box.
Stuart, J. L. (2008). Performing queer female identity on screen: A critical analysis of five recent films. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland.
,
