Why are we so quick to dismiss chick flicks?
It’s hard to deny that, at some point, most people have enjoyed a ‘chick flick’. Whether openly declaring love for a film in this category or secretly labelling it a guilty pleasure (even if genuinely adored), the existence of chick flicks cannot be ignored. Despite being often dismissed as unserious cinema, this genre holds a significant place in many people’s hearts.
There has been much debate around the term ‘chick flick’, especially in feminist circles, as some people believe that the term perpetuates harmful stereotypes about women. To some, this suggests that only women are interested in “fluffy” and “lighthearted” stories that stray from “hard-hitting” and “intellectual” material. While these are valid complaints, maybe we should reconsider chick flicks as a whole, a genre that is routinely attacked as possessing less value than others despite many chick flicks being genuinely great, thought-provoking and empowering films.
Thus, the term chick flick is perhaps outdated now, as it suggests that only women can be into these films when, in reality, that is obviosuly not the case. Yet, the term is so widely used that it makes sense to refer to these movies as chick flicks for ease of understanding and also to raise the idea that something labelled as being predominantly ‘for women’ isn’t a bad thing.
Some people dismiss chick flicks as insulting or unrepresentative of their experiences of womanhood. However, to write off an entire genre is unfair. There are many bad chick flicks out there, but there are many brilliant ones – the same goes for every genre. For example, just because some war films portray the brutality of battle unrealistically, we don’t write off the whole genre as bad. Thus, the same rule applies to chick flicks – we can criticise the terrible ones that uphold patriarchal ideals of womanhood while also championing the ones that celebrate female friendship, independence and indulgence in all things stereotypically girly.
We rarely get to see overly feminine aesthetics on screen, the kind many of us loved as kids because the androcentrism of our society and the film industry shuns these visuals as ‘poor taste’ and ‘unintellectual’. But chick flicks are one of the rare spaces where a certain kind of femininity is allowed to exist, and this is validating, especially in a world where women are encouraged to grow out of these kinds of aesthetics and interests, whereas men are allowed to continue loving stereotypically masculine things, like cars.
Of course, your average chick flick isn’t representative of the scope of femininity (of course, not all women love pink), but it merely presents a facet of it which deserves to be celebrated. Moreover, there are many chick flicks that don’t foster these stereotypical images of femininity, like Bridget Jones’ Diary and The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants, which present us with various women who don’t fit into the idealised mould of skinny, girly femininity. These movies also highlight issues that have plagued women for decades, such as the pressures of achieving a certain weight or the struggle to fit in as a member of a marginalised group outside of being a woman.
There are certainly issues with many chick flicks being overwhelmingly white and heterosexual and many centring around the quest to simply find a man and subsequently become happy. Moreover, some chick flicks only help to perpetuate negative stereotypes of women as nothing more than shopping-loving and boy-obsessed. However, many genres besides chick flicks are guilty of this too, and this stems from the wider issue of our patriarchal society spreading oppressive and infantilising notions of womanhood that paint us as inferior beings.
Similarly, in the film industry, a playground dominated by men, these stereotypical notions of femininity also make their way onto the screen – mirroring real life. Stories about women and aesthetics associated with femininity aren’t valued as highly and are seen as less cinematically stimulating, throw-away pieces of media – unless they’re serious stories of hardship and surviving trauma, that is.
Why is it that buddy movies and male-centric comedies like Superbad and The Hangover (with few female exceptions like Bridesmaids) are enjoyed by both male and female moviegoers alike and heralded as modern comedy classics? Yet, works like Mean Girls, Bring It On and Legally Blonde, all of which are just as funny while also bringing valuable social commentary to the table (Bring It On is noted for its inclusion of intersectional feminism), are treated as for girls and almost exclusively referred to as guilty pleasures by men.
We must eradicate the shame (found in many men and women) in watching chick flicks. Clueless is a hilarious film that many men laugh out loud to, but they would never admit to loving it in front of their friends wholeheartedly, at least not without some level of irony in their tone. Chick flicks are an important part of the cinematic canon, providing a source of comfort and validation for many women and girls, as well as providing prime bonding material between young girls who typically watch such films at sleepovers, likely seeing people just like them reflected on screen for the first time.
There is nothing wrong with liking chick flicks, from the good to the cheesy. What needs to change is the idea that liking films made for and about women is embarrassing. Women need to be depicted in multitudinous ways on screen, and many chick flicks present complex displays of the female experience as well as being fun and highly entertaining. The idea that male-centric stories, no matter the genre, are of higher merit needs to be eradicated. While chick flicks are not flawless pieces of media, it is hard to imagine growing up without consuming them, and no one should be shamed for finding something targeted at women enjoyable.
