disturbing, but not for the reasons (probably) intended

Rating: 6/10 (22 June 2005)

I have seen this film several times over the years, from childhood to middle age. I used to like it better, as a child, than I do now, as a middle-aged woman. Parts of the film, most notably the lyrical and sometimes humorous treatment of childhood and maturation, remain moving and beautiful. The segments about the unbalanced neighbor are just as scary for me today as in the 1960's. I wish to raise a point on which I will concede that I am acutely sensitive. What bothers me about this film (and probably would about the book, tho' I haven't read it) is its treatment of the white woman and her allegation--namely, that she must (of course!) be lying. I'm well aware that there was and is plenty of racism in our society, and that grave injustices have been and sometimes still are committed. However, all too often members of society seek to "make up" (as tho' that were possible) for past injustices by inflicting new ones, or to use this line of reasoning as an excuse to not deal with real problems. I spent 17 1/2 years in school and I've been in the working world for a quarter-century in several different organizations; in all of these places, I've experienced a lot of harassment, both physical and verbal. I can assure you that even today, supervisors, coworkers, the whole personnel and management apparatus will do practically anything to avoid having to deal with harassment, particularly sexual harassment, just as they failed to deal effectively with it in any of the schools I attended. To use a legal term, the burden of proof rests squarely on the accuser, to report, document, and (my personal favorite!), explain why the person would do what he's doing, rather than put the harasser on notice that his behavior is totally unacceptable and must stop. No, instead these caring/sharing/wonderful folks in society want to examine your words and deeds to see whether you did anything to provoke the harasser. Then come the excuses; he's having problems at home/school/work, so you should exercise a little forbearance when he hits you, screams obscenities at you, and otherwise treats you like dirt. Or, he comes from a "different culture" (which, near as I can tell, is code for he's from somewhere--perhaps from somewhere as nearby as his own head--where it's OK to treat girls and women as 3 steps lower than a goat--who knows, maybe it's just your perceptions that are off!). So, these sweetly reasonable, compassionate people imply that it's OK for him to scream, or hit, or kick you. Of course the problem isn't that he doesn't choose to exercise the ordinary self-control required of civilized beings, or that the powers that be, thru their excuses and inaction, tacitly but nevertheless clearly communicate to him that it's OK to continue behaving this way. It's rather as if they want to balance the whole burden of society's past problems on your back! Of course they can preach to you in this offensive way--after all, it's Just you it's happening to, not them! Observe what happened to Anita Hill at the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. If that disgraceful episode proved anything, it's that women are the only group in America that it's still OK to treat badly. I realize that in this film, the viewer is supposed to know that the accused man is innocent, not guilty. I just wish the powers that be, the PC crowd, could've used some other example to show this. And I wish that some of the admiring viewers could discern the major flaw in this film.