Pulling a "Paris"

The events of yesterday will lead to a new phrase being born. Like anything new, it will take time before it is recognized and comes into common usage (how may years passed between Jim Jones and everyone using the phrase "drank the kool-aid?"). And this phrase will come into use because it will describe a situation that we commonly understand, but there is no one word that summarizes it.

The phrase will be "Pulling a Paris", as in "Did you see what that girl did when the boss told her that her work was sub-par and they were getting rid of her? She totally pulled a Paris!"

"Pulling a Paris" will describe the following situation: When a child that is raised by parents who coddle the child and shelter the child from the realities of the world to such an extent that the child believes it deserves "special treatment" and is not subject to the laws and obligations that everyone else lives by, reaches a point in child's adult life when the child does something from which mommy and daddy can no longer protect it, and the child reacts by crying and whining and saying "It's not fair" and other behavior that would commonly be associated with a four-year old.

Well, we all know who "pulled a Paris" last night. Unspecified medical condition, my ass. Last week on The Sopranos, AJ pulled a Paris in his bedroom when Tony told him times just got tough and he had to cowboy up, and AJ sat on his bed and cried. (Well, not for long, Tony "corrected" that situation.) Earlier this year, The Wall Street Journal had an article about how twenty-somethings that were new to the workplace were crying when they got a less than glowing employee evaluation. The reason? All their life their parents told them they were special and could do no wrong. So the first time someone gives them negative feedback, they collapse into tears.

We should not give a second thought to anyone who "pulls a Paris". To keep coddling someone that has no coping skills does no one any good. If someone at work gets a negative evaluation, does their work somehow become better because that person cried about it? Will their work magically improve in quality in relation to the number of tears the person sheds?

At least the judge in the Paris case realizes this, even if th sheriff doesn't. But this saga is far from over, and I have no idea how it will play out.

"Gracie" Slick

There is a new, empowering, uplifting movie that all us stupid men are supposed to see with our daughters, lest we fail the good citizenship test. The movie is Gracie, and it attacks the long held prejudice that girls can't compete in boys sports.

Except that...is this really a long held prejudice in this day and age? Look at the calendar, it's 2007. Look at the soccer fields all through America, and you will see boys and girls playing along side each other, having fun rather than harboring some attitude that belongs in the 1950's.

Gracie is symptomatic of a certain type of movie that wants to act like time hasn't moved on. It wants to vilify an outdated attitude, yet it also wants to pretend like this attitude is prevalent in modern society. I am not naive enough to believe that no one holds the attitude that girls shouldn't play sports with boys, but I am also not naive enough to believe that the majority of people in 2007 feel this way, and that those that do will magically change their opinions when they see Gracie.

I feel this way because the changes this movie portrays were taking place when I grew up in a distant time called the 1970's (the same time Gracie is set in, but more on that later). My organized sports were limited to a year of T-ball and 6 years of soccer (the soccer years stretched into the 1980's). In all the leagues I played, I played with or against girls, and no one acted like the world was going to end or the girl was going to be carted off on a stretcher because she played with the boys. In fact, there was no fanfare, everyone accepted it for what it was and got on with playing the game.

But that story wouldn't make much of a movie. So instead we have to make a movie where a girl overcomes seemingly insurmountable obstacles and teaches all the cavemen around her (including her father) that girls are just as good as boys. Oh, and if that isn't enough, Gracie also brings the family together in the aftermath of the tragedy that tore them apart. Wow, what a girl, that Gracie.

When you make an uplifting steaming pile, someone is going to give it an award. According to the review on the imdb database (click the title) and the glowing, 10-star review posted there, Gracie gets the Heartland Film Festival's Truly Moving Picture Award (really, believe me, I couldn't make that up). Apparently the film festival doesn't do much research, as the review states this movie takes place before Title IX. Gracie takes place in 1978, and title IX was enacted on 06/23/72, but never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Which is the problem I have with films like Gracie. They want to act like history hasn't moved forward. The movie cleverly tries to move around this point (by setting it in 1978) but the fact is we are watching this in 2007. The basic subject matter for this has been mined to death (Quarterback Princess came out 24 years ago), yet we are supposed to act like Gracie is an eye-opening revelation on a previously unexplored topic.

There are numerous examples of inequity in modern-day society that would make relevant movie topics. But the battles in Gracie have been fought and won. Time to move on.