True story of the Granite Mountain Hot Shots, an elite group of firefighters facing one of the worst fires in Arizona.
I have big deadlines and don’t have the time to give to this that I wish I could. But I just wanted to say that this film has an essential quality that I have not seen in a loooong time in movies: a real heroic masculinity. I’m not talking about fake karate fights and sci-fi effects and comic book silliness. I mean the kind of heroism that inspires you to be a strong man in the self-loathing, self-destructive society that we live in.
If you are sick of the infantilization of colleges, the sexist attack on masculinity by feminism, the attempt to emasculate all males based on the sexual depravity of some in power, the agenda to destroy God’s image by gender confusion, and the outright cowardice of our politically correct, SJW society, then you must see Only the Brave.
It highlights not merely bold, gritty courage and bravery in men, but it gives honor to their women, and even shows the men’s flaws and how they seek to address them to become better husbands and fathers and role models.
Heroism, courage, love, comradery, maturity, masculinity, it has it all.
And we need it all.
Go see this movie.
2 comments on “Only the Brave: Extinguishes the Flames of Toxic Feminization”
I understand that there are some who use feminism as an excuse to be man-haters. But feminism is not about man-hating. It is about freedom and equality. For example, this article states “but it gives honor to their women,” which implies the idea of women not as equals, but as men’s possessions.
This an example of the pervasiveness of sexist ideology. It has become so ingrained in our society that it is practically subconscious. I don’t think that sentence was intended to be offensive or harmful to women, as the writer was trying to highlight that women were honored in the film. But in addition to referring to women as belonging to the men, this kind of honor, this reverence for women only as wife and/or mother, making their honor conditional and only in connection to domestic roles, is a form of oppression. It is sexism in disguise, whether intended or not. This is the sort of thing that feminism is standing up against.
Liz, thanks for your comments.
Interpreting “their women,” as an expression of “possession” is a subconscious expression of sexist misandrist matriarchal oppression. And it reveals the manipulative fascist tendencies of leftism to colonize language with ideological lawlessness.
Now, I’m being a bit facetious there, in doing to you what you are trying to do to me. But I do it to make a point. Jesus might have said it this way, “How can you say to your brother, let me deconstruct your language, when your own language will deconstruct you?” If you want to call Jesus a sexist oppressor for using “brother,” go right ahead. I wouldn’t want to be in your shoes (Or is that sexist? Should I say “high heels,” or is that sexist? linguistic fascism sure is tiring.)
The denial of “possessive” tense in language is inherently absurd and incoherent, not to mention nihilistic. It would make all language unspeakable.
Possessives reflect relationship. If you applied your linguistic attack consistently, no one could say, “my husband,” “their men,” “my friend,” or heck, any human being as a subject of any possessive, for that would imply “possessions belonging to,” “lack of equality” or “oppression” or whatever fashionable identity politics buzzword you want to use.
How’s that for “mansplaining?” (which is a sexist misandrist “man-hating” word used to dismiss rationality).