untroubled by comments made by male coworkers suggesting that women belonged home and pregnant, not in the mines. Such statements, he said, were expressions of free speech and were made in the context of the free exchange of ideas. And McNulty clearly believed that Eveleth Mines should not be penalized for what was the cultural norm in the Iron Range. "We must also bear in mind," he wrote, "that for generations the iron mining industry on the Iron Range was dominated by males who were products of a culture which is reflected" in the sexual tensions that gave rise to the lawsuit. A restructuring of the culture, he wrote, could not be expected to happen "overnight." After all, he noted, the Civil Rights Act was only three decades old.
(Limits on expression in the workplace can indeed end up punishing sexual speech that is free of the intent to harass, as this 22 October 2003 Cato Institute article demonstrates. Keep in mind, however, that in the Jenson case the men's words and actions specifically expressed hostility to the presence of women in the workplace solely because they were women. The environment was thus literally hostile, and many of their actions were well over the line of sexual battery, in any event.) Bingham and Gansler are plainly disgusted by McNulty's comments, but they themselves establish a similar point—without justifying it, of course—at the beginning of their book:
"Females are there to be used and abused," said a [Mesabi Iron Range] male. "Take care of me, my kids, my family and don't bother me. I'm going fishing. Women are chattel." A classic Ranger bumper sticker reads: THE PERFECT WOMAN: A NYMPHOMANIAC WHO OWNS A LIQUOR STORE.
In vacating McNulty's opinion, the Eighth Circuit stated: "We emphatically reject the Special Master's conclusion … that the fact that the culture of the Iron Range mining industry allowed sexual harassment is a mitigating factor for Eveleth Mines…. Instead, we find this observation underscores the overall culpability of Eveleth Mines." It will probably seem clear to anyone likely to read this review that the Eighth Circuit was right, but the men who felt that women didn't belong in the mines were coming from somewhere, besides Mars.
Getting into this sex-role paradigm shift might well make for a great movie (though it's hard to think of a model for it), but the writer and director of that movie would have to have much more talent than Seitzman and Caro (i.e., any) for naturalistic reenactment and analysis. Instead, North Country is shaped much like Whale Rider (2003), Caro's international hit in which a little girl in New Zealand proves herself as a tribal leader despite her grandfather's insistence that it's not a role for a girl. Hopes dashed, tears, hugs, compromise, mutual respect, uptilted chins, more tears and hugs.
Article comments
1 - Bill Fraser
This is a superb movie review. In fact, the review is more engaging than the movie. It analyzes North Country in the level of detail I'd like to see in every movie review. The disingenuous attitude film makers adopt that they have to alter historical facts drastically to engage the audience's attention in the story is a combination of laziness and contempt for the audience. In fact, in claiming to represent the true interests of the protagonists, by using distortion and outright fiction to bolster the audience’s supposed lack of interest in historical storytelling, they actual work *against* the interests of the protagonists " the audience is left with no clear belief in what’s real and what’s made up. It’s like Barry Bonds and steroids " how do we know how many of his accomplishments are legitimate?
We all understand that no one can capture the whole truth, that truth is always a composite of multiple viewpoints, and every director’s choice to leave something in or out is a subjective editing decision. But it’s a lazy copout to substitute fiction for fact for the majority of a movie’s content, as a reaction to the daunting task of presenting a compelling story which is generally true to historical accuracy, though by necessity truncated via subjective editing decisions.
What a shame that Lois Jenson’s and a few of the plaintiffs’ gritty, persistent heroism has been turned into a sort of Hallmark movie card, which cheapens the immense sacrifices they made. As the reviewer Alan Dale says, “Acquaintance with the facts makes it plain that the behavior the women were subjected to was so scurrilous that moviemakers wouldn't have to make anything up.” Throughout the movie I was discussing with my wife (we watched at home) how this character’s actions and that situation didn’t ring true, while simultaneously expressing admiration and sympathy for the main character’s plight and courage. This isn’t the way I like to watch a movie. I prefer to be drawn in to a movie’s plot and characters because of the ring of truth that resounds in every scene. However, the movie did make me aware of the Jenson vs. Evelyth Mines case and prompt me to do some research, bring me to this excellent movie review, The Kitchen Cabinet, and del.icio.us, where I hope to find more thought-provoking and well-written articles.
2 - Alan Dale
Thanks for the comment, Bill, and the praise. I was disgusted to read this news report, that a New York Women in Film & Television survey had declared North Country the most-important film for women to see in 2005. To learn from by negative example? I'm afraid the survey respondents must have liked it not despite the movie's evident flaws but because of them--because of the slick way it sells "feminism." If people want candy they're going to have candy, no matter how much more nutritious and subtly flavorful fruit may be.