Could Be a Guy Thing but ‘Sleepless’ Is Sexist Eye-Opener

Like most men interested in where the women’s movement is at any given point in time, I’m always on the lookout for clues.

“Sleepless in Seattle,” with its big box-office suggesting that it’s hit a national nerve, must be offering clues. The buzz is that women love the movie, so it behooves us men to pay exceedingly particular attention to its message. More important, it’s directed and largely written by a woman known in the past for her strong female characters, so what better setup for getting a fix on the women’s movement?

As always, we men must proceed with extreme caution in these areas. After seeing the movie twice, I must confess that it leaves me confused and wary.

In short, can the women of America who just two summers ago loved “Thelma and Louise” now be applauding Meg Ryan’s character in “Sleepless”?

And if so, can’t the women of America forgive us men if we’re thrown for a loop again?

Surely you remember Thelma and Louise, who took no male prisoners as they fled cross-country in metaphorical pursuit of their own freedom and empowerment. Men easily deciphered that movie: We were scum.

Now comes “Sleepless,” and what characters has director-screenwriter Nora Ephron given us?

The two main men are peaches of guys. Tom Hanks plays Sam Baldwin, so faultless he’s boring. He’s a Perfect Dad. A Perfect Suffering Widower. A Perfect Gentleman on Dates. A Perfect Friend. He didn’t exist in Thelma and Louise’s world.

And then there’s Walter, the fiance of Meg Ryan’s character, Annie. Although she could have, to win audience support, Ephron never makes him the bad guy. Rather, his only drawbacks are that he has allergies and doesn’t make Annie’s head spin.

But it is Annie, of course, who drives the action in “Sleepless.” Her character tells us what Ephron is trying to say.

Annie is a confident, intelligent professional woman, in this case a reporter (gasp) for the Baltimore Sun. Right out of the feminist textbook.

So, what does Annie, this intelligent ‘90s woman do? She hears Sam talking on a radio show about his dead wife and decides that she must fly to Seattle to meet him in the hopes that he might be the Guy She’s Always Wanted.

Now, I thought I’ve been paying attention to the women’s movement over the last 20 years, but wasn’t Prince Charming a fraud perpetrated upon unsuspecting little girls? Isn’t the idea that a successful career woman would drop everything in pursuit of Mr. Right considered a raging insult to women? In short, isn’t the idea that an intelligent woman would shed tears and fall for a guy over the radio just a little at odds with the entire thrust of the feminist movement?

In “Sleepless,” it all comes under the heading of “destiny.” Annie says she’ll never know whether she and Sam were right for each other unless she gives it a chance. Indeed, fate brought her to listen to the radio that night.

Please. I love destiny as much as the next palooka but, as the women’s movement might have said, what’s fate got to do with it? Wasn’t it about the real world and choices and self-determination? My definition of self-determination doesn’t square with “destiny.”

It could be argued that Annie showed classic female empowerment. That is, she heard the voice on the radio and decided that, why not, she could get on a plane and fly to Seattle and show up on Sam’s doorstep. What could be more self-empowering than that?

Nothing, except that the movie isn’t about empowerment. It’s about contrived coincidences that culminate in a hokey love fest at the end. Off into the sunset, hand in hand, go Annie and Sam, “destined” for a lifetime of happiness although they just met seconds ago and know nothing about each other, other than she’s good-looking and so is he.

And speaking of powerlessness, what about Walter? The poor cluck thought he was marrying a woman who, by the way, repeatedly said she loved him. To her credit, Ephron refused to write Walter as villainous or resort to giving him that most current of cursed male traits--insensitivity. Walter’s reward for being a nice guy? Annie dumps him, but not until he’s bought her a diamond engagement ring, which she returns to him over dinner and Dom Perignon in a penthouse restaurant.

Petty aside: I hope women who applaud the “romance” of Annie and Sam and yet who still call men jerks will remember Annie’s treatment of Walter.

How I could go on, but my time is up. As I said, I come seeking clues. Given the success of “Sleepless,” and given that women love it and a woman wrote it, inquiring men want to know:

Is it no longer demeaning to talk about women’s pursuit of Prince Charming?

Is it no longer sexist to talk about the extent to which emotion affects a woman’s decisions, inasmuch as Annie’s teary reaction to Sam’s radio spot kicks everything into gear?

And finally, could a man write a character like Ryan’s without being called sexist?

Not that you asked, but I didn’t like “Sleepless.” I disliked it much more the second time than the first. For my six bucks, “Thelma and Louise” was where it’s at . . . but like all those other guys out there, hey, I just go with the flow and try to keep up with the information curve.

I just hope Walter had a money-back guarantee on the ring.

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by writing to him at The Times Orange County Edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, Calif. 92626, or calling (714) 966-7821.