The Hunt” tells the story of a divorced middle-aged teacher who loses his reputation after being falsely accused of sexual assault for refusing a kindergarten girl’s advances. The middle-aged man named Lucas did not commit the crime of sexually assaulting the girl, but the crowd unanimously believed the girl’s testimony, and even after the girl spilled the beans, the smoke screen of suspicion did not dissipate.
Why did the crowd prefer to believe a girl’s lies rather than accept the middle-aged man’s defense?
The so-called “children’s words are not deceitful” is particularly evident here. It is because the girl’s mind is not yet mature, for the sexual abuse of the matter of ignorance, she can naturally speak of this unspeakable thing. If replaced by adolescent girls, in turn, may choose to keep their mouths shut because of shame or other reasons.
At the same time, Lucas divorce middle-aged man identity more easily associated with the evil pedophilia: apparently civilized, but actually nasty.
This is the reason why the crowd would rather side with the yellow-tongued child than believe the middle-aged man’s defense. The ignorant young girl is definitely the object of love and care.
The Queen of Hearts tells a similar story with a reversal of logic.
A female lawyer who specializes in reversing cases of teenage sexual assault has a beautiful family and a fruitful career. Unable to hold back the fire of her teenage youth, she has sex with the son of her husband’s ex-wife who comes to live with her. After the incident, the female lawyer faked that the act was forced by the other party and blamed it on the innocent son. The conflict between father and son was thus brewed, and the son eventually left with his hatred and died in the wilderness.
The husband believed his wife for reasons that can be analyzed. The son was a delinquent boy who blatantly stole from the family home, and the wife was an accomplished gold medal lawyer. As a husband, he could not imagine that his decent wife would openly seduce his ex-wife’s son and have an incestuous relationship.
Do the two films illustrate the right of the vulnerable to be protected? I don’t think so.
The girl who is protected in “The Hunt” is indeed on the vulnerable side, and the crowd is willing to believe her words. But in “Queen of Hearts”, the son seems more helpless than the wife.
It seems that the logic common to the two films is not here. So, where is it? I think it lies in the gender power of men and women.
The liars in both films are women, who are firmly believed and protected, whether they are vulnerable or not. In this way, the films actively present the opposite of real life: a reflection on the vulnerable position women occupy in gender power and the rights they gain as a result.
This kind of reflection is rare at a time when the Metoo movement is in full swing. The Queen of Hearts, as a work directed by a woman, makes this reflection even more precious.
In a way, “political correctness” flips the power of gender between men and women, transforming men into a vulnerable group.
People do not trust the middle-aged man in “The Hunt” not only because the girl is absolutely vulnerable, but also because of the usual imagination of divorced men. The wife in The Queen of Hearts is able to deceive her husband, partly because her position as a litigator gives her a voice, but also because of the usual imagination of the rebellious teenager.
These two films are like peeling back the outer skin of the kumquat of common sense and letting us see inside. Sometimes it is the women who commit the crime, not the men. It’s just that most people voluntarily choose to trust subjective judgments. Is this a post-truth era now?
