span.fullpost {display:none;}

Sunday, April 30, 2017

Robbie Gould was a Sephardi Jew

When Max Kellerman introduced the waiter Robby Gould to the Houseman family as a Yale medical student, Kellerman pronounced the waiter's name as rhyming with cooled (not as rhyming with cold). The movie audience never sees the name spelled, except in the credits at the end.
Robbie Gould, the Yale medical student
in the movie "Dirty Dancing"
In 1987, when Dirty Dancing was released, movie audiences were familiar with the family name Gould -- and with the spelling G-o-u-l-d and with its pronunciation -- because of the actor Elliott Gould. He had appeared in many movies, playing leading roles in

Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice in 1969

Mash in 1970

The Long Goodbye in 1973

California Split in 1974

A Bridge Too Far in 1977

The Devil and Max Devlin in 1981

Inside Out in 1986.

In Inside Out, released one year before Dirty Dancing, Gould looked like this:
Elliott Gould in 1986
During the mid-1960s -- the college years of Baby and Lisa Houseman -- Elliott Gould was famous also as the boyfriend and then husband (married 1963-1971) of Barbra Streisand. Many Jewish college girls adored Jewish Princess Barbra and her Jewish Prince Elliott.
Elliott Gould and Barbra Streisand in the mid-1960s
During this marriage, Streisand starred in Funny Girl, a 1969 movie about the Jewish comedienne Fanny Brice. Streisand won the Academy Award for Best Actress.

When 1987 movie audiences -- especially the Jewish females -- heard a handsome Jewish young man in a Jewish resort being introduced as a Gould, that family name resonated with Elliott Gould. By 1987, however, Elliott had been dumped and divorced by Barbra, and his acting career was only coasting, at best. In 1987, the name Gould suggested the concept of a once handsome but now unreliable Jewish man who had tried to become successful and rich by marrying a rising female star.

In other words, the real-life Elliott Gould now resonated with the movie character Robbie Gould, a medical student who might marry Lisa Houseman, the daughter of a successful, rich doctor.

Now in the year 2017, however, most people watching Dirty Dancing are relatively unfamiliar with the family name Gould. Essentially, the name now makes no impression and suggests no connotations at all.


Elliott Gould was born Elliott Goldstein in 1938 (the same year as Dirty Dancing's screenwriter Eleanor Bergstein). His grandparents were Jews who had emigrated from Russia, Poland and Ukraine. He changed his last name to Gould when he began his acting career (his first acting credits are in 1964).

I have studied the family name Gould to write this article.

In past centuries, many Jews worked in metallurgy, gems and jewelry, and so many Jewish family names include the word Gold -- for example, Goldstein, Goldman, Goldberg, Goldblatt, Goldenbaum, Golder, Goldfarb, Goldhaber, Goldschmidt, Goldwasser, and so forth. These family names originated in East Europe among Jews who spoke Yiddish or German.

The word gould is the Scottish pronunciation and spelling for the English word gold. The family name Gould is common in Scotland, Ireland and England. The name Gould suggests an ancestral association with Scottish metals, coins or jewelry, but the metal gold was not mined significantly in Scotland. In some Gould families, the name might have originated because an ancestor had remarkably golden-color hair or complexion.

Elliott (Goldstein) Gould is not the only Jew who has replaced his birth Gold-Something name with the Scottish-sounding Gould in order to disguise his Jewish ethnicity. Probably that motivation explains the relatively recent origin of the surname of some Gould families that are Jewish.  

When I think about the name of the Dirty Dancing character Robbie Gould, I assume that his ancestors had the Gould name for many generations, originating in the Middle Ages in some association with gold and Scotland. In such circumstances, the family ancestors must have been Sephardi Jews. Indeed, the name Gould is included on a webpage titled A Large Selection of Sephardic Jewish Surnames.


Now I will propose a hypothetical genealogy of the movie character Robbie Gould. I must admit that I was not able, despite a day's research, to assemble solid evidence for such a hypothesis. However, I judge that my evidence is good enough for this blog article of mine about a fictitious person's ancestry.


In the year 1492, Spain expelled all its entire Jewish population. The descendants of these expelled Spanish Jews are called Sephardi Jews. The bulk of them resettled in North Africa, but some of them resettled in North Europe. At that time, they were not allowed to resettle in England.
Purple lines show Sephardi migration to North Europe in the 1500s
Teal line shows Jewish migration from Holland to England in the 1600s
Because Sephardi Jews spoke Spanish and because many had skilled experience in previous metals and gems, they were able to involve themselves in Spain's massive import of gold and silver from Latin America. Some of them became involved also in financing trade between North Europe and the British Isles. In particular, North Europe imported wool from England and Scotland.

I speculate that in this situation at least one Sephardi family adopted the name Gould. Perhaps such a family financed, for example, some of the trade between Holland and Scotland, exchanging gold coins and jewelry for wool.

In the 1600s, some Jews were permitted to settle in the British Isles. Later, as England and Holland established colonies in North America, the colonists included some Sephardi Jews. They immediately dispersed throughout the country. According to an article titled What Happened to the Sephardic Jewish Colonists?, they dispersed throughout the southern states, and some of them even married American Indians. Significantly for my hypothesis, a few Sephardi Jews settled "on the edge of the Georgia Gold Belt", from where they imported "Spanish weapons, armor, jewelry and pottery".

Practically all the Jews who settled in North America until the late 1800s were Sephardic Jew. Only later did the huge migration of East European Jews -- the so-called Ashkenazi  Jews -- into North America begin. The Ashkenazi immigrants initially settled together in huge Jewish neighborhoods, from where they dispersed and assimilated much more slowly than the Sephardi Jews had done.

Because the Sephardi Jews immigrated centuries earlier, they were much more educated, sophisticated and prosperous than the Ashkenazi Jews in North America during most of the 1900s.

To make a rough analogy with Christians, Sephardi Jews are to Episcopalians as Ashkenazi Jews are to Baptists.


Of course, Eleanor Bergstein probably did not have this Jewish ethnic history in mind when she wrote the Dirty Dancing story and named one character as Gould. It's more likely that she simply had the actor Elliott Gould in mind. Perhaps she actually had known a real, similar person named Robbie Gould.

However, I will suggest to you, my readers, another way to think about Bergstein's decision to use the name Gould. Bergstein grew up in New York City, which was populated largely by Jews in that time of her life. In that Jewish environment, various nuances, such as family names, resonated distinctively in her Jewish mind. For her, perhaps, the family name Gould reflexively resonated as belonging to an ambitious, well established, prosperous Jewish family.

Above, I made an analogy of Sephardi Jews to Episcopalian Christians in the USA. I have found a list of famous Episcopalians, and perhaps many of my readers here will perceive a similar resonance. Such names naturally seem to belong to upper-class families. I feel that way about, for example, the following names:
Acheson, Astaire, Bankhead, Blish, Boyle, Bradley, Bragg, Dallas, Dawkins, Dressler, Garland, Grant, Harrison, Madison, Monroe, Olivier, Pierce, Roosevelt, and Shaw.
The name Madison resonates as higher-class than Smith, just as Gould resonates as higher-class than Goldstein. Imagine that the movie's Yale medical student had been named Robbie Goldstein. The latter name is less impressive. That is exactly why -- to sound more impressive the young, aspiring actor Elliott Goldstein changed his name to Elliott Gould.


As a Sephardi Jew, Robbie Gould felt socially superior to the Ashkenazi Jews that comprised the vast majority of Jews who worked or vacationed at the Kellerman resort. His working as a mere waiter was a trivial consideration. He had descended from an ancient, distinguished Sephardi ancestry of international financiers, and now he was studying at Yale University to become a doctor.  

Neither Lisa or Baby knew much, if anything, about Sephardi history, but they might perceive reflexively that a Jewish family named Gould would be a big step up socially from a family named Houseman.


The diminutive nickname "Robbie" is perhaps a period-piece element of the movie. Perhaps in the early 1960s, young adults were more likely than now to call themselves by diminutive nicknames -- Johnny, Penny Billy, and even Baby and Marjorie.

Gould's nickname could be spelled either Robby or Robbie -- both spellings are correct. I myself prefer the spelling "Robby" for boys.

In the cast credits at the end of Dirty Dancing, the Gould character's first name is spelled "Robbie".

Maybe the spelling "Robbie" resonates as somewhat Scottish, such as Scotland's national poet Robert "Robbie" Burns.

Scotland's national poet, Robert "Robbie" Burns
During the 1960s, one of the most popular television shows was My Three Sons. One of the three sons was a character named Robbie Douglas -- spelled R-o-b-b-i-e -- played by Don Grady. The name "Douglas" is Scottish.
The character Robbie Douglas of the 1960s TV series "My Three Sons"
played by the actor Don Grady

This article is the first in a series of three articles. The next two articles in the series will be:

1) The Housemans and Kellermans were German Jews

2) The Schumachers and Pressmans were Eastern European Jews

Saturday, April 29, 2017

Waiters in 1963 wore bow ties

Here is Robbie Gould's waiter uniform in Dirty Dancing.
Robbie Gould wearing a waiter uniform
in the movie "Dirty Dancing"
To see what waiter uniforms looked like in about 1963, I did a Google search for waiter movie 1963 and found the following images.[TV]%20%27Espionage%201.10%20Festival%20of%20Pawns%27%20(1963).htm
Actor Dennis Edwards playing a head waiter
in the 1963 movie "Festival of Pawns
Actor John Baker playing a waiter
in the TV series "Edgar Wallace Mysteries" in 1963
Actor Paul Phillips playing a waiter
in the 1961 movie "Only Two Can Play"
Actor Paul Phillips playing a waiter
on the TV series "The Saint" in 1963

Actor Alf Casha playing a waiter
in the 1963 movie "The Human Jungle"

Actor Andrew Andreas playing a waiter
in the 1963 movie "The Human Jungle"

Actor Pat Judge playing a waiter
in the 1963 movie "The Sentimental Agent"

An unknown actor playing a waiter
in the 1963 movie "The VIPs"
An unknown actor playing a waiter
in the TV series "The Saint" in 1963
Actor Andre Charisse playing a waiter
in the 1964 movie "Hot Enough for June"
Actor Henri Desoto playing a waiter in various roles
All of the images except the last were found on the Movie Dude website.

The last, Desoto montage was found on The Unsung Joe website.

Thursday, April 27, 2017

A T-Shirt for Slovak Babies

Slovakia is a small, landlocked country, but it is the World's Superpower in the production of videos that spoof Dirty Dancing.

See my previous posts:
 Two Slovak Guys Spoof the Final Scene 
More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby
 Still More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby
 Yet More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby
 Slovak "Hriešny tanec" Spoofs -- Solid Gold.

It turns out that Slovak babies even wear Dirty Dancing t-shirts.

"Baby Will Not Sit in a Corner"
written in the Slovak language.
The t-shirt can be purchased on this webpage.

See also my previous post Children's Dance Classes in Slovakia.

Here again is a Slovak spoof video that even non-Slovaks can understand:

Reader Comments about "Robbie Gould's Philosophy"

My most viewed blog article, by far, is Robbie Gould's Philosophy. Since I published it in December 2008, it has received almost 21,000 pageviews.

It receives so many pageviews because people watch Dirty Dancing, wonder about Robbie's book, search the Internet for an explanation, and find my article. Just now I did a Google search for dirty dancing robbie book, and my article was the top find.

(For comparison, my article with the second-highest number of pageviews is Eleanor Bergstein and Five Female Characters, which has received about 14,500. In a Google search for dirty dancing female characters that article is the fifth-top find.)

Several critical comments have been posted under my Robbie Gould article, and I am acknowledging them here.


A few comments addressed the question of whether the Housemans already knew Robbie before the movie's story. In my article, I wrote:
When the movie’s story begins, the Housemans already are acquainted with Robbie Gould, although the reason is not explained. Perhaps Robbie’s father was a medical colleague of Doctor Houseman. Perhaps the two families had met at the resort hotel in a previous summer. Perhaps Robbie had served the Houseman family as a waiter during a previous summer.
Here are the critical comments:
The Housemans are introduced to Robbie at the first meal. They didn't know him before.
The Housemans do not already know Robbie Gould when the movie begins. Max introduces all of them to Robbie at their first meal in the dining room.
NO, they did not know Robbie before
I judge that those criticisms are correct.

I do not remember why I wrote with such certainty that "the Housemans already were acquainted with Robbie Gould" and so forth.

I will keep this issue in mind, and look for relevant evidence.

I judge these critical commenters to be right and myself to be wrong.


One comment addressed the question of whether Robbie is Jewish. In my article, I wrote:
The hotel resort’s owner has encouraged the waiters – all of whom are Jewish and successful college students – to flirt with the Jewish families’ daughters of marriageable age.
Here is the critical comment:
... there is no reason to assume Robbie is Jewish, and in any case, I don't see how it matters.
I don't assume that Robbie is Jewish. Rather, I infer it.

Many people who watch Dirty Dancing do not recognize its Jewish subtext. Such recognition is not necessary for an intelligent understanding and appreciation of the movie.

However, I invite those people to read my articles The Jewish Subtext in Eleanor Bergstein's Two Movies and The Resort Hotel's Employees.

I judge this critical commenter to be wrong but correctable.


A few commenters addressed the question of whether Robbie was carrying the book in order to lend it to Baby. I wrote:
During this conversation, Robbie pulled his much-read paperback copy of The Fountainhead out of his uniform pocket and tried to give it to Baby to read. Why was Robbie carrying this novel in his uniform as he set the tables for the next meal? He could not have expected Baby to confront him in this situation, so he could not have brought the novel with the intention of giving it to Baby.

Apparently, Robbie had brought the novel into the dining room with the intention of giving it not to Baby, but rather to Lisa, whom he expected to serve as a waiter at the imminent meal. He and Lisa had quarreled the previous night when he had become sexually aggressive at the golf course. Lisa had refused to submit to him, and he had refused to apologize. Robbie had not given up in his efforts to seduce Lisa, however, and he intended to lend Lisa The Fountainhead as his next step.
Here are the critical comments:
He's got the book with him to read on breaks.
... he was carrying the book, I think, not to gift to Lisa, but rather like I do Atlas Shrugged.

Atlas Shrugged is like a Bible to me. When I'm actively reading it, I carry it, and I write notes in the margins. And it's tattered and ratty looking from much usage, similar to Robbie's The Fountainhead.
The second critical commenter, who writes notes in Atlas Shrugged, has a blog called Yoga Sophisticate, where she published an article, titled My Amazing Discovery in Dirty Dancing, about the movie and Ayn Rand. She argues that "Hollywood is trying to make a mockery of Ayn Rand in this great movie." She has written several blog articles about Rand.

I judge these critical commenters to be plausible and myself to be probable.


A few commenters addressed the question of whether Robbie was slumming with Lisa. I wrote:
...Johnny and Baby embraced briefly on the porch.

At that moment, Robbie walked past the cabin porch and noticed Johnny and Baby embracing, and joked insultingly: “Looks like I picked the wrong sister. That’s okay, Baby, I went slumming too.”

The joke’s idea was that Robbie perceived that Baby was more on his intellectual and cultural level than Lisa was. Baby would have been a better sexual partner for Robbie. Lisa still was refusing to have sex with Robbie, but Baby apparently had begun already to have sex with Johnny.

Robbie had picked the wrong sister to seduce when the Housemans had arrived for their family vacation. Baby was the sister who read books and could understand The Fountainhead and understand the Objectivism philosophy. Baby was the sister who was willing to have sex without a marriage commitment. Instead of picking Baby for a brief sexual affair, Robbie had made a mistake and went slumming with the intellectually and culturally inferior sister Lisa.

Robbie told Baby that Baby had made a similar mistake. Baby actually was like Dominique Francon, but she had gone slumming with the intellectually and culturally inferior Johnny instead of submitting herself sexually to and spending her vacation time with Robbie the Roark-like genius.
Here are the critical comments (emphasis added):
When Robbie made the comment about picking the wrong sister, he only meant that Baby puts out and Lisa doesn't. By "slumming," he wasn't referring to Lisa, he was referring to Penny, just as Baby was "slumming" with Johnny.
He meant Penny when he said he went slumming
I thought that Robbie meant Penny when he said he went slumming too since he considered that the dancers were 'lower class'.
I agree ... about Penny being the one he went slumming with...
Why no mention here of what Robbie says to Dr. Houseman about Penny in his last scene?...that certainly gets into his "slumming" philosophy. ... the "girls like that'll pin it on any guy..." line,if I remember it correctly,is what prompts Dr. Houseman to snatch back the envelope (and later apologize to Johnny).
The critical commenters are correct that Robbie surely did think that he had slummed with Penny.

However, his intention of his particular scene was to insult Baby, and I think this comparing him to Penny would have been an ineffective insult. He said to Baby: "Looks like I picked the wrong sister", so he was comparing Baby with Lisa. Robbie indicated that he had slummed with Lisa too, but Baby has turned out to be more slummable than Lisa.

I judge these critical commenters to be plausible and myself to be probable.

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Swayze was the only actor ever considered

In previous posts, I reported that actors Billy Zane and Val Kilmer were chosen before Patrick Swayze to play the role of Johnny Castle.

However, Eliza Thompson has reported in a recent Cosmopolitan article, dated February 2, 2017, that only Swayze ever was considered. Thompson writes that screenwriter Eleanor Bergstein said:
No other actors were ever considered for Johnny except Patrick. It was always him and only him.

We looked through pictures and I said, "Oh, there’s the eyes we want," and we turned them over, and Emile [Ardolino], our director, said, "As a matter of fact he’s a Joffrey dancer."

We went after him, and when I met him, I said, "Now that I know you, if you decide not to do this, it’s hard for me to think that I’ll make the film."

I really felt that way and I still do. So it was always Patrick, only Patrick, the only one we offered it to, and a wonderful, brilliant, good man.
I still assume, however, that other actors were considered and tested. After all, Swayze might have decided to do the movie.


Jennifer Grey has said in a video interview (at 2:25) that when she was auditioning for the role of Baby Houseman, she thought that the role of Johnny Castle would be given to Billy Zane.


In the same recent Cosmopolitan article, Bergstein remarks that she still might write a sequel to Dirty Dancing.
I do have a very clear sense of a very complicated, long future that they [Baby and Johnny] have when this [the Dirty Dancing story] is over. ... I think maybe now I’ll do a sequel.

That [the sequel] is the question that people are incredibly interested in. Sometimes they grab me by the arm so that I have marks on my arm!
I think that Bergstein essentially has already written the sequel -- her 1995 movie Let It Be Me.

Bias Against Clean-Cut, Ivy-Type Guys

The blog Ivy Style was founded in 2008 by Christian Chensvold, a New York-based writer who publishes about male fashion. He has founded also the websites, and Chensvold attended Cal State Fullerton on a fencing scholarship, where he was conference champion while studying English. He is an author of the books The Stylish Life: Golf and Ivy Style: Radical Conformists.

In 2009 he wrote an article, titled Dirty Rotten Scoundrel, about Robbie Gould's Ivy-Style clothing in Dirty Dancing. Here is an excerpt, as illustrated:
Dirty Dancing ... showed Hollywood’s bias against clean-cut, Ivy-clad guys on the path to success. In other words, the kind of characters who used to be the good guys.
Robbie Gould wearing a madras jacket
in the movie "Dirty Dancing"
Every so often Hollywood makes a film that perfectly crystallizes the inversion of values that has taken place in America since the 1960s. Dirty Dancing — made in 1987 but set in 1963 — perfectly illustrates the new-found bias against clean-cut, Ivy-type guys who wear madras jackets.

Set at a summer resort in New York’s Catskill Mountains, the movie is a powerful piece of counter-cultural propaganda that, through the medium of cable television, repeatedly brainwashes American women into thinking that uneducated hunks in leather jackets are preferable to college boys in oxford-cloth button-downs. Johnny, played by Patrick Swayze, is poor and dresses in all black. He is the film’s hero. Robbie (pictured) wears white bucks and tennis sweaters. He is the film’s villain.

Yeah, try and wrap your head around that one.
Robbie Gould wearing a tennis sweater
in the movie "Dirty Dancing"
Robbie is a Yale med student working a summer job at the resort. Evidently planning to study gynaecology, Robbie has no less than three dalliances during the course of the film.

But while Robbie has the collegiate look, he’s no rich kid: Not only is he forced to work as a waiter to pay for med school, his sense of superiority, unsupported by high birth, must seek its justification in the novels of Ayn Rand. At one point Robbie spouts a cynical remark about the superiority of the select few, then whips out a tattered copy of The Fountainhead. He’s promptly called a sleazebag.

At the end of the film, the resort’s owner laments how the business has survived two World Wars and the Great Depression, but he isn’t sure he’ll make it through the ’60s.

“It all seems to be ending,” he says wistfully. “You think kids want to come with their parents and take foxtrot lessons?”

Here are some comments that follow Chensvold's article.
This is a great article. It’s so true in American movies. It makes me think that the movie directors/writers were picked on, bullied or had some issues with the clean cut “ivy style” type of guys when they were young, and so they wanted to get these guys back by making them look evil in the movies.

Another Swayze movie that shows this bias is The outsiders. The Greasers are the poor class and fight the preppie “Socs”. The Socs are portrayed as huge jerks and evil villains, and the movie tries to show the poor Greasers as cool, heroes, etc.

After living life, I hope most kids realize that these movies are fake, and people SHOULD emulate college type, educated people rather than punks who try to destroy civilized society.


The barbarians are not at the gate, they are among us, and have been for a long time. Anything that can help to slow their progress and create a reaction deserves our praise and support. Thanks again, Ivy Style, for fighting the good fight.


.... I didn’t go to Yale medical school, but I have worked as a ballroom dance instructor. Also, whenever I lock my keys in my car, I have a tendency to smash the window rather than call Triple A.


I understand the enduring reality (and wisdom) of De gustibus non est disputandum. And I have lived long enough to know that there are natural- shouldered jerks and polyester-shirted gentlemen.

That said, the Ivy/Establishment style never fails and never betrays because it is so rooted in a long-proven, quiet practicality, quality and sensibility which imparts its own authority. That very authority makes it the inevitable target of those (movie makers, it seems, chief among them) who are, in Nat Henthoff’s penetrating phrase, “class voyeurs” — always busy playing the politics of envy and resentment.

Thanks, Christian, for pointing out “Dirty Dancing” as a prime example.


Nice article for several reasons:

A. for highlighting the class-envy politics of Hollywood

B. the inherent wank tendency of your average so-called ‘meritocrat.’ This particular villain is perhaps so nasty because of his own crisis of confidence.

In my experience real pretension usually arises for individuals who don’t necessarily have the foundation to back up their presumptuously haughty airs.


You’ve approached, but have not quite hit, the target. It’s not just “bias against clean-cut, Ivy-type guys who wear madras jackets” that Hollywood and the rest of the mass media promote; it’s bias against traditional values, Western civilization, and, ultimately, white people themselves.

Although this movie is only a minor player in this overarching motif, if you look at society at large, you will see this is a significant thread running through it.


So, let me get this straight: A guy in an oxford and weejuns is a guy with values. A guy in a leather jacket on a motorbike is devoid of values and wants nothing more that to destroy Western civilization?

This may be the most trite article I’ve ever read!


The preppy rich kid is pretty much the archetypical nemesis of every John Hughes or other 80s teen movie. It’s quite a simple device from a narrative point of view to pit an outsider who is challenging the old guard as the hero (who has to get everything on his own merit), and the representatives of the established privileged class (who live the easy life off daddy’s money and social networks) as the villains. This fits well with American notions of class and meritocracy, individualism and ‘revolutionary/rebellious’ political and economic values.

That said, John Hughes did a better job than many of his peers who used the trust fund preppy as main rival to the hero for the attentions of the girl by often playing with the fraught nature of cross-clique romance, often featuring the ‘sympathetic’ rich kid (Blane in Pretty in Pink, Watts (Mary Stuart Masterson) in Some Kind of Wonderful, Jake in Sixteen Candles, Claire in The Breakfast Club).


.... I think Christian is spot on with this realization that Hollywood hates traditional values. They promote the worst in almost all films. It’s been said that a film like Lord of the Rings could never have been made in America these days (too much honor, loyalty and selfless sacrifice). This is also why they absolutely hate and defame Mel Gibson (Braveheart).

It is most definitely intentional. Their goal is to corrupt our youth and they have done a fine job of it for decades. It has long been their plan to lay the rails for a pathetic multiculturalist society.

More examples:

Caddyshack (they destroy the golf club at the end; anti “right of free association” propaganda

Dead Poets Society (prep kids CAN be “enlightened” –with Marxist ideology!)

Karate Kid (Rude a-hole Johnny hangs out at country clubs, his preppy ex loves underprivileged Danny; to the films credit, Johnny realizes he’s been wrong at the end and personally hands Danny the karate trophy)

I just realized I’d have to list almost every teen comedy since 1978 to point out all the twisted messages aimed at kids in films.

We used to look up our betters and strive to emulate their success. Now youth are being conditioned to despise anyone perceived as better than ourselves. Rich vs poor (and now women vs men via the destructive poison that is feminism) rhetoric and portrayals proves to any thinking man that our media is in the hands on communist lunatics.

.... Preppy clothes, to me, are an outward expression of a person's values. Young girls especially are brainwashed with movies into wanting the rough characters from the wrong side of town and hating the affluent kid who’s going somewhere. The media knows the likely outcome. They love destroying your daughters. They get off on it.

The portrayal is always thus: underprivileged kid is noble, creative, sensitive, polite and trustworthy; the prep kid is evil, cunning, insensitive, rude and untrustworthy.

Best thing you could ever do is shield your kids from the media, and even televised sports (weapons of mass distraction). I’ve even gone so far as to explain how the media works, who writes the dialog, how someone with an ideological axe to grind can portray things in any fashion they want. Once you do this Hollywood's power to influence is vastly diminished.


.... Look at Hayes Code-era movies. They have adults acting like adults, childlike children, brave men, feminine women, and moral messages. Although there may be innuendo and suggestion, the violence mostly takes place off-screen, and the love-making is conducted through singing, dancing, virtuous action, and emotional depth. The woman falls for the right man, the brave man wins the day, families come together or stay together, and all is right with the world at the end. All without profanity, blasphemy, or other crass elements.

Contrast that with the vulgar, violent, nihilistic filth that passes for “entertainment” these days. Movie do not just reflect the culture; they also guide it.


The preppy douchebag was a fixture in movies in the 80’s. Given that, I don’t think it was much of a stretch for the audience in ’87 to be convinced that a guy dressed Ivy League was the bad guy.

In a following article, Chensvold speculated that a madras jacket in Ralph Lauren's new collection for the Spring and Summer of 2015 perhaps was inspired by Robbie Gould's wardrobe.
A madras jacket in the Spring/Summer 2015 collection
of designer Ralph Lauren

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Slovak "Hriešny tanec" Spoofs -- Solid Gold

These last videos might be the best of all.

See also Two Slovak Guys Spoof the Final Scene and More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby and Still More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby and Yet More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby and More Slovak Spoofs.

Yet More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby

The small, landlocked country of Slovakia is the biggest producer of Dirty Dancing spoofs in the world.  See also Two Slovak Guys Spoof the Final Scene and More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby and Still More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby.

Still More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby

There is something odd about many Slovak guys. See also Two Slovak Guys Spoof the Final Scene and More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby.

Children's Dance Classes in Slovakia

All Slovak children grow up learning to do Dirty Dancing, which they call Hriešny tanec

More Slovak Guys Dancing as Baby

For some reason, the small country of Slovakia leads the whole world in Dirty Dancing spoofs featuring guys as Baby. See my previous post Two Slovak Guys Spoof the Final Scene

22 Epic Dirty Dancing Fails

Ducky Dancing

Some wierdo named Rob Rouse makes videos with his pet duck. Here is his video about Dirty Dancing.

Lego Toys Dance the Final Scene

This video was uploaded to YouTube by Deuskartoffel, which wrote the following note:
This is our project for our media lessons. We have spent ca. 20-30 hours on this project.

Watch out for the lovely little mistakes which slipped in during the making of the film :D

Hope you enjoy watching it!

An Advertisement for United Health Care

The Cabin Scene Performed by Channing Tatum and Charlyne Yi

Baby Sees Raptors in the Kitchen

Sunday, April 9, 2017

The MPAA's PG-13 Rating of "Dirty Dancing"

Time magazine reported that the editors of Dirty Dancing edited the movie three times in order to get a PG-13 rating from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).
... the movie was almost Dirtier Dancing: according to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the film went through three rounds of edits with the MPAA, the film-ratings agency, before the raters would agree to knock Dirty Dancing from an R to a PG-13, thus allowing teenagers ... to flock to theaters.

Not everything controversial got cut (the abortion plot cost the film a major advertising sponsor but stayed in) and those scenes that were edited out didn’t disappear. .... recent DVD extras have included at least some of the explicit material. 
The deleted too-sexy dance has been transferred from the DVD's extras to YouTube. Because YouTube sometimes deletes videos in order to comply with copyright complaints, I have preserved three screenshots from a currently available YouTube video.

Now, here is a video currently on YouTube:

After the too-sexy dance was deleted, the passage that the movie audiences watched was this:

The first above video -- the deleted too-sexy dance -- lasts 2:15 minutes. The second above video -- the passage that the audiences watched -- lasts 5:15 minutes. So, more than a third of the original passage was deleted.


The too-sexy dance was deleted in order to reduce the MPAA rating from R to PG-13.

The PG-rating has been defined unofficially as follows:
PG-13 rated movies stand for Parental Guidance-13, with parents strongly cautioned, as some material may not be suitable for children under 13.

Again, it’s a matter of what isn’t in the film; any nudity has to be non-sexual, any swear words have to be used sparingly, and, in the event of the specific obscenity we politely call the F-word, not used in a sexual context. (You can say “Oh, (BLANK) this!” in a PG-13 film, but not more than once, and never “I’d love to (BLANK) Denise …”)

Violence in PG-13 films may be intense, but must also be bloodless – see Jurassic World or any Marvel Movie, for example – and it is, as per usual, the Ratings Board’s call if the film's content is deemed to be more than PG but less than R.
The MPAA itself has defined the PG-13 rating officially as follows (emphasis added):
A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning [than a PG rating] by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them.

A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture.

Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented.

There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence.

A motion picture's single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters fell that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.

The MPAA's official definition of the R rating includes this sentence:
Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motions pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian.
That one sentence caused the Dirty Dancing producers to delete the too-sexy dance. The ticket-purchasing result of reducing a rating from R to PG-13 has been described as follows (emphasis added):
PG-13 - Parental Guidance suggested, with a strong suggestion that the film may be inappropriate for pre-teenagers. This rating is similar to PG, but indicates a greater degree of potentially offensive material. There is, however, no enforcement of it, just as there is no enforcement of the PG rating. If the child can reach the ticket counter to hand over his money, he'll probably be sold a ticket.

R - Restricted. No children under the age of 17 admitted without a parent or adult guardian. This rating suggests that there are strong elements of sex, violence, or (less often) profanity in a film. In practice, the restriction simply means the child can't buy his own ticket. If he can find a cooperative adult, even a stranger, who will buy the ticket for him, in he goes. In theory, it's supposed to be the parent or someone else with a strong relationship to the child.
In other words, the reduction of the MPAA rating for Dirty Dancing from R to PG-13 meant essentially that any teenager could buy a ticket without inhibition.


The producers' effort to make Dirty Dancing a PG-13 movie improved the movie as a work of art for the following reasons:

Deleting the too-sexy dance made time for other scenes.

The deleted too-sexy dance lasted 2:15 minutes. A movie cannot last too long.

* If the dance had remained in the movie, other scenes would have been shortened or deleted.

* When the dance was deleted, other scenes were lengthened or added.

The movie's audiences do not know which scenes were affected. I myself guess, for example, that the scene where Baby is being cut in half by a magician and where a comedian is telling a joke is in the movie because the too-sexy dance was deleted. If the movie's editors were ordered to cut 2:15 minutes from the movie, then that magician-comedian scene would not be in the movie. That's just one example.

Deleting the too-sexy dance improved the movie's proportionality and pace.

Each scene should be sensibly proportional to the entire story. After the two-sexy dance was deleted -- 2:15 minutes --  the remaining scene still lasted more than five minutes. The remaining scene was long enough. The fact that Baby experienced sexual intercourse was only one element of a story that comprised many elements. The movie was also about learning to dance, about responding to Penny's pregnancy, about adjusting a daughter-father relationship, about defending Johnny from a false accusation, and many other issues.

The story should be told at a sensible pace. One scene that is too long can ruin the pace.

The too-sexy dance was not realistic.

Baby was a young, prim virgin. The too-sexy dance would have impressed many people in the audience as artificial, contrived, unrealistic. She is too confident and bold. Her lascivious behavior in this too-sexy dance does not match her behavior in the other dance scenes or match her prim personality.

Of course, many people would think that the too-sexy dance was plausible. I myself do not think so, however, and I am sure that many people would agree with me.

How would Baby really have behaved in her first sexual intercourse with Johnny? Let each person in the audience imagine her behavior. That is better than showing her behaving in a manner that would strike many people as unrealistic.

The movie could not show sexual intercourse and get a PG-13 rating. Showing the too-sexy dance was an attempt to portray sexual intercourse by means of a sexy dance. However, the dance was so lascivious that it mischaracterized Baby.

Many adult activities are hidden from adolescents.

Suppose that the movie had shown Baby accompanying Penny to the abortion and seeing Penny suffer the bloody, painful consequences. Such a scene would have reinforced the movie's message that abortion should be legalized.

However, the dancers helping Penny considered Baby too young to be included in such an activity. Because of her adolescence, Baby was partially included and partially excluded in various activities. Such shifting circumstances caused Baby's adolescent awkwardness that the movie portrayed so charmingly.

Baby was in a hurry to become an adult, and she was frustrated that some adult elements of life still were prohibited and hidden. The adolescents who watch the movie sympathize strongly with that frustration.

Baby did experience sexual intercourse, which no longer was hidden from her. However, the sexual intercourse did remain hidden from the adolescents watching the movie. The only reason they were allowed to watch the movie at all was that it was rated PG-13 -- because of them. This adolescent frustration is ironically exciting -- probably especially for the teenage girls watching the movie.

This idea was called "the discovery of adulthood" in a brilliant essay written by Jason Bellamy and subtitled Oooh Baby, Baby!:
... Many movies are destroyed by their MPAA ratings, as a director's vision is mangled to meet the requirements of an R, or as audiences are kept away by an NC-17, but Dirty Dancing is enhanced by its rating. Most obviously, by stopping short of the R, director Emile Ardolino ensured that teenage girls, the audience most likely to identify with Baby's evolution into young womanhood, could attack the box office.

But much more importantly, the constraints of a PG-13 prohibited the movie from trying to swim in the strong current of truly adult themes that would certainly have drowned it.

From the get-go, Dirty Dancing is throbbing with sexuality, yes, but its hormones are distinctly adolescent. It taps into a time in our lives when dancing isn't just a stand-in for or a gateway to sex but is a perfectly fulfilling erotic exercise all its own. Seen through Baby's eyes, the movie is dominated not just by experimentations with adulthood, a common theme at the multiplex, but something much rarer: the discovery of adulthood.

* It's there in the beautiful slow-zoom on Baby's face the first time she spots Johnny and Penny (Cynthia Rhodes) showing off at Kellerman's.

* It's there again the next time Baby spots Johnny and Penny in the famous watermelon scene.

* It's there, too, when Johnny first puts his hands on Baby and tries to show her how to dance.

* And it's there again and again in the scenes dealing with Penny's unwanted pregnancy and abortion.

Most movie characters understand something the moment they see it. Baby takes time. Sex, abortion, Baby is aware of these things, but for much of the film everything “adult” takes place behind closed doors in what might as well be some other world.

In an R-rated movie, could we have felt Baby's naïveté? It seems unlikely. Similarly, in an R-rated movie Baby's maturation almost certainly would have been highlighted by the loss of her virginity — an event that Ardolino would've felt compelled to choreograph as if it were a dance scene. Instead, as produced, Baby's sexual activity is almost an afterthought.

Sure, if you're old enough to understand what usually happens when two people take off their clothes and get into bed together, as Johnny and Baby do several times, Bergstein and Ardolino leave no mystery. But here Baby “becomes a woman,” as they say, in the way she grows as a dancer, in the way she starts to exude confidence with her body, in the way she starts to understand the complexities of Penny's predicament, in the way she relates to her sister and, maybe more than anything, in the way she relates to her father. ...

For many, Dirty Dancing was, much like Baby's experience at Kellerman's, a stepping stone toward an enticing yet intimidating new phase of life. .... Johnny is at least one life phase ahead of Baby. It's hard to imagine where they go from Kellerman's, but it's notable that when Johnny and Baby first part, before his surprise return, there are no tearful goodbyes and Johnny's parting words are simply, “I'll see ya.” ... 
Yes, Baby's relationship with Johnny had ended, and a big reason was that she was too young for him. Their "life phases" were too far apart. The rest of Johnny's life would remain hidden forever from Baby.


The IMDb website includes a Parents' Guide for the movie Dirty Dancing. The Parents' Guide says:
Sex and Nudity

Dancing scenes involve body rubbing, grinding, and dry humping moves while dancing -- thus the name, "Dirty Dancing".

A brief sex scene but no actual sex is shown.

Three love scenes, a brief glance of the backside of the main male characters buttock when he gets out of bed.

In the water scene where the two main characters are learning lifts, the female's shirt is white, and you can see her breasts through it, but all you can see is nipples.

When the female character changes clothes in the back of the car, the male character watches from the rear-view mirror.


Violence and Gore

Two men fight.

There is a scene where a character gets a back-street abortion (since abortion was illegal in 1963) and she is obviously in a lot of pain, blood is seen on her clothes.



"Shit" is used a few times

At least one "goddamn"

One use of "ass".



Some characters are seen drinking and/or smoking.


Not recommended for under 13.


Another website, Common Sense Media recommends that parents should allow children only of ages 12+ to watch Dirty Dancing, with this explanation:
Although some parents may find the dancing a little too dirty, teenage viewers will be captivated by the flashy fantasy of star-crossed summer romance. Sexual references abound here beyond the dance moves:

* One character has a botched abortion.

* The main character loses her virginity.

* Another character talks about her plans to go all the way.

* An older married woman propositions younger men on staff at the resort and sleeps with one.
The Common Sense Media website enables its readers to respond with their own opinions about the appropriate ages. Responding parents recommended ages 14+, and responding kids recommended ages 12+. Some of the responses follow.

Opinion of the parent of a 16 and 18+ year-old

Moronic plot, disgusting lack of moral qualms, paying for the murder of an unborn being glorified, vulgar dancing, statutory rape of main character. Barffff


Opinion of an adult

Great Movie - you can trust your teen!

I loved this movie as a teenager. I'm looking forward to watching it with my girls (when they are old enough). My oldest is 12, so we are almost there.

For the record, I watched this as a teen. It did not cause me to have an abortion or sex or view those options as possibilities in my life. Additionally, I never thought the movie was about "abortion" but more about people -- doing everything they can to help a friend.

And while Baby's romance was exciting, I would never have had an older boyfriend because I knew it was wrong and my parents would have disapproved.

Teens raised in thoughtful, trusting homes can be exposed to life's conundrums without necessarily racing to make movie characters' bad choices.


Opinion of an adult

... I watched it as a little kid and loved it. I am 28 now.

As far as language I think g-d is said once along with a few others.

As far as sex -- if you can call it that -- it is just to people laying in bed together. Except for one time you see a woman on top of man but all boxy parts are blocked by a cover.

For all you people saying it's not for people under 17 or whatever you do realize that most schools teach sex ed at like 11 or 12 right. Yes the dancing is suggestive but if you're a little kid, you won't notice it.

There is a botched abortion scene But, once again, a little kid won't know what they are talking about.

All in all, it's a great movie with a great story. If you are concerned about any of the subject matter just screen the movie beforehand.


Opinion of an adult

.... It's fun, campy, and a must-see for teens. Parents should note that although there are no sex scenes, there are steamy, steamy dance moves and LOTS of french kissing.

There is also a scary botched abortion. Bad guys, however, get their dues.


Opinion of an adult

I love this movie! The music is wonderful and fun, and the dancing is fantastic! It is a very very fun movie! Watch it!

The sexual behavior is a bit iffy, but get over it!


Opinion of an adult

Funny, romantic movie. It makes a great movie for family nights and stuff.

It's not for younger kids though.


Opinion of a parent of a 7 and 12 year old

The amount of sexual instances and references is what bothers me the most. I watched it first around 14 and didn't understand the abortion part, but I think my kids would today.

I think it would be a good movie to watch with a young teen daughter.


Opinion of an adult

I'm surprised and disappointed to see Common Sense Media give this an OK at age 12 rating. There are some fun and memorable parts to this movie, maybe even a few good lessons, but no 12-year-old needs to be exposed to a botched abortion, teens sneaking out and lying to her parents to lose her virginity with an older man, and going all the way with a sleazy frat boy.


Opinion of an adult

I absolutely LOVE this movie!

I do not think it is appropriate for kids under 17. The themes and subject matter are mature and not appropriate for younger kids.

It seems like themes and subject matter are not taken into consideration by MPAA ratings. An R rating is only granted if there is nudity, of extreme violence.


Opinion of a teen, 13 years old

This movie is SO amazing I can't even express it! I think the reason why it did so well was because it was modern, it meets up with our dancing now. Watch a music video and you'll see the dancing is barely any different.

This movies 'sexual situations' are ridiculous. Sure, they dance suggestively, sure the characters have sex but it's a movie. We've seen worse on TV now and days. They [i.e. Dirty Dancing] don't show anything.

Younger kids don't understand the references and it's not like we're going to run into the street and yell out 'let's all dance like they did in dirty dancing!' C'mon, give kids some credit. We can handle sexy dancing and sexual gestures.


Opinion of an adult
18+ [sic]

I have seen this movie many times. I have enjoyed it each time.

I don't view this movie as in bad taste. It does involve some very taboo subjects for a movie of this type. What happens is each of these taboos are in good taste.

OK, so movies such as this would not happen in real life, but the whole idea of this movie is to make you feel good. The dancing is incredible! The whole feeling that is felt at the end of the movie makes you feel good. In the simplest of all terms you leave feeling good!

The title doesn't make the movie trash.

You ask about kids seeing it? Half of the programs that are on TV now might want you to retract the statement is it safe for kids to watch.

My mom loves this movie. The movie we will never see in real life. I just say go see it and you decide. I love this movie!


Opinion of a teen, 13 years old

I think it's the best movie in the world. It has a little bit of kissing but it's not bad at all.


Opinion of a teen, 14 years old

Really good movie! other than some brief language and very sexual dancing, this movie is good for 12 and up.


Opinion of a teen, 13 years old

Very awesome movie! There is some brief sex but there is no nudity whatsoever and it is mostly ''longer'' kissing.

One fistfight. NO VIOLENCE!

Positive messages saying" Stand up for whats right even if your the only one standing, Respect yourself and others, Have fun!

There is a good amount of sexy dancing but its just dancing!

And if your kid is to immature to understand this he/she should not watch this amazing movie or other TV! ....


Opinion of a teen, 14 years old

Lots of iffy stuff.

My rating: PG-13 for sexuality including sensual/exotic dancing and partial nudity, and for some language.


Opinion of a teen, 13 years old

There's one racy scene with Baby and Johnny when she sneaks out of the house to go to his [cabin].

Lots of racy dancing, language, violence.

Penny has an abortion go wrong.

Other than that, it's a great movie!


Opinon of a kid, 10 years old

I liked the dancing but it was a bit too explicit. You could show a 10-year-old but I do not think they would be so impressed. I am not sure about 11-year-olds but I think it would be more appropriate for them.


Opinion of a kid, 11 years old

Some great messages. Baby stands up for herself and Johnny.

Good chick flick for a sleepover.


Opinon of a kid, 11 years old

There is one sex scene but no nudity. I just recommend closing eyes, because it is a great movie!

There is a few punches and kicks being thrown but nothing more. There is some drugs and smoking involved in the movie. Just know to never do drugs and smoke.

There is also some cussing but nothing much.

I think this is a great, inspiring movie 10-year-olds would love!


Opinion of a teen, 14 years old

Dirty Dancing was a movie for a 16-year-old -- for a lot of sex scenes and fighting scenes.


Opinion of a Parent

It's a great movie and an '80s classic, but its themes are WAY too mature for young teens. Besides the very sexual dancing, the abortion (which is botched and causes major injury) and discussions about sex are so much of the plot. If your child doesn't understand what is happening, it won't just go over her head; she will ask what is going on. It just isn't appropriate for young kids.

That being said, I love the movie and it's a great girls-night thing for us moms!


Opinion of a parent

As the name says this movie has dirty dancing. Dances moves are sexual. There is also a brief sex scene (nothing shown on screen) and three love scenes.


Opinion of a teen, 13 years old

Great movie. Lot's of kids want to watch it but it's better if they wait until they are around 13 so that they can actually understand the movie. LOTS of dirty dancing.


Opinion of a kid, 11 years old

The movie was great and I thought it was a very good chick flick. I think it would be a fabulous movie for sleepovers but make sure all of the parents are ok with it.

There are some iffy scenes but they help give the movie more drama. Although, the characters do give good lessons like how Baby stood up for what she believed in with her and Johnny's love.


Opinion of a teen, 15 years old

I personally enjoyed this movie, and watched it when I was 13. However, with parental supervision.

I would rather that children of 12 years old at a SLEEPOVER NOT WATCH THIS. It speaks of unprotected sex, there is a sex scene, and of course, dirty dancing. Something that should not be seen by children barely even in middle school!

However, if you are a parent and want to let your kid see this rather touching story, by all means, do it. Just be careful and make sure they understand the errors in this movie.


Opinion of a teen, 13 years old

Great movie. It has great dancing and a good story line.

A girl gets pregnant and has an abortion, and there are some other sexually-based scenes and references.

Still, it's a great movie for mature tweens who know what's going on and know it isn't the right thing.


Opinion of a kid, 12 years old

Sex, abortion and lies -- but great acting.

I've known what abortion was since I was 6 and sex since i was 8, but other parents may not tell their kids so soon.

For teens and not young children -- but great intimate acting.



Opinion of a kid, 12 years old

Great movie for girls of any age!!!. I love watching it with my Grandma and Mom, since it's kind of a chick flick. ....

Even though Baby makes some bad choices, she learns from them, and that's the important moral of this movie.

There is some mature dialogue in this film, so you might want to see this wone with your kids if they aren't 13 or over.