![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
More on the Twilight and the pain it is causing my soul
I wish I had never seen Twilight. It makes me angry and I'm angry that so many women don't see why I'm upset. Not being upset themselves, that I can understand. Loving the books or the movie, that I can see too. That women don't see why this story is damaging to women JUST KILLS ME. I would almost rather let my daughters (theoretical ones at this point) watch Disney princess cartoons than this heinous stuff.
I'm not singling this story out because the author is a Mormon, although I admit that I have deep (and somewhat irrational) issues with this religion, nor am I against abstinence. Not at all on that last point. I am very very much for women making informed and conscious choices about their bodies and sexuality, and if that means choosing to abstain until marriage - or for whatever time or reasoning - more power to them, because it is certainly not the easiest choice in our sex drenched society.
I'm not against protecting the ones you love, cheesy fantasy stories, power play in relationships, or being domestic. But Twilight takes all of those things and twists them, adding slightly modern touches of independence, but really it just rehashes all the messages of gender and relationships that main stream conservative religion wants us to believe.
This story disempowers women and I am deeply saddened that millions of young girls and women are now day dreaming of a relationship like Bella and Edward's. A relationship in which the woman's whole world is the man, where she can lose herself, and in effect not be responsible for the consequences. If the man is stronger willed, then she doesn't have to worry about stating her wants or boundaries or even worry about losing control sexually. Because the man will be the boundary keeper. If the man is the woman's whole world then she doesn't have to worry about making difficult choices beyond what will keep them together. If she's a 17 year old, with hormones surging through her body, then the first person she is (IRREVOCABLY) drawn to is the person she should marry. Because being married at 18 is a good idea* and the legal contract of marriage validates the sexual act. Millions of girls are watching men be the gatekeepers for Bella's sexuality and all other avenues of personal agency. Plus, she is 17. She does not even have legal agency yet. Millions of women are longing to be kept women.
And who can blame them? It would be easier in this day and age to just acquiesce and succumb to these messages. It's really fucking hard work to be a strong, loving, independent, smart woman. Finding balance between interdependence (notice the prefix there, please) and independence, freely giving of oneself and submission, work and family, self and others is exhausting even on the best of days. And let's not get into the more shallow, but in some ways more tricky and damaging, struggles between too thin and too fat, too prudish and too slutty, etc. For me, these struggles are most keenly felt in my spiritual journey and motherhood. Some days I really wish there was a clear formula that would make my spirit automatically connected up with God. If I just prayed X prayers Y many times, or if I did or was X, Y, Z then I would have the deep spiritual epiphany I long for. But that's not how it works. I don't believe there is a formula for touching God, so I put in the work. Just like I put in the work to find balance between my self, my wants, my needs and those of my husband's and my son's. Motherhood. I don't have the energy today to open that can of feminist confusion.
Suffice it to say, I am not surprised that women are sucked in by the "comforting" messages in Twilight. But it makes me sad. In that world, in this world, men/patriarchy** have the upper hand at the expense of the woman's interior world. Part of why Bella is so bland is that she has no interior world. No thoughts, just Edward.
These things make me sad. They make me angry. When I see women going along with the status quo, not questioning the images of identity and relationship that our culture holds up, I get upset. I really, truly, deeply care about the lives and identities of girls and women.
*To my younger friends here, I recognize that some people find a good match at an early age and I think that is wonderful. But having a healthy, lasting relationship with a teenage sweetheart is the exception, not the norm. Encouraging people to marry young is, in my opinion (which is never very humble), an antiquated, anti-feminist agenda.
**I fear that I need to say that individual men are not necessarily tools of the patriarchy. I think there are plenty of women (Stephanie Meyer!) who are more patriarchal than some men. I am a radical feminist, but not a separatist (although some days....) nor do I hate men. God, it makes me sad that I even feel it necessary to type this sort of disclaimer in my own freaking journal.
I'm not singling this story out because the author is a Mormon, although I admit that I have deep (and somewhat irrational) issues with this religion, nor am I against abstinence. Not at all on that last point. I am very very much for women making informed and conscious choices about their bodies and sexuality, and if that means choosing to abstain until marriage - or for whatever time or reasoning - more power to them, because it is certainly not the easiest choice in our sex drenched society.
I'm not against protecting the ones you love, cheesy fantasy stories, power play in relationships, or being domestic. But Twilight takes all of those things and twists them, adding slightly modern touches of independence, but really it just rehashes all the messages of gender and relationships that main stream conservative religion wants us to believe.
This story disempowers women and I am deeply saddened that millions of young girls and women are now day dreaming of a relationship like Bella and Edward's. A relationship in which the woman's whole world is the man, where she can lose herself, and in effect not be responsible for the consequences. If the man is stronger willed, then she doesn't have to worry about stating her wants or boundaries or even worry about losing control sexually. Because the man will be the boundary keeper. If the man is the woman's whole world then she doesn't have to worry about making difficult choices beyond what will keep them together. If she's a 17 year old, with hormones surging through her body, then the first person she is (IRREVOCABLY) drawn to is the person she should marry. Because being married at 18 is a good idea* and the legal contract of marriage validates the sexual act. Millions of girls are watching men be the gatekeepers for Bella's sexuality and all other avenues of personal agency. Plus, she is 17. She does not even have legal agency yet. Millions of women are longing to be kept women.
And who can blame them? It would be easier in this day and age to just acquiesce and succumb to these messages. It's really fucking hard work to be a strong, loving, independent, smart woman. Finding balance between interdependence (notice the prefix there, please) and independence, freely giving of oneself and submission, work and family, self and others is exhausting even on the best of days. And let's not get into the more shallow, but in some ways more tricky and damaging, struggles between too thin and too fat, too prudish and too slutty, etc. For me, these struggles are most keenly felt in my spiritual journey and motherhood. Some days I really wish there was a clear formula that would make my spirit automatically connected up with God. If I just prayed X prayers Y many times, or if I did or was X, Y, Z then I would have the deep spiritual epiphany I long for. But that's not how it works. I don't believe there is a formula for touching God, so I put in the work. Just like I put in the work to find balance between my self, my wants, my needs and those of my husband's and my son's. Motherhood. I don't have the energy today to open that can of feminist confusion.
Suffice it to say, I am not surprised that women are sucked in by the "comforting" messages in Twilight. But it makes me sad. In that world, in this world, men/patriarchy** have the upper hand at the expense of the woman's interior world. Part of why Bella is so bland is that she has no interior world. No thoughts, just Edward.
These things make me sad. They make me angry. When I see women going along with the status quo, not questioning the images of identity and relationship that our culture holds up, I get upset. I really, truly, deeply care about the lives and identities of girls and women.
*To my younger friends here, I recognize that some people find a good match at an early age and I think that is wonderful. But having a healthy, lasting relationship with a teenage sweetheart is the exception, not the norm. Encouraging people to marry young is, in my opinion (which is never very humble), an antiquated, anti-feminist agenda.
**I fear that I need to say that individual men are not necessarily tools of the patriarchy. I think there are plenty of women (Stephanie Meyer!) who are more patriarchal than some men. I am a radical feminist, but not a separatist (although some days....) nor do I hate men. God, it makes me sad that I even feel it necessary to type this sort of disclaimer in my own freaking journal.
Re: I really appreciate your thoughts on all of this
I don't think there is anything "inherently feminine" about women, except for maybe a uterus. But then some women are born with out one, or they don't "function properly." Or breasts. But wait, some women are really flat chested. Ok, nurturing. Nope, damn. I know some very unnurturing women and some men who crave fatherhood, like a stereotypical woman. There is nothing "inherently feminine."
i firmly believe in inherent gender differences that are not simply a matter of physical characteristics. this does not mean that i buy into the "anatomy is destiny" bullshit and it doesn't suggest that a woman who is not nurturing is any less "woman" or a man who craves fatherhood is any less "man". there's plenty of gray area and fluidity in *my* definition of "gender". but i do believe that if a social experiment was conducted with a large enough sample, male and female babies raised w/out gender socialization will exhibit at least SOME stereotypically feminine and stereotypically masculine traits. of course there would be an enormous overlap in behavior but the differences would be there as well for a large portion of the sample group. there's plenty of evidence that biological sex influences behavior. unfortunately, society drives those inherent gender differences home, affirming predispositions that might not necessarily blossom without societal pressure.
regardless of whether gender is inherent or not, regardless of whether inherent femininity exists or not, i do believe that feminism can damage a woman's desire to get in touch with her femininity. i think every woman should take feminist 101 taught by you because far too many end up fearing that wearing a skirt and having a baby will automatically equal turning in their feminist card. living in a large metropolitan area i see this ALL.THE.TIME. and this is why your "twilight" post got me going.
ya know... i was typing up this here novel when ian came home and i took a break to explain to him your thoughts and my thoughts on the subject. he pointed out that "the mechanics of what you're arguing do not matter because it sounds like you are both looking for the same end result."
he's right.
if what you'd like to see if a society of men and women free from being pigeon-holed into their stereotypical gender roles, i'm with you. my only issue is assuring that nothing gets lost along the way; that women who desire to have a strong partner and cook barefooted in the kitchen are not any less intelligent or strong than their feminist friends and men who enjoy watch sports and drinking beer are not automatically macho jerks.
Re: I really appreciate your thoughts on all of this
I will take issue on one point though, and that is the gender vs sex. It is not semantics. If your u/s technician told you that s/he could see the gender of your child then that is mistaken. Sex and gender are used interchangeably, but this is incorrect. I'm not trying to be all wordsmith perfect but the nuances between the two do matter. There are 7 traits that determine biological sex (off the top of my head, let's see how many of them I can name: primary sex organs such as penis or vagina, secondary sex organs such as testes or ovaries, chromosomes, brain biochemistry... shit that's only 4). Gender is what we perform.
I do not deny that there are male and female differences, but how we break that down culturally usually isn't helpful.
Yes, there are some militant feminists that will deny the validity of skirts and babies, but they are not the majority of feminists. Just like the loudest most obnoxious Christians aren't the majority. Why is it that the loudest losers fuck up everything good for us? :)