(no subject)
Jan. 13th, 2012 07:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatAw..nobody responded to my movie trailer post. (pouts) Not that I really expected anyone too. But...one squee over the Spiderman Trailer would have been fun. Apparently I'm the only one who thinks the Avengers trailer is lame?
Work has put me in a pissy mood. For lack of a better term. I am tempted to hibernate tomorrow and not deal with people. I had a headache by the end of the day...from email. Sigh. Project Managers and Engineers. Sigh. Actually - the men at work drove me nuts. Patronizing bastards. Who were completely clueless. One guy insisted on talking to another guy, and refused to listen to me, because I was female. I told him I was managing the project and had only pulled the other guy in for a bit of help. He was "assisting" me NOT the other way around. I know, shocking, but there it is.
After much thought and analysis, I've decided that Buffy the Vampire Slayer the Television series, in spite of Whedon or because of him (on the fence) was feminist. It unlike all his other stories did not fall into the victimized little girl trope popularized by Luc Besson and later by Stieg Larrson. I'm sorry, the victimized little girl trope is not what I'd consider feminist. How is showing a girl repeatedly at the mercy of men, until she finally gets fed up and kicks them in the balls feminist? It feels more like male guilt or a way of handling that guilt (much like the magical black man helped and aided by the nice white couple in The Blind Side is about white liberal guilt not the black experience and is insidiously racist), and in a way - female revenge fantasy, which is okay, I guess, but not what I'd define as feminist or even misogynist for that matter. Just female revenge fantasy.
What I liked about Buffy the TV Series is two things: 1) Buffy was not and never was a victim. She wasn't raped. She didn't let it happen. 2) She took the reins. She was a hero like guys are heroes. She didn't have to become a victim first. She was like Peter Parker in Spiderman.
My main problem with the victimized little girl trope is the girl can only become physically powerful and a hero after she is raped and tortured by men, not before. She can't be a hero just because she is - like men can. Buffy prior to the episode "Get it Done" was not about the victimized little girl. And in many ways subverted the stereotype portraying traditional male roles throughout much of the series (with the possible exception of the first two seasons). That is however the only thing that I've seen or read that Whedon has written that I can say that about. I don't know why or when he decided women can only be powerful after they've been brutally tortured by men or at the mercy of men. Nor do I know why everything else he created is scarily and disappointingly sexist in places, not completely, just in places. I suspect somewhere along the line Whedon fell into the same fantasy as Luc Besson and Stieg Larrson? Where he assauges his own guilt by creating a fantastical heroine who kills her rapist over and over again. She does what he'd do if he were female - as a friend of mine neatly put it. Forgetting the power women have which is uniquely our own. We don't have to kill the rapist to survive. We can forget he exists. Excise him from our memory. Or in some cases transform the experience into one that is not painful and lacks power. There are ways to handle things that do not require fists or guns. We can rise above. Our lives are not about our gender. Most of the time, we don't think about being women. We are just ourselves.
Sorry I keep editing this. I think one of the things I love most about lj and the internet social mediums...particularly the fanboards, is you can't always tell who is male or female, black or white, rich or poor, old or young, queer or straight...these things fall away. What we see is the essence of the individual, not the constructs or short-hand categories that we use to define one another. Race, gender, class, all of these things...fall away. You can fall in love with a person, not what they look like, not their physical essence. We live in such a material world, so physical, the internet..often strips that physical materiality away...and we are left with each others words and our perceptions of them. I love that. I can be male on the internet (people on a fanboard actually thought I was for a bit) and I can be black, I can be
short, I can be young, I can be ancient. I can be whatever I want. Rich, poor. It's freeing. Until people find out...and then that's lost.
Work has put me in a pissy mood. For lack of a better term. I am tempted to hibernate tomorrow and not deal with people. I had a headache by the end of the day...from email. Sigh. Project Managers and Engineers. Sigh. Actually - the men at work drove me nuts. Patronizing bastards. Who were completely clueless. One guy insisted on talking to another guy, and refused to listen to me, because I was female. I told him I was managing the project and had only pulled the other guy in for a bit of help. He was "assisting" me NOT the other way around. I know, shocking, but there it is.
After much thought and analysis, I've decided that Buffy the Vampire Slayer the Television series, in spite of Whedon or because of him (on the fence) was feminist. It unlike all his other stories did not fall into the victimized little girl trope popularized by Luc Besson and later by Stieg Larrson. I'm sorry, the victimized little girl trope is not what I'd consider feminist. How is showing a girl repeatedly at the mercy of men, until she finally gets fed up and kicks them in the balls feminist? It feels more like male guilt or a way of handling that guilt (much like the magical black man helped and aided by the nice white couple in The Blind Side is about white liberal guilt not the black experience and is insidiously racist), and in a way - female revenge fantasy, which is okay, I guess, but not what I'd define as feminist or even misogynist for that matter. Just female revenge fantasy.
What I liked about Buffy the TV Series is two things: 1) Buffy was not and never was a victim. She wasn't raped. She didn't let it happen. 2) She took the reins. She was a hero like guys are heroes. She didn't have to become a victim first. She was like Peter Parker in Spiderman.
My main problem with the victimized little girl trope is the girl can only become physically powerful and a hero after she is raped and tortured by men, not before. She can't be a hero just because she is - like men can. Buffy prior to the episode "Get it Done" was not about the victimized little girl. And in many ways subverted the stereotype portraying traditional male roles throughout much of the series (with the possible exception of the first two seasons). That is however the only thing that I've seen or read that Whedon has written that I can say that about. I don't know why or when he decided women can only be powerful after they've been brutally tortured by men or at the mercy of men. Nor do I know why everything else he created is scarily and disappointingly sexist in places, not completely, just in places. I suspect somewhere along the line Whedon fell into the same fantasy as Luc Besson and Stieg Larrson? Where he assauges his own guilt by creating a fantastical heroine who kills her rapist over and over again. She does what he'd do if he were female - as a friend of mine neatly put it. Forgetting the power women have which is uniquely our own. We don't have to kill the rapist to survive. We can forget he exists. Excise him from our memory. Or in some cases transform the experience into one that is not painful and lacks power. There are ways to handle things that do not require fists or guns. We can rise above. Our lives are not about our gender. Most of the time, we don't think about being women. We are just ourselves.
Sorry I keep editing this. I think one of the things I love most about lj and the internet social mediums...particularly the fanboards, is you can't always tell who is male or female, black or white, rich or poor, old or young, queer or straight...these things fall away. What we see is the essence of the individual, not the constructs or short-hand categories that we use to define one another. Race, gender, class, all of these things...fall away. You can fall in love with a person, not what they look like, not their physical essence. We live in such a material world, so physical, the internet..often strips that physical materiality away...and we are left with each others words and our perceptions of them. I love that. I can be male on the internet (people on a fanboard actually thought I was for a bit) and I can be black, I can be
short, I can be young, I can be ancient. I can be whatever I want. Rich, poor. It's freeing. Until people find out...and then that's lost.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 03:33 pm (UTC)I agree. I've actually seen the film, read the novelization, and much later the teleplay. The novelization isn't bad, although have very vague memories of it, and it wasn't good enough to purchase. I think I read it in a book store. But yes, I think, after reading the teleplay...how they did that movie is the only way it could be done. I remember reading an interview with Whedon - that he'd written the film for his Mom - who was dying of cancer at the time. And was upset when he saw it - because he didn't feel she'd like it. So the tv series was his second chance to..write that tale for her. When reading anything Whedon's done, it's probably worth keeping in mind that his mother was the founder of NOW, raised him as more or less a single Mom, and died of a horrible disease that he couldn't save her from.
After Life, Suspension and of course Alien 4 aren't what I'd call feminist in the slightest. A4 actually seemed to get more disturbing with each draft. CitW, I can barely talk about without ranting. Only thing I don't think I've read of his are Avengers and Wonder Woman.
I think I saw bits of his Wonder Woman script - which was, according to things I read back in 2007-2008 informed the comics. I'm not positive, but I think the Buffy Comics were heavily influenced by the defunct Wonder Woman script.
I haven't seen or read the movies you've mentioned. But I'm guessing that's probably not a bad thing. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 04:19 pm (UTC)I'm not positive, but I think the Buffy Comics were heavily influenced by the defunct Wonder Woman script.
I think the initial premise was from a WW script, yeah. The World turning against the hero bit and the vast incongruity with AtS. I'm certain Jane E said as late as 2005--it was a Halloweencon, I believe--that the original ideas being kicked around followed the AtS stuff. Buffy and Dawn in Italy. Then suddenly we got what we got.
I do subscribe to the theory that the underlying motivation was resentment, though. He became mad Buffy overshadowed everything else and started tearing it down. It's like a footnote at the bottom of every page.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 09:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 10:13 pm (UTC)Effort? What effort? The 2 1/2 comics he's written in 2 years? The finale he had his editor write? S9, that will be more or less written by Chambliss because he couldn't get Simone to write it (and I guess we can see why)? All the research he put in that he couldn't remember major character deaths and mythology? The storyline that even fellow writers weren't aware of?
Sorry but I find that a bizarre idea.
Of course you do. You're a Joss fan. I'm not. He's long since passed the point where he deserves the benefit of any doubts regarding his characters or feminism. Hey, if you want to keep drinking what he's pouring, go right ahead, but I'm done trying to rationalize away his Final Girl and rape/violation obsessions, especially since his stance on it appears to be one that I find rather appalling.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 11:01 pm (UTC)2 1/2?! Huh? He wrote 14 out of 40 regular issues on his own - far greater percentage than on the show - plus a one-shot and a short e-comic, plus he co-wrote 3 more issues. So, 18 full length and 1 short comic issue, and that includes 17 out of 40 regular issues, i.e. 42.5 %.
What finale did his editor write? The finale, #40, was all written by Joss. The previous arc, Last Gleaming 1-4, was written by: #36 - Whedon, #37-39 - co-written by Allie and Whedon.
S9, that will be more or less written by Chambliss
And that's because Whedon is disinterested in Buffy, not because he's incredibly busy with The Avengers?
because he couldn't get Simone to write it (and I guess we can see why)?
Gail Simone was never asked to be a writer for season 9. That was just a speculation by fans, and she said she wasn't asked, but if she does, she'll try to finally see BtVS, which she hasn't yet.
The storyline that even fellow writers weren't aware of?
That helps your argument how?
Look, you may hate Whedon's work and hate the comics - but it just doesn't make sense to say he hasn't put effort in them, when facts say otherwise.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 11:26 pm (UTC)2 years. The last 2 years. In that time he wrote 36, 40 and 1. Excuse me. 3 whole comics--1 weeks worth of television workload. In 2 years. Effort, you say?
Show me an instance where an author let his friggin' editor write the finale of a series he had all heart into. Any of it.
not because he's incredibly busy with The Avengers?
And Shakespeare and various other things. Sure sounds like he's ripping and raring to write for "his baby", doesn't it?
That was just a speculation by fans, and she said she wasn't asked, but if she does, she'll try to finally see BtVS, which she hasn't yet.
She wasn't formally asked.
That helps your argument how?
What writers who care for their story operate that way? Hey, come write for this story I deeply care about. I'm not going to tell you anything about it or anything. It'll be fun.
Look, you may hate Whedon's work and hate the comics - but it just doesn't make sense to say he hasn't put effort in them, when facts say otherwise.
No, it doesn't make sense to you because you see and read things you want to hear. Like above where you blatantly ignored that I said 2 years and tried to include the whole comic run into it (17 issues in 5 years, btw? Nothing to brag about). Or you try to act dumb, which you're not, and infer the writing operations of S8 were anything but lazy.
I don't hate Whedons' work. I wouldn't be here now otherwise; I wouldn't have been here as long as I have otherwise. I certainly don't hate Buffy or Angel or Roseanne. I'm not going to ignore the issues, though.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 11:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 11:40 pm (UTC)I'll go with that. I was just going to send an apology your way.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-14 11:46 pm (UTC)