Joss Whedon is not a feminist?

T

thrustbucket

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
This is only really relevant to Joss fans.

I came across a blog today, of some lady that tries to point out how Joss Whedon's stories portray women the exact opposite from what he and most people believe they do.

I encourage any Whedon fans to read it and post. Do you agree? Do you disagree? Does she make valid points? Or is she insane?

I have to admit, reading her blog, I had flashbacks of this forum. I'd especially like to see what mr. fairness himself, Mykevermin, had to say.

*Yes, I realize in my haste I misspelled Feminist. That's what happens when the boss keeps walking by and you type fast, ignoring spell check.
 
I don't care about this Joss Whedon guy/girl, but you can edit the title if you want by doing an advanced edit or double clicking next to the title in the forum view.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I don't care about this Joss Whedon guy/girl, but you can edit the title if you want by doing an advanced edit or double clicking next to the title in the forum view.[/QUOTE]

Thanks.
 
Well, I read about half of it before I sorta gave up. A hypersensitive and self-congratulatory livejournal? Color me surprised. I'm a fan of Whedon's stuff, though not to the degree that some are, and I've never really considered it from a critical point of view, but it's pretty clear that she's just working from a broken premise that I don't agree with, and most modern feminists I know -- self-described or not -- would side with me on this one, I think.

For one, she takes prostitution and pornography to be inherently degrading to women. While they often are, they aren't necessarily, and that's pretty much an insurmountable gulf right there. Inara doesn't have a pimp (she chooses who to take as a client; the power is entirely in her hands) and she's far more than just a "hooker" -- she's a sex therapist, geisha, and monk all rolled into one.

There's simply no reason women can't benefit from transactional sex, unless you're suggesting that women are simply "different" -- they're too emotional, too sensitive to simply enjoy a physical act. The problem with prostitution comes in when the women are taken advantage of, but that doesn't mean the act itself is inherently bad; eating disorders aren't good things, but that doesn't make enjoying a burger a sin. So it's interesting that this supposed feminist is so threatened by female sexuality, by a woman choosing to have sex, uncoerced, on her own terms, that it's automatically a sign of repression.

And don't even get me started on the bit about "Zoe taking orders from Mal" -- she conveniently ignores Zoe in turn giving orders to others, and the fact that, well, that's just how armed forces work -- or that she's obviously expecting a political polemic rather than a smart bit of entertainment.

My rebuttal could easily go on as long as she did, so I'll drop it here, but suffice to say, her critiques have about as much logical weight as complaining that Resident Evil 5 is racist. In short, she's a boob (oh, look! -- he used female anatomy disparagingly!).
 
Trq, I don't often agree with you but I think you hit the nail on the head. I thought she was nuts, but in today's political climate, I often find myself thinking people are nuts, and everyone else tells me I'm just insensitive.

You also didn't mention her borderline racist remarks. She essentially said that every white man her black family members were married to were abusive. Then she somehow tried to take that and parallel it with Mal.

I'm also a moderate Whedon fan. And I know enough about him to say that he's very concerned about women's rights. He donates a lot of money to a lot of causes and he promotes many pro-women rights orgs.

Anyway, glad to see I'm not alone.
 
This person pretty much loses all their credibility when they start making quotes like this:

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, Joss uses his own wife in this way. Expects her to clean up his emotional messes. Expects her to be there, eternally supportive, eternally subservient and grateful to him in all his manly glory. I hope the money is worth it, Mrs. Whedon. But somehow I doubt that it is. No amount of money can buy back wasted emotional resources.
Click to expand...
Let me just say now that I have never personally known of a healthy relationship between a white man and a woman of colour. I have known a black woman whose white husband would strangle and bash her while her young children watched. My white grandfather liked black women because they were ‘exotic’, and he did not, could not treat women, especially women of colour, like human beings. I grew up watching my great aunts, my aunty and my mother all treated like shit by their white husbands, the men they loved. So you will forgive me for believing that the character, Wash, is a rapist and an abuser, particularly considering that he treats Zoe like an object and possession.
Click to expand...
Last I checked, Wash was the submissive partner in the Zoe/Wash relationship, and Kaylee was pretty much the lynchpin of the entire ship (God forbid she isn't cooking or cleaning) so I'm rather confused as to what the fuck she's talking about.

Sounds like a cry for help to me. Too bad she's too far gone:

*I’ve finally finished the damn thing. I won’t be allowing comments from anyone who is not a radical feminist (or pro-radical feminist) or a lesbian feminist/separatist. Yes, I am pro-censorship. Boohoo.*
Click to expand...

~HotShotX
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Trq, I don't often agree with you but I think you hit the nail on the head. I thought she was nuts, but in today's political climate, I often find myself thinking people are nuts, and everyone else tells me I'm just insensitive.

You also didn't mention her borderline racist remarks. She essentially said that every white man her black family members were married to were abusive. Then she somehow tried to take that and parallel it with Mal.

I'm also a moderate Whedon fan. And I know enough about him to say that he's very concerned about women's rights. He donates a lot of money to a lot of causes and he promotes many pro-women rights orgs.

Anyway, glad to see I'm not alone.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I actually took personal offense at what she said about interracial relationships, and I *never* feel that way about anything on the internet. I assure you, they weren't just borderline racist. But she so clearly has some massive psychological and/or emotional issues that I decided to not go off on that rant. If nothing else, she's a good reminder for both of us that that's what the far batshit insane left looks like.
 
[quote name='trq']I assure you, they weren't just borderline racist. But she so clearly has some massive psychological and/or emotional issues that I decided to not go off on that rant. If nothing else, she's a good reminder for both of us that that's what the far left looks like.[/quote]

Right or left, people like her shouldn't be lumped in with those on the spectrum who are not batshit insane :)

Please consider her batshit left in future references, thanks.

~HotShotX
 
I wholeheartedly disagree with the Andrea Dworkin school of feminist thought. It lacks any and every nuance, and is premised on the need for such deferential treatment of women at all times that any and every effort to act "egalitarian" (or "feminist" if you consider that a synonym) is rendered irrelevant the moment a single action can be construed so as to be misogynist.

As "Mr. Freedom" or whatever it was I am now evidently known as (;)), I'm fine with feminism, I'm intrigued by pornography (in terms of the tired 'why-can't-there-be-feminist-porn' question), but I'm not fine with condemning absolutism.

As for Joss Whedon, his shows are what they are; I've chuckled at the occasional Buffy episode, but I don't follow his work. That said, even if he were someone I did follow, I'm not particularly interested in what a television show tries to tell me, implicitly or explicitly, about culture and relationships. All shows do, to varying degrees - but I'm savvy enough to discern these sorts of things (without, I'd argue, going overboard as this livejournal user has) and recognize the implications of them.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']

As "Mr. Freedom" or whatever it was I am now evidently known as (;)), I'm fine with feminism, I'm intrigued by pornography (in terms of the tired 'why-can't-there-be-feminist-porn' question), but I'm not fine with condemning absolutism.
[/QUOTE]

Are you still looking for a job? Because I think you just found your fortune. ;)
 
[quote name='HotShotX']Right or left, people like her shouldn't be lumped in with those on the spectrum who are not batshit insane :)

Please consider her batshit left in future references, thanks.

~HotShotX[/QUOTE]

Duly noted and corrected, even.

[quote name='mykevermin']I'm intrigued by pornography (in terms of the tired 'why-can't-there-be-feminist-porn' question)[/QUOTE]

Kind of difficult when some branches of feminist theory posit that cameras are subconscious surrogates for the penis, and thus any sort of close-up in film is inherently transgressive and anti-womyn. And yes, there are people who actually say that kind of thing with a straight face -- ironically I dated one of them, and she turned out to be a fantastic girl.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I'm intrigued by pornography (in terms of the tired 'why-can't-there-be-feminist-porn' question)[/QUOTE]

Kind of difficult when some branches of feminist theory posit that cameras are subconscious surrogates for the penis, and thus any sort of close-up in film is inherently transgressive and anti-womyn. And yes, there are people who actually say that kind of thing with a straight face -- ironically I dated one of them, and she turned out to be a fantastic girl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top