A feminist analysis of Firefly
Mar. 31st, 2008 05:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dennyReposting this link from a friends-only post elsewhere: I have to say that now that I have subjected myself to the horror that is Firefly, I really am beyond worried about how much men hate us, given that this was written by a man who calls himself a feminist.
Highlights:
* The first scene opens in a war with Mal and Zoe. Zoe runs around calling Mal ‘sir’ and taking orders off him. I roll my eyes. Not a good start.
* Zoe is not shown to have a personality of her own. (we interrupt your edited highlights for a hysterical giggling fit)
* Given the fact that women are largely absent from the action and the dialogue of the majority of scenes it is unsurprising that the action onscreen is highly homoerotic. [...] This intense homoeroticism is present from the outset as Mal asserts his rights as alpha male on the ship. [...] Violence is a part of the landscape throughout the whole series and Mal is often the instigator. He is constantly rubbing himself up against other men ...
* The women who ‘choose’ to be ‘Companions’ are shown as being intelligent, accomplished, educated, well-respected and presumably from good families. If a woman had all of these qualities and opportunities then why the fuck would she ‘choose’ to be a man’s fuck toy? Would being a fuck toy for hundreds of men give a woman like Inara personal fulfillment? Job satisfaction? A sense of purpose? Fulfill her dreams? Ambitions? Money doesn’t seem to be the motivation behind Inara’s ‘choice’ to be a ‘Companion’, presumably she just ‘enjoys’ swanning around in ridiculous outfits. And being used as a fuck toy by men is seemingly a small price to pay for the pleasure.
* Let me just say now that I have never personally known of a healthy relationship between a white man and a woman of colour. [...] 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.
And from the comments:
* I think you've missed a massive bit of misogynistic symbolism. The ship itself. The ship is characterised as female throughout the series [...] The name of the ship by itself "Serenity" suggests a demure, submissive role. But, more than that, they all live off her, they all live *in* her, symbolically raping her, while staying safe and cosy inside her womb.
* I cannot think of even 1 person I know in real life who would be happy to take on the job of "Companion". [...] The argument in "Firefly" is that she wants to share her love with everyone... this is a very MALE point of view of sexuality. Not female. Women are not like that.
Highlights:
* The first scene opens in a war with Mal and Zoe. Zoe runs around calling Mal ‘sir’ and taking orders off him. I roll my eyes. Not a good start.
* Zoe is not shown to have a personality of her own. (we interrupt your edited highlights for a hysterical giggling fit)
* Given the fact that women are largely absent from the action and the dialogue of the majority of scenes it is unsurprising that the action onscreen is highly homoerotic. [...] This intense homoeroticism is present from the outset as Mal asserts his rights as alpha male on the ship. [...] Violence is a part of the landscape throughout the whole series and Mal is often the instigator. He is constantly rubbing himself up against other men ...
* The women who ‘choose’ to be ‘Companions’ are shown as being intelligent, accomplished, educated, well-respected and presumably from good families. If a woman had all of these qualities and opportunities then why the fuck would she ‘choose’ to be a man’s fuck toy? Would being a fuck toy for hundreds of men give a woman like Inara personal fulfillment? Job satisfaction? A sense of purpose? Fulfill her dreams? Ambitions? Money doesn’t seem to be the motivation behind Inara’s ‘choice’ to be a ‘Companion’, presumably she just ‘enjoys’ swanning around in ridiculous outfits. And being used as a fuck toy by men is seemingly a small price to pay for the pleasure.
* Let me just say now that I have never personally known of a healthy relationship between a white man and a woman of colour. [...] 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.
And from the comments:
* I think you've missed a massive bit of misogynistic symbolism. The ship itself. The ship is characterised as female throughout the series [...] The name of the ship by itself "Serenity" suggests a demure, submissive role. But, more than that, they all live off her, they all live *in* her, symbolically raping her, while staying safe and cosy inside her womb.
* I cannot think of even 1 person I know in real life who would be happy to take on the job of "Companion". [...] The argument in "Firefly" is that she wants to share her love with everyone... this is a very MALE point of view of sexuality. Not female. Women are not like that.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-03-31 04:56 pm (UTC)I read it a week or so ago. I *do* think that Inara is a problematic character and that there are some legitimate gender and race wibbles with Joss Whedon's work (though he's still a darn sight better than most other Hollywood tv writers). But the author of that rant not only makes some very not-so-legitimate wibblings, she also seems to miss most of the real problems. Just - really, dude. Not helpful.
And the last point that you quote... wtf? Racist herself much?
All in all it reminds me of Why I Am Not A Radical Feminist. Although it also reminds me of why I should probably be a bit louder in being the sort of feminist that I am, to remind people that we can be reasonably sane...
(no subject)
Date: 2008-03-31 05:06 pm (UTC)Obviously I have trimmed a middle section out of that quote which makes it sound a touch more directly insane than it does in her post (she gives her reasons for believing such a thing), but even so, yeah... wtf? This lady is way beyond a bit biased.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-03-31 09:54 pm (UTC)Heh, indeed.
And let's not even get in to her conviction that Joss Whedon rapes his wife. W.T.F.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-01 04:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-01 06:33 pm (UTC)apologies to barge into denny's lj, but i just wanted to note that 'radical feminism' can cover both 'sex-positive' and 'sex-negative' stances.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-01 06:45 pm (UTC)I was hoping for a bit more input from the 'sane' feminists who are part of my friends-of-friends network, but most of them seem to have just said "oh god she's making us all look like fucking lunatics" and left it at that. Which is fair, but not very informative for those of us who are basically well-intentioned but fairly confused by the details of what is and isn't feminist/sexist/right/wrong/left/etc even on a good day, let alone with this kind of thing :)
This woman does seem to have a lot of other people agreeing with some or all of her points, both in her own journal and in others, so presumably she's not just making this stuff up wholesale, there's some kind of 'accepted' reasoning process behind it. That leaves me wondering if there's actually any room for me (given my apparently unfortunate gender) in the world-view of these people.