A feminist analysis of Firefly

[denny]

Reposting 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.

Comments

[fire-brand.livejournal.com]

Some of this I agree with, some of this I don't. I'm not sure this person has spent enough time really watching Firefly to have gathered all the appropriate information.

Firstly, the last point, as mentioned above, I believe to be racist in itself, so I'm striking that one. Not the mention the highly problematic way this person has let her personal opinion cloud her analysis: "Let me just say now that I have never personally known of a healthy relationship between a white man and a woman of colour." While this may or may not be true - that doesn't rule out a "healthy" relationship existing in fiction.

As for the fact he treats Zoe like an object, I very much see Zoe as the dominant partner in that relationship, so I'd be interested to hear examples to the contrary.

Secondarily, Inara - yes, I agree she a is difficult character to resolve. I would like to point out that her reasoning for becoming a companion, as far as I remember, is to do with the freedom that it affords her. A few times they use Inara to get them into/out of more secured areas because she's actually far more respected than any of them.

I'd also like to point out that she has her choice of men - she is sent invitations and only takes up the men she has some interest in.

I'd also also like to point out that she was offered marriage at one stage by a very rich and influential partner of hers, and she turned it down - further suggesting that she chooses that path for her own freedom.

Now, I realise all of these points are problematic on many levels - she is still basically a prostitute. However, this is an overly extreme feminist reaction. Yes, it has its morally dubious points - but lets not forget that Firefly (like every other series) doesn't *just* represent gender. It's also a genre rehash, it looks at worldwide culture (the speaking of mandarin, the way Inara dresses etc), it looks at power structures, the movie looks at drug use, etc, etc. All of these things are going to effect the way that gender is represented because all of these things can only be analyzed in comparison to our own culture. And, in our culture - gender representation is flawed.

Just because Joss Whedon calls himself a feminist, doesn't mean he is bound to represent females in a flattering light. He certainly doesn't represent the men in Firefly in such a positive way.

I think the really sticky issue in Firefly is actually River Tam - she's taken away by (male) scientists and brainwashed until she's crazy and under their control. They literally insert things into her brain. She's then saved, and cared for, by her brother. Etc...

[fire-brand.livejournal.com]

Oh, and, bitches be crazy.