I don't know how well this will come out; generally I'm not so good at discussing the issue. But here goes: I'm going to focus on the second half of your post, because those are the things I want to address most.
Sexism in TV. Okay. Taking your example; you say that the whole thing is meant ironically (or at least partially so) on the part of the writers. This is all well and good, but it's not the intention of the writers that matters when it comes to interpretation. If gender equality was truly realised in our society, this wouldn't be a problem; if the gender was switched it would be the same situation, in which the writers are commenting on (let us say) the ways young people might use sexuality to "get their own way".
However, you have to acknowledge that gender equality is not a reality. There are preconceived notions held by many members of society - the stereotypical representations of women (and men, of course, but in this case women), let's say. One of these stereotypes is the young woman who gets her own way with sexuality! And this is the problem: in presenting a stereotype (however ironically meant!), the show is perpetuating it. And given that female stereotypes very rarely present a society in which both genders are equal, perpetuating this stereotype is much the same as perpetuating sexist thought. As long as someone interprets the show in a way that reinforces their own preconceived sexist stereotypes, we have a problem. Especially when you throw in the "woman are just playing hard to get and actually want to have sex always" angle - and believe me, there will be people who interpret it like that.
As an addendum, switching the genders would, I imagine, produce more or less the same reaction.
Okay, moving on to privilege. I think this is really a case of unfortunate terminology; the point of the concept of white (or whatever) privilege is to raise awareness of disadvantaged minorities. If you're aware of what you have that others don't, you will (theoretically) be able to acknowledge and attempt (passively or actively) to prevent discrimination. Going back to the previous example, dare I say that if you were not a white male you'd be more critical of the show? I do agree that the word 'privilege' carries some unfortunate connotations, but that shouldn't preclude discussion of the concept.
I think many people trivialise accusations of sexism because they seem to be trivial; but trivial things are indicative of the general mood of society. Until that mood changes, I think such accusations are more than justified.
It's such a stretch from this superpower to an actual stereotype, though, made worse by the fact that several other people got similarly-ironic powers.
Maybe I'm most uncomfortable with that notion that we should censor anything that might suggest sexist/racist/ableist/whateverist thoughts to anyone looking for them. To me, that emphasizes whatever cultural problem we're trying to avoid far more than some plot device.
I meant to imply that switching the genders would garner a much more ferocious reaction, as it would be "promoting the idea that men are in control of women's sexuality" or something.
I should look past what the word "privilege" actually says and focus on the intention? Why doesn't that apply to the TV show?
As someone already aware that our culture is kinda fucked, very active attempts to remind me of such come across as pretty obnoxious. It always sounds like it's my fault personally that X Y and Z happen, and my fault personally for not knowing about it, even though I do. Maybe they should work on that so they don't encourage me to avoid any organized group concerned about this problem. Constructive criticism!
I'm not particularly attached to my sex and am already a social misfit for unrelated reasons, so it's hard to hypothesize on what I may think if I'd grown up as a female. But I've never taken any real flak for being either bi or an atheist, and I can still sympathize with people who do, and I still take notice of how such things are treated in the media and in meatspace. (For example, I do notice trends in how many characters tend to be gay or bisexual. But I don't take a disproportion of straight characters to mean that every writer who creates straight characters is some homophobic douchebag.)
They're not always trivial. Like I said, sometimes there are serious blunders made, and feminists will often have thought-provoking things to say about them. But when we're effectively crying racist at an Asian who's good at math or bad at math because it might remind us that there's a connection between Asians and math, I feel we have strayed away from trying to change how people think and are focusing on changing how it looks like we think. I guess that might make us feel better about ourselves, but I don't like it on principle and I don't imagine it actively cleanses bias from anyone's mind in practice.
It's such a stretch from this superpower to an actual stereotype, though, made worse by the fact that several other people got similarly-ironic powers.
Not really. You said yourself the power is ironic exactly because she is characterised as (roughly) the sort of stereotype I was describing.
Maybe I'm most uncomfortable with that notion that we should censor anything that might suggest sexist/racist/ableist/whateverist thoughts to anyone looking for them. To me, that emphasizes whatever cultural problem we're trying to avoid far more than some plot device.
Not censorship. The idea is to prevent these things from being made in the first place, and if they are made, point out the sexist/racist/ableist/whatever thoughts. The idea being that pointing these things out makes it easier to avoid them in the future. Of course I am not saying the writers are sexist; just that part of the show they are writing appears to have (maybe we should both actually watch it first?) sexist elements. I point this out in the hopes that I can make said writers more aware of these elements, and hopefully avoid/correct them in future episodes.
I should look past what the word "privilege" actually says and focus on the intention? Why doesn't that apply to the TV show?
Because people who are discussing privilege have a common ground in the general definition of the term. People who are discussing the TV show do not have a common ground, since their interpretations can differ wildly.
That said, I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you to either a) ignore the word privilege, since changing it would take a lot of effort (ask biologists: they are very much used to annoying terminology that doesn't make any sense in modern biology) or b) start using a different term and hope it catches on.
They're not always trivial.
There should have been a 'most' in there.
But when we're effectively crying racist at an Asian who's good at math or bad at math because it might remind us that there's a connection between Asians and math, I feel we have strayed away from trying to change how people think and are focusing on changing how it looks like we think. I guess that might make us feel better about ourselves, but I don't like it on principle and I don't imagine it actively cleanses bias from anyone's mind in practice.
Oh, definitely, these things can get taken too far. But not, I think, in the example you gave; and, as I said, generally I think people too easily dismiss situations which are sexist/racist/ableist/whatever.
My ultimate question is this: if we didn't know of the current stereotypes regarding men and women and how they treat sex, would there be a problem with this power?
I don't think so, which is why I'm having trouble quite seeing the problem, and why I compared it to Asians and math.
A boy who feels invisible becomes invisible. A boy who wishes he could undo something can now undo things. A girl who feels she can control her life with sex gets the power to control everything with sex.
A brief reply before I go to bed: stereotypes involving men/women tend to be sexist. The stereotype that Asians are good at maths is not really racist - it is laughably unauthentic, but not necessarily harmful (Asian characters defined by their ability to do maths, however? different story). To answer your question: no, I don't think there would be a problem, but not, I believe, for the same reasons as you. As I said, I think male/female stereotypes are generally sexist; and I think they contribute a lot to sexism in society. Thus a person who is not aware of these stereotypes would be more liable to view men and women as equal, and thus would not have a problem with the power (or its inverse). This is what I said before about it not being an issue if we lived in a world where gender equality is real. I think there is a case to be made here for a relative perception of sexism, too.
At this point I should mention that I object to the portrayal because of the harm it could do in the societal perception of gender, not necessarily to the portrayal per se.
Also I am not entirely sure how "making men want to rape her by touch" equates to "controlling life with sex", but again. Context. Watch show first, analyse later.
How do you think Koreans who are bad at math get along? What about every other race implicitly being worse at math? Racial stereotypes are racial stereotypes, and I would hope nobody take any of them to heart.
Either way, the power is only a problem in the minds of people who are already discriminatorily-minded. I don't want those people controlling the media, even indirectly like this, and I find it very hard to believe that they will up and change their minds if gender issues vanish entirely from the media.
I'd hope she'll be able to dangle her inflicted lust over people's heads and get them to do things for her. Just outright getting raped all the time wouldn't be very good as either a superpower or a plot device.
Sexism in TV. Okay. Taking your example; you say that the whole thing is meant ironically (or at least partially so) on the part of the writers. This is all well and good, but it's not the intention of the writers that matters when it comes to interpretation. If gender equality was truly realised in our society, this wouldn't be a problem; if the gender was switched it would be the same situation, in which the writers are commenting on (let us say) the ways young people might use sexuality to "get their own way".
However, you have to acknowledge that gender equality is not a reality. There are preconceived notions held by many members of society - the stereotypical representations of women (and men, of course, but in this case women), let's say. One of these stereotypes is the young woman who gets her own way with sexuality! And this is the problem: in presenting a stereotype (however ironically meant!), the show is perpetuating it. And given that female stereotypes very rarely present a society in which both genders are equal, perpetuating this stereotype is much the same as perpetuating sexist thought. As long as someone interprets the show in a way that reinforces their own preconceived sexist stereotypes, we have a problem. Especially when you throw in the "woman are just playing hard to get and actually want to have sex always" angle - and believe me, there will be people who interpret it like that.
As an addendum, switching the genders would, I imagine, produce more or less the same reaction.
Okay, moving on to privilege. I think this is really a case of unfortunate terminology; the point of the concept of white (or whatever) privilege is to raise awareness of disadvantaged minorities. If you're aware of what you have that others don't, you will (theoretically) be able to acknowledge and attempt (passively or actively) to prevent discrimination. Going back to the previous example, dare I say that if you were not a white male you'd be more critical of the show? I do agree that the word 'privilege' carries some unfortunate connotations, but that shouldn't preclude discussion of the concept.
I think many people trivialise accusations of sexism because they seem to be trivial; but trivial things are indicative of the general mood of society. Until that mood changes, I think such accusations are more than justified.
Reply
Maybe I'm most uncomfortable with that notion that we should censor anything that might suggest sexist/racist/ableist/whateverist thoughts to anyone looking for them. To me, that emphasizes whatever cultural problem we're trying to avoid far more than some plot device.
I meant to imply that switching the genders would garner a much more ferocious reaction, as it would be "promoting the idea that men are in control of women's sexuality" or something.
I should look past what the word "privilege" actually says and focus on the intention? Why doesn't that apply to the TV show?
As someone already aware that our culture is kinda fucked, very active attempts to remind me of such come across as pretty obnoxious. It always sounds like it's my fault personally that X Y and Z happen, and my fault personally for not knowing about it, even though I do. Maybe they should work on that so they don't encourage me to avoid any organized group concerned about this problem. Constructive criticism!
I'm not particularly attached to my sex and am already a social misfit for unrelated reasons, so it's hard to hypothesize on what I may think if I'd grown up as a female. But I've never taken any real flak for being either bi or an atheist, and I can still sympathize with people who do, and I still take notice of how such things are treated in the media and in meatspace. (For example, I do notice trends in how many characters tend to be gay or bisexual. But I don't take a disproportion of straight characters to mean that every writer who creates straight characters is some homophobic douchebag.)
They're not always trivial. Like I said, sometimes there are serious blunders made, and feminists will often have thought-provoking things to say about them. But when we're effectively crying racist at an Asian who's good at math or bad at math because it might remind us that there's a connection between Asians and math, I feel we have strayed away from trying to change how people think and are focusing on changing how it looks like we think. I guess that might make us feel better about ourselves, but I don't like it on principle and I don't imagine it actively cleanses bias from anyone's mind in practice.
Reply
Not really. You said yourself the power is ironic exactly because she is characterised as (roughly) the sort of stereotype I was describing.
Maybe I'm most uncomfortable with that notion that we should censor anything that might suggest sexist/racist/ableist/whateverist thoughts to anyone looking for them. To me, that emphasizes whatever cultural problem we're trying to avoid far more than some plot device.
Not censorship. The idea is to prevent these things from being made in the first place, and if they are made, point out the sexist/racist/ableist/whatever thoughts. The idea being that pointing these things out makes it easier to avoid them in the future. Of course I am not saying the writers are sexist; just that part of the show they are writing appears to have (maybe we should both actually watch it first?) sexist elements. I point this out in the hopes that I can make said writers more aware of these elements, and hopefully avoid/correct them in future episodes.
I should look past what the word "privilege" actually says and focus on the intention? Why doesn't that apply to the TV show?
Because people who are discussing privilege have a common ground in the general definition of the term. People who are discussing the TV show do not have a common ground, since their interpretations can differ wildly.
That said, I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you to either a) ignore the word privilege, since changing it would take a lot of effort (ask biologists: they are very much used to annoying terminology that doesn't make any sense in modern biology) or b) start using a different term and hope it catches on.
They're not always trivial.
There should have been a 'most' in there.
But when we're effectively crying racist at an Asian who's good at math or bad at math because it might remind us that there's a connection between Asians and math, I feel we have strayed away from trying to change how people think and are focusing on changing how it looks like we think. I guess that might make us feel better about ourselves, but I don't like it on principle and I don't imagine it actively cleanses bias from anyone's mind in practice.
Oh, definitely, these things can get taken too far. But not, I think, in the example you gave; and, as I said, generally I think people too easily dismiss situations which are sexist/racist/ableist/whatever.
Reply
I don't think so, which is why I'm having trouble quite seeing the problem, and why I compared it to Asians and math.
A boy who feels invisible becomes invisible. A boy who wishes he could undo something can now undo things. A girl who feels she can control her life with sex gets the power to control everything with sex.
But yes, perhaps we should actually watch it. 8)
Reply
At this point I should mention that I object to the portrayal because of the harm it could do in the societal perception of gender, not necessarily to the portrayal per se.
Also I am not entirely sure how "making men want to rape her by touch" equates to "controlling life with sex", but again. Context. Watch show first, analyse later.
Reply
Either way, the power is only a problem in the minds of people who are already discriminatorily-minded. I don't want those people controlling the media, even indirectly like this, and I find it very hard to believe that they will up and change their minds if gender issues vanish entirely from the media.
I'd hope she'll be able to dangle her inflicted lust over people's heads and get them to do things for her. Just outright getting raped all the time wouldn't be very good as either a superpower or a plot device.
Reply
Leave a comment