Comments | blubird_pie: Mmm, Meta...

blubird_pie

Mmm, Meta...

Feb 02, 2010 19:31

Swapping Spit and Satin Panties: Sexual Objectification of the Male Characters in Supernatural

Summary: Despite plausible allegations of sexism, women still like Supernatural. Also, Dean gets kissed by demons a lot. Maybe these things are related? And no, I’m not saying we just watch for the h/c and the pretty.
Word count: 2,000 yes I know ( Read more... )

meta, spn

Comments 42

mtee February 3 2010, 18:33:24 UTC

Well I'm actually going to say this ( ... )

blubird_pie February 4 2010, 01:20:55 UTC

Haha, that's cool. I get carried away with my personal brand of pseudo-intellectual enjoyment, but I certainly didn't mean to imply that h/c and pretty aren't valid reasons to watch; part of the reason that I noticed the trend of dub-con kissing was that I *ahem* pay a certain amount of attention to those scenes.

I'm glad that you were interested enough read through all my over-analyzing even though you don't really go in for that type of thing. And thank you for commenting, too! it's good to get a reality-check and a different point of view ;)

amonitrate February 3 2010, 20:33:22 UTC

Interesting essay.

Consent, and the withholding thereof, is the male leads’ main weapon. In this light, the mytharc is all about sexual assault, and to me that’s an interesting development.

Good point, and I think more specifically the metaphor can be read as sexual coercion.

Dean has to say yes to Michael, but how much choice is he given in the scene with Zach, where Zach tortures and threatens Dean and his loved ones?

Sam has to say yes to Lucifer, but there's a heavy element of manipulation there as well.

Is it really consent if you don't have any other choice? That's an interesting issue.

I'm on the line about whether the show is consciously aware of the sexual connotations of the vessel storyline or not. But that doesn't mean we can't analyze it from that angle.

blubird_pie February 4 2010, 01:10:37 UTC

"But that doesn't mean we can't analyze it from that angle." Exa-actly. Glad that you found the essay interesting!

I agree that sexual coercion is probably the better metaphor for angel possession. I suppose why I went with "assault" (though I haven't quite wrapped my head around this part) is that I think there's something in the mix about presenting an escapist fantasy where control of one's body /requires/ consent: even though a good deal of pressure can be brought to bear on Sam'n'Dean, the angels ultimately cannot override their say-so. That doesn't hold with Demon possession, but then the ability to protect yourself with knowledge (ie: the right protection symbol) is also a watering down of the threat that control can be taken from you despite being strong/smart/prepared. Humm.

Anyways, thanks for the comment!

amonitrate February 4 2010, 01:13:58 UTC

well, coercion can be a form of assault. Like I said, is it consent if you aren't given any other choice?

blubird_pie February 4 2010, 01:29:08 UTC

No, not so much- you're definitely right! I just find it interesting that the literal word "yes" has such power in SPN. Not really sure what to do with that "power," considering it's rendered nigh-irrelevant if it can be obtained through violence (as you point out)... but the way the boys' consent gives them leverage over the angels seems to indicate something different than if the angels, like demons, could just slip right in regardless. Still not sure what, though.

etoile444 February 4 2010, 02:59:14 UTC

You put a lot of thought into this and I respect your opinion. I also love anaysis of the show, but sometimes, I think we people have a tendancy to overanalyze it. As mtee said in her post, "TV is entertainment ( ... )

blubird_pie February 4 2010, 10:06:09 UTC

What, overanalyze?! Is that even possible? (kidding! (...mostly))

Re: Dean and the panties- You're right that he wasn't forced and did enjoy it. I would even agree about the bi-sexual thing, considering his reaction to Dr. Sexy! When I brought the panties up, I guess I was remembering how Dean said that Rhonda "made us try on her panties," emphasis on made. Even though it was a generally positive experience, I still think it falls under the general umbrella of men being controlled sexually both because the girl was the one calling the shots and because of the specifically feminizing nature of the act (wearing panties, specifically pink ones).

ANYWAY. Like I said to Mtee, I didn't mean to imply that people need to justify their enjoyment of TV at all. I actually agree with you that the destiny vs. free will thing is more a part of why I like SPN than the gender stuff. I'm just throwing it out there to give people something to think about ;)

Thanks for the thoughtful comment, and for reading my exceptionally long post!

yourlibrarian February 4 2010, 04:25:06 UTC

Interesting take on this issue, We might also add that in Sam, Interrupted. Sam seemed more violated by the kiss than Dean. It's also questionable what the show was implying with Becky deliberately ignoring Sam's statement that he was uncomfortable. Given Chuck's attitude towards her, it would seem the underlying message was that her behavior was desirable, but a nuisance when directed at the "wrong" person, rather than her behavior being a real breach of consent.

What's particularly interesting about the angel vessel issue since the last episode, is that it splits hairs when it comes to the issue of consent in a rather alarming way. Swap Meat suggested that whoever inhabited the body was capable of providing consent, even though Sam himself had already been violated in its abduction. This would seem to smash the line between coercion and consent, and it also provides a rather disturbing take on the idea that bodies are simply there to be used by anyone who can take control of them.

blubird_pie February 4 2010, 10:13:41 UTC

Glad you found it interesting! I'm going to have to go back and watch Sam vs. Dean's reaction to the kiss in 5.11, now. The brothers are so often foils, it would probably be worthwhile to analyze the different ways they react to violation/ having control taken from them. Hmm...
I think you're also right that there's something interesting going on with what types of sexual advances are "ok" and which are "bad" re:Becky.

I agree that Swap Meat really brings the issue of objectification of bodies to the fore; Show often seems to differentiate between soul and body as if they were two totally disconnected things, so in a way bodies ARE objects to be shuffled around (see Ruby's "environmentally conscious" meat suit) rather than extensions of self. Hah, I feel like you could almost do a whole other meta on the use of bodies in that one episode. Ah, SPN. I love you so.

Thank you very much for the comment, and the extra thoughts to chew on!

partaymon5 February 4 2010, 05:44:40 UTC

Interesting meta. I'm not sure that this was case from the first though...I can't remember that far back. I'm suspicious that a lot of the 'sexual assaulting' of the two leads, came AFTER a few cons or Kripke reading forums and realizing just how much some of the female audience enjoyed that kind of thing. I think that the writers felt that the women might identify better with the male characters, if they suffered from some of the same things as female characters often do and of course some of the most horrific ideas to a woman - would be rape. The most emasculating thing to a man would also be rape I would guess ( ... )

blubird_pie February 4 2010, 10:24:47 UTC

Yeah, I think Show changes a great deal from S1 to the present. I do think that some things changed when they realized just how much of the audience was women, and we know that Kripke pays at least a bit of attention to fandom, in which hurt!Dean is a pretty common trope. Still, Meg's sexual harassment was an issue as early as 1.16, and the vampire-baiting kiss is also from season 1. You're right though, that there started to be alot more of that kind of thing in later seasons ( ... )