Opening that can of worms again...

[hells_half_acre]

It's time for another post about everyone's favourite can of worms...Misogyny.

As you all know, I LOVED 7x08. But, there was that one little aspect (of perhaps many) that threw some people off ...mainly, the fact that Sam was "roofied" and tied to a bed. I thought it was a great send up of the film Misery, and since Becky didn't actually do

Comments

[ramblin_rosie]

It's a fair question, and there's the related problem of why there's virtually no support for battered husbands (i.e., male victims of non-sexual assault by a spouse)--which, well, Sam is, if you consider getting whacked on the head with a waffle iron domestic abuse.
I haven't seen the ep, and plan not to, precisely because I don't find that kind of thing funny. Not that I judge you for your own opinion of the episode, mind! It's definitely possible to think something's hilarious while still acknowledging its problems. But in the larger context, that kind of humor smacks not just of misogyny (which it definitely does) but also of misandry--the assumption that the man is always the aggressor and the woman is always the victim and that somehow a man who is genuinely the innocent victim of a female aggressor is someone to be mocked by both men who think he's weak and women who think he had it coming. It's just flat wrong all the way around

[ramblin_rosie]

Just re-read and noticed that you *had* mentioned "abuse/rape"--my eye skipped past it somehow. Sorry.

[hells_half_acre]

but also of misandry--the assumption that the man is always the aggressor and the woman is always the victim and that somehow a man who is genuinely the innocent victim of a female aggressor is someone to be mocked by both men who think he's weak and women who think he had it coming. It's just flat wrong all the way around.

Yes, I completely agree. And this is the way I always say it - as purely a problem of misandry...which was why the article was so interesting to me, because it didn't occur to met that this issue actually stemmed from misogyny as well.

I'm really glad that I was told this about Wedding Crashers before I ever saw the movie, so that I can avoid it. I can't imagine what my reaction would have been if I had seen the movie and been SURPRISED by a rape scene. Oh man...this is why I always read the warnings on fics so carefully, there are certain things that I just can't stomach.

[katsheswims]

Yay, you mentioned me! I'm glad you posted something about it.

I don't actually have much to say on the subject. Like you I've noticed the rather abundant amount of times Sam and Dean have been sexually objectified by other characters/and the camera and outright (or by implication) sexually abused. And actually I enjoy that the show is acknowledging that men can be victims of sexual abuse etc. Funnily enough the treatment of women by the show never bothered me (until the Ruby/Meg naked torture scenes, but I've accepted them because of the horror nature of the show).

[hells_half_acre]

Yeah, I've also really enjoyed the fact that Supernatural actually "goes there", and I've liked the fact that they've been more blatant about it too recently. Unlike some people who criticize the show, I think they've handled it rather tactfully and realistically.

The Ruby/Meg torture scenes didn't bother me, because I accepted them as the horror nature of the show as well.

Thanks again for sending me the article! :)

[claudiapriscus]

It's a complicated issue, one of those things that goes so far it doubles back again. Just like female-on-male violence, which is also used as comedy

[hells_half_acre]

And mostly this is rooted in old fashioned sexism: it runs contrary to a lot of really stupid ideas about what rape is, about gender roles (Women are the raped, duh! Men all want sex all the time from every female body. It's women's jobs to be the sexual gatekeepers!) The old feminist saying is "patriarchy hurts men too." There are as many poisonous ideas about masculinity as femininity in the misogynistic paradigm. The funny thing about this "old fashioned sexism" is that it's actually fairly modern. The misogyny isn't, but the the "women as sexual gatekeepers" is. Back in the middle ages, it was the reverse. Women were considered the horndogs that needed to be kept in line by men. It's one aspect of the whole Witch-Trials thing that goes relatively unmentioned in popular histories. It was of course due to the sex-negativity of the church (along with the misogyny). If women are bad, and sex is bad, then women must be the sexual aggressor...or some such faulty logic. Today it's been reversed, yet, still men are considered better than

[ramblin_rosie]

I apologize if this comment goes off at a tangent, Alix... delete it if you think it's too far off topic.

Well, the role of women in the church is a whole other can of worms, and it's not like the virgin/temptress fallacy was/is exclusive to Christianity. But AFAIK, you're right about the rationale shift being recent--just look at Viennese literature from the 1890s and 1900s, where a lot of authors/poets/playwrights were practically jumping up and down and shouting to draw attention to how messed up misogyny and sexual politics were making everyone, and there were really disturbing pseudo-scientific debates over the personhood of women going on. One of Freud's proteges even wrote a book called Geschlecht und Charakter (Gender and Character) that had the following theses

[hells_half_acre]

Nothing is tangential when we're LEARNING!

That's all really interesting stuff. And you are right, of course, I didn't mean to imply that the virgin/temptress thing was exclusively the fault of the Christian church. I was just thinking of the witch trials in Europe, and at the time the catholic church was the predominant social/cultural leader.

I didn't know that about Chaucer, that's pretty damn cool of him.

I was had a misogynistic German lit PROF, haha, I wonder if that's why we never studied misogyny in all that German lit we read... :P

[4422shini]

You bring up an interesting point. This also reminds me of that Nicole Kidman remake film.. What was it? Oh yeah, The Stepford Wives. I've never seen the original, I'll say that upfront. And I wouldn't want to because I was livid when I saw it the first time. Of course the film is misogynist, but what upset me the most was the reprogramming of the women and the sex that would occur after. I was kind of horrified at the rape, considering it was marketed as a comedy, and the storyline kind of responds with, 'yeah, it's wrong, but it's their husbands, so it's more insulting that rapey.' I watched it with my mom and she told me to stop being so sensitive. THAT'S being in bed with sexism.

Remember that episode 4.08 Wishful Thinking? Remember the dweeby guy brainwashes the sexy girl to marry him and has copious amounts of sex? I do.
..Okay I don't know where I was going with THAT comment, but I just felt like bringing it up.

[hells_half_acre]

VERY good point. And yeah, you were definitely not being too sensitive. Rape happens (most of the time) inside of relationships...especially when if we're talking about men being raped.

And I HAD actually forgotten about that...but yeah, Wishful Thinking WAS rapey.

So, I'll add Stepford Wives to the list of movies that I can't watch. Thanks for the warning.

[claudiapriscus]

I felt a little bit better when they had the boys call the dude on it. And then I felt a little bit worse when I realized the show expected us to feel sorry for him.

I respectfully disagree re: Stepford Wives

[jennytork]

I've seen both Stepford Wives movies.

I actually prefer the remake, because at least the women survive.

In the original, they are not reprogrammed -- they are brutally murdered and replaced. At the end, the main character is strangled by her duplicate, which then takes her place.

And also in the remake, the lead's husband realises what he's got and works with her to reverse it. In the original, he is an active participant in her murder.

So, in my opinion, the remake is much LESS misogynistic than the original.

If you didn't like the remake, though, I would definitely stay away from the original. It's more brutal and the body count is very, very high. And the ending is truly terrifying.

[fannishliss]

I feel like there was an element of misogyny in this episode, which made me very sad, and I think it was in the utter assassination of the character of Becky. I liked Becky a lot, even though she was kooky, and now I can't respect her unless I strike this ep from the record, which I would dearly love to do. She made choices that are not defensible. She roofied Sam. That's not okay, even though some of the scenes that resulted were pretty funny. She is a villain now, and to me, that's the essence of misogyny -- taking a woman character, reducing her to a pathetic need for a man's approval, and taking her agency and wasting it on a crazy play for affection. Yuck. Very distasteful.

She went from being a wacky force for good in her own unique way -- I often ficced about her being part of a wider network of Winchester helpers -- to being a pathetic loser who would roofie Sam. Very, very sadface.

[hells_half_acre]

Yes, my friend who I watch with her in Vancouver felt the same. I did not, but that's me. I know a lot of people saw the episode as a character assassination as you did.