Comments | prozacpark: on gender fail, in general. And tv renewals.

prozacpark

on gender fail, in general. And tv renewals.

May 15, 2009 22:16

So, apparently, Dollhouse has been renewed. I...shouldn't be depressed by this news because I can always just, you know, not watch. But...sigh. It's hard to put in words, but this, along with the new wave of Gender Fail on "Supernatural" is depressing me. Who wants to bet "Supernatural" is totally getting renewed, too ( Read more... )

women in fiction, supernatural, gender fail, dollhouse, gender issues

Comments 52

abrakadabrah May 16 2009, 15:50:21 UTC

prozacpark May 17 2009, 15:52:36 UTC

Actually, I watched "Supernatural." For about two seasons. During which every recurring female character was turned into an evil bitch the brothers could kill or a victim the brothers could save. This show is like a Hemingway book: in its world mythology, heroism is only available to men and women just can't be heroes. Because they're there to motivate men by dying. Or motivate them by being evil ( ... )

abrakadabrah May 17 2009, 20:02:48 UTC

Lilith is an evil demon from antiquity. Are you familiar with the history of Lilith at all?

Yep. But they appear, on the whole, to be using the Judeo-Christian tradition. Except a few disempowered pagan gods and a trickster god and a djinn. Most of the rest of the mythology appears derived from judeo-christian tradition if only of an extremely twisted version thereof. And then they set about being equal opportunity offenders of sacred cows, as it were.

She has been around longer than the Bible, for instance, and her name is mentioned in the oldest extant religious texts we have -- the Sumerian myths of Inanna. Lilith has special significance to feminists and to feminist theologians who view her in a positive light. I'm fond of her, too. The fact that the show would use Lilith (someone who is seen as having rejected the patriarchal distribution of power and having been exiled from heaven as a result of this) as a villain is very offensiveAnd I can see where the whole problem of Lilith being the choice might be problematic for ( ... )

meganbmoore May 17 2009, 20:30:56 UTC

There is no Judeo-Christian Lilith. Lilith is sometimes discussed in Judeo-Christian tradition, but as something that exists outside of it, not as a part of it.

By the way, have you read essay anthology In the Hunt? In it, Jacob Clifton puts forth that Supernatural has a strong and prominent female presence because evil women "pervert" (his word) the relationship between Sam and Dean. And the thing is, that's the truth of female power in Supernatural. It's evil and corrupt and something to be overcome by the "good" male power and presence. That is a core and overwhelming element of the show, and the fact that the show is at least partly built around the idea of female power being bad and male power being good means that the misogyny is built in. You say that there are male villains, and it's true, there are. But the protagonists-the continuing protagonists who aren't going to disappear-are men. There are no major female protagonists to serve as a counterbalance to the portrayal of females and female power as an evil that must ( ... )

trempnvt May 16 2009, 18:29:04 UTC

Exactly what you said about Sarah Connor Chronicles is how I feel about it. The part about how it's cool that it's told from Sarah's perspective, and the part that it's sorta boring.

lyssie May 16 2009, 19:45:08 UTC

I think that might be because, while told from her pov, it is ALL ABOUT JOHN AND HOW SPECIAL HE IS and John is sort of like one of those kids from Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and gets boring. Fast.

prozacpark May 17 2009, 15:58:58 UTC

You're possibly very right here. And while I want to be all, "Well, this is still a story about a MAN, just told from her POV," that's still new? I mean, how often do we have stories about women, but they're totally stuck in the male gaze and important only in how they affect that male POV character? John is sort of like that, here. So I find it interesting in that *he* is a part of HER story. Which is fun on a metafictional level, at the very least. But does not make him any less boring, sadly.

prozacpark May 17 2009, 15:59:49 UTC

Are you caught up on it and are you shipping Cameron/John yet? Shipping makes it less boring for me. :)

Thread 6

acrimonyastraea May 17 2009, 02:34:29 UTC

This is the first I've heard that Dollhouse is being renewed. ugh. I suppose I'll probably watch it just to have actual ammunition against Joss zombies who have to defend every single thing he does.

I'm thinking if I have the time and energy to put together an in depth look at how Dollhouse plays into and supports rape apologist myths. Rape without a rapist is at the top of the list.

acrimonyastraea May 17 2009, 02:36:40 UTC

oh, and I wanted to say I agree 100% with your post and people saying things like this helps me hang onto my sanity.

prozacpark May 17 2009, 16:02:23 UTC

It hasn't been officially renewed yet, but sources seem to be saying that it's been picked up. We'll find out tomorrow.

I suppose I'll probably watch it just to have actual ammunition against Joss zombies who have to defend every single thing he does.

This is exactly why I watched it this season. I'm not sure I'm strong enough for another one, though.

I'm thinking if I have the time and energy to put together an in depth look at how Dollhouse plays into and supports rape apologist myths. Rape without a rapist is at the top of the list.

I fully support the writing of this meta. :)

karate0kat May 18 2009, 00:33:46 UTC

So I have this weird thing with Lost, Dollhouse, and Supernatural. They all massively fail on gender issues. Massively. But for some reason all my anger gets directed at the writers and I still enjoy the shows. Does that make sense at all? Like, I think Supernatural probably is the worst of all of them but I love Sam and Dean and I can't blame them for the shit that happens with the female characters.

So yeah, I still enjoy these shows, but I won't defend them, at least not on gender issues. I'm still pissed that Supernatural acts like the Harvelles don't exist anymore. Although at least they didn't kill Jo, which is more than can be said about most of the females who were ever romantically linked to one of the brothers.

prozacpark May 20 2009, 01:14:20 UTC

But for some reason all my anger gets directed at the writers and I still enjoy the shows. Does that make sense at all?

Makes perfect sense. For me, how much of my anger gets directed at the writers sometimes depends on my opinion of them. Like, I hate on Ron a lot (and give him very little credit, which is a bit unfair, I know) because of my Roswell issues with him. And then I expect a lot from Joss because of Buffy, so.

Although, sometimes, it's kind of hard not to let what the writers are doing with the characters affect your opinion of them. I was really offended, for instance, by Dean saying that Bela was flattering herself by thinking that she was hot enough to rape apparently.

And really, it's only unconditional "Supernatural" love that frustrates me. I'm generally okay with people watching when they're aware of the issues. Then it's an informed choice and not one made out of denial or ignorance. :)

notexotic May 19 2009, 18:24:24 UTC

This post is just...wow. You managed to articulate SO many of my own thoughts on the subject in a way that actually makes me angry all over again--which may not sound like a good thing but totally is. The fact that Dollhouse got renewed (ignoring the fact that it's also probably a half-assed attempt to atone for canceling Firefly) when TSCC didn't says multitudes about American society. Euuurgh.

Your journal is wonderful. Would you mind terribly if I friended you?

prozacpark May 20 2009, 01:19:07 UTC

Thank you, and friend away. Just be prepared for random bitterness because I sometimes do that a lot. ;)