Moments when a piece of entertainment completely lost you.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:24 pm

A_Cynic wrote:Let's leave both the Buffy-Angel Universe alone for a bit and go to the Firefly universe to check on the sexism.

snip

But River is undefeatable.

snip

Yeah, I call it Deux ex Machina and misogyny.

Sexist I'll grant you easily, but misogynistic, really?

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 2:58 pm

PhoneLobster, I want to be as sympathetic to you as possible because I know the tendency to pile on anyone criticizing anything gender-related, but I don't understand the point you're trying to make.

First, some minutia:

"Heart of Gold" is not named after Hitchhiker's guide, it's named after this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... eartOfGold

Similarly, I have a hard time believing that the title "trash" was a dig at Saffron and not, you know, a reference to the fact that the entire plot revolved around literal garbage disposal.

But more seriously, what is your point about the presence of whores in Firefly? It all seems to flow naturally from the cast of characters.

You listed four "whore-related" episodes. 2 of them are character episodes for Inara. Considering that over a 14 episode show each of the 9 cast members should get about an episode and a half, that's not unreasonable. The other two were devoted to a recurring villain. And OF COURSE Inara's whore contacts are going to come up nearly every episode: she's a cast regular, she has to be relevant. To object to all references to he profession as unseemly seems a bit regressive.

Now, there's plenty of arguments you could make about why Firefly's treatment is problematic. Maybe you're opposed to including a whore in main cast at all. Maybe you just think the portrayal of Inara was objectifying or exploitative. Maybe you just think it's part of a problematic pattern through Whedon's oeuvre, which does sometimes seem to be all abused women all the time.

But so far all you've said is that the show has whores in it, which is not actually evidence of its being misogynistic without further analysis.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:50 pm

PL: As much as I hated on Firefly-U a post back. I have to ask, Tropes much?

Heart of Gold: I'm not talking about watching Dolly Parton in a western musical. There've been several renditions of the idea of Hookers with babies being protected by people or just hookers protected by people. Unforgiven was a great Clint Eastwood movie that had a similar concept. I don't think it had the baby though. But prostitutes in trouble - knights a come rescuing. bad guys in town.

Maverick's done an episode along the same line I'm pretty sure.

Dead Man's Gun: did an episode on it. Maybe? I never finish any of my western tv shows.

But like hooker with a heart of gold, this is a pretty damn big trope. Hookers in trouble.
-----

Boolean: I was mainly referring to Serenity. not to Firefly the series. It came off as FIrefly-universe as I read the post. Plus I'll always come off harsh on the movie. They killed off Book!@#$435360934508345

erik · Post by **erik** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 5:57 pm

PL, as near as I can tell, your objections are due to over-thinking it and finding the flaws you wish to find.

I can find all sorts of things that aren't present if I look hard enough.

I don't see any of the episodes in a remotely similar light. By and large they are more complicated relationships and situations than given credit by you, and so many of the references and inferences you are making on them are beyond pretty thin. "Trash," really? The lassiter is the "Trash." They steal it by throwing it in the garbage, and then they later are unable to sell it such that it is useless to them.

Saffron is the closest to a misogynistic character depiction. She tricks men with her wiles and leaves them in positions where they are likely to die. She doesn't do this because it is her job, it is worse than that, she is doing it out of some stranger psychotic desire. If the show was nothing but Saffron bests the crew, then I'd say you were onto something. But since she is only in 2 episodes, it is more like she is just one more crazy person in a crazy verse that the crew runs up against. A single point does not make a pattern, and this is about the only point I could conceivably yield.

Your take on them seems to fixate on certain things while missing their context. I don't really see how I can convince you otherwise if you're already so deeply wrapped in this perspective unfortunately.

[edit:]

Cynic wrote: They killed off Book!

I held out hope that if the series renewed they could do flash-backs with him on occasion to get some glimpses into his life as an operative. Oh well. I think everyone's moved on too far, and honestly many of them would have a hard time getting back into their characters by now and might not do a service to the show.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:14 pm

I'm more than a little weirded out by the fact that Joss Whedon wants tiny women to sexually dominate him and keeps writing allusions to that into his material. But I have a hard time calling that sexism in the pejorative sense. Look, every straight man, bisexual man, lesbian, and bisexual woman wants to have some sort of sex with some sort of woman. That's completely normal, even if the sex in particular desired is unusual. Wanting to have sex with one gender and not with the other is not sexist, and to call that behavior sexist is to undermine real oppression that really happens and really hurts people.

I like boobies. I like to look at boobies. I like to put my hand on and gently rub boobies. That's not sexist. That's me liking boobies. A lot. Refusing to promote or transfer someone because they have boobies that I like to look at is sexist. Ignoring what someone has to say because I am too busy looking at their boobies is sexist. Feeling up someone's boobies without permission is assault. But looking at boobies is just normal behavior.

People having sexual fetishes, even people writing about their sexual fetishes and publishing their work in major media, is not pathological. That's normal. And getting all puritanical about it is fucked all the way up.

-Username17

Count Arioch the 28th · Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:32 pm

Well, I tend to shy away from media that has overt sexual or relationship based aspect. That is not puritannical, my morals don't really extend very far into that subject. It's more that the whole thing is alien to me, and it confuses and infuriates me. ("Why doesn't Ross, the largest Friend simply eat the others?") Or something.

It's not that I'm puritanical or whatever, I just don't get it and I'm not interested. I would rather just watch my Invader Zim DVDs again.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:49 pm

Boolean wrote:"Heart of Gold" is not named after Hitchhiker's guide, it's named after this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... eartOfGold

They didn't call it hooker with a heart of gold. They called it "Heart of Gold", word for word the name of Zaphod Beeblebrox's stolen improbability drive space ship. That just annoys me, I don't care if they meant to reference something else. This is a sci fi show, they just referenced major sci fi, how ignorant are they?

But more seriously, what is your point about the presence of whores in Firefly? It all seems to flow naturally from the cast of characters.

One of whom's ONLY defining character traits are a) Captain's crush and b) Whorey whoring whore.

If that's all the character development they could manage then maybe they should have had a smaller cast. Or they could have made the whoring more exciting, fun and sexy.

To object to all references to he profession as unseemly seems a bit regressive.

But they were presented as unseemly. In her two episodes her professional activities and ties very nearly get everyone killed, create distance between herself and the ignorant dick head space captain she (unaccountably) likes, and generally suck. Even the various "see yah guys I'm off to go whoring" scenes are grim and forced with suggestions of shame and the occasional defensive comment involving captain dick head.

But so far all you've said is that the show has whores in it, which is not actually evidence of its being misogynistic without further analysis.

Actually I said a lot more than that. I described the nature of the depiction as boring and unpleasant. I surmised that they could have pulled it off in an acceptable manner but didn't. I discussed the ways the various whoring based episodes involved women betraying, and backstabbing men in various ways.

Throughout fire fly Joss Whedon takes an idea that could have added flamboyant and entertaining color to his series and uses it to do nothing other than add repressive depressing angst. It would be better to describe the whoring references in firefly as "whoring angst" references. And THAT is what's wrong with it.

A_Cynic wrote:PL: As much as I hated on Firefly-U a post back. I have to ask, Tropes much?

I find trope as no excuse for anything.

On the other hand it was supposed to be a Western in space and westerns were full of brothels and dancing girls (even if it was rarely mentioned they were there in ever second saloon).

But again, the sucking and the use of the material as a brick to clobber female characters with lost me. In actual westerns no one cares that the female lead works in a giant frilly prostitute dress in a room above the saloon. They care so little they might not even mention it. She just does it. It's an excuse for her to sing and dance, wear extravagant clothes, and end up with a fight seen in her room while she is having a bubble bath.

And really that's were Firefly departs from Genre on the whole prostitution thing and becomes un-nice.

Frank wrote:Boobies!

Firefly could have had more boobies. I probably would still have faulted it because by that point I don't think Whedon could include a single boobie in one of his shows without me going "Yeah Whedon, why is the nipple pierced with such a large spiky piece of jewelry?".

But this isn't just like he shot the entire series with the female characters walking around topless because it was "the future" or anything like that. The context and the nature of the sexuality was twisted into the forms of misogyny.

That is, virgins and whores, super angel women and demon monster women. Often one in the same flipping on a fickle and feckless invisible switch.

And you know even that I could have worked with if they didn't make it so damn tawdry.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:37 pm

Seriously, are we calling Joss Whedon's stuff Misogynistic now?

Seriously this is like the guy most people call a feminist since his shows promote girl power.

Like pretty much all the girls in Firefly are competent or better fighters, except for Kaylee, and she's awesome at mechanics and doing what she does.

Seriously... wow... never thought I'd see the day when Whedon would be accused of being misogynistic. Crazy.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 11:59 pm

PL: Wait a minute, westerns are seriously sexist. In the other direction. I love my westerns. Until something like Mccabe and Mrs. Miller, or High Noon, you don't have a strong Female lead. even when you have a strong female lead like High noon, she still is a strong female lead in that she weeps and says don't worry, I'll be here for ya. Go on Kick some ass, take some names. I'll watch out.

Mrs. Miller is a strong lead in that she is a good businesswoman and also she is a prostitute.

The reason people look the other way when there are prostitutes walking this way and that way in the saloon in a western is because they they are backdrop and setting.

Where the fvck do you get these ideas from?

---

Frank: you are a boobist, by the way!

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:49 am

Phonelobster -- your complaint is seriously that Firefly's whoring isn't enough FUN?

Look, Inara's episodes are the one's where her whoring almsot gets everyone killed, just like in Jayne's his history of violence almsot gets everyone killed, and in River's episodes her psychic powers almost gets everyone killed, and in Mal/Zoe's their Browncoat allegiances almsot get everyone killed.

Similarly, her whoredom is a source of "angst" because every fucking thing in a joss whedon show is angst. And I don't even buy your interpretation. The show pretty clearly implies that Mal is in the wrong for disrespecting her.

But yeah, real life whoring isn't all fun and games, and people can and wil look down on you, and it's not irresponsible to portray that.

---

Random -- that said, Grrl Powah! isn't immune to other criticisms of sexism. It's true that on most of his shows the female characters tend to be pretty competent, and in most cases as in control of their own destiny as anyone. (Exceptions: Buffy, River, Kaylee, and anyone in Angel)

And for that I legitimately thank him. But he does still lean on sexist tropes like the Evil Lesbian, the Amazon Warrior, and so on. This is not, I think, because he's a bad perosn but because in a sexist culture, almost all art will have something sexist in it. And more specifically, since he actively uses, re-uses, and satirizes so many tropes, some of the mainstream culture's sexism is going to sneak in.

Look, I like his shows and I would characterize him as a misogynist. But neither is it madness to ask question about the portrayal of gender in his shows.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:21 am

Boolean wrote:Look, Inara's episodes are the one's where her whoring almsot gets everyone killed, just like in Jayne's his history of violence almsot gets everyone killed, and in River's episodes her psychic powers almost gets everyone killed, and in Mal/Zoe's their Browncoat allegiances almsot get everyone killed.

Let's play the one of these things is not like the other game.

Jane (seriously, psycho boy has a girl name, you read nothing into that) gets everyone nearly killed, with his killing people trait.

River and bro nearly get everyone nearly killed with their super killing machine and killer government conspirators enemies.

Captain dick head nearly gets everyone nearly killed with his "The South Will Rise Again" true patriot of the rebel south type military killing people history.

Space prostitute nearly gets everyone killed because of... sex for money.

One of those things is NOT like the others. One of those things is NOT quite the same.

Phonelobster -- your complaint is seriously that Firefly's whoring isn't enough FUN?

It's a piece of entertainment. It's biggest crime is it's lack of entertainment value.

Adding fun wouldn't make the misogyny go away, but without the fun there is no clear reason why that material is there OTHER than as the creators expression of his personal insecurities.

If it brings nothing good to the show why the fuck is it there?

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:42 am

Boolean wrote: And for that I legitimately thank him. But he does still lean on sexist tropes like the Evil Lesbian, the Amazon Warrior, and so on. This is not, I think, because he's a bad perosn but because in a sexist culture, almost all art will have something sexist in it. And more specifically, since he actively uses, re-uses, and satirizes so many tropes, some of the mainstream culture's sexism is going to sneak in.

Honestly I think the culture is way too sensetive to sexism if we're calling his shows misogynistic. I mean, he has mostly good lesbians in Buffy. And his female characters really run the gamut. I mean having a few submissive non-combat female doesn't make a show misogynistic, especially not with all the women in his shows that do totally kick ass.

It just seems that society today complains about everything. I mean there are some shows that we can legitimately call misogynistic, but Whedon's aren't among those. I mean really, if his stuff is misogynistic, then pretty much everything ever created is misogynistic.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 1:49 am

Random --

Read my post: I never called Whedon misogynistic and have defended him form that charge explicitly. That doesn't mean there's nothing sexist in his stories. And the presence of small amounts of sexist material in his stories doesn't mean he personally is a sexist.

I'm a fiction writer. I think my own fiction has been greatly improved by picking apart what's out there and figuring out what i like and don't like in it. I'm in college for literature; what we DO is pick things apart and find things to criticize even in beloved classics.

But yes, almost everything IS sexist. Not in the "violent and hateful towards women/men" sens,e but in the "grounded in inaccurate or stereotypical perceptions of women/men" -- that's kind of thing about being part of a culture, you tend to reproduce your culture's attitudes in your art.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 2:05 am

Boolean wrote: Read my post: I never called Whedon misogynistic and have defended him form that charge explicitly.

Yeah, though you confused me with this statement in your last post.

You in prior post wrote: Look, I like his shows and I would characterize him as a misogynist.

Maybe that's just a typo, since your posts prior to that definitely did seem to be defending him.

But yes, almost everything IS sexist. Not in the "violent and hateful towards women/men" sens,e but in the "grounded in inaccurate or stereotypical perceptions of women/men" -- that's kind of thing about being part of a culture, you tend to reproduce your culture's attitudes in your art.

Honestly I see little point in a label if it can be applied to everything.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 2:15 am

Yeah that's supposed to be WOULDN'T characterize as misogynist.

Sorry...

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 2:18 am

I sometimes wonder how much of it is the idea that something's declared sexist simply because the character is a woman; the idea that if a female character has a character flaw, then it's a sexist portrayal. One could claim mysandry in Buffy from the fact that Spike and Angel both are incapable of sex without being monsters and the one non-monstrous male that does have sex (Xander) ends up subservient & emasculated.

I don't actually profess a belief in the above, but it's a comparison with some (not all) arguments I've seen on people claiming misogyny.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:03 am

virgileso wrote:I sometimes wonder how much of it is the idea that something's declared sexist simply because the character is a woman; the idea that if a female character has a character flaw, then it's a sexist portrayal. One could claim mysandry in Buffy from the fact that Spike and Angel both are incapable of sex without being monsters and the one non-monstrous male that does have sex (Xander) ends up subservient & emasculated.

Yeah, you could definitely say Jayne in Firefly is also pretty much the epitomized "male pig" stereotype. Still I don't really consider it sexist, because you have to look at all the other characters too.

More often than not, I think people tend to jump to bad conclusions based off of one single character in a show and not looking at the big picture.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:10 am

virgileso wrote:I don't actually profess a belief in the above

But emasculation through sex and sex with a woman corrupting a man into a monster is very much in keeping with misogynistic ideas rather than the opposite.

You would more want to point to examples where the men were corrupting the women for that, and there is a LOT of source material so if you dug I bet you could find it. Of course you don't have to dig for the misogyny stuff which is a large part of the problem.

But I still stand by my entertainment point.

This material exists throughout these shows and often as not it has no obvious merit that it is adding.

What exactly was the point of the love interest in fire fly being a prostitute and rubbing our face in it? Did it actually add ANYTHING good to the story?

Really? Because if it didn't then the only thing it added was misogyny.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:23 am

RandomCasualty2 wrote:Yeah, you could definitely say Jayne in Firefly is also pretty much the epitomized "male pig" stereotype.

I'd have described him as a sociopathic moron. And as such sadly one of the most likable and interesting characters in Fire Fly (yikes). And really NO ONE finds his girly name to be a rather interesting comment on the attitudes of the writers?

Hell what's the bet he was originally written as a female character actually called Jane? That would be right up whedon's alley.

Regardless. Jane gets a pretty easy ride of it all what with his greed and his killing and such. He totally sells everyone out mid season and he gets to hang around anyway. His lifestyle is depicted with more humor and excitement and far less angst and guilt than the space prostitute's.

Indeed in his "all about me!" episode the consequences of his socipathic drives that they uncover, is a town full of people that worship him as a hero. And he goes on to be a hero. In her episodes space prostitute meanwhile gets to have stupid men have a stupid fight over her. And then nearly gets everyone killed doing a job for a brothel where her friend betrays her and makes her feel bad about her crush on captain dick head.

So really it's pretty hard to find anything about Jayne that isn't bad news for anyone defending firefly on this front.

Anyway, for a male pig I point to captain dick head. He is perfect for that role.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:29 am

PhoneLobster wrote:
Jane (seriously, psycho boy has a girl name, you read nothing into that) gets everyone nearly killed, with his killing people trait.

DO you know why the Fvck he has the name, Jayne? See the proper spelling that you misspelled twice.

Well. let's go to a great historical entry for that.

In some countries, he might be a Jane, even?

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:32 am

I am quite deliberately calling him Jane because that's what it sounds like.

And if you think that has no relevant modern context then screw you.

Some fiction creators with a long history of misogyny named one of their most openly proudly sociopathic male characters a girly sounding name.

Excuses are nothing more than that.

edit: Also your excuse is stupid because Jayne is his FIRST name. And even with that spelling... It's a girl's first name

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:47 am

This is the rule of Whedon though: the more reprehensible a character is, the better they fare. People suffer calamity in proportion to the extent that they are good and wise. In direct proportion even, to the point where anyone who experiences significant growth or character development will suffer a personal tragedy next episode.

her episodes are there to *establish* that Mal is a dick; he's *supposed* to come off looking stupid every time they spar. The duel is a result of the Mal and the men fucking things up: how you get misogyny out of that is unclear, since it's not even presented as the inevitable consequence of whoring, but rather of Mal's unique brand of stupid.

EDIT: On another note, I have no idea why you feel that Jayne's name is offensive. I don't mean that I feel your complaint is ridiculous or that I am trying to dismiss it. I legitimately don't have any idea what you're getting at.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:55 am

Boolean wrote:I don't mean that I feel your complaint is ridiculous or that I am trying to dismiss it. I legitimately don't have any idea what you're getting at.

So after the whole line about being a writer who looks for small pieces of meaning you don't find any kind of message in that choice of name?

In fiction you choose names to add subtle meaning, make little jokes, and hint at various things. Sure sometimes they are just place holders or something that sounds cool but Jayne's name was very clearly and deliberately chosen. Heck I think there may even have been an episode where they discussed how it was a girls name... (You can buy T-Shirts about it on the internet) And this is a show where one of his GUNS is named in the movie as a reference to an internet fan.

Also. Another interesting factoid. All of Jayne's evil mercenary doings, all to supply funds he sends home to his mother. No really.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:01 am

PL: Is Jayne's gender-bending name so horrifying for you?

supposedly one of the most americana of americana of novels "to kill a mockingbird" has two of the most sissy and bro-hammy names. Jem & Scout. Jem = Boy. Scout = Girl. Hey wait there used to be a bad 80s cartoon about girl rockers caled jems or something. I might be misspelling it. Aren't Scouts BOYS. TOTALLY!

Cowboy bebop: Edward - now that's a fvcker who is messed up. i don't even know ed's gender. ed just likes ramen.

---

Louis XV - WTF kinda name is LOIS and that XV? That's just gotta be some french shit that stands for GIRL.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:17 am

PhoneLobster wrote: Some fiction creators with a long history of misogyny named one of their most openly proudly sociopathic male characters a girly sounding name.

I just don't see how you can call Jayne misogynistic when he's basically a walking stereotype of everything considered wrong with men. One could even go so far as to call him an example of mysandry, but I just don't see where you're getting misogynistic out of it. Despite having a girls' name, the guy acts as pretty much stereotypically manly as you can act.