A discussion about Rape and gender roles in Firefly and Serenity.

[ThomCat]

It's in the lounge for some reason. :shrug:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=7905529&mesg_id=7905529

[ismnotwasm]

1. Odd thread for the lounge

I don't know anything about it. I just looked it up on Wiki, it doesn't sound so hot to me.
I've yet to see a televised SF show that isn't sexist, one reason being they have to market to todays audience. So you get standard gender roles and sexual tension between characters marketed as the "future". And honestly, reading the premise of the show-- (from Wiki)
"The show explores the lives of people who fought on the losing side of a civil war and now make a living on the outskirts of the society, as well as the pioneer culture that exists on the fringes of their star system"

With the operative word "pioneer", prostitution and a society of what is really a typical and mundane hyper-male patriarchy is not surprising at all. And a very common theme in a lot a SF, trying for a new "temple prostitute" archetype. Kind of a big yawn for me. I wouldn't be disapointed, because I wouldn't expect anything else.

Certain SF authors have created societies where gender is not based on the master/slave dialectic. These are great to read, because the homophobia (sometimes homophobia expresses itself by it's very lack of homosexuals--not likely in any society) is much less, prostitution, when it exists, is an equal opportunity employer with males, females and all degrees in between.

Woman in these books are woman, yes, but their gender isn't made clear by sexual roles. They are good or evil or whatever. They are Captains of starships, Heads of State, or just one of the crowd. C.J. Cherryh does an excellent job creating a possible future in her Union-Alliance universe. C.S. Friedman is another author who explores gender roles, and does have a short series where women are little more than ornaments in one group, but it's ever so much more complicated and thought provoking. Octavia Butler is simpley amazing in her book "Lilith's Brood"

Anyway, I am going on. I'm sure the blog author made valid points, but I read awesome SF. The show sounds like drivel I wouldn't watch in the first place.

[ThomCat]

2. As it turns out, it's not much a discussion.

It's more of a bashing thread. And of course, people who are not feminists defining what real feminism is. Apparently, real feminism is a love of porn, prostitution, strict gender roles, and men who promote them on tv. Who knew?
:shrug:

[ismnotwasm]

3. I saw that

I was cracking up, and it takes a lot for invisible internet people to do that to me.

To be fair though, the blogger was pretty long winded and her anger got in the way of what she was saying. It's fairly weird to pick something like that and start defining feminism however.

BTW, I was sitting here talking about it with my son, he has seen the show and he didn't think it was particularly sexist. He thought the woman in the show were presented as strong characters. I pointed out that in the year 25-whatever hopefully, woman no longer service males sexually in an unbalanced gendered dichotomy even in, or especially in, the mythical sacred prostitute sense. And males no longer think they really need that shit.

[bliss_eternal]

4. Weren't Firefly and Serenity written by Joss Whedon...?

I haven't seen either personally, but was a big fan of his work with "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." I would be surprised to learn they weren't "pro-woman" as his work usually is.

At the same time, I understand he's suffered as many other writer/directors do in the industry--seeing their work become more "hollywood spin" than their original vision. Which means the powers that be (network execs, producers, etc.) usually will "water down" strong female characters, or anything else that they are personally uncomfortable with--or deem as "inappropriate" or not "sexy" enough. :shrug:

[ThomCat]

5. Yes, and because Joss Whedon wrote them,

knowing his reputation, I expected far better from Firefly. I was very, very disappointed.

I am guessing that he just really, truly wanted to make a sci-fi western. Any feminist thoughts and beliefs he might claim to have were put aside in order to draw on the themes and traditions of westerns. He just amplified the sexism and gender roles from westerns when he made put it in a sci-fi environment. There was no feminism in the old west, so there was no feminism in Firefly. The best you could say is that some women were tough and acted like men, and some were promoted from background into supporting cast roles usally reserved for men.

Having a woman as second in command, and a woman mechanic, etc. doesn't seem so much like feminism when it's in a setting where brutal masculinity is the norm, and seems to be required to address every situation and solve every problem. Women are given permission to be more like men, but the male gender role is still upheld as the rule.

[bliss_eternal]

6. Oh---it was a western...

...got it. Thank you for the details on the show, scenario, background, etc. It makes sense now, that it came from Whedon but wasn't woman positive--given he tried to maintain the "western aesthetic."

I recall seeing previews before it aired, and I had a total disconnect--it just didn't look interesting, had no idea it was supposed to be kind of a "space western" at the time.

It's kind of funny, now that we're talking about this--it makes perfect sense to me that I've never liked westerns. The first western I allowed myself to watch, (and liked) was in the 80's, Kasdan's Silverado. Prior to that, I had a real disconnect with westerns--didn't get them, didn't want to get them. The blatant racist shit in early westerns (with native americans) didn't help. :puke:

[blueraven95]

7. I hate to nitpick, but...

I'm going to.

The old west was actually where feminism, and really the suffragette movement, gained any real movement, mostly because women were doing as much work on farms as their husbands, and realized that if they could do that, then why couldn't they be equal everywhere else to. (That's a major simplification, but it's how I understand it.)

The idea that the old west lacked feminism comes from the the western genre of entertainment (particularly John Wayne movies). I know it's not a huge deal but the distinction is important to me because I think we need to point out when our media is rewriting history. We all know that westerns generally do a huge disservice to Indians, etc., but it is rarely pointed out that they do the same thing to women.

I can't comment on Firefly, because I've never seen the show, but in general I tend to not really like the western genre, but I love the space western genre...however space westerns usually have strong, interesting female characters, who are equal to the male characters.

:hi:

[ThomCat]

8. I was only commenting on the genre. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

:)

I think you are right about the value of the old west in regard to feminist history. It is westerns that always seemed to have the macho male heroes, the prostitute with the heart of gold, the trusty sidekick(s), etc.

Some sci-fi has been really good about imaging futuristic worlds with far more equality than we have now. True. If Firefly had done that too then it might have had a bigger fan base and survived.
:shrug:

[blueraven95]

9. actually, I'm really surprised that I've never watched Firefly

it's in a genre I like, with actors I like, and a creator I like.

But honestly, I saw Serenity and just wasn't that impressed (without even considering the female roles). It was a story that I felt had been done before and better, and large parts of the plot felt like author manipulation, and therefore untrue to the story. But that might just be me. A lot of my friends LOVED the show and think I'm crazy.

[ismnotwasm]

10. I was going to see "Serenity"

When it came out, I was just remembering about this. I can't remember why I didn't go. Someone had posted a thread here even. It was supposed to be a great movie for women's characters.

I'm kind of glad I didn't go. The whole "companion" thing throws me off, not the prostitution part, but the lack of male companions, or use of companions for either sex, by either sex.

Like I posted earlier, really good SF that has sex for hire makes it an equal opportunity employer, and women's sexual needs are not subsumed. Or, ASSUMED to be any less than a males. Men don't have special needs for emotional release and sex just because they're male.

The readily available for a hour-desperate-outlaw-with-issues type don't do it for every woman, and the show sounds like it has more than it's share. Pretty face, to self absorbed to be good in bed. Yuk.

That pig Orson Scott Card endorsed it anyway. (Not a feminist thing exactly, he's a decent SF author who I boycott; I can't stand the man, his politics suck)