A Rapist's View of the World: Joss Whedon and Firefly

[Berin Kinsman]

Something that will always be entertaining to me is when someone starts off with a valid point or two, then takes it to extremes so ridiculous as to invalidate their own credibility and turns their argument into a hilarious if unintended self-parody. These are generally people who go out of their way looking for things to be offended by.

For example, the following LJ post arguing that Firefly is all about rape:
http://users.livejournal.com/_allecto_/34718.html

I see a few valid points in there. I also see a lot of gross generalizations and serious effort to find things to get righteously upset over. Again, I see the points the writer's trying to make; it's the hyperbole that makes me laugh out loud.

"I really am beyond worried about how much men hate us, given that this was written by a man who calls himself a feminist."

Gosh, I liked Firefly, I must hate women.

I find much of Joss Whedon’s work to be heavily influenced by pornography, and pornographic humour.

Buh?

Firefly takes mysogeny to a new level of terrifying

Wow, if they'd pitched it to FOX that way they might have put effort into keeping the series alive. Makes a great tagline, doesn't it? I can see that quote on the back of a DVD box.

Only one episode was written by a woman. It was no better or worse in its depiction of women than the ones written by men.

Jane Espenson hates women! Who knew?

This goes on and on... and on... and on. This person counts how many lines women have, as opposed to how many lines men have. Seriously. This person is offended that Zoe, a black woman, takes orders from Mal, a white male. Because, you know, in the future people can't follow other people on merit or anything.

Read it. Or not.

[Sir Golgotha, KEoPS]

That is essentially the argument that a friend of mine uses. She is in many respects the most die-hard feminist ever, but feels that it is an overly politicised and ill-defined term, and that as a philosophy it is self-refuting. That is, thinking of women solely as the victim rather than as a person is itself chauvinistic and degrading to women. My favourite quote of hers: "I am a wife because I choose to be, and a mom because I get to be." The fact that this quote was from a drunken argument with another woman, one who claimed the label 'feminist' and insulted my friend for being married with kids, doesn't diminish the impact of the statement.

Were the linked article not from December, I would have thought it an April Fool's prank. This is someone who--while professing not only to dislike, but hated the show so much as to accuse Mr Whedon of being a rapist for creating it--not only watched the entire series, but actively studied it, read the scripts, counted how many times people spoke, and devoted quite a bit of time and effort into attacking it. If the Alliance had attacked the Browncoats with equal fervour, there wouldn't have been a series to watch.

Then I encountered this little gem near the bottom: "Let me just say now that I have never personally known of a healthy relationship between a white man and a woman of colour." I guess this is what you mean by taking the argument to ridiculous extremes. As someone in a mixed-race relationship (though the reverse of the above), I find this both offensive and immaterial to the point of whether or not Joss Whedon is a rapist or worse: a non-feminist writer. It's completely out in left-field, like inserting that Mr. Whedon also kicks puppies or something.

I'm not wanting to give the article's writer too much attention, though. 'Dani' is actually "Danny", a white male who has never even kissed a real girl. He is taking the 'lesbian trapped in a man's body' bit too far. Poor Danny--he's a sad little bloke who fits the negative 'geek' stereotype without the benefits of enjoying good sci-fi or having the active social life that develops from roleplaying. He isn't even an accomplished computer geek: come on, Danny, a Livejournal with a dodgy template, filled with raping & how great it is to be a gay woman? Really now.

[Lon Sarver]

Huh.

If that last pararaph isn't a joke I didn't get, I don't suppose you could back it up?

[Sir Golgotha, KEoPS]

Something of a mean joke, but admittedly more cruelty than comedy.

I did a quick check of the main page for that article/rant, just to make sure it wasn't an elaborate April Fools joke. The topics consist of: rape, rape, rape, lesbian, rape, rape, "I believe that the pro-lifers would be better served by promoting lesbianism", rape, rape, lesbian, rape, racism, rape, rape, lesbian, rape, rape. If it is a hoax--or especially if the 'Danny' scenario is true at any point--it is an incredibly elaborate one. Then again, this is the internet, and I wouldn't put it past anyone to concoct such a fantasy for themselves & stick with it to extremes for years.

I have no idea if this person really is a woman, or the loser bloke named Danny, or some confused 9-years-old girl with too many angry webpages bookmarked. I don't know which is sadder, that someone would voluntarily assume this persona, or that this really is the real person. Either way, Dani is a poorly socialised misanthrope who seems to enjoy nothing more than attacking people, but too afraid to do so directly. Witness attacking Firefly instead of Whedon himself. There are references to what may have once been a geek girl (other references to Firefly or Stan Lee, as examples) that have since been lost in a sea of hate and bile. Since the targets of her hatred are things of which I am fond, I shot back in my own spiteful little way. The theme of that Livejournal is portrayed as hating everyone that isn't of her identical sex, ethnicity, and sexual orientation (all total, for the hat-trick), is evil, inhuman, unworthy of anything but hatred, and should not only be shunned or destroyed, but actively converted to match her. As this is the case, I have no sympathy, and no regrets in returning some small share of the sentiment.

[Lon Sarver]

Ah. I thought it might have been a joke.

The reason why I ask is that people who are against feminism setting themselves up as straw-man feminists is not unheard of. If there was some evidence that such was the case here, it would have spun things differently.

As it is, I fear that my intial reaction was correct: "Gorram it, this is exactly the kind of reactive BS that gives feminism a bad name..."

[Vulcan Stev]

Several of these points were raised in our thread without a topic. It plays into my main objection with the more radical elements of feminism, that fact that EVERYTHING is anti-womxn (thanks Berin for that spelling).

Since I happen to like womxn in general but by their argument that as man I do in fact hate womxn, I will begin calling myself a male lesbian.

[Xose Lucero]

Trying to figure this out: if a woman following a man's lead equals rape, does a man following a woman's lead equal rape?

Men and women are supposed to be equal and in math if X = Y then Y = X and X/Y = Y/X.

But men and women are not numbers. Perhaps we should turn to philosophy. Consider this dialogue from Plato's Critias (new translation):

Sappho: Stop looking at my breasts!
Critias: I wasn't--
Sappho: Don't give me that, you overprivileged patriarchal pornographer!
Critias: But I'm a feminist too!
Sappho: Shut your festering gob, you dick! Your type makes me puke, you rape-mongering pre-castrato!
Critias: Look, I came here for Reparation. I'm not going to stand--
Sappho: Oh! I'm sorry, but this is Revenge.
Critias: Oh, I see. Well, that explains it.
Sappho: Yes, you want room 12A, just along the corridor.
Critias: Oh, Thank you very much. Sorry.
Sappho: Not at all.
Critias: Thank You.
Sappho: (muttering) Phallofascist oppressor...

Then again, Plato died a bachelor.

[Xose Lucero]

Sorry. The point I was shoving aside in order to make a lame joke is that it seems like an inviolable part of human nature to seek equality for ourselves and inequality for everyone else. The practical opposite of inequality is not equality but different inequality. When you release a pendulum it doesn't stop at the bottom; it swings past. History is a long series of wildly swinging pendulums (pendula?). In other words, That's kind of a fatalistic bummer, but the best we can hope for is to be a drop of reasonableness in the great sea of Human Idiocy.

[Sir Golgotha, KEoPS]

That dialogue only needed a Wonder Woman joke for maximally efficient awesomeness.

Coincidentally, Wikipedia once considered Plato to be "not just a Liberal but a radical feminists" on a previous version of his page there. He may have been a bachelor, but so were his hot young students.

[Xose Lucero]

I'd be interested to know if that means radical feminist and liberal by Ancient Greek society's standards or ours (and what might be the difference).

As for Wonder Woman: yeesh. Every other issue I've seen has her tied to a phallic symbol on the cover and every other other issue has more bondage than a women's prison movie. I don't know if a woman ever wrote for WW but the character couldn't have been a more blatant male fantasy if she were plastic and inflatable.

Q.E.-freakin'-D.

[Hank Harwell]

Its interesting in that, according to a book I read recently, Wonder Woman was conceived in the 1930's as a feminist Super-Hero(ine?) by a psychologist and feminist theorist, Charles Moulton.

Of course, he was a man, so what do you expect?

[Lon Sarver]

Certainly she was a male fantasy object... No one had any illusions as to who National Publications (the company that became DC) was trying to sell comics to. Of course, considering that the only other prominent female comic book character at the time was Lois Lane, Girl Reporter (and professional hostage), WW was something of a step forward.

Weren't we indicating above that it's a bad idea to judge things out of context? :)

Of course, Moulton was into non-monogamy and BDSM, so I'm not at all surprised that these things made it into his comic.

[Hank Harwell]

Huh.

I just re-read the wikipedia article on Marston (Moulton) I linked to above, and these quotes jumped out at me:

"The only hope for peace is to teach people who are full of pep and unbound force to enjoy being bound ... Only when the control of self by others is more pleasant than the unbound assertion of self in human relationships can we hope for a stable, peaceful human society. ... Giving to others, being controlled by them, submitting to other people cannot possibly be enjoyable without a strong erotic element".

About male readers, he later wrote: "Give them an alluring woman stronger than themselves to submit to, and they'll be proud to become her willing slaves!"