You are viewing gabrielleabelle

Previous Entry | Next Entry

It seems my womb is still missing

will37
Guys, I've had some rage stored up, and you know what? It ain't over. I thank Bitsy for being the trigger on this one, and please feel free to link him so he can see what he was wrought (In fact, link it far and wide. I'm calling out fandom on its douchebaggery). This is moving beyond his statement though, and this rant? Not directed at him.

Because there is a sickness in fandom. It's not the shipper wars (although those are annoying). No, folks. It's the way sexism is wielded freely as a weapon to curtail honest discussion. It's the way we do it with each other. Women using the tools of the patriarchy to shut each other up.

Okay, geez, how melodramatic can I get, right? Throw me a penguin to get me back down to earth here.

Seriously, guys. I ranted mightily yesterday about how the label of "shipper" is used to silence. How about "fangirl", though? It was brought up in comments that being a female fan of Spike can get you silenced as well. I joke about being "blinded by the Cheekbones o' Sexiness". But it's really not funny because people believe that shit.

What's up with it?

It's female sexuality. It's the idea that women are openly appreciating a man in a sexual way. We like Spike. We think he's a fab character. And most of us also think he's hot. We'll wax philosophic over his chiseled abs, ivory alabaster skin, cheekbones that can cut glass. And then we'll turn around and discuss the subtext of Spike's arc or the metaphorical whatsit of something else.

But, no, you know what sticks out to people? That we are women who are openly sexually attracted to a man. And that's not done. Female sexuality isn't supposed to be like that! It's either for men or it doesn't exist!

So it's used to smack Spike fans down. Try to bring up some intelligent discussion on Spike? Oh, well, she's just blinded by the cheekbones. Silly girl!

You know what they're saying? "You're being way too open with your sexuality. Stop it. Until you stop it, I won't listen to you (unless you say something I agree with)."

Does a man who openly appreciates how hot Faith is then get smacked down if he tries to discuss her (or anything else) later? Why are female fans of Spike subject to being in the "wet panty brigade" but male fans of Buffy aren't in the "stiffies for Slayers brigade"?

Cause dudes are supposed to sexually appreciate female characters. Chicks? Aren't supposed to enjoy men in a similar fashion. If we do, we must meet with sanctions.

Fuck that shit.

These people try to paint us as idiotic, flighty, drooling girls with hardly enough brain capacity to eat a cupcake much less discuss the show. I ask again: Who's the illogical ones here? The ones who appreciate, among many things, the physical beauty of a male actor, or the ones who swiftly decide not to engage an argument and, instead, attack the poster?

It's easy, isn't it? Finding ways to discredit another poster so you don't have to argue with them.

1. Step One: Find out what "faction" of fandom they're in.

2. Step Two: Pick out the most "offensive" feminine activity that they engage in: smutty fanfic about men? fangirling Spuffy? having naked!Spike screenshots in their LJ?

3. Step Three: Be a sexist asswipe and use the activity from Step Two to dismiss them.

Men and women, alike, can do it.

See, I love discussion. I love debating. I love engaging with different ideas and opinions. Different interpretations. I'm a Spuffy fan, yes. I have had some proudly naughty dreams involving naked!Spike, yes. But those things? Don't typically enter into any arguments I'm putting forward. And if they do, then my argument will probably be weak and you can debate the hell out of it. Out of the argument. You know...like you're supposed to do in a debate.

But I suppose it's just easier to give in to the larger sexist culture we live in and use this stuff as ammo to discredit entire portions of fandom. Less time. Less energy. And, hey, you maintain the status quo wherein romance is an icky girly thing and women aren't supposed to enjoy their sexuality. And who doesn't want that???

What would Buffy do, fuckers? I think she'd be disapproving of this bullshit, for one.

Comments

( 164 comments — Leave a comment )
norwie2010
Apr. 22nd, 2010 05:53 pm (UTC)
Excellent!

Where do we marry? ;-)

It is really a shame that all the bullshit Sigmund Freud said about female sexuality is taken as "the word" by society at large but his more interesting and quite accurate points about purpose, libido and thanatos are just glossed over and dismissed as "soooo last century". Also, he wrote some really disturbing stuff about male sexuality - which never gets mentioned, like ever. :-D
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:04 pm (UTC)
Hey! Marriage is such a patriarchal institution. I'm a free bitch, baby.

It kinda boggles me how stuck we are in Victorian notions of sexuality sometimes. Freud make me rage-y, though. Grrr.
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:04 pm (UTC) - Expand
sueworld2003
Apr. 22nd, 2010 05:56 pm (UTC)
Seems word spreads fast.

http://twitter.com/temnabol

"So it's used to smack Spike fans down. Try to bring up some intelligent discussion on Spike? Oh, well, she's just blinded by the cheekbones. Silly girl!"

God If I had a penny for every time I've heard that one shouted at me on the net. *g*



Edited at 2010-04-22 05:57 pm (UTC)
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:05 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that Twitter link. I think ubi4soft posted it. I hope the dude reads my rantiness. Probably won't do anything, but hey. At least he'll know I think he's a sexist asswipe.

(no subject) - shipperx - Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:01 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - shipperx - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:17 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:30 pm (UTC) - Expand
shipperx
Apr. 22nd, 2010 05:58 pm (UTC)
::applauds::
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:06 pm (UTC)
I have no gun icons. I'll use a Dark Willow one instead. :)
(no subject) - shipperx - Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:49 pm (UTC) - Expand
rebcake
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:02 pm (UTC)
Two things come to mind from this post:

1. I am lucky to have so many people in my life who do not try to stuff me into the (nun/whore/mother) box.

2. Amen, sister!
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:07 pm (UTC)
Word. I've lived a very fortunate life. :)
caliente_uk
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:03 pm (UTC)
Well said!
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:07 pm (UTC)
The man in your icon is sexy. *licks*
framefolly
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:16 pm (UTC)
I agree that sexism is pervasive, and it's used to dismiss fans who are women, and that it's wrong.

I think, though, that the implied pejorative in "fangirl" is as much about the "fan" as about the "girl" -- "fanboy" has negative connotations, too.

In addition to the difficulty that some people have with the concept of women who can BOTH be sexual AND be intelligent, many people have difficulty with the concept that people can BOTH enjoy -- relish -- popular entertainment -- AND STILL be critical about it.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:31 pm (UTC)
Agreed. I was using "fangirl" to specifically refer to the sexual component of fandom. That is confusing, though, as "fangirl" is a more general term that also has different stigmas attached to it.
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eilowyn - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
flake_sake
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:23 pm (UTC)
once more *signs rant*

I'm so sick of this shit that tries to pretend women in fandom are the collective annoying little sister you don't want to let into your tree house.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:32 pm (UTC)
Meh! I think their tree house is dumb anyway!
(no subject) - penny_lane_42 - Apr. 24th, 2010 08:19 pm (UTC) - Expand
larabeckinsale
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:24 pm (UTC)
Amen sister!
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:32 pm (UTC)
*licks your icon*
bree_black
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:40 pm (UTC)
Hi! Linked by a friend.

Agreed, on everything. This is why my academic work atm is on representations of female fans in particular (in academia, in the news, on tv), because I think it's done differently (and unfairly so) for men and women. Basically, you take all the negative connotations of "fan" and amplify them times a thousand with the word "girl."

The only thing I would add is that although I think it's important that we're acknowledged for our other (more "serious") fannish behaviours, those "girly" things can and do have value in their own right as well. Sometimes (and I'm not saying you're doing this on purpose!) there's a tendency to treat romance, smut, fangirling as some kind of guilty pleasure we need to justify by listing the other, "important" stuff we do.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:52 pm (UTC)
You're definitely right, and I don't want to make it appear as if I'm "justifying" the romance and smut. Indeed, part of the spark behind this rant is because I often feel the need to do so (see my derogatory joke about being "blinded by Spike's Cheekbones o' Sexiness").

And I hate that I do that, and that I feel the need to do that. Because the unabashed fangirling and porniness of fandom shouldn't be something we're ashamed of. I like to think I'm not, but I also recognize that, to some people, it will invalidate what I say. *sigh*

Feminism is HARD.
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:04 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eilowyn - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:28 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - angearia - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:18 am (UTC) - Expand
eowyn_315
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:44 pm (UTC)
I know it's all ranty and such, but this actually made me think. Because I'd always considered the inherent insult to be "Oh, those frivolous wimminz aren't capable of rational thought. They're too easily distracted by chiseled abs and cheekbones." I hadn't thought of it as not wanting to see women being open about their sexuality. The "women are delicate creatures who shouldn't be troubled with the taxing job of thinking" mentality has been around forever, but combining it with female sexuality makes it even more insidious.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:54 pm (UTC)
Who told you to think???

;)

Seriously, there's an element of both going on. "Oh, those frivolous wimminz aren't capable of rational thought. They're too easily distracted by chiseled abs and cheekbones....and they shouldn't be." It's implicit in the insult that we shouldn't be focusing on the abs and cheekbones. And if we are, then we're obviously unable to maintain any sort of intelligent discussion.

It's such a huge, tangled mess of so many old, sexist cultural assumptions tied up in gender roles and female sexuality.
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - rebcake - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - ubi4soft - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:39 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:43 pm (UTC) - Expand
ruuger
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:45 pm (UTC)
What you said.

What I think is the funniest thing about it all is that Joss himself made fun of the 'women only like Spike because he's hot' argument - hello, remember Angel being worried about Fred falling for Spike's charms in "Hellbound"?

And it's not just sexist, it's also terribly heteronormative because lesbian fans of Spike apparently don't exist. I have often jokingly said that James Marsters is my last bastion of heterosexuality, but Spike's looks are way, way down towards the end of my list of things why he's my favourite character...

gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 06:57 pm (UTC)
Indeed.

Not only do lesbian fans of Spike not exist, male fans of Spike don't exist (unless they're gay). Or maybe the male fans of Spike are "doing it right" since they, apparently, can't fawn over teh hawtness.

And I doubt I'd fangirl Spike's looks if I didn't like his character. That's the way it is with me. If I like a person or character, I'm gonna find them gorgeous. I rarely find men to be physically attractive without some emotional or intellectual attachment to them.
(no subject) - angearia - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - shipperx - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:21 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - angearia - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:09 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - angearia - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:20 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - penny_lane_42 - Apr. 24th, 2010 08:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - rahirah - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:21 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:31 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - ms_scarletibis - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - penny_lane_42 - Apr. 24th, 2010 08:24 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - rahirah - Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - rebcake - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - zippoluv - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:34 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bobthemole - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:55 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mad_brilliant_ - Apr. 23rd, 2010 09:51 am (UTC) - Expand
concinnity
Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:37 pm (UTC)
****applause****
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:58 pm (UTC)
Mmmmm...Buffy in glasses...

*licks your icon*
me_llamo_nic
Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:41 pm (UTC)
Not to be deliberately contrary, but...

Does a man...get smacked down

I have been. Not in online fandom, but I've had some of my points dismissed on the basis that Sarah Michelle Gellar is sexy or because I openly think Alyson Hannigan is one of the hottest women alive. I've been in situations where I tried to make points about the show or characters and had those opinions dismissed because the characters are sexy. I'm sure men don't have it nearly as bad as women, but it does happen.


On the more direct subject, using sexism to devalue an opponent in a debate is incredibly wrong. I agree with you completely on that.

However and please don't crucify me, I don't think it's necessarily intentional (which is the flavor I'm picking up in this post). I think it's more the effect of swimming in misogynist water, as it were. Pretty much like what you said about it being easier to give in to the larger sexist culture, except they do it subconsciously. And they DO need to be made aware of it. The behavior is still wrong and shouldn't be excused, but I don't think it's (always) an intentional thing.

You're completely entitled to the righteous anger. I think any educated person would agree that the behavior is juvenile at best. Dismissal of opinions based on sexism (or any factors unrelated to the discussion) pisses me off too. But basically, I think the "fuck you" attitude isn't helpful (or completely called for in all cases). The more patient "you're swimming in misogynist water and you need to be made aware of what you're doing" seems like the better option to me.

Word to your point though. The behavior is wrong. It's douchebaggery. It's rooeted in misogyny whether people know it or not. It needs to be stopped. I'm glad someone is calling people out on this. I know this comment probably has a very contrary tone, but I'm on board with this post. I wanted to point out the things that didn't completely work for me, but I agree with you on the central points.

I'm still afraid to hit 'Post Comment.' *sigh* *gulp* *click*
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:00 pm (UTC)
Does a man...get smacked down

I have been.


Noted.

However and please don't crucify me, I don't think it's necessarily intentional (which is the flavor I'm picking up in this post). I think it's more the effect of swimming in misogynist water, as it were.

Yep.

You're completely entitled to the righteous anger.

Thanks.

But basically, I think the "fuck you" attitude isn't helpful (or completely called for in all cases).

Do you think this post is for them or for me?
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:19 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:29 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:43 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:11 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:43 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - rebcake - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:30 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - zippoluv - Apr. 22nd, 2010 10:01 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 10:39 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - angearia - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:33 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:19 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:35 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:40 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:51 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 23rd, 2010 12:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:15 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:39 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:55 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:32 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:59 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:20 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - stormwreath - Apr. 23rd, 2010 01:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 01:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:49 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 05:50 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 09:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:34 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:38 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 10:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 10:48 pm (UTC) - Expand
hkath
Apr. 22nd, 2010 07:45 pm (UTC)
Disturbingly enough, though, a lot of female fans play into the idea that the mere sight of chiseled body parts turns them into drooling keyboard-mashing idiots to the exreme, at the detriment of any sort of substantial discussion. I've especially seen this on LJ, where, admittedly, that kind of post is far less likely to be commented on by male fen in search of something to criticize.

Which makes me wonder if it's natural behaviour, or if, due to the unspoken implication that it's lame and/or stupid and/or weaksauce for a female fan to express sexual attraction to a character and expect to be taken seriously, they're somehow expressing their frustration by becoming extreme caricatures of the behaviour they're being accused of.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:04 pm (UTC)
I think that there are times when people fall to extreme behaviors when they feel they're in the company of like-minded fans. Like the running penguin jokes in Spuffy fandom. They're great fun and over-the-top ridiculous. However, it's not something I'd throw out there when with a larger group of fans.

Likewise, shipping and fangirling behavior follows similar dynamics wherein with an exclusive, comfortable group, they fall into what (to outsiders) probably appear to be maniacally immature patterns. But those discussions aren't meant for the outsiders (even though lots of people leave the conversations public). And it seems reasonable that, outside those conversations, the individual fans would still be able to hold and intelligent and rational discussion.

I think that has more to do with group dynamics rather than anything else.
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eilowyn - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:40 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:50 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - eilowyn - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:03 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - hkath - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:54 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - hkath - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:47 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:37 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - hkath - Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:58 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - bree_black - Apr. 23rd, 2010 05:08 pm (UTC) - Expand
elisi
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:24 pm (UTC)
Men only buy Playboy for the articles you know.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:31 pm (UTC)
I buy it for the boobies.

Or...I would if I ever bought Playboy...which I haven't.
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:42 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:49 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - elisi - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:50 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - me_llamo_nic - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - elisi - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - stormwreath - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:17 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - duh_i_read - Apr. 23rd, 2010 03:07 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - elisi - Apr. 23rd, 2010 08:35 am (UTC) - Expand
ms_scarletibis
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:42 pm (UTC)
So it's used to smack Spike fans down. Try to bring up some intelligent discussion on Spike? Oh, well, she's just blinded by the cheekbones.

What I funny about that is that in reality, that's all that they see in the character. The surface and topical layer only. I think an additional problem is that because he's not a favorite (my entry about the shipping wars taught me a most interesting fandom history lesson, where Spike fans were treated like lepers, and there was only one thread he could be discussed about on one of the official forums, and if you talked about him elsewhere, your comment was immediately deleted. Not to mention the "You're a rapist lover/you write guys in prison, don't you?" comments), for...I don't know, impending upon Angel's alleged territory (cause he did after all mark Buffy like a dog by taking her virginity, and I'm rolling my eyes as I typed that line) and "stealing the show."

I'm not sure that their simple minds are even capable of understanding that what they say is indeed sexist. I think you're giving them too much credit.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:54 pm (UTC)
Good point. It's not only a dismissal of the female fans, but a dismissal of the character, himself. Crap, you've stirred some thoughts up, but I gotta mull them over a bit now. :)
(no subject) - ms_scarletibis - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
local_max
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:50 pm (UTC)
'Twas a great rant. Word to it.

I'm a straight male in fandom, and relatively new to fandom--so I know I have it pretty easy.

My take. Thinking about gender in fandom, I see two huge double standards: Buffy vs. Angel, and Faith vs. Spike. I'm oversimplifying here and don't want to step on any specific fans' toes (mainly because I can't remember SPECIFIC fans, and don't want to follow the link to bitsy because it'll bother me greatly). You bring up Faith vs. Spike so I make no claims to originality.

1) Buffy and Angel, in different ways, are both very cut off at times (Buffy in the later seasons, Angel most of the time). Lots of people call Buffy a bitch for this. I don't see many people holding the fact of being cut off against Angel. Because (speculation?) being cut off is a very stereotypical male trait, and is totally cool in male heroes but not female ones.

2) Faith and Spike have similar arcs--both the sexy bad girl/bad boy who gets redeemed. Both have an attempted rape (Faith against Xander in "Consequences", Spike against Buffy), both murder people. Not many men are trashed for liking Faith and thinking she is hot. LOTS of women are trashed for liking Spike and thinking he is hot.
eilowyn
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:54 pm (UTC)
Are you single?
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:57 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:01 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:07 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - stormwreath - Apr. 22nd, 2010 11:08 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 11:43 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - stormwreath - Apr. 23rd, 2010 12:13 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 23rd, 2010 12:24 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:41 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - norwie2010 - Apr. 22nd, 2010 10:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 22nd, 2010 11:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 22nd, 2010 11:55 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 23rd, 2010 12:26 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - gabrielleabelle - Apr. 23rd, 2010 12:39 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - penny_lane_42 - Apr. 24th, 2010 09:11 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - zippoluv - Apr. 22nd, 2010 10:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - penny_lane_42 - Apr. 24th, 2010 09:14 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - local_max - Apr. 26th, 2010 04:47 am (UTC) - Expand
eilowyn
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:53 pm (UTC)
I love you.

And I'm so sick of being dismissed as a silly wimminz and a Spike fan.

When I object to how women's bodies are portrayed in the comics, I'm not just complaining as a Spike fan who just doesn't like the comics. I feel objectified on behalf of the actresses whose images are being used in such a fashion.

When I object to glowhypnol being used in the Bangel space fucking, it's not because I'm a Spuffy. It's because Buffy's free will is not being consulted in this, and this leads to connotations of actual rape.

When I object to the pacing of the story, the characterization in both the Buffy and Angel comics, the poor plotting, or the over-the-top comic book tropes, it's not because I "just don't get comics" as a medium. It's because I appreciated the story Joss told over twelve seasons of television and find this particular extension lacking from a literary analysis standpoint.

I don't like being excluded from the conversation because of my admitted opinions. I don't like being dismissed. And with the current fandom kerfuffle, I find that I am being dismissed.

So, I love you. And I love Spike.

I shouldn't be dismissed because of this.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 08:59 pm (UTC)
Ugh. And you shouldn't. You have brilliant thoughts. It's just that these conversations that we want to bring up can be uncomfortable, and it's easier to discredit the people trying to raise them rather then discuss them.
(no subject) - rahirah - Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
zippoluv
Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:23 pm (UTC)
Well ranted! A brilliant observation.

Yup, any of us 'fangirls' (ugh what a term, I know there are 'fanboys' too, but I despise being called a girl, or any women being called girls) who are into anything porny or smutty must have our brains oozing outta our ears....
because intelligent men are NEVER into porn or lusting after female tv stars...ha, or no - this is it - they have seperate brain compartments see, so their sexual appreciation of a person never addles their brains or affects their capacity for critical thought!

And of course, it's not just about being blatant with our sexual appreciation of a guy/character - we are Spike fans.
Spike fans must be exponentialy empty-headed and imbecilic since we are silly women who have fallen for a bad boy and are all susceptible to abusive boyfriends ( yup, even the lesbians!snerk!).
Spike's character was just one dimensional you see, an evil bad boy who has no complexity or character development. We are all very shallow. ;o)

On the bad boy thing - we are actually intelligent enough to tell the difference between fntasy and reality. In real life, we do not want mass murdering partners, even repentant ones. But more than that, vampires, although evil, have always been a fantasy - about death and sex and immortality and viscerality. It doesn't relate at all to the grim reality of real life violence.
I saw a clip of James playing the part of Ted Bundy brilliantly. Too well - it was creepy. And guess what - not at all attractive. I have heard James saying that he has some concerns about female Spike fans falling for the bad boy, that we think a bad boy will treat his woman right.( He did actually say this, but on the other hand, I know he considers Buffyverse fans to be very intelligent). But actually, we're not like that, a hellava lot of us are intelligent feminists and not necessairly into heteronormative relationships either.

Erm , that was a huge tangent, but it just seems the other major reason that anything we have to say is dismissed. And I'm sure this has been discussed loads, but I'm very new to sharing my thoughts on this on the net!


I too got hooked on Spike in the later seasons, James' great acting, character development, blah blah. I did find him hot in S2/3, but wasn't a full on fan. I find it hard now looking back to remember
though - how hot did I find him before I was into his character? It's a long time ago, and I watch S2/3 thhrough different eyes now, so I'm a bit uncertain.

I say this, because I think sometimes that we should be careful of defining all female sexuality the same way and falling into assumed generalistaions about it. A lot of us are saying ' I only really found him hot when I got into the character development' ( erm, which is a bit of a generalisation), and may well be true.
But if we did moslty only like Spike or James for his washboard abs and chiseled cheek bones - would that be such a bad thing? If in actuality female sexuality can be closer to male sexuality? Because of the misogny of objectification, we I think feel superior that our 'female desires' are linked to liking a person/character. But what about that part of us which just goes - 'guh!' - do we I wonder deny that a bit to ourselves, because we've been conditioned - female sexuality is meant to be tamer. Are we sometimes justifying ourselves?
I'm not sure, it's just some random thoughts splurging out.

Bloody hell, what've I done? Writen an essay in a comment - sorry guys!I suppose this should've been a response in my LJ, but I'm still kinda new around here and you peeps don't know me. Who would go and read it? Plus my LJ, is empty cos I'm not a fic writer and I'm not sure what to put in it or start it with. And this bloody rambling and huge replies is why I sometimes lurk and don't enter into discussions.

Ok, the end.



gabrielleabelle
Apr. 22nd, 2010 09:50 pm (UTC)
Long comments get much love from me. Don't apologize for it!

Spike fans must be exponentialy empty-headed and imbecilic since we are silly women who have fallen for a bad boy and are all susceptible to abusive boyfriends ( yup, even the lesbians!snerk!).

Oooh! Good point. I abhor the "chicks only like jerks" thoughtmeme that gets around. And I hate how being a fan of Spike seems to feed into it. You're very correct, of course. We're able to distinguish fantasy from reality. I find Spike a fascinating character. I certainly wouldn't want to date him (Well...maybe souled up!Spike). Most Spike fans I've talked to have a much deeper understanding of the character than people give them credit for. In fact, I'd say the most attractive quality of Spike for his fans is not the Bad Boy image but that he's the perpetual underdog. I love the underdog in almost any situation. And that's Spike.

A lot of us are saying ' I only really found him hot when I got into the character development' ( erm, which is a bit of a generalisation), and may well be true.
But if we did moslty only like Spike or James for his washboard abs and chiseled cheek bones - would that be such a bad thing? If in actuality female sexuality can be closer to male sexuality?


Very good point, and you're right to bring it up. That does sound like a bunch of scrambling to try to distance ourselves from the more "inappropriate" forms of sexuality.

Even in thinking on it, though, I honestly don't know. Even in real life, I'm rarely physically attracted to men unless I like them emotionally. That carries over into the fictional realm (For instance, I recognize that Angel and Riley are objectively aesthetically attractive, but they don't do anything for me cause I'm not a big fan of their characters). On the other hand, I do find women physically attractive much more easily and openly without any sort of other connection. There's many things I could make of that, but it would be a tangent and a half to do so. :)
(no subject) - eowyn_315 - Apr. 23rd, 2010 02:59 am (UTC) - Expand
ever_neutral
Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:41 am (UTC)
Oh my God. The love just does not quit. I want to put this rant on a t-shirt. Or frame it on a wall. Even better, I plan to link this to the next sexist asswipe I come across. Knowing fandom, shouldn't take too long.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:50 pm (UTC)
I encourage this plan of action. :)
mad_brilliant_
Apr. 23rd, 2010 09:59 am (UTC)
Brilliant rant, amen and amen. <3
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 23rd, 2010 04:50 pm (UTC)
:)
annegables
Apr. 24th, 2010 12:52 am (UTC)
I especially love that I came here to read this after another LJer commented that you had "another rant"!! I love that you are famous for your "rants"!!
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 24th, 2010 02:40 pm (UTC)
Huh. I suppose there are worse things to be famous for. :)
penny_lane_42
Apr. 24th, 2010 09:16 pm (UTC)
Has anyone ever told you that you're sexy when you're angry?

:D

Seriously, thank you so much for continuing to give voice to my own thoughts, my own emotions, my own righteous anger. I love that you're doing it. This post is made of everything that is awesome.
gabrielleabelle
Apr. 24th, 2010 10:29 pm (UTC)
Heh. I'm actually kinda waiting for these rants to come around and bite me in the ass somehow. But in the meantime, I'm glad they've spoken to (and for) a number of other women in fandom. :)
(no subject) - penny_lane_42 - Apr. 24th, 2010 10:42 pm (UTC) - Expand
sidhlairiel
Apr. 24th, 2010 09:42 pm (UTC)
*nods vigorously in agreement*

When I first started watching Buffy back in the day I did so because I had seen snatches of episodes and thought it looked interesting. And then I saw Spike and the cheekbones. But so what? There are plenty of television/movie characters who I find hot, but there has never been another that I find as inherently fascinating as Spike, cheekbones or no. It's been seven years since I first discovered the show and my passion for him has never wavered. If it was just a superficial attraction I wouldn't still be here, that's for sure.

(Is it okay if I friend you, btw? Lovin' all your meta!)



gabrielleabelle
Apr. 24th, 2010 10:31 pm (UTC)
Friends are welcome and awesome! :)

And word. While I think Spike is hot beyond hot, what I like most is his journey, the complexity of his character, the ever-changing nature of his role on the show, how it interacts with Buffy's journey. I'm just fascinated by him.
(no subject) - sidhlairiel - Apr. 24th, 2010 10:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
( 164 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

will57
gabrielleabelle
The One Who Isn't Chosen

Latest Month

July 2012
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Pretentious Quote

"We are shaped by our thoughts; we become what we think. When the mind is pure, joy follows like a shadow that never leaves."
- the Buddha
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner