Re: The Gender Divide
Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2011 1:12 am
Well, Chernaudi, just to let you know, I couldn't id your gender from your posts, although (a) I wasn't really trying and (b) I did notice that you had quite the knowledge of weapons and aircraft, and did note a slightly higher than typical enthusiasm for gunning down papz over in that thread. So hello!
There is certainly a general tendency in our society - not just related to Twilight - to stigmatize "girly" behavior in XY's where we tolerate similar "boyish" behavior in XX's. I was a tomboy, everybody knows a tomboy, and it's not particularly stigmatizing to wear pants and play sports and with certain "boy toys." (GI Joe might be considered over the top, but trucks and guns are fine.) But boys playing with dolls, dancing, etc are scorned as you mention. I deliberately redirected my son's early love of pink to red, not because I thought it was inappropriate (a lot of men look pretty hot in pink), but because I was concerned about teasing. It's not fair, just, right, and it forces boys to suppress their nurturing side, not to mention constrict their range of interests. It's cruel. But it's not limited to Twillight.
Let's see if this is a gender difference or individual: you were more distressed by the amping of sex appeal in the wolfpack than by the amping of action in the movies. But I feel the opposite. At least sex appeal was something that Stephanie deliberately wrote in - ref the first Comic-Con, when a fan asked Catherine Hardwick why all the male actors were so sexy and Stephanie leaned in to say "Because I wrote them that way!" (Although I've always felt that Robert's pants could have been lifted up another inch or so in the plaza scene in New Moon - I mean really - vampires don't lose weight, so I don't think he would have bought them that low. I feel like shading my non-virgin eyes every time. ) And then, through Bella's POV, she doesn't perceive herself as sexy, or feel attracted to any of the female characters. And - back to societal issues! - Leah, of necessity, spends her time running around in shabby clothes, probably barefoot a lot from running out of shoes, and in reality would have trimmed her hair shorter, although maybe not as short as the guys. This is not conventionally sexy. Julia Jones' portrayal probably IS sexier than written.
But the emphasis on action at the expense of the dramatic storyline is very annoying to me. They keep changing the emphasis in the movies, always at the expense of the relationship, and yet never enough to really make a difference. Eclipse was never, never going to be an "action" movie, not enough to pull in an action crowd. All they really did was upset fans. Replacing dramatic interactions between Kristen and Rob - some of the best stuff out there - with CG is just a bummer to me. The dramatic interactions are so much more intense. But I like your idea of Dr Strangelove meets Twilight as a spoof! And I completely agree with you that not all guys are action-oriented. My husband loves period dramas ... and really violent gangster movies too, but you see what I'm saying.
I'm going to throw some other potential gender-based POV issues out there, to help stimulate thought :
Which character do you identify with? Since the story is, at different times, written from opposite-gendered-characters' POVs, do you find it easier or harder to read from a same or opposite gendered character?
Do you find the portrayal of self-esteem issues realistic or not, considering gender?
Stephanie has commented that Edward's frequent arrogance (which he has some justification for) is, in her experience, more typical of men. Yes, no, sometimes? Are the genders arrogant in a different way, or about different things? What role does arrogance play in the secondary characters, and does it seem gender consistent?
Does our gender influence what we think of the non-battle at the end of Breaking Dawn?
Does it impact our perceptions of how the pregnancy and birth were written?
I think that's enough for now!
There is certainly a general tendency in our society - not just related to Twilight - to stigmatize "girly" behavior in XY's where we tolerate similar "boyish" behavior in XX's. I was a tomboy, everybody knows a tomboy, and it's not particularly stigmatizing to wear pants and play sports and with certain "boy toys." (GI Joe might be considered over the top, but trucks and guns are fine.) But boys playing with dolls, dancing, etc are scorned as you mention. I deliberately redirected my son's early love of pink to red, not because I thought it was inappropriate (a lot of men look pretty hot in pink), but because I was concerned about teasing. It's not fair, just, right, and it forces boys to suppress their nurturing side, not to mention constrict their range of interests. It's cruel. But it's not limited to Twillight.
Let's see if this is a gender difference or individual: you were more distressed by the amping of sex appeal in the wolfpack than by the amping of action in the movies. But I feel the opposite. At least sex appeal was something that Stephanie deliberately wrote in - ref the first Comic-Con, when a fan asked Catherine Hardwick why all the male actors were so sexy and Stephanie leaned in to say "Because I wrote them that way!" (Although I've always felt that Robert's pants could have been lifted up another inch or so in the plaza scene in New Moon - I mean really - vampires don't lose weight, so I don't think he would have bought them that low. I feel like shading my non-virgin eyes every time. ) And then, through Bella's POV, she doesn't perceive herself as sexy, or feel attracted to any of the female characters. And - back to societal issues! - Leah, of necessity, spends her time running around in shabby clothes, probably barefoot a lot from running out of shoes, and in reality would have trimmed her hair shorter, although maybe not as short as the guys. This is not conventionally sexy. Julia Jones' portrayal probably IS sexier than written.
But the emphasis on action at the expense of the dramatic storyline is very annoying to me. They keep changing the emphasis in the movies, always at the expense of the relationship, and yet never enough to really make a difference. Eclipse was never, never going to be an "action" movie, not enough to pull in an action crowd. All they really did was upset fans. Replacing dramatic interactions between Kristen and Rob - some of the best stuff out there - with CG is just a bummer to me. The dramatic interactions are so much more intense. But I like your idea of Dr Strangelove meets Twilight as a spoof! And I completely agree with you that not all guys are action-oriented. My husband loves period dramas ... and really violent gangster movies too, but you see what I'm saying.
I'm going to throw some other potential gender-based POV issues out there, to help stimulate thought :
Which character do you identify with? Since the story is, at different times, written from opposite-gendered-characters' POVs, do you find it easier or harder to read from a same or opposite gendered character?
Do you find the portrayal of self-esteem issues realistic or not, considering gender?
Stephanie has commented that Edward's frequent arrogance (which he has some justification for) is, in her experience, more typical of men. Yes, no, sometimes? Are the genders arrogant in a different way, or about different things? What role does arrogance play in the secondary characters, and does it seem gender consistent?
Does our gender influence what we think of the non-battle at the end of Breaking Dawn?
Does it impact our perceptions of how the pregnancy and birth were written?
I think that's enough for now!