The Problem With Twilight

[Crazy_Bird]

I don't think I agree with you people. I do agree, that Bella is annoyingly passive and dependent during the whole series and that this might send the wrong kind of message ("It's okay to just sit around and let the man protect you.") Even the female vampires are protected by their men. What for?!?

However, I really think this whole "Virginity is the most important aspect of you" is a bit far fetched. In the book it was because Edward didn't want Bella to loose her soul and go to hell after she dies. Where do you get the idea that humanity correlates to virginity?

The "Sex only after marriage" message was more obvious, but Edward is old fashioned and some people might find that romantic. But honestly, I think churches, parents and teachers do much more harm in indoctrinating young girls with that message than Twilight ever could. If this was never an issue for you, it won't be after reading Twilight.

Also, really young girls (11-14) might find the idea of a boy actually wanting to have sex with them a bit scary. They like save relationships. ((This is also one of the reasons why girls like Yaoi)) So it makes sense considering the target audience for once. If you did any research you'll find that, lusting after hot but save boys is an important step in sexual development of girls. How can that be anti-female? When girls get older they grow out of it and search for real relationships. Whats the harm? Reading all this one could get the idea that in fact you don't like the idea of a female sex drive and hate Twilight for marketing this to girls. Who is the backwards thinker in all of this?

You guys keep forgetting that this is porn for girls. They don't put much more thought in it than "Hey Edward is really hot". Yes, young girls are manipulable. But the message is "Vampires are hot, buy our products" and not "Virginity is important". This movie and the books are for young girls. You are not the target audience. So stop complaining and conspiring. You watch your kind of porn and let them watch their kind of porn. You put way to much effort into it.

All in all, I agree that Twilight might send the message "It is okay to depend on your man", but it really doesn't say "Sex is evil for women".


- Crazy_Birds girlfriend

 

[My1stLuvJak]

Patriarchal-omnipotence. The surrendered wife. Virginity as commodity. Female sexuality as something deadly to be controlled. Women being defined entirely by what sort of men lay claim to them. This isn't just anti-feminist, it's anti-female, period - and anti-modern and anti-individual to boot. This is bad stuff, and it's bad stuff that most modern cultures have spent a long, arduous time digging themselves out of. But like some kind of stubborn recurring cancer, here it is again, tossed back to the surface.

The scariest part of this to me is that no one, or very few, see the underlying scariness. The media touts Twilight as a good role-model book for girls, but really? I don't want my hypothetical daughter to think she has to be a satellite to a man and that her soul worth is derived and defined by who she's with.

I understand the draw of the teen fantasy, but sometimes at that age it's also hard to objectively step back and say this is a fun man to fantasize about, but in real life he would be on Cops.

When I saw the preview for (what was it..Eclipse?) playing at Blockbuster one night, I very nearly threw up. Here I am, watching a girl so obsessed about her supernatural boyfriend, that she will willingly throw herself off of cliffs and drive into trees just for a chance to see him again. Seeing that preview scared the ever-loving crap out of me; I had no idea that anything like that went on during the books

 

[VivaciousDeimos]

When I saw the preview for (what was it..Eclipse?) playing at Blockbuster one night, I very nearly threw up. Here I am, watching a girl so obsessed about her supernatural boyfriend, that she will willingly throw herself off of cliffs and drive into trees just for a chance to see him again. Seeing that preview scared the ever-loving crap out of me; I had no idea that anything like that went on during the books

Ahh, apparently you've never played Horrify the Twilight Noob.

In the words of my favorite blogger [http://cleolinda.livejournal.com/630150.html] Srsly, the recaps are pure lulz: [http://cleoland.pbworks.com/Twilight#HorrifytheTwilightNoob]

"Okay, so. Previously on As the Vampire Sparkles, emoteen Bella Swan moves to a tiny little depressing rainy town and won't shut up about it. There she meets a mysterious boy who turns out to be a 100+ year-old vampire who literally sparkles "like diamonds" in direct sunlight and reads minds (but not hers), and after three hundred pages of Bella wondering why he's so mean to her and why he's so weird and why he's not being mean to her anymore and what his deal is and if he likes her and if he actually loves her and how much he loves her and how he could possibly love as someone as Mary Sue plain and boring and clumsy as she is and if his vampire family will like her, a plot finally shows up, but it doesn't last very long. And then they go to prom. In the second book, Edward the sparkling vampire leaves Bella for her own good, and she spends most of the book trying to kill herself with motorcycles and cliff-diving. Sort of. And then her best friend falls in love with her and turns out to be a werewolf, but Bella runs away to save Edward from committing suicide by public sparkling in Italy. In the third book, Jacob the best friend/boyfriend wannabe/werewolf turns into a total asshole trying to force himself on Bella, and a vampire with a grudge from the first book is trying to kill her, but more importantly, Bella and Edward argue about whether they should have sex, get married, and/or vampirize Bella, and in what order.

Hand to God, I did not make one word of that up. Twilight means never having to say you're kidding."

And Breaking Dawn is even crazier.

 

[Littaly]

It's always nice to see someone criticize Twilight where it deserves to be criticized. 80% of the hate amounts to "They ruined vampires!!", which just wants to make me smash my head against the desk.

Still, despite what signals it may or may not be sending, I think Twilight is gonna turn out to be a good thing in the long run. If this is what it takes to make the average girl understand what it's like to be obsessed with a piece of fantasy fiction, I'm okay with that.

 

[Timbydude]

I...I guess I just don't understand exactly what's wrong with the "virginity until marriage" message. That mantra doesn't necessarily lead to utter submission to a man. At the very least, it's better than the opposing message, which would encourage lust-filled teenage girls to just act on every impulse they have. Like I said, I'm just not seeing why this message in particular is such a grave problem.

Granted, the stalking bits and the parts where she actually is completely submitting herself to Edward (though I still don't think that arises from the virginity bit) give off a bad vibe, but this article seems more like MovieBob's personal views being declared as objectively correct.

 

[Fearzone]

Double post, please delete.

 

[Fearzone]

Social attitudes around sexual promiscuity and restraint do not progress in one direction but rather cycle back and forth throughout history. Just look at the Romans.

Suggesting that the fall of Rome was not kind of a step backwards for society?

That's a complicated question for which I don't have a quick answer, but I don't think the fall of Rome had much to do with social values and much more to do with economic sustainability of military expansionism. The point is, throughout history attitudes on sex span the spectrum from society to society and I doubt anyone could convincingly show any linear "forward" or "backward" direction over time.

I didn't say it had anything to do with social values. You just said that there wasn't progress in one direction or the other in terms of sexual promiscuity, then cited the Romans as a sexually promiscuous society. This seemed to imply to me that Romans were "back", and most of what has come since has been "forward".

It may have been "forward" in time, but generally speaking, I'd say that everything for about 1600 years after the fall of Rome can safely be considered "back" from Rome in every conceivable fashion other than chronologically.

You are free to contest this, and you're correct that attitudes cycle in the short term, but the long-term trend is that technological advancement and general living standards are correlated positively with loosening attitudes about sex and greater independence for women.

So I call bs on your suggestion that there is no "forwards" or "backwards" regarding sexual attitudes and women's rights.

I'll say Roman society was a pretty mixed bag. As great as it was, I'm not sure I would like to have lived in it, or preferred it over the middle ages (discounting the climate changes and epidemics that had nothing to do with the social order). I suspect a strong link between Roman brutality and the rise of Christianity.

While empowerment of women I agree is a "forward" trend, I wouldn't equate that with attitudes about sex. I mean, assuming Movie Bob's interpretation of the hidden meanings is valid--who wrote and who is going to read and watch the Twilight books and movies? Shouldn't women be free to enjoy their entertainment, and interpret as they please, and hold what values they do, whatever that may be?

 

[Negatempest]

helen of troy?

 

[xanith02100]

Single best article the Escapist has seen yet. Way to go on this one, Bob.

 

[Dana22]

80% of the hate amounts to "They ruined vampires!!",

But didnt they ? As a big fan of "World of Darkness", I think they did.

 

[Acting like a FOOL]

The Problem With Twilight

It's more than just bad moviemaking.

Read Full Article

I'm so glad someone else sees the problems with this series that I do.

Although I worry much more about teaching girls that their lives should revolve around a guy (or two), then brainwashing them into thinking they have to stay virgins. An entire generation of girls who can't think for themselves just scares me, thats all there is to say.

There are SOOO many better books for teenage girls with MUCH better messages . . . not to mention better writing. Although I'm pretty sure I've read elementary school book reports with better writing than this series

a generation of girls who "can't" think! THIS generation of girls isn't thinking...
that's how this whole thing got so big in the first place.Mostly it's children doing something because other children are doing the same thing.there's some larger sociological explanation behind this reply but I think I said 'nuff.

 

[Lord_Ascendant]

MovieBob speaketh the truth once more.

and thats the Gospel truth, boys and girls.

*amen*

First of all Moviebob speaks only truth.

Second of all, I'm not into men so I'm not necessarily the best judge but is the dude who plays Edward supposed to be attractive? I think he's ugly as fuck. His face is like, malformed or something.

Since MovieBob is an Avatar of Truth to you all, I'm anxious to know what kind of morally restrained gender-equal balanced videogames praising nonviolence, civiliziational values and the pursuit of peace in an orderly manner are you people playing.

Touchè

 

[Breaker deGodot]

The Problem With Twilight

It's more than just bad moviemaking.

Read Full Article

I find it ironic that you call it "The Problem With Twilight". It seems to imply that there is only one flaw. Of course, we all know that's bullshit.

[http://dragcave.net/view/rYtd]

 

[Luke Cartner]

The Problem With Twilight

It's more than just bad moviemaking.

Read Full Article

I'm so glad someone else sees the problems with this series that I do.

Although I worry much more about teaching girls that their lives should revolve around a guy (or two), then brainwashing them into thinking they have to stay virgins. An entire generation of girls who can't think for themselves just scares me, thats all there is to say.

There are SOOO many better books for teenage girls with MUCH better messages . . . not to mention better writing. Although I'm pretty sure I've read elementary school book reports with better writing than this series

For perspective's sake, though, is the "your life revolves around your life interest" any different from any romantic comedy? I mean, a review of even some of Gaiman's work would have some very similar undertones of female vulnerability, male heroism, ect.

Every form of media focused on romance is based in large part on the premise that "my life revolves around my love". I mean, come on, from D.N Angel and Full Metal Panic to Stardust, to John Cusack's extended resume, it's all about obsession (perhaps love) being the driving force in someone's life.

True, the male-centric stories tend more toward the deed of daring do, but even that's tinged by the "manipulative *****" aspect; and if we assume that young men are just as empty-headed as young women, then the entire catalog of tropes in that genre are doing just as much harm.

How about we count it all as escapist fantasy, and assume that the readers (male and female) can distinguish between fiction and reality.

On the issue of Bella's self, sacrifice, though, it does raise an interesting question. If the roles were significantly reversed, and a guy had to harm himself/endanger his life in order to protect or aid his love interest, would we bat an eye? When Richard in the Sword of Truth series does stupid shit in order to protect Kahlan, do we consider it wrong? When Harry Dresden becomes self-destructive and retarded after the loss of his girlfriend (and, arguably, the love of his life), do we view it as self-indulgent crap, or as legitimate character development?

Maybe I'm spending too much time defending a series I don't have any actual affection for (and I have defended the mythological "everyone makes shit up" aspect of vampire stories), but it seems like the same behavior we deride in Bella (and consider antediluvian) we would praise in a male character.

I can talk about the "virginity/honor killing" thing another time, it just feels like we're not being entirely fair.

I hate to disagree but you couldn't be more wrong. While you do make some good points about the whole self sacrifice thing on Bella's part, that isn't really what I meant about her being so reliant on the boys in the story. I have read plenty of books where the female leads sacrifice just as much as the male leads, and do so without being so wimpy. Bella has NO existance wthout Edward, her life literally revolves around him.

Try reading anything by J.D. Robb for example. Her books are about a strong female lead who is married (after the third book at least), but she has a life without her man. Both main charactors in that particular series have issues and rely on eachother to get through them, but it goes both ways. In the Twilight books Edward is ALWAYS the one saving Bella, she can't do ANYTHING without him.

For me its all about going both ways in these books. Bella is always being saved, never doing the saving. She thinks life is over when Edward leaves, while he apparently continues to function (even though I'm sure he misses her). Bellas is just not the kind of role model I think is good for girls who are still developing their sense of self. They should be looking at female leads who can save themselves, not rely on a man to do it for them (I swear I'm not some crazy feminist, I just hate books when the girls are TOTALLY useless without their men)!!

I cant agree enough with this statement. I mean in the same genre (pulp fiction about vampires) you have two very strong female protagonists (Anita Blake and Sookie Stackhouse) both who sacrifice themselves when necessary but are still strong, independent characters.

 

[lyrandar]

The ironic part is just how much the series relies on sex appeal to sell tickets!

 

[(LK)]

I'm kind of thankful there's more good reasons to dislike Twilight aside from it being schlock.

Hating it for being shoddy escapism feels snobbish. Hating it for being culturally immature shoddy escapism feels snobbish too, but I can hide behind moral indignation.

(I'm mostly just making fun of myself, here)

 

[twasdfzxcv]

The problem with Twilight is that it is fan-fiction yet expect to be taken seriously.

 

[Warnolo]

I hate Twilight, and I've only just understood why...

Bella (whiny little ***** that she is) has no social skills and no friends. She makes no effort to know those classmates in her school... or just about anyone. I know this, I read the books.

Look, that's ok, I did that too. But the thing is, Bella gets a boyfriend. No, scratch that, she gets two hunky immortal types who fight over her. This is not real, girlies! You Twihards need to understand being introverted and unsociable does not gets you the continued interest of men!

I got a boyfriend eventually... when I was 21! Ok, living proof right there. And I had to work hard on communication and friendship and stuff first. That's really what I hate about Twilight. As far I can tell, it leads girls to believe that it's ok to be social inept and not to care about others, only about yourself. That your worth is determined by the number of immortal hunks fighting over you, even though you have the personality of a wet tea towel, and that it could really happen.

I mean, I want to see the ending where both the vampire and the werewolf realise what a brat Bella is and walk away. So she can grow a personality. And hopefully a brain.

You won me, im 26 and still no girlfriend.

 

[Warnolo]

MovieBob speaketh the truth once more.

and thats the Gospel truth, boys and girls.

*amen*

First of all Moviebob speaks only truth.

Second of all, I'm not into men so I'm not necessarily the best judge but is the dude who plays Edward supposed to be attractive? I think he's ugly as fuck. His face is like, malformed or something.

Since MovieBob is an Avatar of Truth to you all, I'm anxious to know what kind of morally restrained gender-equal balanced videogames praising nonviolence, civiliziational values and the pursuit of peace in an orderly manner are you people playing.

The Sims?

Or fallout 3?

 

[ldwater]

Empowering women is a fine thing to do which most (modern) men wouldn't have a problem with at all. I really enjoyed Buffy and Angel because of the empowerment that buffy had (ie, being uber strong and saving the world on a number of occasions) but still showing that it doesn't pay the bills (in that season where Buffy has to get a job).

My problem with Twilight is that this empowerment of women (the reader) or woman (Bella) comes across as manipulative and selfish because of the way she uses that power - the series is almost DESIGNED to give the reader that power and let them be lost in their own fantasy to prevent them from looking into the situation further than just emotional gratification.

Lets take a look at the start of the series: plain jane arrives in town. Her parents are split up, she lives a simple (ie, not poor but not well off either) life with her father and she has no real skills, talents, abilities or anything else that elevates her above any other human in the universe. Therefore she is powerless.

Power is then thrust upon her by Edward - but she does nothing to deserve this power and seems to have it thrust upon her, its almost at random.

She then uses this power through the first 3 films to manipulate both Edward and Jacob to her whim. In the 2nd one she feels all alone and needs a buddy, so she goes to Jacob for a pick me up and he does everything he can to make her feel better - but the WHOLE TIME she is with Jacob she is still thinking of Edward.

She is basically the worlds biggest cock tease. And with that she HAS power.

Even though Bella is more into Edward than Jacob she never really gives him any clear seperation, so again she is giving him enough 'hope' to keep him interested and manipulatable. In eclipse she is the focus of a vampire army and at the point where Jacob is about to say "Screw this" she pulls out "I love you" on him and convinces him to not only sacrifice his life, but the lives of his wolf buddies as well. All of the time she has already made up her mind. I know they say "You can love 2 people" but only a selfish ***** of a woman would lead both of them on in order to coerse them into fighting for her.

But why wont she go with Jacob? Because she wouldn't GAIN any power.
Lets face it - he (and his native american friends) represent the 'good' faction of the story. They are humble, friendly, honest, caring, hard working - everything that is to make you feel warm and fuzzy. The other fact is that they are POOR. They all live in one mud hut, they probably don't work or only work simple jobs for low pay, they probably eat off the land and sing songs around a camp fire without hot running water or a TV.
If she went with Jacob what would really happen? She couldn't be 'turned' into a wolf and eventually she would just be 'plain jane' but with some dogs around her. She wouldn't have any power to impose her will, she wouldn't have anything special about her and would have to life a very simple, rough, poor and hard life before she dies.

Now, lets look at the Cullens: Rich, opulent, sofisticated and immortal. Power in almost every sence of the word. Even if her and Edward broke up after a few hundred years together she would still have super strength, super speed, money and imortality. The fact that she is more willing that he is to jump Edwards bones is probably more about convincing him to bite her than it is about him trying to save her soul etc.

So yes - Twilight shows that if you don't have power you should try to take it and use it to your own gain. The appeal to alot of people in the books is that all this attention to Bella is completely undeserved and all the power she is being given is almost as if she got the golden ticket for the chocolate factory - she didn't WORK for it, she didn't EARN it yet she has armies fighting over her, has 2 hunky guys willing to fight and die for / over her and all she has to do is give them a little affection and they fall about themselves.

Unfortunatly though I won't be explaining all this to my wife who loves Twilight