"Joss Whedon is a misogynist homophobe"

[wenxina]

I responded to a similar question on the #18 thread.

[dragonweaver]

Aug 30, 2008 0:07:06 GMT -5 ded1 said:

That blog actually got me thinking about something that never really occured to me before.

If the shadowmen "raped" the first slayer when they gave her the power,then didn't Buffy do almost the same thing when she called all the slayers.
I mean,yeah,the girls already had the power laying dormant in them,but Buffy essentially forced them(and by them,I mean the potentials that weren't in Sunnydale) to have their lives changed forever.(I'm not including the Sunnydale group because they knew it was going to happen)

Any thoughts...or am I just crazy?

That's a good point, but the answer depends on whether Buffy knew that the spell would reach that far and affect that many girls. She may not have known the totally ramifications of her actions.

[Emmie]

Aug 30, 2008 0:17:43 GMT -5 dragonweaver said:

Aug 30, 2008 0:07:06 GMT -5 ded1 said:

That blog actually got me thinking about something that never really occured to me before.

If the shadowmen "raped" the first slayer when they gave her the power,then didn't Buffy do almost the same thing when she called all the slayers.
I mean,yeah,the girls already had the power laying dormant in them,but Buffy essentially forced them(and by them,I mean the potentials that weren't in Sunnydale) to have their lives changed forever.(I'm not including the Sunnydale group because they knew it was going to happen)

Any thoughts...or am I just crazy?

That's a good point, but the answer depends on whether Buffy knew that the spell would reach that far and affect that many girls. She may not have known the totally ramifications of her actions.

So it's not pre-meditated metaphorical rape. Just accidental metaphorical rape.

Like premeditated murder versus accidental vehicular manslaughter. Still means someone winds up dead. The consequences are the same no matter what Buffy's intentions were. Acting without the necessary knowledge makes you reckless, not innocent. Unfortunately.

[KingofCretins]

There's even a very handy expression on that point -- the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I think most of the blog entry is absurd, but the Slayer spell is a pretty strong argument for a feminist shortcoming in the Buffyverse.

[buffyfan21]

I read the whole article and at first I thought, "Ok, maybe I misjudged this guy, this doesn't seem so bad." Boy, was I wrong! For every argument this guy makes, I can just as easily produce a counterargument.

He Basically talks about how Buffy's watcher is a male and how she is enslaved to him, relying on The Watcher’s Council for help and guidance and to issue orders, etc., which she is expected to follow, thus, reinforcing the patriarchal view of society.

Well, in his argument he seems to have forgotten how, at the end of S3, Buffy turned her back on the WC, refusing to follow anymore orders. Then again in S5, when The WC makes a visit to Sunnydale, black mailing Buffy with unfair demands and rigorous tests, threading to deport Giles, if she did not comply, Buffy once again puts them in their place, saying that she will not be working for them, but they for her, that things will be played her way and on her terms.

Buffy has always stood up against the WC. The reason she keeps Giles around is b/c he is much less like a "watcher" to her, and more like a father. He is someone that she trusts. Furthermore, I would certainly not say that Giles is a "stuffy white guy." Yes, he was part of the WC, but he was opposed to many of their methods right from the beginning, so much so that he risked his job and lost it in an effort to save Buffy from an "archaic exercise in cruelty." His "love for the child" was far more important than any archaic rules of a patriarchal society. You could always see that Giles kind of went against the grain and wanted to do things a little differently, that he was opposed to many of the rules and rituals the WC imposed. And again in S7, when Buffy is captured by the shadowmen, she refuses to be held under their power and fights against them once more.

And basically saying that Buffy is a dumb blond bitch just b/c of her, "bleeding tragic taste in men," well, I say, that's a little harsh. Saying that Buffy is nothing more than an abused enabler making excuses for her murderous boyfriend. I argue that all of this shows that Buffy is human. This is to a large extent what makes her so relatable and endearing to us. She is not just another super hero, like Superman or Batman. In Spite of her super strength, Buffy is still very much a human being at the core. These examples show that Buffy is subject to vulnerability just like any other human. Her super human strength does not exempt her from human emotions; these are things that exemplify that.

And saying that Willow and Tara’s relationship is hidden behind metaphor, I say, “well duh!” The whole series is based on exploring issues through the use of metaphor, what show has this person been watching (if he is in fact watching at all)? Saying that the intimacy of Willow and Tara’s relationship is hidden behind the use of magic and spells, gotta disagree again. Tara and Willow had plenty of steamy moments on screen during the course of their relationship. One in particular I can think of is in the “Who Are You” episode when Willow and Tara do a spell that turns downright erotic! And let’s not forget their first spell together in “Hush.” The chemistry they had together in that moment made them a force to be reckoned with when joining together to escape from The Gentlemen. Plus, there were many intimate scenes between them in which magic was not involved. So, I definitely wouldn’t say that Joss was afraid of exploring their relationship; he simply wanted to portray it with class and respect, unlike so many of the raunchy and tawdry scenes on television today where same sex relationships are simply exploited for sex value. Joss even strategically placed the first kiss of Willow and Tara in “The Body” so that it would not be seen as a gimmick or stunt. Even when the network told him to pull the kiss he vehemently refused. This doesn’t sound to m e like someone who is a homophobe, afraid to explore the same sex relationship.

This person basically says that the problem with the use of metaphor is the fact that it is open to so many interpretations. True, metaphor is open to many interpretations, that is the wonderful thing about it. This is why metaphor is a tool widely used in literature for exploring social issues. This is why for every argument that this person makes, I can make a retort. It seems to me as if this person is only willing to look at things from one angle, completely unwilling to explore things from other viewpoints and perspectives. The Buffyverse is a world so rich with texture, that to limit oneself to a single perspective alone is to do the show, and oneself, a great injustice. The Buffyverse is a form of television literature that openly welcomes the many views and interpretations of its loyal audience.
This person says that because of characters like the watchers’ and Caleb and Warren, for instance, that Buffy is in fact not a progressive feminist show about girl power. I argue the contrary. Buffy is put up against these seemingly misogynist foes to show that it, in fact, IS about girl power. Joss creates the very characters that Buffy is supposed to be against, and uses them as a tool. And yes, Buffy fights and stands up against these characters each and every time. She fought back against the WC and put them in their place when they threatened to make her nothing more than a subservient female. She stood up against Caleb and stripped him of his misogynist, woman hating power. All this, I would argue, is why Buffy does indeed, “put the grrr back in girl.”

[Skytteflickan88]

Buffyfan21, your arguments are excellent. Your post made me realize that this person can't stand that Buffy isn't a superhero without flaws. How can a show be about girl power, if the girls in the show aren't acting like ordinary humans? It's not like Buffy's made out of rock, or raised by man-hating amazons.

[ligeia]

I wanted to write this but couldn't post it because I didn't subscribe :

I think you're so out of it. It's like you decided before watching the show that Joss Whedon was a "misogynist homophobe" and then picked up and biaised all you could to try to demonstrate that. I guess Buffy would have had to be all alone, never falling in love, to match your definition of a strong female character.

Willow didn't suddenly turn gay because she had been dumped by a guy. She just met Tara and fell in love with her. Have you ever met people who used to be straight but turned completely gay afterwards ? Moreover, Buffy sleeps with a girl in season 8 but remains heterosexual. And in season 6, magic doesn't stand for lesbianism but for drugs. I just don't get why you say that Willow and Tara weren't just shown as two people in love.

Some people already made very good comments so I'm gonna stop here.

[Joe]

Crazy.. crazy guy

[Tyler Austin "tiewashere"]

At least you responded to that annoying post very well.

[snizapman6294]

if he were a misogynist homophobe, why would he have a show about a woman who is more powerful than any man? and have lesbians who turned out to be the best characters on television. that's just ignorance saying Joss is misogynist and homophobic.

[faithnspike]

This is insane troll logic
Is this article supposed to be a joke
Because it is one

[snizapman6294]

hahaha insane troll logic.

[rogerparker20]

It's an interesting blog post but I don't really agree with a lot of what he said.

I always saw Buffy and Giles complimenting each other. Giles had more of mental "strength" (i.e. knowledge about demons, slayers, etc.) and Buffy (while having a mind of her own) had the physical strength. I never saw their relationship as Buffy solely having to rely on a man for the root of her power. I always saw them needing each other.

Also, like it's been stated a lot of the men on Buffy could technically be compared to the girls traditional "damsel in distress" role. Xander, on many occasions, fulfilled this capacity as did Riley and Spike and Angel in some respects.

I think Joss's portrayal of Buffy's character was realistic. Even strong, powerful women are still girls inside i.e. wanting the hot guy, having moments of weakness, etc. It's a just a fact of life just like men wanting to be macho but also having the same moments of weaknesses and stuff.

I never, ever looked at Willow's sexuality as unrealistic. I dated girls in high school but then I met a guy I feel in love with and we were together for a year then we broke up (he cheated). I still think girls are hot and stuff but I've mostly stuck with men because it's more me. So I completely feel Willow's sexuality naturally progressed. She couldn't help that she fell for Tara -- which she told her in season five that she was new to this because Tara was the first girl she fell in love with.

I also don't think that Willow and Tara had to kiss and hold hands every moment of an episode. Xander and Cordy didn't do that, Xander and Anya did that on occasion but never every single moment. Same with Buffy and Angel, Buffy and Riley. Buffy and Spike was different because Buffy was going through a depression and using sex to fill the void that she felt she had which is not unrealistic at all as some people use sex or drugs, etc. to fill a void they feel.

I also completely agree that he missed the message and point of "Helpless." Throughout the entire series Buffy not only used physical strength to solve problems but also used her knowledge and the help of friends. I think the writer of that post is forgetting that Buffy didn't just turn to, say, Angel or Giles for help. She turned to Willow and Tara on occasions as well as other characters who aren't men.