Today's Lesson - Why You Can't Argue With Twitards, Part Two

Last time I gave you the first installment of logic fail courtesy of the Twilight fan known as 'V. Karim'. She'd been busying herself defending the books on the comments page of an Amazon review which (hilariously and aptly) pointed out how crap they were. Every time a fellow reader with a brain came along to comment on the review and give the reviewer a pat on the back, V. Karim would pop out of the woodwork to say how awesome Twilight is, as if it was her personal mission to defend Meyer. Now, to be fair - she is NOT saying the books are flawless, but she is repeatedly arguing for how Edward is the perfect moral gentleman and how Bella is a strong heroine. She's also saying that young men and boys could learn a lot from being like Edward...and that's where I just had to step in and say HELL NO.

But why can't you just let her be? If she enjoys Twilight that's up to her. It certainly is, but she's not letting the people who don't enjoy Twilight be. She started the debate, not me.

Here's my reply, unedited, from Amazon.com. Additional comments (only posted here) are in bold.

'V. Karim - are you KIDDING me? Stephen King jealous of Stephenie Meyer?? Stephen King has been consistently in the bestseller charts for almost 40 years. FORTY YEARS. No-one will be reading Meyer in 2050, I can assure you that. Stephen King is the man not only behind horror classics such as The Shining, but also behind Stand By Me, The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. Beautiful, passionate, hope-inspiring tales of humanity.' (Yeah, all right, I was having a fangirl rant in defence of my favourite author, but can you blame me?!). 'What has Meyer written? Tween girl fantasies about a sparkly vampire without fangs who doesn't bite people. Yeah. I can see why he's jealous. Pfft.

'I think you're confusing "having a legitimate critical opinion about another author" with 'jealous'. And Edward RESPECTS Bella? Did we read the same books? He bosses her around, treats her like a child, ignores half of what she says because he's the big strong man and therefore MUST know better than the silly irrational little woman, removes the engine from her friggin car to stop her seeing her friends, and is generally a condescending douche by treating her like an intellectual inferior. Oh, and stalking the girl you just met and breaking into her bedroom to watch her sleep is such a sign of respect. (Not that Bella merits respect - she's a sneering, mindless drip who needs a man to live). But anyways, these books suck butt, and more readers need to wake up and realise how crap, boring, and utterly offensive to women (and vampire mythology, and YA literature as a whole) they are. Loved the review.'

V Karim's reply to this -

'We just see things differently. And yes Stephen King is jealous.'

Notice she doesn't say what he's jealous of, because there is nothing. Seriously, give me one trait of Meyer's that Stephen King should be jealous of. Go on. I'm waiting.

'You cannot put other people down without having some sort of inferiority complex.'

Aww. Did that mean ol' bully Mr King hurt Meyer's poor ickle feelings?! For Christ's sake, she's an author. A professional. She supposed to be able to take criticism without screaming 'waah you're just JELLUS!' What's hilarious is that she's so pathetic her fans have started doing it on her behalf.

King wasn't 'putting her down'. He was asked his opinion on her work compared to Rowling, and he gave an honest answer. He wasn't screaming 'SHE SUCKS!' through a megaphone for no reason. And once more, with feeling:-

HAVING A NEGATIVE OPINION OF SOMETHING DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN YOU ARE JEALOUS OF IT!

'His criticism was not constructive. It was distasteful.'

He said, and I quote 'She can't write worth a darn. She's just not very good. ' That's not distasteful - it's [S]true[/S] pretty bloody polite compared to what I could say about her.

'I have read a lot of Stephen King. I like his works - yet they aren't all riveting and perfect. I do think that Meyers Twilight Saga is extremely flawed. But I do not come away with your perspective regarding the relationship between Edward and Bella. You are peering into this with an alternate position than myself and many others.'

It's called the feminist viewpoint, love. You know, the radical ideology that sees women as people, rather than just sandwich dispensers?

'This is your opinion and your viewpoint.'

No. 'Edward is a douchebag' is my opinion. The EXAMPLES FROM THE BOOK I gave about how and why he is a douchebag - such as the disabling of Bella's car and the frequent jokes about her being stupid - that was all fact. Notice how V.Karim happily ignores all of that .

'In my opinion the story itself is imaginative, gripping and literary.'

Literary?! Edward's 'incandescent chest' and 'scintillating arms' say hello.

'I do think her general writing - depiction, description - was terribly inconsistent. I think she sculpted pages and pages of magic only to ruin it in pieces in between. You must know that the story takes place in a transformed world. The same rules in the world as we know it do not necessarily apply in the moody, lushness of Twilight. If you were to transfer these characters behavior into the world as we know it then the psychology plays out differently than it does via Meyers Forks, Washington.'

I've said all I have to say about how ridiculous this is in my last post - I'm not going to repeat myself. Suffice to say yes, the same rules DO apply.

Also I think it is refreshing that Meyers Vampires divert from "Vampire tradition" if there is such a thing. It is a well traversed mythology. I think it's refreshing and romantic that they do not have fangs and have skin which shimmer in the sunlight. In this world it is compelling that Edward is drawn to Bella in the way that he is. In real life a similar scenario based on human behavior would lose its allure. But it does work in this story. Also this story is not just for 'tweens'. It resonates with people of all ages.'

And yet I've yet to meet an older, educated Twilight fan who will maniacally sing Meyer's praises as a great author and declare Edward the paragon of male virtue. And no, horny, lonely, bored American housewives who haven't heard of feminism DO NOT count.

'I don't think they are offensive to women at all.'

So you're ok with the message that women are useless 'freaks' if they are not capable of bearing children? And the message that education should take second place to marrying a hot rich guy? And that women should know their place in the kitchen while the men sit around cleaning their guns and playing sports? And the message that you're a raging slut if you ever dated anyone before you met your One Twoo Love? And the message that whatever you say will be ingored because the men know better? And the message that...oh God, I'm suddenly exhausted.

'I think it's a good guideline for boys and men actually.'

Jesus Christ in a sidecar, she did not just write that. SHE DID NOT JUST WRITE THAT.

Your stupidity is giving Godzilla a headache.

NO NO NO NO. This is what is so fucking dangerous about these books being read by young people - especially young people who don't have a strong, intelligent figure in their lives to point out how screwed up Meyer's morals are. It is NOT good to teach boys to treat their girlfriends like dimwitted, irrational, fragile little chattels, and it is NOT good to teach girls that that's how they should be treated.

Remember the good old days, when girls wanted to be like Buffy Summers instead of Bella Swan?

'I think we are all discerning enough to draw out what transfers well into our world and leave the rest behind in the moody world of Forks.'


That's convenient. So when it suits you to compare Twilight to real life, you do, but when it comes to Edward stalking Bella, that's ok because stalking controlling douchebaggy behaviour isn't creepy in a fantasy world because the rules of our world don't apply at all!!

'There is much magic here and it isn't all a black and white literal translation of story and text. There's a lot of delicious blurs which seep, bleed, drip and pour betwixt the lines.'

Blurs, otherwise known as inconsistent writing and frequent contradictions. Not to mention the 'my vampires are based on science!1!' epic fail.

'It leaves one a bit heady and drenched with ardor and blushy restlessness.'

It left me angry, nauseous and bored, but each to their own.

'Does her errant writing ruin it for me when she veers off track and punches you with rows and rows of horrible dialogue and description? Yes it makes me hurl the books at the wall. But just like a bubbling pot of custard, it's the rich layer of sweet fat which surfaces at the top that I choose to drink in.'

She chooses to read a book that makes her want to throw it at the wall. I...just give up, at this point.

'The rest doesn't hold enough substance for me. But it's a good story'

What story would that be? I read 4 tomes of this crap and I didn't come across a scrap of plot other than 'boy meets girl and they fall in love despite contrived peril which is soon over'. THAT ISN'T A STORY.

'and it takes you under like a good pour of Grand Marnier- slow slips of swoon.'

You'll certainly need a drink after reading that drivel.

'I just wish I had been her editor. So cheers. We will just have to agree to disagree. Thanks for writing and I respect your opinion.'

It's nice that she's polite, but again, only half of what I said was opinion. The other half was fact - things that Edward actually DOES to Bella in the books. She did not address any of those in her reply - a frequent trait of Twilight fans, because they know that when we start showing them actual examples from the book, their argument runs out, and they can't stand it. It's like:

Me: Edward controls Bella.
Them: That's your opinion.
Me: What about him 'ordering' her not to see her friends?
Them: That's for her own good.
Me: However Edward tries to justify it, it's still a controlling and bullying behaviour for a boyfriend to tell his girlfriend who she can and cannot see and threaten her when she 'disobeys' him.
Them: *shuffling their feet* Well, that's just your opinion. I think it's sexy and romantic.
Me: *brain hemorrhage*

Lesson learned - this is why you can't argue with Twitards. Even the courteous ones just don't listen to reason.

Today's Lesson - Why You Can't Argue With Twitards Part One

There's a reason why Twilight fans have a bad reputation - most of them, or at least roughly 99% who troll the internet, are batshit insane and have the mentality (and grammar skills) of your average toddler. Now, before the haters start howling, I know that not ALL of them are. I know that there is a minority who like Twilight, enjoy the guilty pleasure aspect (I understand girlish guilty pleasure - Titanic is one of my favourite movies, after all), and leave it at that. Not all of them insist it's the best literature ever and worship Meyer as a goddess. Not all of them want to marry Edward, or failing that, a guy just like Edward (who they will determinedly model in his likeness, hair gel and glitter and all). Not all of them scream bloody murder and curse you, your ancestors, and all your descendants if you dare to point out Twilight's flaws. Not all of them cram their fingers in their ears if you ask them if they know what feminism means. But, sadly, most of the fans I have come across have not been of the latter - they have been of the batshit insane former.

And now I present to you the collision between myself and one of them, revealing just one random example of a Twilight fan who dances around all the arguments I'm making, ignores the logic I present her with, and generally comes out with some facepalm-worthy, lulzy things. She's perfectly polite and coherent - rare for a Twitard - but she is still doing the fingers-jammed-in-the-ears routine that so many Twitards specialise at. Her quotes are taken, unedited, from Amazon.com.

So, this is what this fan wrote in response to someone else's pointing out the flaws in her favourite series. My comments (not posted on Amazon, only here) are in bold.

'Thanks for your commentary. Well we are all different and therefore take things in from alternate perspectives. If we are to translate the story into the 'real' world as we know it - the quixotic and magical nature of the story vanishes. It doesn't decode into our reality very well at all. I don't think it was meant to be this way. The original reviewer was trying to make sense of it by trying to relate it the world as we all know it.'

Yeah, because it's set in the real world. Oh dear, are we back to the whole 'it's fantasy so it doesn't have to make sense!' crapola?

'He didn't summarize it correctly either. I believe there are lessons to be derived from this story that we can all draw from. The rest is to be left in the moody forests of Washington State.'

Which is in the REAL WORLD. So they point out how it's set in the real world while arguing that it doesn't have to be anything like the real world? My brain just broke.

'In Meyer's Vampire Lore - her vampires are monogamous. They cannot help it. They are devoted to their mate and that individual is their mate for life.'

Oh, so just like the shapeshifters' imprinting, huh? Apparently in Meyer's world you must only have romantic feelings for ONE PERSON your whole life, and if you don't hook up with them then you're screwed, because they were the ONLY ONE you could have been happy with. You've got to praise these books for their realism and the positive 'plenty of fish in the sea' message they send to young people.

'Edward will protect Bella at all costs. In the real world it may seem he is a stalker and controlling. However in THIS world he is not. He loves Bella unconditionally and wants the best FOR her.'

Oh, Lord. I knew it. It's the old 'it's fantasy so common sense doesn't apply' argument. NO. NO. NO. NO.

Twilight is fantasy, but apart from the existence of supernatural creatures, there is no sign that the world Bella inhabits is anything different to our real world. If Twilight was set in an alternate timeline where different laws and customs had been adopted, this argument might hold some ground. But in the real world, which Twilight is set in, stalking, breaking into someone's house, disabling your girlfriend's car, and controlling who they are friends with is CREEPY and EMOTIONALLY ABUSIVE - not romantic. If you are in a relationship where the guy treats you like this, you get the HELL out of that relationship. The fact that Edward berates himself in Midnight Sun for breaking into Bella's bedroom shows that EVEN HE agrees that he's being stalky and creepy - but he then just chooses to continue this behaviour anyway. This is a recurring theme of Edward's.

'He has her best interests at heart.'

That doesn't sound paternalistic at all. And isn't that the kind of thing husbands say after they 'beat some sense' their wives? 'I was only doing it for your own good...'

'If it were SHE who decided to see someone else or be with Jacob he would let her go.'

No he wouldn't. He'd take the engine out of her car to stop her driving away, and failing that, have his sister kidnap her. Has this person not read Eclipse?

'It would break his heart but he truly wants what is best for her. I can't blame Jacob for being upset and broken hearted. In "New Moon" he spent so much time with her and fell in love with her. He and Bella had a great connection. Then Edward comes back... Of course he is bitter and angry.Anyway Edward is pretty much the perfect man.'

...

When people ask me why I take my hatred of Twilight so seriously, I'm going to show them that quote. Let me just repeat it for emphasis. 'Edward is pretty much the perfect man.' If this is the future generation of women, folks, we're all doomed.

'He is devoted to Bella, loves her, respects her,'

The physical manhandling, constant jokes about her mental inferiority, comparing her to angry kittens/toddlers/baby seals, and ignoring her when she protests about his assholishness (which admittedly isn't often) really screams respect.

'is protective of her, he is moral,'

I think they mean 'amoral'. Or did they not read all the bits where he happily admits to listening in on everyone's private thoughts to the point where he is frustrated that he can't rape Bella's mind the way he can her schoolfriends. The guy shows not a fucking SHRED of remorse or even doubt over whether he should be invading their privacy. And don't give me the 'he can't help it' bullshit - Sookie Stackhouse can shut it out, so Eddiekins can to - he just chooses not to because it benefits him.

'a gentlemen,'

Don't make me pull out the quote where he drags her kicking and screaming accross the parking lot. Or where he laughs because she falls on her butt. Or throws her over his shoulder and carries her around despite her pleas for him to put her down.

'strong, attractive etc. Not all his behavior and actions can transfer to the real world. He is a vampire after all living in a world of much magic and monsters. I think many boys and men can take a good look at Edward as an example of how to be a wonderful man in every way.'

That sound is me crying. You can probably hear it from several countries away.

'Why do you think so many girls and women swoon over this character? There is a reason.'

They're all blithering idiots with no self respect and/or rabidly hormonal teenage girls who fancy Robert Pattinson?

'Take notice. Like I said take what translates positively into the real world and what doesn't work in the real world - DOES acquiesce beautifully in Meyers Forks, Washington. I think we are all astute enough to know the difference. Also who says Bella is weak?'

I say it. If she were any more of a fucking doormat she'd have 'welcome' tattooed on her vagina.

'I never saw her as weak. She is very strong actually. All that she went through and sacrificed?'

What did she sacrifice, exactly? She gets everything she ever wanted, and lives happily ever after as an immortal sparklepire. And don't give me the 'she sacrificed her human life/family/friends' thing, because it doesn't count as a sacrifice if she didn't give a flying fuck for them in the first place.

'The books were far from written perfection.'

^ Greatest. Understatement. Ever.

'The essence however was evocative, moody and lush. There were many wonderful passages.'

I particuarly enjoyed the attempted daterape, the uteral munching, and the werewolf falling in love with the baby. All classic literary moments right up there with Shylock's trial and Harry's duel with Voldermort.

'However there were many others that needed to be omitted or edited.'

We finally agree on something. I think Meyer's editor was either nonexistent or sleeping through the entire series...which I wouldn't blame them for.

'I was very conflicted with the inconsistency. However there was enough good stuff to save it. I wish I had been her editor. And yes Stephen King was jealous. No one puts someone down unless they are insecure about something.'

K wut. So if you point out that something has flaws you're automatically a 'WAHHHHH MEANIE YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS!!!!' *bursts into sobs*'? This might be the stupidest thing I ever read...and that quite an accomplishment, because I've read all 4 Twilight books.

'Also to the reviewer Alex P. Smith: I think it's a wonderful change that these vampires sparkle and do not have fangs. Who said they HAVE to have fangs?'

That's kind of like saying 'Who said werewolves HAVE to transform into wolves at the full moon?' It's an integral part of them, and as as I pointed out before, not having fangs makes it sort of hard (and very messy) to suck blood. It comes down to this...twist the original myth and you're being creative, but take away enough attributes of the original myth, and you might as well just call it a different creature altogether.

'The vampire genre has been well traversed and here is a lady who put a refreshing and creative spin on the vampire mythology. I love that they CAN go out in the sun but resist doing so because their stone like skin shimmers in the sunlight. Makes sense to me.'

That sound you hear now is me choking on my own laughter. Vampire sparkling like discoballs, you say? Why, that makes PERFECT sense! And look - Cthulhu appears to be doing the macarena! So what? I don't see what's strange about that!

'I think guys have a hard time with this story. Vampires can be powerful and winsome at the same time. Think strong black coffee laced with a heavy dose of sugar. A really toothsome kick. These vampires are as such: A heady, intoxicating, ambrosial mixture of tortured love and altercation. They are layered and complicated.'

No, they're as flat and one-dimensional as cardboard backrgound scenery in a poorly funded theatre. Apart from Rosalie's backstory, which seems oddly ripped off from Kill Bill.

'Not just killing machines.Also I don't think it is 'romantic fluff'. The story is a metaphor for so many things.'

Yeah, an incredibly clumsy metaphor for abstinence and perfect morman morals.

'Also Meyer didn't write these books for the tween/teen age group. The story translates to all age groups. It's fascinating. There hasn't been anything like it that has struck a chord with people of all ages.'

Harry Potter begs to differ. All good literature worth its salt strikes a chord with people of all ages - stop acting like Twilight is the first thing ever to have appeal out of its target audience age range.

'I love the lessons.'

How to disable your girlfriend's car when she disobeys you, or how to whine and weep and curl up in a ball of despair when your boyfriend leaves the room for five minutes?

'How refreshing it is that there isn't a whole lot of cussing and no sleeping around.'

Only a girl who practically humps her boyfriend's leg, orgasms every time he speaks to her, and is willing to throw her life and humanity away just to have some sparkly rapey sex. Yeah, that's so much healthier.

'I am by no means a prude- but there is casual sex all over the place in the media and it's really not interesting. Guys should be flattered that so many women depict male characters in such an adoring light. We make our guys for the most part- noble, strong, appealing. I mean really great guys. But how do many men portay women for the most part? In porn. As sexual objects.'

Edward telling Jacob to bring Bella back 'in the perfect condition he left her in' isn't objectifying her AT ALL. Edward offering to rent Bella out to Jacob behind her back isn't objectifying her AT ALL.

'It's not complimentary. So guys don't get upset that this story isn't about a bunch of evil, blood thirsty killing rampage vampires who torture women, fire guns and sit around and objectify women. Guys like that are revolting to women. These creatures she writes about are enduring, masculine,'

Because skinny, pale guys who sparkle, use enough hair products to explode a three mile radius if they come into contact with a naked flame, need a forklift truck to put on their makeup, and constantly bitch/whine about how emo and tragic they are - yeah...they're just dripping with testosterone!

'sensitive wonderful guys. Of course they are presented with events in the world of Forks that their characters are torn by. They aren't exactly perfect specimens.'

The author disagrees with you. She raped the thesaurus so hard for every possible synonym of the word 'perfect' that the poor thing had to be taken into protective custody.

'How tedious it would be if they were.'

Yes, listening to Bella dribble about how 'angelic' Edward's face is for the 7845603th time is pretty bloody tedious.

'These are the story parts that are sewn into their character framework. What makes the story riveting. What challenges their nature. Like I said you take what works and leave behind what doesn't for the sake of the story. There are some really good lessons here.'

*headdesk*

Holy crow! The lack of logic burned a hole in the cosmos! Next time - my polite response to this load of horseshit.

Deconstructing Twilight Part Five - The Road to Womanhood! Meyer Style

Today, on Deconstructing Twilight: Meyer shows us why Bella Swan is such a FABULOUS model for young women. Fuck being smart, as long as you're pretty. Fuck college, as long as you can marry a hot guy and instantly spit out babies. Fuck having a life of your own, because if your boyfriend leaves the room you will fall into DEEP EMO ANGST. Being a hot rich sparkly monster is ALL THAT MATTERS IN LIFE!!!

Education? Pshaw. I'm gonna sparkle like a discoball.

Did I mention yet how much I hate this series?

L concurs.

The female characters in Twilight are presented as shallow, superficial and dependent, and have no interests other than having a man, a family, and a domestic life of eternal wealth and beauty: ‘Confined in cages, like the feathered race, they have nothing to do but to plume themselves, and stalk with mock-majesty from perch to perch’ (Wollstonecraft 1769, 130). Bella is depressed without Edward around: ‘Disappointment flooded through me... Had he gone home? I followed the still-babbling Jessica through the line, crushed. I’d lost my appetite – I just wanted to go home and sulk’ (Meyer 2005, 74), ‘...I couldn’t stop the gloom that engulfed me as I realised I didn’t know how long I would have to wait before I saw him again’ (Meyer 2005, 96), ‘There was no sign of Edward...desolation hit me with crippling strength’, ‘…spiralling downward in misery’/ (Meyer 2005, 126). After Edward’s departure in New Moon, she falls into a catatonic state for four months – with only the names of the months and blank pages left in the book to show the passing of time. She has no interests or life of her own, and has become so reliant on Edward for happiness that she is an empty, emotionless ‘zombie’ without him, only recovering when a new man – Jacob – enters her life as an emotional crutch. This reinforces Meyer’s clear message that a woman can only be content and fulfilled when she is with a man.

Bella discovers that putting herself in danger conjures hallucinations of Edward, and throws herself into suicidal situations such as cliff-jumping to be able to hear his voice: ‘I was addicted to the sound of my delusions. It made things worse if I went too long without them’ (Meyer 2006, 310). Addiction is not a decision but a psychological need, a dependency, revealing that even when Edward is gone, Bella believes he still has sway over her free will. This dependent, helpless, suicidal state that Bella cannot recover from even months later is inarguably a harmful lesson on how to deal with a teenage breakup – if the boyfriend leaves, the girl’s life is not worth living. (Hear that, ladies? Your life is WORTHLESS without a hot rich man. If he dumps your whiny, irrational, co-dependent ass, you might as well sulk in your bedroom and listen to Linkin Park and cry tears of blood and slit your wrists.)

Wait - wrong crappy emogasm of a story.

After meeting her handsome, wealthy boyfriend, Bella’s singular goal in life is to become his beautiful, wealthy wife, setting aside any and all other vocational or educational pursuits: ‘College was Plan B. I was still hoping for Plan A, but Edward was just so stubborn about leaving me human....’ (Meyer 2006, 12). Readers are told that Rosalie Cullen has an interest in cars and is an excellent mechanic[1] – an interest which does not conform to stereotypical ‘feminine hobbies’. However these facets of her personality are never shown; instead all we learn about Rosalie is that: ‘She had a beautiful figure, the kind you saw on the cover of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue, the kind that made every girl around her take a hit on her self-esteem just by being in the same room’ (Meyer 2005, 16) and that ‘Rosalie was thinking, as usual, about herself. She’d caught sight of her profile in the reflection of someone’s glasses, and she was mulling over her own perfection. Rosalie’s mind was a shallow pool with few surprises’ (Meyer 2006, 1). Even when Meyer creates a potentially progressive, interesting female character, she undermines these positive traits by demeaning her as vain, shallow and selfish.

Bella often shows herself to be a small-minded heroine: ‘I guess my brain will never work right. At least I’m pretty’ (Meyer 2008, 374). (I love this quote SO MUCH, because it pretty much sums up in ONE FUCKING LINE everything that I hate about Bella Swan, Meyer, and Twilight. A lot of Twitards defend this line on the ground that Bella was 'joking', which would be a viable argument if Bella hadn't spend the entire fucking series saying this exact thing in subtler phrasing. Remember, this is the girl who saw college as something to do ONLY if she couldn't marry her hot rich boyfriend. And even if it WAS a joke, it's pretty fucking offensive).

She frequently belittles her classmates about their appearance: ‘a gangly boy with skin problems and hair black as an oil slick leaned across the aisle to talk to me. “You’re Isabella Swan, aren't you?” He looked like the overly helpful, chess club type’ (Meyer 2005, 14) (Note the implicit message that friendly boys who are polite to you are EW and GROSS but bipolar guys who treat you like crap are HAWT!). When admiring the Cullens and pondering their status as the town’s outsiders, Bella posits: ‘Their isolation must be their desire; I couldn’t imagine any door that wouldn’t be opened by that degree of beauty’ (Meyer 2005, 28), implying that she believes, and therefore the reader is encouraged to agree, that it is only beauty, not personality or any other traits, that matter in life. This is the shallow mindset that Mary Wollstonecraft was warning about when she wrote: ‘Taught from infancy that beauty is woman's sceptre, the mind shapes itself to the body, and roaming round its gilt cage, only seeks to adorn its prison.’ (Wollstonecraft 1792, 116)

Esme Cullen serves no apparent function other than fulfilling the maternal role of the housewife; unlike her husband Carlisle, Esme is never said to have a job, her hobbies and interests are never mentioned, and her only power is described to be ‘that of unparalleled capacity for passionate love’[2] (BWAHAHA! Someone drew the short straw!); a stereotypically feminine and arguably weaker power than Edward’s mind reading abilities and Emmett’s enormous strength. Alice Cullen boasts the powers of precognition, but again her strengths falter where the men’s do not; her visions are unreliable (there's an understatement. My magic 8 ball has better precognitive powers than Alice) and her powers do not extend to the shape shifters, while Edward is free to read any mind. Bella’s power following her transformation in Breaking Dawn is a ‘mental shield’[3] which protects her friends and family; not only a defensive and passive power in comparison to the male’s primarily offensive and active powers, but also limited, as she is unable to protect against physical attack. Even Meyer’s super powered women are presented as redundant and flawed beside the men, and are only granted power when vampirized by the men (Bella by Edward, Alice, Esme, and Rosalie by Carlisle). Twilight shows none of the depth of progressive, contemporary vampire texts where the female becomes the heroine by developing her own powers, such as Buffy’s role as The Slayer, and Sookie Stackhouse discovering her fairy heritage[4].

Twilight is congratulated by Oprah Winfrey[5] for harking back to the literature of the nineteenth century, when women were damsels in distress and men were Byronic heroes; but what is old-fashioned and romantic for many readers is misogynistic and outdated to others. That Bella is so lacking in a personality and a mind of her own – is literally a tabula rasa – is unsurprising, as Meyer herself has admitted that creating such a blank slate female protagonist would allow the reader to ‘more easily step into her shoes’[6]. However, such a protagonist is hardly a strong female role model when compared to Elizabeth Bennet or Jane Eyre.

Bella Swan, along with most of Meyer’s female characters, is shown to be physically incapable, dependent, unintelligent, sneering, and completely willing to allow male figures in her life to physically and emotionally intimidate her because she finds such behaviour romantic. Bella is ‘everywoman’ (a moral sermon acted out[7]), deliberately constructed so that everyone can better imagine themselves as her. This coupled with the overarching themes of morality, suggests that Meyer is not only presenting women as content to be dominated but encouraging readers to agree with this depiction, accepting Bella’s passive mindset and the patriarchal rules of her universe. This makes the Twilight series not only an offensive presentation of women, but a troubling influence as even in this time of supposed gender equality, many young girls

Logic has no effect on them!! Bring out the Death Rays!!!

and their mothers

Twilight Moms - hope their daughters grow up to find a man as respectful to woman as Eddieboy.

seem to be happy to worship Edward Cullen through Bella’s eyes, and like the female characters of the Twilight world, never question Meyer’s obsolete moral standards or demand gender equality.

That's all she wrote, folks. Or at least, that's the end of the essay. The snark of Twilight will keep coming :D

[1] http://twilightsaga.wikia.com/wiki/Rosalie [Accessed 23/5/11]
[2] http://twilightsaga.wikia.com/wiki/Esme_Cullen [Accessed 22/5/11]
[3] http://twilightsaga.wikia.com/wiki/Mental_shield [Accessed 22/5/11]
[4] http://southern-vampire-mysteries.wikia.com/wiki/Sookie_Stackhouse [Accessed 22/5/11]
[5] http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/Twilights-Rob-Pattinson-Kristen-Stewart-and-Taylor-Lautner [Accessed 22/5/11]
[6] http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/twilight_faq.html#bella [Accessed 23/5/11]
[7] http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/Guides3/Everyman.html [Accessed 23/5/11]

Deconstructing Twilight Part Four - or, It's all your fault, woman!!

Today, on Deconstructing Twilight: Lions fell in love with lambs, and woman are to blame for everything in the world ever. So if you get raped, it's totes your own fault for wearing makeup and tempting the guy. Mmkay? Because men are good and moral and don't want your icky slutty girl germs.

We all know Meyer is allergic to research, but this is fucking ridiculous - it only takes 15 seconds to Google 'lion and lamb' and figure out what it means. Stop assraping religion because of your laziness, Meyer!

Sexual withholding and control games provide another opportunity for Meyer to dramatise the marginalisation and stereotyping of her female characters through the attribution of blame. While another critic could argue that Bella is the objectifier and Edward is the objectified, making Twilight a progressive text, Meyer’s presentation of sexual desire embodies double standards: ‘He was too perfect, I realized with a piercing stab of despair. There was no way this godlike creature could be meant for me’ (Meyer 2005, 224). Bella’s constant ogling of Edward (there are 165 references to Edward’s beauty in the first novel alone[1]) is not an empowered reversal of the male gaze but another device to portray Bella as ‘degraded by being made subservient to love or lust’ (Wollstonecraft 1792, 96); a shallow heroine obsessed with looks who feels she is undeserving of Edward’s spellbinding beauty. (We get it, Meyer, you're a bored middleaged woman who wants to vicariously bang her fictional hawt smexy teenage vampire creation through her Author Avatar Sue.)

Presenting Edward as the honourable (pfft) man who refuses the offer of sex outside marriage subsequently presents Bella as morally weak-willed; Edward frequently talks about how Bella is sexually attractive to him, but any of Bella’s advances are quickly chastised. He controls all aspects of their sex life, and demeans Bella when she attempts flirtation. In Twilight, he compares her to heroin, alcohol, and ‘...a demon, summoned straight from my own personal hell to ruin me’ (Meyer 2005, 236), to which Bella merely responds ‘Please don’t worry about offending me’ (Meyer 2005, 235) (Don't worry about offending me! Compare me to drugs, booze and meat! Treat me like shit! I LIKE IT!). It is always Bella’s fault for tempting Edward, never the other way around, carrying a strong biblical intonation of Eve tempting Adam with the forbidden fruit: ‘And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat’ (King James Bible) (Yeah, but she didn't MAKE you eat it. Dick.). Edward reprimands Bella for her passion by saying that he must restrain himself from harming her; he controls all aspects of their sex life by demeaning Bella even when she responds to his advances – and she not only fails to notice how absurd and unfair this is, but agrees that she should ‘know better’:

Then he took my face in his hands almost roughly...there really was no excuse for my behaviour. Obviously I knew better by now. And yet I couldn’t seem to stop from reacting...
He staggered back. “Damn it, Bella!” He broke off, gasping. “You’ll be the death of me, I swear you will.” (Meyer 2005, 317)

It would explain the body glitter, the bitchy attitude, and why he pushes his girlfriend away every time she tries to french him.

The themes of morality and the strong ‘no sex before marriage’ message of Twilight is unsurprising, as Meyer is ‘an observant Mormon’[2], but even strongly right-wing Christian fundamentalists find her presentation of gender roles to be outdated. Riess, the former Religion Book editor for Publisher’s Weekly, states that there are ‘rich connections between LDS (The Church of the Latter Day Saints – commonly referred to as ‘The Mormon Church’[3]) theology and Meyer’s writing’, but expresses concerns with the ‘retrogressive gender stereotypes in all of her novels — particularly the ineptitude of Bella. Although the novels repeatedly tell the reader that Bella is smart and strong, what the novels actually show the reader consistently is Bella's powerlessness. These are things that I hope do not originate with Mormonism.’[4] (HA. I love that even the Mormons are trying to disown Meyer! "That creepy housewife with the marble fetish who had a wet dream about a sparkling teenage vampire? Er, no. She's not with us. *cough*")

Bella is ‘made to suffer for and be ashamed of her sexuality’ (Millett 1969/1970, 119); she is punished for sex in the same way Eve is punished – through the pain of a bloody, agonising, and in this case, fatal (not fatal enough for my liking) childbirth. This presentation starkly contrasts with contemporary female protagonists of vampire texts. In Buffy the Vampire Slayer (Whedon 1997), it is the male character Angel who pays for sex with his true love by losing his soul, while Buffy remains unscathed[5]; and Sookie Stackhouse of the Southern Vampire Mystery novels (Harris 2001) enjoys heightened senses and abilities after sex with her vampire boyfriend Bill. Both Buffy and Sookie lose their virginity and still live to ‘kill the bad guy’[6], while Bella is physically battered from losing hers, calling to mind a scene of domestic violence – ‘…large purplish bruises were beginning to blossom across the pale skin of my arm. Edward placed his hand against the bruises on my arm, one at a time, matching his long fingers to the patterns.’ (Meyer 2008, 82) (Yay rapey sex! Seriously, does Meyer not see how sinister this is??). She also instantly falls pregnant with a child that breaks her ribs and severs her spine (And Edward has to chew through her uterus to get it out. With his teeth. And then inject her with poison. And this is after she vomits 'a fountain of blood.' Whoa, what age bracket is this series marketed at, again?!) .

Even the chest-bursting scene from Alien was less R-rated than this!

The first two texts present female sexuality as natural, healthy and empowering, but Twilight presents it as something to be ashamed of and something to be punished for. This outdated stereotype of the ‘scarlet temptress’ who corrupts good, moral men has fewer similarities with Twilight’s contemporaries, and more with Dracula (Stoker 1897), where sexuality and vampirism were portrayed as evil.

In Dracula the male characters must step in and battle to stop Mina Harker becoming a seductive vampire monster. However, even Dracula attributes less blame over female sexuality than Twilight – Mina Harker survives despite losing her virginity, and though she feels disgusted and ‘tainted’ by Dracula’s mark upon her, the men all repeatedly reassure her that it is not her fault.

Yet another way that Dracula pwns Twilight, in case you needed any more.

Twilight places the blame so squarely upon its female characters that they eventually facilitate this ideology by feeling guilty over their sexuality – Bella’s first response upon waking up following her wedding night is ‘My first instinct, the product of a lifetime of insecurities, was to wonder what I had done wrong.’ (Meyer 2008, 80.)

Next time - the final part! - TWOO WUV is co-dependent and suicidally clingy, and if you have aspirations, hobbies, lives, or even a personality outside of your boyfriend/husband, you clearly have no idea what TWOO romance is about and your relationship can't compare to the DEPTH of Edward and Bella's DEVOTION coz their WUV is TWOO and BETTER than all those posers like Westley & Buttercup and Lizzie Bennett & Mr Darcy and Romeo & Juliet!! (Meyer actually implied this! God, how I wish I was joking...)

[1] http://storywrite.com/column/644 [Accessed 23/5/11]
[2] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1734838,00.html [Accessed 23/5/11]
[3] http://lds.org/?lang=eng [Accessed 25/5/11]
[4] http://www.mormontimes.com/article/8474/Book-editor-points-out-religious-symbolism [Accessed 23/5/11]
[5] http://www.buffyworld.com/buffy/summaries/026_summ.html [Accessed 23/5/11]
[6]http://www.alternet.org/sex/141317/rough_sex_with_vampires:_what_does_%22true_blood%22_tell_us_about_women_and_sexuality/ [Accessed 23/5/11]

Deconstructing Twilight Part Three - Or, Woman Are Cuter When You Compare Them To Angry Kittens and Baby Seals.

Today, on Deconstructing Twilight:

Apparently having a dick means you're allowed to act like one!

There is a strong theme of paternalism in Twilight that limits Bella’s control, and belittles her as weak, fragile and childlike. The way Edward treats her is more reminiscent of a paternal figure than of a lover: ‘...he pulled me around to face him, cradling me in his arms like a small child’ (Meyer 2005, 246), ‘“Don’t you have a coat?” His voice was disapproving’ (Meyer 2005, 147), ‘“I think you should eat something.” Edward’s voice was low, but full of authority’, ‘He walked to the door of the restaurant and held it open with an obstinate expression. Obviously, there would be no further discussion’ (Meyer 2005, 144), ‘“Drink,” he ordered. I sipped at my soda obediently’ (Meyer 2005, 147) ‘“Put on your seat belt,” he commanded’ (Meyer 2005, 141).(I want to make a joke here about how Bella would forget to breathe if Edward didn't order her to do it, but sadly, Meyer already made that joke for me in the books - when Edward kisses Bella, she actually forgets to breathe. Because your body just forgets to do something AUTOMATIC AND NECESSARY FOR STAYING ALIVE when you're drooling over a hot guy. Remember that, children!), Bella is constantly picked up and carried around by Edward and his family – ‘He threw me over his stone shoulder… I protested as he carried me easily down the stairs, but he ignored me.’ (Meyer 2005, page 275). (Seriously - count the number of times the phrase 'he ignored me' or an equivalent is used in these books.) This usually happens without Bella’s consent, which she admits to Alice: ‘“You’re the first one to ask permission,” I smiled.’ (Meyer 2005, 353) revealing that Bella is so lacking in freedom of choice that the Cullens take it upon themselves to pick her up and carry her around without asking. She submissively accepts this to the extent that she is surprised and pleased when finally offered a choice.

Edward is (a) condescending (bastard), making jokes about Bella’s intellectual inferiority – ‘“You are an idiot,” he agreed with a laugh’ (Meyer 2005, 240), ‘“Silly Bella,” he chuckled’ (Meyer 2005, 246), ‘“I think you’ve made your opinion on the subject of my intellect perfectly clear, too.” My eyes narrowed. He smiled apologetically (Meyer 2005, 76), ‘He enunciated every syllable, as if he were talking to somebody mentally handicapped’ (Meyer 2005, 71) – and her irrationality – ‘He chuckled. “I didn’t realise that you were capable of being reasonable” (Meyer 2006, 43) (What's sad is that this genuinely passes for romantic banter in the Twilight world).

Well yeah, Bella is as dumb as a post, but it's still not nice to LAUGH ABOUT IT, you insensitive turd.

What makes this offensive is not just that Edward expresses this attitude, but that Bella agrees with and laughs about it; cheerfully accepting her boyfriend's degradation because she is (a blithering doormat) ‘always on the watch to please’ (Wollstonecraft 1792,132).

Meyer ensures that Bella’s thoughts and actions do nothing to refute the patriarchal assumption that women are unreasonable and dim-witted; her attempts to give herself up to the villain in the first Twilight novel highlight not only her low self-esteem and lack of preservation instincts, but also her stupidity – there is no logical reason given as to why the seven Cullen vampires would not be able or willing to overpower a single rogue vampire (because they're all inexplicably willing to die for Mary Su- uh, I mean Bella). This choice is a plot device to dramatise Bella’s wilful martyrdom, recklessness and helplessness, and place her firmly in the ‘damsel in distress role’ (a role she reprises again in Twilight when Edward saves her from a group of rapists). Bella is passive as Edward rescues her from James, not only uninvolved in the action but unconscious while a group of men dispatch the villain; the female protagonist is removed entirely from the most crucial scene in Twilight’s plot. (And as we've all gathered from the infamous 'there's gonna be a bloodbath! The greatest war ever fought! OMG! Oh, wait, false alarm. Everything's ok now - they've talked it out and the bad guys have turned around and gone home' let-down at the end of Breaking Dawn, Meyer will go to any length to avoid having to write an action scene. Because heaven forbid a big, action-packed climactic battle should ever be shown in the Twilight universe - we might miss another riveting conversation whereupon Edward asks what Bella's favourite colour is and she says it's whatever colour his eyes are and this goes on for pages and pages and...how many trees died to print this?? *bangs head repeatedly against desk*)

Millett states ‘In the matter of conformity patriarchy is a governing ideology without peer; it is probable that no other system has ever exercised such a complete control over its subjects’ (Millet 1969/70, 32). Patriarchal dominance and the marginalisation of women is imposed upon Meyer’s female characters as a pervasive ideology, and they are so conditioned that they do not notice its effect in their lives. Bella does not resist or show awareness of the discrimination she experiences[1]. After moving to Forks she assumes all responsibility of cooking and cleaning for her father; the fact that he has fended for himself for years does not deter her: ‘“You’ll be okay for dinner, right?” “Bells, I fed myself for seventeen years before you got here,” he reminded me. “I don’t know how you survived,” I muttered.’ (Meyer 2005, 129)(How on earth DID Charlie manage to exist for years without Her Holiness deigning to grace him with her feasts of grilled cheese?!) . Instead of cooking because she enjoys it, or even as a gesture of love, it is presented as a matronly duty, the subtext being that this is what a good, devoted daughter should do because a man cannot possibly cook for himself. Bella never offers to clean the car or mow the lawn, and her father does not argue with her offer to cook, and sits and watching sports while Bella works in the kitchen; a stereotypical pigeon-holing of gender roles. The reader’s acceptance is facilitated by Bella’s accepting first person narrative, internalising and normalising of this patriarchal mindset.

Bella not only fails to acknowledge the misogyny, gender inequality and borderline-abuse she experiences, but lacks the desire to question it because she is ‘content’ with her ‘own lot’ (Millett 1968/1970, 57). Edward frequently displays extreme, possessive jealousy, a common trait of the abusive personality[2], and shows aggressive and irrational contempt for any male who comes into contact with Bella. He takes pleasure in dismissing Bella’s potential suitors for her:

Edward’s tone changed, and the threat in his voice was suddenly much more evident as he continued. “To be perfectly honest, she’ll be unavailable every night, as far as anyone but myself is concerned.” (Meyer 2005, 421)

Bella placidly accepts this decree – when Edward asks her if he offended her, she changes the subject. She also allows Edward to assert his will over her in physical ways that contradict his supposed concern for her wellbeing, as shown when he demands to see her home, forcibly dragging her across the parking lot and into his car, ignoring her protests:

“Where do you think you’re going?” he asked, outraged. He was gripping a fistful of my jacket in one hand.
He was towing me toward his car now, pulling me...
“Let go!” I insisted. He ignored me.
“I’ll just drag you back,” he threatened, guessing my plan. (Meyer 2005, 89)

Despite Bella’s perfunctory ‘You are so pushy!’ she does not protest or call for help, and her annoyance with Edward is soon forgotten. Meyer again solidifies her presentation of women as men’s chattels, to be passed around and fought over; creatures so shallow that they are not bothered by such things as gender equality as long as their attention is diverted by something else.

When Bella and Alice dare to disagree with (the whiny, trantrum-throwing little bitchman)Edward, he asserts that his will as the man is sovereign. The following exchange sums up the presentation of women in Twilight – it implies that Bella is his property, and is insensitive and threatening:

“No! Edward! No, you can't do this.”
“I have to, Bella, now please be quiet.”
“There's another option,” Alice said quietly.
Edward turned on her in fury, his voice a blistering snarl.
“There — is — no — other — option!”

His declaration: ‘“If you let anything happen to yourself— anything at all — I'm holding you personally responsible. Do you understand that?”’ is condescending, implying that Bella is stupid, and is emotionally manipulative, as it implies that it is Bella’s fault if she gets kidnapped because she did not do things Edward’s way. Bella’s response to this is meek acquiescence, and when Alice reprimands her brother, the chapter closes with Edward’s response, which clearly puts an end to the women daring to think for themselves: ‘Edward smiled at her. “But keep your opinions to yourself,” he muttered.’ (Meyer 2005, 333-340)

When Edward unapologetically admits that he followed Bella to her house and watched her sleep at night: ‘He was unrepentant. “What else is there to do at night?”’ (ARE YOU KIDDING ME? ANYTHING ELSE!! You psychotic, stalking, creepy-ass fuckwit!) Bella is not outraged that a man has broken into her house, watched her sleep, and secretly followed her around –actions more common to a villainous sexual predator than a romantic hero – she is only upset that she might have said something embarrassing in her sleep.

Edward Cullen: His turn-ons include restraining orders, disabling your car, and talking about murdering you.

Her reaction is not the righteous indignation that we would expect from a strong female character, but instead a coquettish embarrassment that he heard her sleep talk –

“You spied on me?” But somehow I couldn’t infuse my voice with the proper outrage. I was flattered.
“Are you very angry with me?”
“That depends!”
“On?” he urged.
“What you heard!” I wailed. (Meyer 2005, 256) (Never have I wanted to beat a fictional character to death so much. Even better - I'd like to put her in a logical and realistic story, where - as SatireKnight pointed out - allowing The Amazing Rapeman to sneak into your bedroom ends with the discovery of your mutilated corpse. I mean, this series is shouting 'BUT IT'S OK IF THE GUY YOU BARELY KNOW STALKS YOU, BECAUSE HE WUVS YOU!! AND HE'S HOT!!' at its target audience of young teen girls. What the fuck kind of editor let this go to press?!)

Even when Edward’s behaviour is at its most (CREEPY! CREEPY ALERT!! THE SIRENS ARE BLARING!!!) reprehensible, Bella is still too self-conscious over her own actions to rebuke him for his.

Bella’s compliant and forgiving tolerance of Edward’s domineering, bullying and sinister behaviours is troubling. She remarks about his forbidding her to see her friends: ‘I was free to go anywhere I wanted…free to do anything I wanted—except see Jacob’ (Meyer 2007, 39). In Bella’s mind seeing Jacob has become illegal: ‘I knew I wouldn't be allowed to hit a werewolf party...’ (Meyer 2007, 51). She phrases it ‘allowed’ – confirming that she needs Edward’s permission and thereby accepting his control over her. When Bella attempts to sneak out to see Jacob – all of which described as an act of disobedience, as if Edward’s will has become law – she finds that Edward has removed the engine from her car to prevent her from leaving the house (and then sits brooding silently in the backseat in the pitch dark waiting for her, because that's not sinister at all, it's ROMANTIC!!). Bella has the opportunity to become justifiably angry and protest about such inequality, but instead, minutes after storming back up to her bedroom, she has surrendered and opened the window to allow Edward in, conveying the message that it is acceptable for a girl to allow her boyfriend to control her life if he says he knows best. (I truly wanted to throw the book at the wall when I read this. We all knew Bella as a passive idiot, but her attitude just beggars belief:

'He treated me like shit. Oh, well. I'm going to fume ineffectively like a spoiled child for a 60 seconds and then forgive him, or he might not let me have Sexy Snuggle Time tonight.'

I want to insert the picture of the Picard Facepalm here, but even that doesn't do this justice. Ugh.

[1]With very minor exceptions, where she will grumble quietly about Edward’s domineering attitude, but still refuse to confront him about it:
“Allow me,” he suggested. He took the gift from my hand and tore the silver paper off with one fluid movement. He handed the rectangular white box back to me. “Are you sure I can handle lifting the lid?” I muttered, but he ignored me. (Meyer 2006, 42)

[2] http://www.recovery-man.com/abusive/abuse_rel_types.htm [Accessed 23/5/11]

Next time: Meyer turns her attentions to the Bible, so she that can fail religious symbolism as well as regular symbolism, and abuse something other than the poor thesaurus.

Deconstructing Twilight Part Two - Why Imprinting is Fucking Creepy

This time - Bella belongs to Edward (not in the romantic way. LITERALLY.) and teenage boys falling in twoo wuv with babies. Hooray!

Edward’s reaction to Bella’s pregnancy in Breaking Dawn is an example of the lack of choice of the female characters, and also how the women of Twilight are objectified. When Bella refuses to abort the foetus that is killing her from the inside out, Edward secretly visits his love rival for Bella’s affections, Jacob Black, and asks Jacob to persuade Bella to abort the current child and become pregnant with him instead, resulting in a healthier pregnancy. Jacob is sickened but eventually (it doesn't take a lot of persuading, because, as we know, EVERYONE WITH A PENIS IS AUTOMATICALLY IN LOVE WITH BELLA!) agrees: ‘Borrowing Bella for the weekends and then returning her Monday morning like a rental movie? So messed up. So tempting.’ (Meyer 2008, 166) Bella is her husband’s possession, with her choices and rights dismissed because he and Jacob believe they know what is best, showing that even on the rare occasion when a woman finally makes a choice in Twilight, this choice is overruled by the male figures in her life.

This objectification of Bella is common throughout the books, dehumanising her as property: ‘Then he turned back to Jacob. “But if you ever bring her back damaged again – if you ever return her to me in less than the perfect condition that I left her in…’ (Meyer 2007, 340). Bella, as usual, sits silently (like the dead-eyed lump of pudding that she is) through this exchange; either flattered that the men are fighting over her, or ignoring it altogether. When she is hurt by the villain towards the end of Twilight, her words to Edward seem less an apology for making him worry and more an apology for putting herself in danger because she belongs to him:

“What should I apologise for?”
“For very nearly taking yourself away from me forever.”
“I’m sorry,” I apologised again.
“I know why you did it.” His voice was comforting. “It was still irrational, of course. You should have waited for me, you should have told me.” (Meyer 2005, 401)

Silly, irrational little woman! Don't you know you're supposed to let The Amazing Doucheman do everything for you? You can't do anything by yourself! Silly!

Another example of both the illusion of choice and women being ‘owned’ by the men is found in the reproductive ‘imprinting’ practice of the Quileute shape shifters. Imprinting – the finding of one’s soul mate through love at first sight – is performed only by male shape shifters, and is both paedophilic and sexist. Leah, a shape shifter, admits in Breaking Dawn that unlike the rest of her male pack, she cannot imprint. Jacob tells us of Leah’s distress when her periods stopped:

She’d realised that her body wasn't following normal patterns anymore. The horror--what was she now? … Had her body changed because she'd become a werewolf? Or had she become a werewolf because her body was wrong? … The only female werewolf in the history of forever. Was that because she wasn't as female as she should be? (Meyer, 2008, 291)

This depiction of women who cannot or choose not to get pregnant as ‘abnormal’, ‘wrong’, and ‘not as female as they should be’ perpetuates the stereotype that a woman’s only function is to bear children, her identity solely dependent on their ability to do so. This message comes from the mouth of a female character, thereby normalising it:

You know why Sam thinks we imprint, she thought, calmer now. To make a bunch of new little werewolves. Survival of the species, genetic override. You're drawn to the person who gives you the best chance to pass on the wolf gene. If I was any good for that, Sam would have been drawn to me. There's something wrong with me. I don't have the ability to pass on the gene...so I become a freak--the girlie-wolf--good for nothing else. I'm a genetic dead end. I'm…I'm menopausal. (Meyer 2008, 291)

The male shape shifters are only attracted to the women that can provide them with children. This is similar to the subjugated treatment of women in the dystopian novel The Handmaid’s Tale – their bodies are regarded as instruments, and they are treated as ‘nothing more than a set of ovaries’[1]. While The Handmaid’s Tale presents this totalitarian thinking as wrong, Twilight promotes it. Menopausal women are dismissed as ‘freaks’ and ‘genetic dead ends’ who, having lost their ability to reproduce, are inferior because they have no purpose and are not attractive to men (Fuck you, Meyer. Fuck you.). Biologically and evolutionarily speaking, if imprinting is done only for the purposes of reproduction, then it defies logic for Leah’s eggs to lose their viability following her transformation, while the male shape shifters remain fertile. By removing Leah’s fertility, Meyer presents her as ostracised from every other woman on the reservation as well as the rest of her pack, and removes her choice to imprint, while the male members of the pack suffer no ill-effects of transformation, and are granted an endless supply of viable sperm and the ability to carry on their genes. The only possible excuse for this is to present Leah as yet another female character who, along with Rosalie Hale, is ‘unfulfilled when not pregnant’ (Millett 1969/70, 218), and whose petulant moods are endured by her family, who suffer her presence as if her infertility has rendered her nothing more then a useless, whining burden to them. (Seriously, I never came across anyone who was so bloody sexist against her own gender!! Would it really kill you not to inflict and normalise every possible negative female stereotype we have spent the last fifty years trying to break, Meyer?!)

Another problem with imprinting is who is imprinted on, and exactly what the process entails. One character, Quil, imprints on a two year-old toddler named Claire (to this day I'm trying to work out if the Claire Quilty reference was A) accidental and the most hilarious, apt coincidence ever or B) because Meyer really, really, really misunderstood Lolita). Another, Jacob, imprints on a newborn baby, Renesmee. (Yeah, you heard right. Jacob can't have Bella, so he falls in love with her minutes-old baby daughter instead. Yes, it is as stupid and gross as it sounds).

Because a two year old wasn't young enough for you?

Both Quil and Jacob are young adults when they imprint, but so as to dismiss any accusations of paedophilia, Meyer states that there is no sexual act or thought in the process and up until the imprintee grows up, the imprinter will be to her ‘whatever is needed, whether that’s a brother or uncle or father.’[2] This explanation of deliberate actions taken by an adult in order to form a trusting bond with a child, with the ultimate intention of a sexual relationship, sounds alarmingly similar to child grooming. This exactly describes the actions being taken by Quil and Jacob – taking an authoritative, protective, trustworthy role in Claire and Renesmee’s lives with the expectation of eventually having sex with them; another case of sexualisation and objectification of Twilight’s females.

The process of imprinting is for the purposes of reproduction, and so is inherently sexual in nature – making it repugnant that teenage boys should imprint on infant girls. It could be argued that the process is not sexist because it demeans both sexes equally – the men have no choice over who they imprint upon (it is an involuntary act) and after imprinting they remain hopelessly infatuated with the imprintee, powerless to stop their feelings and slaves to their devotion. However, the males are still at an advantage. They are in love with their partner, harbouring strong feelings toward them and having no doubt over the relationship, while the imprintee, the woman, is granted no so such reciprocal feelings or choice in the matter, and might be disgusted or uncomfortable with the match. It is implied that the women are under no obligation to turn the relationship into anything sexual once they come of age, but this is only the illusion of choice.

Because imprinting is considered a natural and acceptable practice, the parents of the child will raise her to believe that an adult’s man’s fixation on her and her eventual role as his lover or wife is also natural and acceptable, and she will not see any inequality in the situation. After a lifetime of trusting their imprinters and viewing them as authority figures, the child is likely to grow up believing that the sexual relationship which is expected between them two of them is as inevitable as any arranged marriage – in the words of Arzim’s Rebuttals: ‘a fact, not a choice’[3]. Meyer denies the females the chance of refusing the match by suggesting ‘It’s hard to resist that level of commitment and devotion’ (Meyer 2007, 123), presenting Twilight’s women – even from birth – as resigned to having no say in their romantic relationships or future decisions, because they have already been ‘destined’ for certain men.

[1] http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/handmaid/themes.html [Accessed 22/5/11]

[2] Cited at: http://www.fanpop.com/spots/critical-analysis-of-twilight/articles/29723/title/anti-feminism-bella-swan-illusion-choice [Accessed 25/5/11]

[3] http://www.fanpop.com/spots/critical-analysis-of-twilight/articles/29723/title/anti-feminism-bella-swan-illusion-choice [Accessed 23/5/11]

*takes slow, deep, cleansing breaths* Next up: paternalism, or why a guy who acts more like your dad than your boyfriend is apparently very sexy.

Deconstructing Twilight Part One - Freedom of Choice...and Lack of It.

‘Many women do not recognise themselves as being discriminated against; no better proof could be found of the totality of their conditioning.’ (Kate Millett, 1969/70, 55)

Discuss with reference to the presentation of women in Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series.

Feminism is defined as the ‘Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes’[1], but Stephenie Meyer, author of the Twilight series (2005-2008) argues: ‘In my own opinion (key word), the foundation of feminism is this: being able to choose.’[2] This reveals one of the (many!) central underlying problems in Twilight; Meyer fails to recognise the difference between overt sexism and ingrained patriarchal dominance. Nobody in the Twilight series tells protagonist Bella Swan that ‘she can’t do something solely because she’s a woman[3]’; instead, Bella’s decisions and potential are limited in far subtler, deep-seated ways, because she has been taught that she is inferior and therefore believes it. Meyer’s argument that choice is the foundation of feminism leads to an erroneous conclusion: that because Bella chooses to accept patriarchal dominance, believes in her intrinsic inadequacy in comparison to Edward Cullen, and stays with him despite misogynistic and abusive behaviour, Bella is a feminist.

Yeah. You go girl.

The lack of choice is a clear theme in the Twilight series, and many of Bella’s apparent choices are not hers at all. Perhaps the most important choice Bella makes is the decision to become a vampire; a first person narrative voice presents her perspective as a human who desperately wants to be a part of vampire Edward’s world (like most mindless teenage vampire groupies) by being turned into an immortal. Edward will not inflict such a dark life on her: ‘I can’t do it, Bella. I won’t do that to you’ (Meyer 2005, 413). However, while Bella’s determination and willingness to sacrifice her mortal life to be with the man she loves might seem like the empowered decisions of a strong-willed girl, the situation is a clear case of a female ‘continually obliged to seek advancement through the approval of males as those who hold power.’ (Millett 1969/70, 54). The power is all Edward’s, the man’s, to give. In the middle of life-threatening childbirth Bella is finally turned into a vampire by Edward, while she is unconscious and drowning in her own blood. Her choice to become immortal is the choice she fights for hardest (or at least, whines and wheedles about the most) throughout the series, yet is only the illusion of choice; decided upon and granted by a man while she is inert and dying.

In New Moon, it is revealed that Edward believes Bella so incapable of making her own choices that when he leaves, breaking up with Bella ‘for her own good’, he also removes from her house gifts he had given her and other personal reminders of him. As well as being a disturbing violation of boundaries (but this is the asshole who stalked her, broke into her house, and watched her sleep, so this is TAME behaviour by his standards...), this completely removes Bella’s choice to deal with his departure as she sees fit: ‘“It will be as if I’d never existed,” he’d promised me’ (Meyer 2006, 74). Even when removing himself from her life, Edward has taken charge (like the dick he is), deciding for her that removing all memory of him is best for her.

'So even though I've just dumped you, I'm still gonna break into your house, sneak up to your bedroom and paw through your personal effects like a serial killer. Cool? Cool.'

Edward’s influence over Bella’s decisions extends to Bella herself believing she has no choice; she says ‘Making decisions was the painful part for me’ while admitting in the same breath, ‘I didn’t know if there was ever a choice, really. Because when I thought of him… I wanted nothing more than to be with him right now’ (Meyer 2005, 121). She frequently describes a ‘hypnotic’ sensation when she hears Edward’s voice or looks into his eyes – and although intended as romantic (blurgh. That sound is my spleen trying to exit my body.), this alerts the reader that this outside mesmeric force (specifically, Edward) is manipulating her decisions: ‘There was no way around it; I couldn’t resist him in anything.’ (Meyer 2005, 249), ‘I turned slowly, unwillingly’, ‘There was no question of me looking away.’ (Meyer 2005, 62, 63), ‘His eyes were melting all my fury. It was impossible to fight with him...’ (Meyer 2005, 422), ‘His mouth was on mine then, and I couldn’t fight him. Not because he was so many thousand times stronger than me, but because my will crumbled into dust the second our lips met’ (Meyer 2006, 451). Edward erodes Bella’s thoughts and willpower, sometimes to the point where she faints (yes, people. she actually loses consciousness when he kisses her. Because swooning like a hysterical victorian romance heroine shows what a strong female you are!), and yet she never removes herself from the situation or even questions whether it is wrong to lose her sense of self so utterly.

Bella is too weak to argue with her boyfriend, and often too frightened to try: ‘I shivered at the threat in his voice’ (Meyer 2005, 143), ‘He flashed his teeth in a brief, threatening smile. I fought back a shiver before it could expose me’ (Meyer 2005, 189), ‘I worried it would provoke the strange anger that flared whenever I slipped...’ (Meyer 2005, 201). Mary Wollstonecraft states ‘The obedience required of women...comes under this description; the mind, naturally weakened by depending on authority, never exerts its own powers...’(Wollstonecraft 1792, 151) Bella is so subjugated that she has learned that practising independent thought and questioning Edward is dangerous, punishable by his anger. By having all the decision-making power, the male characters of Twilight have all the control in relationships and subsequently, the women do not even attempt to think for themselves.

[1] http://www.answers.com/topic/feminism [Accessed 23/5/11]
[2] http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/bd_faq.html [Accessed 23/5/11]
[3] http://www.stepheniemeyer.com/bd_faq.html [Accessed 23/5/11]

Phew! End of part one. Next time, continuation of lack of choice, and how the women of Twilight are treated like objects.

Welcome, those who seek sanity and logic. And vampires who suck and bite in the GOOD way.

So, what eventually drove me to this? What got me more riled up in seething, frothing rage than anything I'd ever read? What vile abomination drove me to create a...*le gasp*...Anti-Twilight Blog??

I'll tell you, friend.

I first stumbled across Twilight in december of 2008 - half because the movie trailer had just started showing on TV and looked fairly intruiging, and half because my stories on fanfiction.net seemed to be very popular with a bunch of young girls whose profiles were smothered in praise to Stephenie Meyer. 'She sure writes hot vampires!' I remember one girl wrote.

Curious as to what fans of my work were reading, and curious to see the latest sexy vampire fad (yeah,I'm a Lestat fangirl ), I bought myself the book on Amazon with high hopes. 'Ooh!' I thought when it came 'what a beautiful cover!' I couldn't wait. I was dizzy with anticipation for reading what I believed might just be the next best thing to Vampire Chronicles.

My disappointment started with the very first paragraph. I kid you not. The very first paragraph of this supposedly gripping book filled with 'hypnotic, dreamy prose' is bland protagonist Bella Swan (beautiful swan=veeeery subtle nomenclature, Meyer. Way to make your readers gag before they even begin your crappy novel) blabbing about her clothes. It goes something along the lines of 'the temperature was blah blah blah. I was wearing blah blah blah *zzzzz*. You might think I'm pedantic, but a reader's first impression of the book, right from the very first page, is critical. It is also a good indicator of how good the rest of the book is. If the first line is something as poetic and lyrical as that of, say, Lolita ('Light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul...') then I won't want to put it down. But when it's some girl I don't care about yet wanking on about her clothes...'Urgh,' I thought, 'this isn't going to be good, is it? I could really care less whether you're wearing white eyelash lace, or whatever. Unless it's important to the plot-' (ha. I still thought there was a plot, at this point. bless.) '-shut up about your clothes'.

But Bella didn't shut up. She just kept on and on with her sullen whining and mindless drivel.

I forced myself to keep wallowing through the endless crap until the bit where Bella had just made plans with Edward to drive to Seattle...and then I put the book down and gave up. My initial impression with Twilight was simply boredom, confusion as to why it was so popular, annoyance with the flat, duller-than-dishwater writing, and slight nausea over how many times the author felt it necessary to beat us over the skulls with how beautiful PERFECT and ADONIS-LIKE Edward Cullen was. That, and a slight undercurrent of dislike that I couldn't for the life of me put my finger on.

Anyway, I sold my copy, sad that Twilight hadn't been as good as I'd heard (and honestly hoped, because I love finding new novels to immerse myself in and gush over), and didn't think anything of it. But Twilight was growing in popularity, and eventually, dismayed that something so boring and mundane could have such a massive fanbase, I began to visit Twilight and anti-Twilight websites. Suffice to say I was SHOCKED about what some of the antis had to say, and I finally understood that little nagging voice that had been bugging me about what I had been reading. The trouble was the first-person narrative - Bella is so passive and accepting of everything that happens to her that the reader is encouraged to accept it too, and to think it's ok.
But it's not ok. Here's what's going on in Twilight when you tune out Bella's inner ramblings and open your eyes:

CASUAL MISOGYNY. NORMALISATION OF PATRIARCHAL DOMINATION. ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS & UNHEALTHY, SHALLOW OBSESSION DRESSED UP AS TRUE LOVE. PAEDOPHILIA. GLORIFICATION OF STEREOTYPICAL GENDER ROLES.

And the worst part of all...

VAMPIRES WITH NO FANGS WHO COME OUT IN DAYLIGHT. AND SPARKLE.

Well all right, it's not the worst part, but it is god-awful. I'm all for new twists on vampire mythology, but seriously - if Meyer's creatures weren't called vampires, you wouldn't know that's what the hell they were. At all. They don't sleep in coffins. They aren't allergic to garlic or crosses or holy water. They don't explode/burn in the sun. They don't even have fangs, for the love of Akasha. So what do they have? Random superpowers, which are hilariously inconsistent and pander to the little thing known as 'plot convenience'. Pale skin...but so do the goths that go to my college - and as much as they wish they were vampires, they're not. Meyer's vamps do have a craving for blood, but as they don't have fangs, the whole vampire thing is kinda diminished...I mean, how do they pierce skin and suck blood in any kind of classicly vampiric, graceful way? Answer-they can't. They'd just have to gnaw and nom and chomp at it like Hannibal Lecter. Not so sexy now, right? And lest you forget...they sparkle.

And to really up the WTF factor, they have VENOM. It's if Meyer temporarily forgot she was writing vampires and started a book about sexy snakes!
*pauses to giggle*

These aren't vampires - these are Meyerpires, sparkly, superpowered vampire-lite versions of Louis from Interview, but without any of the awesomeness. Twilight is vampires toned down for teenage girls - all the scary stuff has been taken out and (literally) replaced with glittery sparkles and pretty faces, but naturally all the supernatural angst and tortured hot guys are left in to keep the fangirls panting. Except they have nothing to angst about, because they're all perfect. Perfect, hot and rich - naturally.

I hate you, Meyer.

But apart from all this utter, utter rape of vampire mythology (Meyer merrily admits she has never read her contemporaries. Yeah, IT SHOWS) the worst thing about Twilight is its insidious, horrifying degree of anti-feminism. It isn't just how Edward treats Bella that is sick and wrong - it's that Bella allows him to treat her this way, appears to enjoy being treated this way, and how she never, ever seems to even notice the lack of gender equality - even when her boyfriend is removing the engine from her car to stop her seeing her friends. This is a series aimed at teenage girls. This is a series where the fans want to be Bella, and want to date a guy like Edward. And this is why I won't shut up about how misogynistic Twilight is, and neither should anyone else. It isn't just a matter of 'don't like it don't read it', because turning a blind eyes to this kind of thing trivialises what the suffragettes fought and died for.

IT IS NOT OK FOR THIS SHIT TO BE HELD UP AS GREAT LITERATURE; FOR PASSIVE, DEPENDANT DRIPS LIKE BELLA TO BE ROLE MODELS FOR OUR YOUNG GIRLS; AND FOR GUYS TO THINK IT'S OK TO STALK AND CONTROL THEIR GIRLFRIENDS.

IT IS NOT OK.

It is so not OK that for my university mini dissertation, I wrote an in-depth essay about how not OK it is. Next time...the treatment of women in Twilight, part one.