Kat Gets a Makeover Because Feminists Are Ugly

As some of you may know, I like trashy television -- especially trashy teen television. I have talked about the show 10 Things I Hate About You before in relation to how feminists are silenced in high school. So, I was watching 10 Things I Hate About You last night and wasn't very pleased with what I saw.

I love the character of Kat. She's a feminist who isn't afraid to speak her mind. But, as gnatalby at Booze.Tv.Food. points out, Kat has been getting the "ugly makeover." The actress who plays Kat is obviously a very beautiful young woman. But she's been made to look not ugly but as if she doesn't care about her looks.

First of all, I don't really there is such a thing as not caring about what you look like. Even if you try to put off that image, you care that you are putting off that image. But there's nothing wrong with not partaking in patriarchal and societal standards of beauty. But in last night's episode, Kat gets a makeover from her sister before the dance. While there's nothing wrong with wanting to look nice for the dance, I found some things about this plot line kind of troubling.

For the most part, this is the main thing that I had a problem with: when Bianca, her sister, is applying makeup on Kat, she starts complaining about why women would do this, that it is just a patriarchal standard of beauty. But she obviously wears makeup all the time on the show.

It's not so much that she wears makeup all the time and then complains about it, it's the reinforcement that feminists are ugly or hate making themselves look good that bothers me. By having Kat go from not conforming to societal standards of beauty to having this makeover to make her "pretty" just reinforces the idea that feminists are not attractive. Yes, Kat before the makeover was beautiful. But Bianca didn't see it that way. Bianca sees her sister as someone who doesn't care how she looks so she took it upon herself to pretty-up her sister...for the benefit of her date.

Probably not the biggest deal. But I've been very interested in how 10 Things I Hate About You is portraying their feminist heroine. By portraying her as someone in need of a makeover shows that her feminist values (and therefore the teens who watch this show will see feminist values as this) lie in not in presentation of self. While I don't think that you have to be preoccupied with your self-presentation, I think that everyone partakes in it. And by portraying feminists as "not pretty," it is just perpetuating stereotypes of feminists.

Slaying the Vamps [Feminist Flashback Friday]

Ever since I started blogging I have wanted to write a post dedicated to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It is probably one of my all time favorite shows...and I just started watching it this past winter! This probably isn't that much of a flashback or a history lesson for many of you...but Buffy is in the past, so it's ok for a Feminist Flashback Friday, right? Even if it's not, it's going to be...


Joss Whedon has made some great creations and is a pro-feminist himself, so it would make sense that his feminist beliefs rub off on his TV shows. Buffy is one of his most feminist creations.

For those of you who don't know, the show revolves around the "chosen one," the slayer, who at this point in time is Buffy Summers. Buffy spends every episode fighting "the big bad," whether it is vampires or some other form of demon. She has her crew of "scoobies" that help her out and occasionally get into trouble. My favorite of the Scoobies is Willow who has some special powers of her own: she's a witch. There's just so much that happens over the seven seasons that I'm not even going to attempt to summarize right now, so this is the best I can do right now.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is all about strong women. Buffy herself is supernaturally, physically strong because of her status as the slayer. But she is emotionally strong as well. Sure, she has her breakdowns and times that she no longer wants to be the slayer, but overall she is a strong women, physically, emotionally, and mentally. And it's great to see a female action hero that was so sucessful. Buffy kicked ass on a weekly basis.

Willow was a strong woman as well. She went from a shy bookworm to a powerful, confident witch throughout the show. And she's the one example that I can think of in a mainstream, network show of a successful transition from straight to a lesbian. I don't know if "successful transition" is the right phrase, but there have been so many shows that make a character a lesbian for a couple shows and then she's straight again. But with Willow, she realized her sexual identity when she met Tara and she stuck with it. Yes, she did go crazy at one point, but all that did was to show how powerful and strong she actually was when it came to her magical powers.

And then there's Anya, who was a vengence demon who lost her powers (then regained them later). Even when she didn't have her supernatural powers, she was one of the key Scoobies. While it takes her a while to adjust to not having powers, she becomes one of the strong members of the team.

There are also some recurring minor strong women in the show. There's Faith, the slayer-turned-evil. Glory, who was a demon god bent on getting back to her hell.

Oh Xander. One of the two men in the Scoobies (yes, I do count Giles). He goes through a lot of identity crisis', especially in the later seasons, because he is surrounded by such powerful women and he doesn't really have a lot to offer. Buffy's the slayer, Willow and Tara are powerful witches, and Anya is an ex-demon. Some definite woman-power there.

One other thing that I like about Buffy is that it's not super focused on romantic relationships. Buffy's romantic relationships definitely play a big role in the show, but she's not relationship-centric. When Angel goes evil and when he leaves, Buffy does have a really hard time and falls apart a little bit, but then she learns that it's ok to be a strong woman on her own. Xander and Anya's relationship and Willow and Tara's relationship are key to the show as well. But in all of the relationships, each of the people are independent and strong on their own and have a pretty healthy relationship because of that (the only exception I can think of is Buffy and Spike, but that's a whole other story).

To me, one of the undertones of the show is about being the best person that you can be, no matter what your powers. While the characters themselves are probably not feminist, I think that the show is. Buffy the Vampire Slayer portrays strong women as they are. Sure some of their strength comes from supernatural powers, but the strength that I am most concerned about is their mental and emotional strength.

What Buffy has is something that is severely lacking from television today. It has great writing, great acting, and strong women. Where are shows like this today? It's not like Buffy was made all that long ago. Where did it go? Well, right now I am jonesing for a Buffy fix, so I think I am going to go watch an episode over on Hulu.

So, how many of you watched Buffy when it was on or have since picked it up, like me? Any thoughts about the feminist value of the show?

This Week in Blogs: August 9-15

I'm thinking of having a post like this more than once a week since the list of amazing posts from other blogs is getting to be really long. Look for a post along these lines on Tuesdays and Thursdays, as well as Sundays from now on. Sorry for the late posting time today. I was at my cousin's wedding this weekend and didn't get home until Sunday afternoon. I'm always looking for new blogs to read! Leave your links in the comments!

Victim's don't "get raped": on blaming, passivity, and verbs - Deeply Problematic
A great post on the language we use surrounding rape. No one "gets raped," they "are raped." Also don't forget to check out RMJ's ongoing 50 Books for Problematic Times.

5 Reasons We Still Need Feminism - Appetite for Equal Rights
Some people think that feminism is no longer needed (not me!), but here are at least 5 reasons why we still need it!

They tried that in the 90's - FBomb
Where are all the shows that accurately represent the lives and worries of teenagers?

Nonmonogamy and Feminism: A Happy Couple - Feministe
How do "open relationships" and nonmonogamy fit into feminist values?

Kelly Clarkson should consider moving to the UK - Feministing
On the use of photoshopping in the US and the UK and more on the Kelly Clarkson Self cover.

The "Sixteen Candles" date rape scene - Salon Broadsheet
I love John Hughes and "Sixteen Candles" but don't forget about that date rape scene...

So, why do we blog, anyway? (I am deeply disturbed) - Small Stokes
Ashley takes on some of the trends that she sees in feminist blogging that worry her.

Filament magazine and the female gaze - Swimsuit Issue
There's a new magazine out geared towards women that features smart stories and hunky men.

What We Can Learn From the French - The Undomestic Goddess
What do the French have that we don't?

A "feminist wedding" is an oxymoron - Womanist Musings
I've been thinking a lot about weddings recently as I just attended my cousin's. How do feminist values fit into the patriarchal norm of weddings?

Silencing in Schools from 10 Things

I've been thinking a lot about silencing techniques recently. This post is about a specific instance of silencing a feminist on TV. It happens a lot, but there is a specific recent occurrence that I want to discuss.

I started watching 10 Things I Hate About You on ABC Family because the movie was such an integral part of my early teen years, so I wanted to see how ABC Family handled turning it into a television show. While there are many things about the show that I don't like (which I'm not going to go into now), there is one thing that I really like: Kat. She was my favorite character in the movie and is very easily my favorite in the TV show too.

Kat's discussions on the show often revolve around feminism and environmentalism and she isn't afraid to call people out on their privilege (but doesn't usually reflect on her own, which is a shame) and their hateful language. This is why she's my favorite character. But I feel like her main purpose in being a feminist on the show is to provide a couterpoint for her shallow sister, not just for the purpose of promoting feminism in a the ABC Family viewing population.

I was shocked (ok, maybe not shocked, but it really stuck out to me) while watching this weeks episode. For an assignment that involved writing a paper on a moment that changed your life, Kat wrote about the day that she first started reading Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex and became a feminist. I think that's a great paper topic. But her teacher told her it was unoriginal and that people in the space station could see she was a feminist so Kat should write about something else. Wow. Yes, people can see that she's a feminist, but being a feminist is a large part of her life, so it would make sense that she wrote about becoming a feminist as a moment that changed her life. To call that unoriginal is insulting, especially considering that a lot of the other people in the class did not write about such insightful things and are not feminists. Kat rewrote the paper about the first day that her dad bought her tampons. Her teacher was pleased and said it was good as long as it didn't end with "and then I became a feminist."

While silencing feminists is not a big surprise in television, this scene made me think about silencing in schools. In college, I can't think of any instances when I felt silenced. But I thinkt hat mainly had to do with the school that I went to and the classes that I took. I went to a very liberal, small school and I took classes mainly in Women's and Gender Studies and Sociology. People there had open minds and were open to other's opinions. So I started to think about my experiences in high school, which were very different that those of college.

I went to high school in a conservative, Christian, white, upper middle class suburb. I definitely fit in in some ways. I'm white, heterosexual, fall into the middle class spectrum (although compared to my high school class mates, I was very very low middle class, even though that's not true in wider society). But I am very liberal and not that religious, so it was hard for me to fit in in that way. So I was usually the one with the differing opinion in classes during high school. But I didn't usually voice that differing opinion because I knew that it would not be respected by some teachers and fellow students.

Silencing people's opinions (not just those of feminists) in a school setting, especially high school, can be very damaging. Schools should be a safe setting for people to express and form their opinions, but that is often not the case for a lot of people. High schoolers can be cruel, but when the silencing comes from the teachers, I think it can be even worse. Like in 10 Things I Hate About You, if teachers make you change papers or shut down voicing opinions in class because "everyone already knows you're a feminist," students might have an even harder time learning how to express their opinions.

Being a Virgin Forever

Ever since I saw the latest episode of True Blood on Monday, I have been thinking about how to approach the following issue. True Blood is one of my favorite shows on TV right now, but I'm sometimes confused about what message it intends to send on social issues, such as gay rights, racism, etc. So at the end of the latest episode, I wasn't quite sure what social commentary the show was trying to make with the situation between Jessica and Hoyt.

Here's what happened in case you don't follow True Blood as closely as I do: At the beginning of the episode, Hoyt and Jessica have sex for the first time (and it was both of their "first times" too since they were both "virgins"). At the end of the episode, Hoyt has taken Jessica back to Bon Temps as per Bill's orders. They start to have sex again, but Jessica makes him stop. It appears that because of vampire's regenerative qualities, her hymen regenerated since it was intact when she was made vampire. Jessica and Hoyt had very different reactions to the situation. Hoyt tried to soothe Jessica by saying that every time will be like their first time. To that, Jessica had this to say: "It'll hurt like hell! I'm a fucking deformity of nature. I'm going to be a virgin forever!"

I've beening trying to figure out for myself exactly what kind of commentary this plot line is intended to have (because I believe television, and especially shows like True Blood, is always consciously trying to make some form of commentary on society).

Jessica's "perma-virgin" status says a lot about how virginity is viewed. Virginity is a much more complex concept than just whether or not you've had sex, like many people believe (see the blog The American Virgin). As we can see with Jessica, who has had sex yet said that she'll "be a virgin forever" because her hymen will always re-grow, virginity is not a cut-and-dry issue.

Jessica Valenti wrote in her book The Purity Myth that "virginity" doesn't acutally exist. The idea of virginity can mean many things to different people. I think that Jessica's "perma-virgin" status is trying to bring light to this issue. And even if it wasn't intended, it does a good job at shedding light on it.

So does hymen = virginity? How do you define virginity?

Further Reading:
Born-Again Virgins, Vampire Style [The American Virgin]

Teen Choice Awards for Adults

I'm a couple years past my teen years, so why would I want to spend my Monday night watching the Teen Choice Awards? Well, I'm fascinated by pop culture, much of which revolves around teens and people who still wish they were teenagers. And when I head buzz around pole dancing and slut-shaming that took place at the Teen Choice Awards (which was filmed on Sunday), I had to watch it!

So I sat down on Monday night with my glass of wine ready to live-tweet the Teen Choice Awards 2009 (@ShelbyKnox came up with the hashtag #teenschoosewine for those of us live-tweeting the awards show under the influence of alcohol).

This year, the awards show was hosted by the Jonas Brothers. I was not terribly impressed and of course we had to listen to two performances from them. Watching the Teen Choice Awards (something I haven't done in a couple years) was an interesting experience. Even if you didn't know it was called the "Teen Choice Awards," you would definitely know who the demographic was. From the humor, the "Dare the Jonas Brothers" bits, and most of the things nominated, you can tell that it is marketed towards teens, especially teens that watch the Disney Channel.

The Teen Choice Awards seemed to basically be a showcase of the sexualization of teen girls and teens trying to be adults.

The main example of this? Miley Cyrus' performance of her song "Party in the USA." She came out wearing hot pants, heels, a racer-back shirt, and a mesh bra that could be seen from the sides and back. I highly doubt that most 16-year-olds' parents would let their kids out of the house dressed like that. What makes it worse: pole dancing. That's right. The 16-year-old "role model" was pole dancing at the Teen Choice Awards. In fact, with a pole that was attached to the top of an ice cream cart. As @ShelbyKnox said (tweeted): "I wish Miley didn't feel she has to sexualize herself in such a way to have fans. She could be such a role model." Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montana had a ton of fans before she started to sexualize herself. I don't care if she's trying to move away from Disney. This is not the way for a 16-year-old girl to do that.

Now don't get me wrong: I'm all for women expressing their sexuality. But when a 16-year-old girl is sexualized in order to sell records, there's problem. I don't see Miley Cyrus' performance as her expressing her own sexuality, I see it as a plot to attrach more fans. The sexualization of younger and younger women is what causes a lot of these body image issues that girls and women have. If they weren't trying to be this "perfect" sexual teenager, girls and women might be more happy to just be themselves.

Then there was the sexism that was in the categories. On instance that particularly stuck out to me was that there was an award for Choice Actor in an Action/Adventure movie, but no Choice Actress. Granted, the action/adventure genre is not heavily populated with women. But there are women in these movies, enough so that they could create a category for these women that "kick butt."

Then there was a new category: Choice Fab-u-lous. A category designed specifically for gay men in fashion. I think the important question to ask is if this category is honoring the contributions that these men have made to the world of fashion, or does it further the "othering" of them by creating a separate category specifically for gay men in fashion? I would probably say the latter, especially because of the title of the award and they way that it was said. But, in Miss J's acceptance speech (Miss J from America's Next Top Model) he shared his award with all the gay, lesbian, and trans people in the country and said that this award made them as fierce as he is. I thought that was a really good touch.

Because the show was filmed on Sunday, some events were leaked. I heard about an event involving Dane Cook on Shakesville in which he "slut-shamed" Vanessa Hudgens for the naked pictures she took a while ago for Zac Efron that were leaked onto the internet. As a result, the crowd boo-ed him. Sadly (kind of), this was not aired. I would have like to seen him boo-ed, but we don't need to broadcast to the country another instance of slut-shaming, so I guess it is good that it was cut out.

I have to say, I'm huge fan of awards shows, especially the Academy Awards. But the Teen Choice Awards was pretty painful to sit through. I hated to see all of the sexualization of teen girls and the stereotyping of numberous demographics (George Lopez on Latinos, for example). I also thought it was inappropriate that this award show was supposed to be run by votes from viewers (aka teens) and some of the things they were supposed to vote on were not appropriate for teens. There were rated R movies (such as Slumdog Millionaire) nominated along with True Blood (which is a great show, but I don't think is appropriate for the age demographic for the show). These things are especially seen for their inappropriateness when they are up against movies and shows from Disney. If parents want to let teens watch these movies and shows, that's their business. But the Teen Choice Awards should not be promoting these age-inappropriate movies and shows to their primary audience of teens.

But the Teen Choice Awards in a venue for teens to try to be adults, for the way they dress, to the way they dance, to the movies they vote for. But I do have to say I have a favorite moment. It would have to be when Ellen Degeneres won Choice Twit (yes, they now have awards for Twitter) and promised that she would give away $1000 to a follower next week. I was happy that Ellen, a proud lesbian, won the award as opposed to Kim Kardashian or Ashton Kutcher, who she was up against.

It's hard to fully summarize what was going on in my mind throughout the Teen Choice Awards because it was a two hour show and so many things happened. One minute I was impressed with a decision made by the show and the very next minute I was disgusted by what was going on on stage. But I guess that says a lot about the Teen Choice Awards. It tried to be a "progressive" but just ended up being a mess of stereotypes and sexualization. I think the awards show should just remember who their main demographic is and fix the show accordingly.

What Happened: So You Think You Can Dance

This post was inspired by an open thread at Shakesville. I agree with most of the things said in this post, but just want to expand on them a little further.

*If you are invested in So You Think You Can Dance and haven't yet watched the finale and don't want to know who the winner is, I suggest you come back to this post after you have watched the finale.

I'm a sucker for dancing and reality competition shows, so it's amazing that I hadn't really watched So You Think You Can Dance until this season. I have to admit that I love it. The finale was on last night and my favorite dancer, Jeanine, won.

While I do love this show and think that it is a great platform for dancers, there is one thing in particular that bothers me: the treatment of the female dancers, especially by judge Nigel Lithgoe. Nigel has a tendency to make pervy comments and the female dancers always seem to look uncomfortable after them. One comment that stands out to me was this past Wednesday night, the first part of the finale where the top 4 dancers perform. Jeanine and Kayla's dance partly involved them shedding layers as they went through the dance, ending in a simple leotard (I tried to find a video of this dance on YouTube, but was unsuccessful). It was a beautiful dance. But Nigel had to go and ruin it by saying "I wish it went on longer." This dance was the same length as all of the other dances. I interpreted this (and so did the other judges and dancers, it appears) that he wanted it to go on longer because he wanted them to take off more clothes. Female dance costumes are already sparse enough, we don't need a creepy old man making comment about taking more clothes off.

Also during the first part of the finale, Nigel made a comment about Brandon and Kayla's broadway piece that was completely unnecessary and not relevant to the judging process. At the end of the dance, when Brandon was supposed to be having a heart attack, Kayla through her leg over him. Nigel then made the comment that if a beautiful blond had thrown her leg over him when he had his heart attack he would die from another heart attack. That had absolutely nothing to do with judging the dance, just Nigel being a creepy old man.

And is it really necessary to constantly ask the two married contestant, Melissa and Randi, if their husbands would approve? Their husbands seem to be pretty supportive of their dancing and therefore probably understand the nature of male/female pairs dancing. While it might not be pleasant for them to watch at some points, I'm sure they understand. And does it really matter what they think about it anyways? These women are doing what they love to do, so their husbands should be supportive and it shouldn't really matter in all cases. And would they be asking male contestants what their wives think? No, because men are "supposed" to play the field and these dances are just a demonstration of that.

So, enough about Nigel being a creepy old man. Let's go onto some of the things that I really liked about this season. Being dance and the fact that every couple (until the last episode) was a man and a woman, it is kind of expected (though not always appreciated) that the female will take the submissive role in the dance. Despite this fact, there was one dance that really stuck out to me about female empowerment. It was the dance of the final three women, Kayla, Jeanine, and Melissa, that portrayed them as superheroes (I cannot remember who the choreagrapher was at this point, it was the woman with the mohawk-like hair, if anyone remembers her name).

Some of my favorite dances throughout the season were the ones that had some form of social commentary or message. The first was the dance about addiction (choreographed by Mia Michaels) performed by Kayla and Kupono. It was a very powerful piece and was a really good representation of the love/hate relationship of drug abuse. One of my other favorite dances was about the fight through breast cancer (choreographed by Tyce Diorio), performed by Melissa and Ade. It was really moving, especially how it brought all of the judges to tears, even Ellen Degreneres, who was guest judging that night (I'm thinking of writing a Breast Implications post on this dance, so I'm not going to comment on it too much right now).

It is great that this show is a platform not only to further the career of amazing dancers, but also for social commentary about drug use, cancer, and so much more. Despite some of the misogynst aspects of the show (that are prevalent through out all reality tv, well, tv in general), it is always entertaining to watch.

Do you like So You Think You Can Dance? What do you like about it? Do you think Nigel's pervy comments are related to his judging and therefore "acceptable"?

Breast Implications #8: Everybody Loves Boob Jobs

This is my first post in the "Breast Implications" series that was not a direct result of the research that I completed with two friends for our Women's and Gender Studies senior seminar, so it is not so much based on research as observations.

I grew up watching Everybody Loves Raymond. I was 9 when the show started in 1996, so I'm not sure if I started watching it then, but my parents definitely did. It is one of my mom's favorite shows and teaching a class on family therapy gave her a great excuse to buy the whole series of the show.

The other day, my mom and I were watching some episodes. One of the episodes that we watched very closely related to the research that we had done as part of the implications/(in)visibility of breasts project: season 4, episode 1 entitled "The Boob Job."

In this episode, one of Deborah's fellow PTA parent got a boob job. Of course the whole family had to discuss this (that's what they do after all). All of the men in the family, especially Raymond, were very interested in this boob job, showing their fascination and obsession with big breasts. Marie and Deborah, on the other hand, did not agree with the decision to get a boob job.

Later that night, Deborah asked Ray if he thought that she needed a boob job. He answered with "not if you don't think so." Deborah took this as Ray wanted her to get one but didn't want to say it. So after Ray comes back from a week long business trip, it appears as if Deborah has gotten a boob job. Ray is, of course, really excited. Only later, after Ray has told Deborah that he likes her new boobs, do we discover that Deborah has in fact stuffed her bra with socks to give the illusion of a boob job. Deborah gets upset with Ray for not loving her body the way that it is.

While breast implants are very prevalent in Hollywood, it is rarely discussed on shows in a way other than pointing out when someone gets a boob job. I appreciated this episode because it points out some of the body image issues associated with getting a boob job. It talks about loving the body that you have for what it is and using boob jobs to get attention. It also showed how men's reactions can influence women to get boob jobs. Having an unhealthy relationship with your body and your breasts along with having men admire larger breasts can lead to having surgery.

This episode of Everybody Loves Raymond shows how perceptions of breasts in society affect how women feel about their own breasts. Society's preoccupation with large breasts leads to women who have small breasts to feel insecure and possibly get a boob job. I love how Everybody Loves Raymond handled this issue with humor and a realistic representation of how people react to large breasts and boob jobs.

I'm a Materna-Smack Junkie

One of the many reasons why I love Stephen Colbert. I couldn't get the video to embed, so go here to see the video. It's hilarious, so I highly recommend it!

Let's first address the issue of being suspended for taking birth control...

Yes, birth control is a prescription drug, which makes it a controlled substance. But really? You're going to punish someone for being responsible about their sex life? Talk about abstinence-only education at its best. Apparently no form of birth control is safe. By suspending Freesia Jackson for taking birth control, the school is essentially telling all of the women at the school that birth control is bad, which could make unsafe sex more prevalent at the school. If girls are afraid to take birth control, then they won't. Especially during the teenage years when you feel like everyone is judging you.

The schools reason for suspending her: she was taking a controlled substance, and as far as the rule is concerned (direct quote) "birth control pills are just as dangerous as heroin." Oh no! I've been a birth control junkie for a couple years and if it's just as bad as heroin, I'm ruining my life. What am I to do? I just can't believe that guy said that.

This seems like some weird form of slut-shaming. The school could have easily gotten around suspending Jackson even if they have a rule against "controlled substances." But because they chose not to, they are punished Jackson for having sex (at least she's being responsible about it, which is more than can be said for a lot of teenagers). Or at least they think she's having sex, because that's the only reason she could be on birth control, right? While I applaud Jackson for having the responsibility to take birth control if she is having sex, did the school even make sure that she wasn't taking it for a medical reason? Because yes, there are medical reasons for taking birth control. I had friends in high school that, for medical reasons, needed the hormones that were in birth control. If they suspended her for taking birth control when it was for a medical reason, are they going to stop people from taking ADD medication? I don't think so.

Now on to Stephen Colbert...

I loved his handling of this issue. It was filled with his usual sarcasm yet did a really good job at pointing out the ridiculousness of the situation. With terms like "fallopian dope," "baby proofies," and "materna-smack," how can we not love him?

Further Reading:
Stephen Colbert Won't Let This Teen Birth Control Junkie Off Easy [The Frisky]

Hooked on Degrassi

I have recently gotten hooked on Degrassi: The Next Generation. I weirdly love teen shows that are way over-dramatic, so Degrassi was perfect for me...I don't know why I didn't watch it earlier. So I'm just going to give you a quick overview of why I'm loving this show right now.

But Degrassi is more than just an over-dramatic teen show. It tackles important social issues in a way that can get information to the public in an entertaining way. I'm currently in the middle of season 6 and I'm going to make you a long list of all the social issues they have already covered: abortion, teen pregnancy, adoption, safe sex, abstinence, eating disorders and body image issues, sexual identity, gangs, violence (school shootings and school rivalries), abusive boyfriends, rape, peer pressure, drug and alcohol use/abuse, cheating, flawed legal system, STDs, domestic violence, welfare, internet predators, being kicked out of your house, death, and there are probably more that I can't think of right now.

I don't know of many other shows that tackle as many social issues as Degrassi does. And it doesn't do it in a public service announcement-like way. Degrassi incorporates all of these social issues into a somewhat continuous storyline. And a lot of it seems like it could be realistic; that the characters would actually do these things and that people in real life would do these things as well. It can tackle all of these because it has such a large cast (I got the characters mixed up sometimes when I first started watching) and is always incorporating new classes and cast members. But that's part of what keeps it interesting too.

So, if you have not seen Degrassi: The Next Generation, I would give it a chance. It may be a teen drama and not always have the best acting or writing, it's an interesting portryal of teen life and has a lot to say about important social issues that many teens face.

This Week in Blogs: July 26 - August 1

There has been some great writing going on this week! Here are some of my favorites. Don't forget to leave your links (that you've been writing and reading) in the comments!

Thin Privilege 101 [Dolly Speaks]
Labyrinth as Feminist Myth [Hoyden About Town]
Twitter and Gendered Language [The F Bomb]
On the abortion ban in Nicaragua [Appetite for Equal Rights]
The Feminist Lens: Catcher in the Rye and Feminism and Relationships [Small Strokes]
Can we achieve a real "common ground" on abortion? [Feministing]
Shocker! Tiller's Murderer Going to Trial [Feministe]
Oppression, Masculine Power, Duality, and Kant [Gender Across Borders]
HBO Working on Another Feminist Show? [Women & Hollywood]
Julia Child: Feminist Icon? [Jezebel]
"More to Love": That Means FAT GIRLS too! [Womanist Musings]
Breasts: Ready to Go Public? and No Hang Ups on "Hung" [The Undomestic Goddess]
SETH ROGEN IS OUTRAGED, some more [Tiger Beatdown]
"Body Lexicon" for Aging Female Bodies [Sociological Images]
From ax-wielding psychos to she-devils [Salon: Broadsheet]

Welcome to Cougar Town

Many times when I have gone to see a movie over PG lately, I have been subjected to this promo for the new fall ABC show, Cougar Town, starting Courtney Cox (of Friends fame):



So, Cougar Town...a show about a 40-year-old divorcee who decides that getting back into the dating world means dating younger men. So many things wrong with this promo/show, where to begin...

How about at the beginning? The promo opens with Courtney Cox scrutinizing every fault of her body. First of all, I don't think that is actually Courtney Cox's body. Other promos have her in underwear and she does not have any "flab." Second of all, the body that is shown (whether it is Cox's or not) is an amazing body. Scrutinizing a body like that not only shows the fear of aging (prevalent throughout the show/promo) but also the impossible body standards that women have to live up to.

The show is all about the fear of aging. Women are going to "shrivel up and die." Throughout society, everyone fears getting older, but I feel like there is a stronger fear among women. A fear that men will no longer be attracted to them when they get older. Because age does not equal beauty. Age equals wrinkles and flab and death.

How does divorce equal "shrivel up and die"? There is nothing wrong with being an independent woman and living the life you want to live. While I think that is the message the show is trying is doing what she thinks is expected of her. I may be wrong, I mean it is only a 30 second promo. But the show does seem to say that a woman is incomplete without a man, even if that man is just a young "boy toy."

And why is that older women who date younger men are called "cougars" but older men who date younger women is a bachelor or a playboy? Cougars are predatory animals, so this implies that women are preying on and attacking young men where as men are congratulated for dating younger women.

Courtney Cox was so great on Friends, so why does she have to go and make a show like this (but Jennifer Aniston is really the only one of the cast that has had any major success after Friends)? Maybe the show is supposed to be some sort of commentary about the fear of aging in society. But if the promo starts out like this with scrutinizing every little imaginary fault on a body, I think it is just reinforcing the fear of aging.

MTSS Goes Cable

I love the Midwest Teen Sex Show. I was introduced to it this past spring and the proceeded to watch every episode, some more than once. If you have never seen it, watch you can watch the episodes on their website (above).

It is a great way to counter abstinence-only education because it does not require reading a lot of research and information, it just requires watching an entertaining video. Many people watch it without abstinence-only just for the entertainment value.

From the MTSS website:

Teens and sex. It happens. Not every teen is having sex and not every teen is abstaining. We hope the Midwest Teen Sex Show will create a space for frank discussion of all things related to teen sexuality. Broadcast media shies away from any real exploration of the topic, and they forget that not all teens live in Orange County.

But MTSS does not pretend to be experts or a replacement proper sex education from parents or schools:

Is this sex education?

Sort of–we like to call it sex information. We’ll leave the formal education to classrooms and textbooks. Midwest Teen Sex Show is here to provide sex information in a clear and entertaining way. We won’t pretend to be experts, but hopefully a few of our own embarrassing experiences and insights will keep you out of trouble.

I think MTSS is a great way to provide information and I'm glad that they don't present themselves as the end-all-be-all of sex education...they are just their to supplement proper sex education.

And now onto the really good news. Comedy Central has asked MTSS to make a pilot that could be picked up by the cable network as a regular, 30-minute show. From the Women's Media Center:

after expressing interest following its third episode, Comedy Central has invited MTSS to make a full-length pilot episode this summer that may leap the online favorite to cable television. The news comes shortly after MTSS videos and fan groups were pulled from YouTube, Facebook and MySpace, which contended that they conflicted with community guidelines.

I think that bringing MTSS to a cable network is a great step in the conversation about teen sexuality. This will bring it to a wider audience and continue to help combat the abstinence-only people.

I can't wait to see if Comedy Central picks up MTSS. I know I will be tuning in!

Further Reading:

MTSS goes CC [The F Bomb]

We Heart MTSS - And So Does Comedy Central [The American Virgin]

Good Intentions, Overweight Stereotypes

With the premiere of More to Love looming in the near future, I have been thinking more and more about the portrayal of overweight people* in the media. I posted earlier about how More to Love is further objectifying overweight people. But More to Love is not the only show on television right now centered around overweight people. The Biggest Loser has been around for a while now, Dance Your Ass Off recently kicked off their first season, and Drop Dead Diva just premiere on Lifetime.

The Biggest Loser and Dance Your Ass Off are weight-loss shows centered around "bettering" yourself. These shows very clearly say that you are not good enough if you are overweight. More to Love is slightly (only slightly) harder to read because it portrays itself as loving the body that you are in. But that's not really the message that it sends. This show defines people by their weight as if it were their only identifiable characteristic and sends the message that only overweight people can love other overweight people.

Drop Dead Diva is a slightly different case because it is an hour long dramedy (by the looks of it) where as the other shows are reality shows. [Disclaimer: I have not seen this show. I am going off of commercials and reading other blog posts about it] The basic premise of the show is that model Deb and brainy lawyer Jane die at the same time and Deb is brought back to life in Jane's body. The only problem for Deb is that Jane is "plus-size."* She doesn't know how to handle. And my guess is that Deb-in-Jane's-body learns what it is like to be "plus size" and that it is beautiful to be "plus size" as well.

While I'm sure that the aim of Drop Dead Diva is to bring light to the discrimination against and stereotypes of overweight people, I see it as having the same effect as More to Love. Focusing on weight as a part of personality further enforces the stereotype that weight matters. "Drop Dead Diva: Sunday Night's Big Comedy," a post on the Bitch blog says...

The show itself somewhat mimics Deb’s obliviousness when it comes to the issues of fatness it seeks to address. While its intentions are coming from a place of standing up for bigger women's right to be seen as fabulous and treated with respect, Drop Dead Diva plays on stereotypes of blondes as bubble heads and donuts as an obsessive distraction for fat women.

It then goes on to question the outcomes of the show...

On one hand, one could say that utilizing these stereotypes makes them more apparent and allows for them to be deconstructed. On the other hand, it also serves to reinforce them as true.

I think shows like Drop Dead Diva and the reality shows focusing on overweight people do have good intentions. And there is some merit to having more normal sized people on television shows. But when they are put on television shows solely because of their weight, that's when we have a problem. These shows fall into the stereotypes they are trying to fight. On the other hand, what would a show that focuses on overweight people loving themselves and their bodies look like and how would it avoid falling into the stereotypes?

Maybe I will have to break down and actually watch one of them, but I just don't know if I can handle the objectification.

* I always have a hard time coming up with a label (not that there should be a label) for "overweight" people. "Overweight" implies that there is a normal weight and that these people are obviously over it. "Plus-size" has the same connotations. I normally choose to go with "overweight" because it is much more P.C. than "fat" and I don't really care for "plus-size." However, when discussing the plot of Drop Dead Diva, I chose "plus-size" because that is the language used in show descriptions. Does anyone this that there is a better term to use in these situations?

Further Reading:
Do Plus-Size TV Shows Inspire or Disgust? [Jezebel]
Drop Dead Diva: "Fat Things Should Not Happen To Skinny People" [Jezebel]
On "Drop Dead Diva," Blonds are Dumb and Plus-Size Are Smart But Insecure [The Frisky]

The Romanticization of Secret Life

Has anyone else seen Secret Life of the American Teenager on ABC Family? I first got hooked on this show last summer while working at a camp. The teenage girls would sit in the lounge and watch this, so I started watching it with them.

In case you are unfamiliar, here is the basic plot. Amy is a 15 year old girl who gets pregnant at band camp (yes, that one time at band camp). She's surprised she's pregnant because she didn't even know she was having sex until after it happened (abstinence-only at work?). She's not interested in dating the father, Ricky, and instead starts dating good guy Ben (who wants to marry her). Ricky is involved (as in they have sex but aren't really in a relationship) with Adrian, who befriends Grace, the resident Christian virgin, who is dating Jack. Grace and Jack get into many disagreements about having sex. Amy's parents are getting divorced. So, that's a very broad overview. There's obviously a lot more that goes on, but I think this overview should help you understand this post and the problems that I have with the show a little better.

This is by no means a good show. I have a problem of getting weirdly addicted to bad television, which is why I watch this show, as bad as it is. And just because I watch it doesn't mean that I don't have problems with it. When I started watching it with those teenage girls at summer camp, I asked them why they liked it so much. Their response: "It's so realistic!" Whoa there!

Now, into the second season of Secret Life, Amy has had the baby (John), her mom is pregnant (and it's unclear if it's her husband's or her boyfriend's), Grace and Jack have had sex, Grace's dad died and she thinks it's because she had sex (don't even get me started on that one!), Ricky is becoming responsible, and Ben is still dying to have sex.

While I think it is great that ABC Family has a show about teen pregnancy, it is not a realistic representation of this situation for a lot of people. In the most recent episode that aired on Monday, July 20, Amy (who has by now had her baby, John) complains to her mom about not being able to go to Italy with her boyfriend, Ben, for the summer. She claims that she is an adult now solely because she has a baby and can make decisions for herself. Mind you, she is still 15 (almost 16), does not have a passport, wants to go without her baby but doesn't have anyone she trusts (she wants her mom to do it) to watch the baby. A. What 15 year olds parents are going to let them go to Italy for the summer with her boyfriend who is going to stay with family and B. I bet a lot of single, teen parents wish their biggest problem was not being able to go to Italy for the summer.

When the teen girls told me they liked the show because it was so realistic, I asked them how many of their friends or people they knew were pregnant and had boyfriends who they were dating for a month who have pledged their love and desperately wanted to marry them (to the point of trying to get fake ids to elope)? Their answer: none. So, how is this realistic? While I'm sure this is the reality for some people out there, I really think that this show is romanticizing teen pregnancy.

When you look at the differences between Secret Life and something like 16 and Pregnant on MTV, you can plainly see the romanticization that happens in Secret Life. In 16 and Pregnant, the struggles of the teens are very clear (even though I wish they would show a little more of after the baby was born, maybe they'll go back to the same teens in a later episode...). Some of them deal with absent fathers, economic struggles, non-supportive or controlling parents, and social ostracism.

While Secret Life does show some struggles that Amy goes through, recently she just seems to be concerned with her social life and John, her baby, falls through the cracks, at least in her mind. Amy is just coming off, at least to me, as whiny and ungrateful. Her parents, especially her mother, are supporting her immensely through this and trying to help her take responsibility, but she won't have any of it. In the first season she was mad because she didn't want to give the baby up for adoption (which is completely reasonable) but was expecting her mother to provide free day care while she went on with life as normal. In the second season, she is heartbroken that she can't go to Grace's dad's funeral because she can't find a babysitting not because she wants to honor and say goodbye to her father, but because everyone else is going to be there. Seriously?

I don't mean to negate any experiences that teen parents might go through, even those similar to what happens on Secret Life. Maybe I have no place saying any of this because I was not a teen parent. But just because I wasn't a teen parent, doesn't mean I can't at least have an opinion about the show. Has anyone else seen this show? What do you think about it?

True Blood is Right Wing's Worst Nightmare

I have a slight obsession with True Blood. I posted earlier about how vampire series like True Blood (and Buffy and Twilight) represent women's sexuality by featuring very few female vampires. But True Blood quickly has become one of my new favorite shows on television right now (I only discovered it a couple months ago). Because of this, every Monday I look forward to Jezebel's "Sunday Bloody Sunday" feature recapping the previous nights episode; it's always smart and sassy. This week's "Sunday Bloody Sunday" tipped me off to an article on The Daily Beast relating the world of True Blood to the "right wing's worst nightmare about post-gay-liberation America."

Looking beneath the surface of True Blood, you can see the connections between the vampires in the series and the gay community. The vampires recently "came out" of hiding among humans (aka heterosexuals, for the purposes of this comparison), exposing the number of vampires in society and demanding an equal place in society. A running theme throughout the first season is the vampires fighting for the right to marry humans. Churches claim that vampires are evil and threaten to destroy the very fabric of society.

I had been aware of this social commentary since I started watching the show (which is also much similar to the X-Men series). But I had never really thought too critically about it because I was too busy enjoying the awesome-ness of the show (ok, so I might be a little biased about the show). So, I have gone over some of the similarities, but there are also some troubling differences...

As the Daily Beast article points out...

it has troubling implications, because the vampires, political rhetoric aside, aren’t really interested in joining human society. Unlike the misunderstood X-Men heroes, most of the vampires we meet are arrogant, perverse, and cruel—everything the far right believes gays to be.

The article goes on to wonder about the true intentions of the show...

It’s hard to tell what creator Alan Ball, who also made Six Feet Under, is up to here. He’s openly gay, so he could be simply tweaking conservative fears. Or, like Rupert Everett, maybe he’s reacting against the domestication of gay life.

It's hard to say. Even though there are similarities between vampires and the gay community, they are not necessarily painted in a good light. Is this Alan Ball just turning conservative fears on themselves, or is it "reacting against the domestication of gay life"?

Even though True Blood offers social commentary on the gay rights movement (whether positive or negative, it's still up for debate), I do not think that the show has much to offer feminism and women's rights. The shows main female character, Sookie Stackhouse, is kind of helpless. She constantly needs Bill, her vampire lover, to rescue her, which has caused Eric, a powerful vampire in the region, to take notice of her as well, often treating her as an object. Sure, she does have her psychic capabilities to offer, but it's always the guys (aka vamps) that do the heavy-lifting. In addition to often having to rescue Sookie, Bill is often highly protective of her, not really letting her do a lot for or by herself. Sookie loves how Bill treats her, most of the time. But she always comes back to him in the end after they have a fight about his protective nature or his vamp nature.

I still love the show. I think it has a lot to offer television, even without being feminist. But encouraging conversation about the treatment of women in the show and the emphasis on sexuality will bring these feminist issues to light.

Further Reading:
True Blood: Pro-gay/Anti-feminist? [Smashing patriarchy daily]
'True Blood' and Female Sexuality [Appetite for Equal Rights]
Rough Sex With Vampires: What Does "True Blood" Tell Us About Women and Sexuality? [AlterNet]

The Case for What Not to Wear

I actually like the show What Not to Wear. I like seeing the different clothes that get picked out. I like Stacy and Clinton, sure they are mean sometimes, but they are generally pretty funny. I think part of why I like the show is because I want to be friends with Stacy and Clinton.

But when Jezebel mentioned the show in passing in an article about how teenage girls use image consultants to boost their self-esteem, I kind of went on the offensive. The Jezebel article states...

Alter's piece explores the growing trend of image consultations for young girls, who, due to the increased societal pressures to present a certain image thanks in part to tween stars like Miley Cyrus and makeover gurus like Stacy London and Clinton Kelly, feel that their looks need an upgrade.

Sure, I will agree that stars like Miley Cyrus are not setting the best example for young girls. But I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to look good. I have even seen many episodes of What Not to Wear where the woman featured that show gains more self-esteem by seeing themselves in a different light.

Stacy and Clinton can be mean sometimes, ok, a lot. But their ultimate goal in that is to help the woman see that the way they are dressing is affecting other parts of their life. While I would love to say that it shouldn't matter how you dress, but it does. People judge. Especially when you are in a professional setting, you need to send the right message with that you wear.

In this past week's episode centering around an ex-ballerina named Holly, the woman had low self-esteem because her body was no longer to ballerina expectations, so she was not dressing to show off her body. But Stacy and Clinton helped her to feel better about her body, let go of who she was and embrace who she is, and increase her self-esteem. While I'm sure this woman will still have some self-esteem issues, I think that seeing her attractive body in attractive clothes helped her to realize that she is still a great person even if she couldn't make it as a ballerina.

While I agree with the Jezebel article that these image consultants may not be the best solution to self-esteem problems, I do think that What Not to Wear has some benefits. Living in today's society, appearance does matter. And looking good should not be anti-feminist. It's possible to look good, dress for your body type (I don't like the phrase, but it's true), and be a feminist. And if this show can help a few people raise their self-esteem just a little bit, I think that it is doing some good. And the pressures to fit in during high school (and beyond) are not going to go away.

This Week in Blogs: July 5 - July 11

This week has been kind of crazy for me, which means that time to work on the blog has been given a lower priority to some of the others things that I have to do. But hopefully this will be a relaxing Sunday and I will have some time to work on blog posts.

Here are some blog posts that I found interesting this week:

• Sarah Seltzer at RH Reality Check compares the racism of the burqa ban to the patriarchal standards of beauty in the United States.

• How do you describe you personal and political attitudes towards abortion? Are you pro-choice? pro-life? anti-choice? pro-abortion? RMJ at Deeply Problematic explores her view being pro-abortion.

• Lizz at Choices Campus Blog looks at how jokes about rape add to a culture where rape is not taken seriously.

• Jill at Feministe qualifies what is necessary in a feminist urban policy.

• There has been a lot of news over Palin resigning. Jordan at Equal Writes examines her resignation a little further.

• Jessica at the Frisky asks: could you date a guy who wasn't a feminist?

• Amy at Pregnant Pause looks at two tv shows that represent teen pregnancy: The Secret Life of the American Teenager and 16 and Pregnant.

• Even though this isn't a feminist blog, I thought I would include this one. Entertainment Weekly examines the role women play in gangster movies.

• Dave Zirin for The Nation further explores the sexism present at Wimbledon.

What were some of your favorite blog posts that you wrote or read this week? Leave some recommendations of blogs and blog posts in the comments.

On Being a Lesbian in Network TV Show - The Case of Heroes

I heard of this via Womanist Musings.

I have been watching Heroes since it started. The first season was great and ever since then I have been hoping that it will some how get back up to those standards. So far, no luck. Their recent plot twists have left me disappointed. But don't worry, they have more plot twists in store for the upcoming season. One of which is creating a lesbian love interest for Claire, the teenager who has healing powers.

TV shows have done this before. One prominent example is Buffy the Vampire Slayer, where Willow developed a lesbian love interest after breaking up with her long time boyfriend. But can Heroes handle this as well as Buffy? I highly doubt it. The writing on Buffy was top notch (but I'm kind of partial to Joss Whedon), whereas Heroes has been kind of lacking as of late.

Using a lesbian relationship solely to increase ratings is just further objectifying and exploiting lesbians and the relationships they have. I feel as if this development in the Heroes script is simply serving as a way to attract male viewers who have lesbian fantasies as opposed to bringing awareness to the issues, struggles, and life experiences facing lesbians today.

Renee at Womanist Musings has this to say...

It seems evident that the producers are going for the titillation factor, considering that this is an attempt to raise ratings. Heaven forbid a lesbian relationship exist on television because women actually engage in sexual relationships for pleasure and not to be a visual fluffer for some guy who wants to get off.

Even if they somehow manage to normalize this relationship, the impetus for its creation will always render it a form of exploitation. The idea that GLBT relationships can be affirmed when it suits the needs of heterosexuals only maintains the power imbalance. Heterosexuals should not be able to decide when expression of lesbian love is appropriate, when little to no such disciplining occurs between men and women.

Using lesbian relationships to serve heterosexuals is just another way to placing lesbians in a subordinate position.

On this note, is it any coincidence that the character entering into a lesbian relationship is Claire, the hot teenage cheerleader, instead of someone like Angela Petrelli? This is just another example of exploiting female sexuality for the purposes of heterosexual men.

I'm going to be interested to see how this story line plays out. Like I said, I'm not really holding out a lot of hope that the writers are going to handle this story line effectively or in a respectful manner. But, you never know.

"Bloodsucking Is a Boys World"

What is America's obsession with vampires? I'll admit, I've fallen into this obsession. It all started with Buffy, which I only started watching earlier this year, and now I'm into True Blood as well. There's also Twilight, which I have a weird fascination with as I've talked about before. As much as I love these vampire shows (Buffy and True Blood, that is), why is America obsessed with them? And why am I obsessed with them? (My obsession might have something to do with my obsession with pop culture and TV shows in general, but maybe it's something more too since America seems obsessed with them as well.)

I loved Buffy because the character was a strong woman who saved the world on numerous occasions which is such a rare occurrence in media today. Even though Buffy had the help of many strong men, she was the one in charge and the one who ultimately would save the day. True Blood centers around a strong female character, Sookie Stackhouse, and her relationship with a vampire, Bill. While Sookie often needs rescuing, she can stand up for herself. My weird obsession with Twilight has more to do with my lack of understanding for the obsession with the phenomenon. Bella is not strong, cannot stand up for herself, and constantly needs to be saved by Edward. And Edward is basically a creepy stalker. I prefer Buffy and True Blood because of the strong female characters, where as Twilight is a feminist nightmare. But why does America like vampires?

In the New York Times article "A Trend With Teeth," Ruth La Ferla examines the appeal of vampires. She states,

The vampire’s attraction is “all about the titillation of imagining the monsters we could be if we just let ourselves go,” suggested Rick Owens, a fashion bellwether whose goth-tinged collections sometimes evoke the undead. “We’re all fascinated with corruption, the more glamorous the better” and, he added, with the idea of “devouring, consuming, possessing someone we desire.”

Dodai from Jezebel wrote a similar, yet feminist, article titled "Women Play Mostly Supporting Role Within Male-Dominated "Trend"". To explain America's fascination with vampires, she proposes,

But in a new interview with True Blood series creator Alan Ball, he says: "Vampires are sex. Vampires basically arose in our time as a metaphor for sex. I mean, vampires are sort of the ultimate Romantic rock star, bad boy or girl fantasy."

So, if vampires are all about sex, it's no surprise that America has an obsession with them. Especially with the 'abstinence porn' that is Twilight. This series is all about sexual control, in a very sexualized way.

But why do we always see male vampires? Buffy had Angel and Spike. Twilight has Edward. True Blood has Bill and Eric. One of the few exceptions is the newly made vampire Jessica in True Blood, who is a whiny teenager who is still learning to control her impulses. There is also Drusilla in Buffy who is very mentally disturbed.

Why is it always the men that embody sex, dominate women, and possess others? Why can't women be in these powerful roles? And why is it that when women are vampires, as in Jessica and Drusilla, they are in some way less than the male vampires, whether through age and experience or mental capability?

"Bloodsucking is a boys world," according to the Jezebel article. It then goes on to describe the online phenomenon that was the video of Buffy 'dusting' Edward.

Jonathan McIntosh, who created the clip, says: More than just a showdown between The Slayer and the Sparkly Vampire, it's also a humorous visualization of the metaphorical battle between two opposing visions of gender roles in the 21ist century […] In the end the only reasonable response was to have Buffy stake Edward – not because she didn't find him sexy, not because he was too sensitive or too eager to share his feelings – but simply because he was possessive, manipulative, and stalkery.

I guess that what we need to combat the male domination of the vampire world is digitally created video of two different shows mashed together.

I wonder if a show or movie centering around a female vampire will ever be as popular as Buffy, Twilight, or True Blood? Sure there are powerful female characters in two out of three of those, but they are not vampires. When will women be able to embody sex and sexuality like men as vampires?