Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hylean)
    Psychology would argue it's a backlash against all the personal freedoms they've been given recently. :yep:
    there's something in that, but it's a really simplistic reading.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    No, I think it's the bits that don't fit in with feminism that we should take notice of.

    I think the reasons Twilight is very important and the reasons Twilight is anti-feminist are very similar. Twilight reveals in a generation of girls and women a strong sexual undercurrent, which is important, but what's also important is the nature of this sexual undercurrent.

    To put it simply, what I find important about Twilight is that it forces us to take notice of this female sexuality, and also forces us to ask questions about it. It forces us to ask the question- why is it that girls find the idea of being helpless attractive? What has society done to create a generation of girls that find sexual violence erotic?

    I don't think the values in Twilight should be celebrated, nor the depiction of sexuality. I think what's important is what Twilight reveals to us about the sexualities of the girls and women in our society.
    Well, I don't want to get into some interminable debate on nature vs nurture, but personally I can't help but feel that the reason girls like the idea of being helpless is because evolution has made them genetically inclined to do so.

    Further back in evolutionary history, it seems to me that big, strong, controlling males would have been most able to hunt food, protect their offspring from predators, fight off other males, etc.

    But unlike my assertions on political philosophy and computing - where I like to think I'm relatively knowledgeable - I admit my knowledge of both evoluntionary biology and the socialization of character traits in teenage girls is extremely limited. I may well be wrong.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Gregory)
    Well, I don't want to get into some interminable, never-ending debate on nature vs nurture, but personally I can't help but feel that the reason girls like the idea of being helpless is because evolution has made them genetically inclined to do so.

    Further back in evolutionary history, it seems to me that big, strong, controlling males would have been most able to hunt food, protect their offspring from predators, fight off other males, etc.

    But unlike my assertions on political philosophy and computing - where I like to think I'm relatively knowledgeable - I admit my knowledge of both evoluntionary biology and the socialization of character traits in teenage girls is extremely limited. I may well be wrong.
    Mmm, well, I'm inclined to believe that evolution has next to nothing to do with it, so that's not really something I can comment on.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    I don't have a problem with people's consensual sex lives- but I think it's naive to think that what people desire sexually is completely unrelated to any other part of their life, and that it isn't gendered or socialised.
    Never said it wasn't, but it's naive to say that there isn't a large proportion of men who have the same kinds of thoughts as those women you're worried about. It's not as black and white as "women want to be hurt, etc." "men want to do the hurting". So much research has been done on this and it's more connected to how we are brought up and the things we suffer early on in life (not in a Freudian way) that affect our fetishes. It's not limited to women. The only reason Twilight fails to arouse the attention of those men is that the character if female.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    For example, I think it's naive to think that a sexual obsession with hurting oneself, being hurt, or hurting other people won't play out into other parts of their lives. Because it usually does. The way someone views themselves sexually is so important to our identity, and it's absolutely related to things such as eating disorders, or self harm, or destructive sexual behaviour. And I think it would be naive to say that the extremely high number of rapes and sexual assaults in our society have nothing to do with the glamourisation of sexual violence in our society.
    I never said it wouldn't, but instead of treating all such cases as bad, I prefer to look at it on a case by case basis. Sexual fantasies often involve inversion of roles. So when the women/men who tend to be the most submissive are often the most dominant outside of the bedroom and vice versa. It's not necessarily that deeply imbedded in our identity as you'd think. It's more a release valve: "I'm sick of always be in charge, let them have the worry for once" or "I'm sick of doing all the work, let them do it for a change".

    Unless you have proof that violent sexual fetishes are intrinsically connected to eating disorders, destructive sexual behaviour (would you also define that please?) or self harm, I wouldn't make such claims. I would also like you to find some evidence for the claim that glamorising sexual violence leads to an increase in rape and sexual assault, as well as evidence that we actually do glamorise sexual violence in our society. I'm a bit removed from contemporary society, so I wouldn't notice it if it were being glamorised.

    I really, truly dislike the way you are relegating BDSM fetishists to the realm of damaged goods. You're ignoring a huge amount of research done on it and you're ignoring the fact that BDSM is often a coping mechanism for many neuroses developed from childhood. Whilst it can be bad for you, on the whole it isn't.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    there's something in that, but it's a really simplistic reading.
    Is it? Care to offer up some contrary evidence?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hylean)
    Never said it wasn't, but it's naive to say that there isn't a large proportion of men who have the same kinds of thoughts as those women you're worried about. It's not as black and white as "women want to be hurt, etc." "men want to do the hurting". So much research has been done on this and it's more connected to how we are brought up and the things we suffer early on in life (not in a Freudian way) that affect our fetishes. It's not limited to women. The only reason Twilight fails to arouse the attention of those men is that the character if female.
    Not really, it's cos it's written in a distinctly feminine style and deals with typically feminine issues. But yes, of course it's not as simple as 'women want to be hurt and men want to hurt'- but I think in most situations where someone is wanting to hurt themselves or others that sucks. I also think that there's a lot of evidence that the roles of men hurting/women being hurt is a particularly strong one in sexuality.


    (Original post by Hylean)
    I never said it wouldn't, but instead of treating all such cases as bad, I prefer to look at it on a case by case basis. Sexual fantasies often involve inversion of roles. So when the women/men who tend to be the most submissive are often the most dominant outside of the bedroom and vice versa. It's not necessarily that deeply imbedded in our identity as you'd think. It's more a release valve: "I'm sick of always be in charge, let them have the worry for once" or "I'm sick of doing all the work, let them do it for a change".
    As someone brought up on psychoanalysis I would obviously beg to differ.


    (Original post by Hylean)
    Unless you have proof that violent sexual fetishes are intrinsically connected to eating disorders, destructive sexual behaviour (would you also define that please?) or self harm, I wouldn't make such claims.
    Er, what sort of 'proof' are you looking for? This isn't science- this debate isn't about proof. I might as well say 'prove it' to every sentence you write.

    My inclination is to believe that if you're disposed to hurting yourself, or hurting others, this will demonstrate itself in your sexual desires, your behaviour, and the way you feel about yourself. I don't think one's sexuality and sexual desires are particularly distinct from the rest of their identity and their other desires. I don't see why this is particularly controversial.

    Also, can you be more careful about how you paraphrase my argument? Because slipping the word 'intrinsically' in there completely changes what I'm arguing, and when you say stuff like:

    "I would also like you to find some evidence for the claim that glamorising sexual violence leads to an increase in rape and sexual assault"

    you're truly setting up a straw man, because my argument was different from this. Maybe the difference was a bit subtle for you, but it's an important distinction nonetheless.


    (Original post by Hylean)
    evidence that we actually do glamorise sexual violence in our society. I'm a bit removed from contemporary society, so I wouldn't notice it if it were being glamorised.
    Er, Twilight?

    I really, truly dislike the way you are relegating BDSM fetishists to the realm of damaged goods. You're ignoring a huge amount of research done on it and you're ignoring the fact that BDSM is often a coping mechanism for many neuroses developed from childhood. Whilst it can be bad for you, on the whole it isn't.
    That's not what I'm doing at all. I don't think sexual inclinations can be 'good' or 'bad', they just an indication of something else that's going on, and part of a much more complex thing. I do think that inclinations to hurt yourself and to hurt others can be explored in a sexual realationship either in a healthy way or an unhealthy way. Sexual relationships that explore pain and power can lead to healing, or balance, or just plain fun. Think "Secretary" with Maggie Gyllenhaal.

    But my key point is that, this is not the kind of relationship that Twilight promotes.


    Is it? Care to offer up some contrary evidence?
    Go ask a teenage girl how much freedom and power she feels.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Not really, it's cos it's written in a distinctly feminine style and deals with typically feminine issues. But yes, of course it's not as simple as 'women want to be hurt and men want to hurt'- but I think in most situations where someone is wanting to hurt themselves or others that sucks. I also think that there's a lot of evidence that the roles of men hurting/women being hurt is a particularly strong one in sexuality.
    I honestly thought we'd stopped discussing Twilight and had moved onto the sexuality that these teenage girls apparently possess which is so bad.

    If you can't follow that the argument has moved past the novels, that's not my problem.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    As someone brought up on psychoanalysis I would obviously beg to differ.
    As a member of the BDSM community, I beg to differ.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Er, what sort of 'proof' are you looking for? This isn't science- this debate isn't about proof. I might as well say 'prove it' to every sentence you write.
    Psychological research for a start? Instead of spouting your own personal interpretations, maybe look for some evidence which agrees with you? Honestly, if you're going to write on this in an essay or your dissertation, you're going to have to do better than this.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    My inclination is to believe that if you're disposed to hurting yourself, or hurting others, this will demonstrate itself in your sexual desires, your behaviour, and the way you feel about yourself. I don't think one's sexuality and sexual desires are particularly distinct from the rest of their identity and their other desires. I don't see why this is particularly controversial.
    That's good for you, but without a shred of proof you're the one building the strawman.

    If you want, I can head down to Torture Garden and gather some anecdotal evidence to support my argument. Might have to give me a while, though. It's not on often and it's hard to travel from Iceland.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Also, can you be more careful about how you paraphrase my argument? Because slipping the word 'intrinsically' in there completely changes what I'm arguing, and when you say stuff like:

    "I would also like you to find some evidence for the claim that glamorising sexual violence leads to an increase in rape and sexual assault"
    "For example, I think it's naive to think that a sexual obsession with hurting oneself, being hurt, or hurting other people won't play out into other parts of their lives. Because it usually does. The way someone views themselves sexually is so important to our identity, and it's absolutely related to things such as eating disorders, or self harm, or destructive sexual behaviour. And I think it would be naive to say that the extremely high number of rapes and sexual assaults in our society have nothing to do with the glamourisation of sexual violence in our society."

    So I exchanged "absolutely" for "intrinsically". It means the same thing.

    Give me evidence that the glamorisation of sexual violence is connected to the "high number of rapes and sexual assaults in our society". If you can't, stop making such claims. Just because this is a forum doesn't mean you can make arguments without backing it up with evidence. Saying your parents brought you up with psychoanalysis isn't evidence.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    you're truly setting up a straw man, because my argument was different from this. Maybe the difference was a bit subtle for you, but it's an important distinction nonetheless.
    Not really.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Er, Twilight?
    One instance is all you can manage? One instance of a disease a pandemic does not make.

    Besides, the bruising could be for added realism, as other Vampiric Romance writers have added the same touches, despite having completely different styles of relationships.

    Instead of acting my arguments, why don't you actually build up your own with evidence?


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    That's not what I'm doing at all. I don't think sexual inclinations can be 'good' or 'bad', they just an indication of something else that's going on, and part of a much more complex thing. I do think that inclinations to hurt yourself and to hurt others can be explored in a sexual realationship either in a healthy way or an unhealthy way. Sexual relationships that explore pain and power can lead to healing, or balance, or just plain fun. Think "Secretary" with Maggie Gyllenhaal.

    But my key point is that, this is not the kind of relationship that Twilight promotes.
    Yet you only say that when you get called up on it. All your other posts have go on about how bad violent sex is, how it's tied to negative things, etc.


    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Go ask a teenage girl how much freedom and power she feels.
    Hehe, cause that'll be indicative of anything. I'd first have to ask her had she read the books; did she like them; why does she like them; what does she think about Bella and Edward's relationship; what her fetishes were; her ideal relationship; does it correspond to the image portrayed by the two characters; if so, why?; if not, why does she think that is; situation at home. Then I'd have to go and ask more girls to get an adequate sampling, before even being able to start comparing the results.

    On top of that, as I mentioned in another post, such fetishes can often be linked to trauma from their childhood, so it's not necessarily about "freedom", though that is the usual reason.

    Until you've got some hard evidence for your theories, which are interesting, please don't reply to me. I'm tired of arguing with you over this, especially as you think that your baseless theories are sufficient for a rather academic debate on the nature of sexuality, identity and how it's all tied to BDSM.

    Also, if you want people to not misconstrue your posts, learn to elucidate your points.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Hearmeout yeah?

    I'm an English Lit student, and obviously Twilight just isn't a good book- as in, it's not well written and it seems to promote scarily bad values without realising it. It's antifeminist, indulgent and the poor writing grates on me.

    However, what pisses me off more than Twilight is people thinking they're clever by ****ging it off. Comparing twilight to proper books is like comparing porn to proper films and saying 'it's so unrealistic and the plot is terrible'. 99% of people know twilight is ****. Just like 99% of people know porn is embarassing and badly made.
    Twilight isn't SUPPOSED to be a literary masterpiece. It's teenage chick lit, it's the female equivilent of porn, or video games or something. Twilight is pure escapism, and fantasy material for girls, just like porn is for guys.

    Yeah, so the difference is that people take twilight pretty seriously, and get obsessed with it- in my opinion it's because for so long teenage girls (and older girls too) have been dying for something trashy and sexy and fantastical like twilight. Teenage girls simply don't have an outlet for sexuality, because they're constantly told they shouldn't really have a proper sexuality.

    Yes, as a literary work, Twilight sucks. But it obviously taps into something really powerful. There's this huge undercurrent of sexual frustration in girls and women, and I think it's amazing that something like this one trashy teenage girls book can cause such a HUGE effect. Meyer has tapped into something important that teenage girls and women feel, and that's not to be sniffed at.

    (Er, to reiterate though, I don't actually think the books are good.)
    Buy a dildo already, Twilight is not the answer.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hylean)
    I honestly thought we'd stopped discussing Twilight and had moved onto the sexuality that these teenage girls apparently possess which is so bad.

    If you can't follow that the argument has moved past the novels, that's not my problem.
    I could equally say, if you've forgotten that we've been debating about Twilight all along, that's not my problem.

    Or, instead of being an aggressive **** about it, I could just say that we've got our wires crossed.

    (Original post by Hylean)
    Psychological research for a start? Instead of spouting your own personal interpretations, maybe look for some evidence which agrees with you? Honestly, if you're going to write on this in an essay or your dissertation, you're going to have to do better than this.
    Well, duh, but I'm not writing an essay, am I? Despite the wealth of sources you've used to back up your points (oh, wait) I'm simply not going to put that amount of effort into an online debate (esp. when I have actual work to do).

    If my argument is weak, then you'll be able to find weaknesses that don't involve lack of sources. Do you seriously expect me to back up all my points with research, in an internet debate? Do you want some kind of referencing system or something?

    I could cite Freud for a lot of what I'm saying- but this isn't an essay, and I have no interest in debating whether Freud's methodology is sound or whatever, which is inevitably what that would lead to.

    Demanding that I provide sources that agree with me is a weak criticism, and I can only assume you can't find any other flaws in my argument.



    (Original post by Hylean)
    So I exchanged "absolutely" for "intrinsically". It means the same thing.
    My God it does not.


    (Original post by Hylean)
    One instance is all you can manage? One instance of a disease a pandemic does not make.
    If millions of people have that disease (or, yknow, buy the book) then yes, it is a pandemic.

    But failing that, you can literally just read a newspaper (obsession with rape and sexual assault and the language used in the reporting). Or read this article on 'torture porn' http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2007/...ld?INTCMP=SRCH
    Advertisement is another area where images with implications of sexual violence are common. It's just everywhere, there's too many examples to list.



    (Original post by Hylean)
    Yet you only say that when you get called up on it. All your other posts have go on about how bad violent sex is, how it's tied to negative things, etc.
    Yes, how bad it is IN TWILIGHT. How it's tied to negative things IN TWILIGHT. This thread and this argument are, in case it's escaped your notice, about Twilight.

    I don't particularly want to go into details of my sex life, but I find it pretty weird that you're accusing me of saying that S&M is soo awful etc when I've already happily admitted to partaking in it.

    (Original post by Hylean)
    Until you've got some hard evidence for your theories, which are interesting, please don't reply to me. I'm tired of arguing with you over this, especially as you think that your baseless theories are sufficient for a rather academic debate on the nature of sexuality, identity and how it's all tied to BDSM.

    Sorry, but I'll take you seriously on that when you start doing the same, yeah? Make sure you include a bibliography.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hylean)
    So, you're saying there isn't a huge strand of Feminist literature that essentially says people should be free to do what they want without having to feel guilty or suffer prejudice from others?
    That is not feminism you moron that is general theories on individual rights.

    Please explain to me in detail how a woman being vehemently anti-feminist and patriarchal is feminist? In fact lets do the whole appeal to authority, why don't you point me in the direction of some of this feminist literature that says such a thing. :rolleyes:


    Riiiiigght. You need to go do some research into Feminism. Like I said, I'm not defending Meyer, just pointing out that Feminism does stand for freedom of choice without fear of any form of reprisal.
    No it doesn't! Lets take this down to the absolute and utter basics. Feminism would be defined as a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women.

    Thus - are you keeping up? - a woman who is vehemently against this would not be a feminist simply because she is doing something. In fact to even suggest such a thing is rather misogynistic.

    But again, you obviously feel you are wider read when it comes to feminism so I would be interested as to what literature you would recommend me that says otherwise.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For goodness sake, it's just a read. The media have hyped it up, it's a little indulging- yes, but it also promotes some good values as well as bad.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.