hmmm that's a tough one.
I agree with that definition, choices and eliminated can'ts.

Feminism means having the choice, not necessarily making the healthiest choice.
It would be sexist to only sell cigarettes, alcohol and other legal substances that are clearly not healthy, to men only. It wouldn't make sense to exclude women who smoke from the movement.
Part of the movement includes allowing for unhealthy choices.
Thankfully,
Part of the movement also includes recovering from unhealthy choices.

In the case of a woman making the choice to be abused by a male, well, it definitely makes me wonder. Does it make the women completely non feminist?
I don't know? I met some pretty amazing feminists who were fighting their way out of abusive relationships when I volunteered at a safe house.
The abusive situation didn't completely define them, it informed them.

As for fictional characters, I just don't invest much in the ones that are weak.
For instance, I like Sarah Connor, I can relate to a character like that, so I watch the show.
That series of vampire books turns me off- the female characters and the males.

I think the problem isn't that Bella herself is anti-feminist, but the Twilight world is anti-feminist. The whole story is set up in a way that keeps Bella weaker than the men. The story blatantly promotes that the only acceptable way for a woman to live is as a mother, and the only women who don't fit that ideal are denigrated for it.

Not only that, but there are a lot of creepy relationship ideals. Edward is a manipulative stalker, and about half-a-step from outright abusive, and this relationship is promoted as completely healthy. The werewolf imprinting removes free will in relationships.

Bella's decisions may not be anti-feminist, but there is no denying that the books are.

Hara--- The problem is that Bella isn't trying to get out of the abusive relationship. Their relationship is portrayed as healthy.

I think the whole concept of choice is more than simply having options and picking one. Most choices that people make are contingent on some cultural factor, be it family, ability, or gender. Do women who shave their legs shave them because they want to or because they have to? Obviously, I wouldn't do it if I didn't have to, but I also like the results. But I still wouldn't say that it was a choice. I think "choosing" to do something that most people do because it's expected of their gender isn't really a choice at all. I wouldn't even say that we live in a pro-choice society, because there are so many environmental factors influencing women with unwanted pregnancies (like the economy and gender stereotypes). Just because women have options doesn't mean that there isn't one option that our society expects and works hard towards making every woman pick it.

BTW, I haven't read any of the Twilight books, but I might see the movie because Robert Pattinson is H-O-T. I quasi met him at the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire premiere. And by that I mean I shook his hand and told him that he has great hair, and he laughed nervously. Fun times.

The whole story is set up in a way that Bella is weaker than the men.
Not necessarily. Alice is portrayed as a pretty kick-ass character, and frequently gets Bella out of dangerous situations.
I agree with Stephenie Meyer that feminism is about choices, and that we shouldn't judge other people because their choices aren't the ones we would make. However, it does bother me that their obsessive, co-dependent relationship is touted as healthy, natural, and what every girl wants.

I think Stephanie Meyer's point is fair when it comes to issues of choice - even though Bella getting married and having children is something I would never do, it is hardly a large step for someone willing to sacrifice their mortality.

As to their supposedly abusive relationship, i agree that it is possible that young teenagers could take their relationship out of context, but if you read it keeping in mind the dangerous vampires that are constantly trying to kill Bella... Edward's overprotective behavior makes quite a lot of sense.

1. Jacob is a werewolf! He and his friends have the possibility to morph into a potentially deadly creature when angry. (eg. Emily's scarred face and the times when Jacob almost morphs in front of Bella.) Edward's initial unwillingness to let Bella visit Jacob is based on these factors. However, when he realises that Bella is set on remaining friends with Jacob, Edward changes his outlook and doesn't limit Bella's movements from then on.

2. A lot of the time (perhaps a tad too much) Bella is being pursued by bloodthirsty vampires (think James, Laurent, Victoria, the Volturi). Any other over protectiveness is usually due to this, completely unrealistic of course, but then this is a fantasy romance!

3. Although Bella is inferior in strength to the vampires before she becomes one of them (including Alice, Rosalie and Esme), by Breaking Dawn she is more powerful than any of them because of her newborn status. I personally enjoyed this book a lot because of this - it was great to see Bella becoming the most important and powerful character.

Wendy notsid

Thanks for the calrification. I'm not a fan of the show. I watched about 3 minutes of it and wasn't pulled in.
I did notice that I look forward to Sarah Connor Chronicles every week (so does my 19 yr old son).
I realized while watching it, that she is one of the few female characters represented in TV or Film who reacts in a ways that makes sense to me.
Almost every other female portrayed comes off as either over the top, annoyingly fitting into a stereotype, or so weak, or cliche'...ugh.
I just have such little tolerance for them.
I wonder if the Sarah Connor character is strong and intelligent because of James Cameron or Gal Anne Hurd? or both?
I wonder about female writers who create stories and characters as in Twilight. Are they processing something? Is it unconscious?
I'm sad to hear of a weak female character written by a woman.
I'm annoyed by characters that act so differently (and with weakness) than women I know.
I touched on that here:
http://metahara.livejournal.com/377012.html

I disagree. I wouldn't call the Twilight series feminist but it isn't anti-feminist. I love the series but I won't really get into that. I agree with Meyer that feminism is about choice, Bella made these choices while I may not agree with all of them, they were hers to make.

I don't understand this asseration that Edward is emotionally abusive. All through the series he had concerns about their relationship because he was afraid of hurting her both emotionally and psychically. During her pregnancy, he wanted her to have an abortion because he didn't want her to die. He even talked to Jacob about having children with her because he knew he couldn't father any children that weren't life-threatening.

I also don't know about the asseration that the series is saying women are nothing if they don't have children. Esme and Rosalie both wanted children. Esme had a son while human but he died of a lung infection when he was a few days old. Rosalie was turned into a vampire before having the chance to get pregnant. Alice, on the other hand, never showed any desire for children and seemed pretty happy with her life without them.

Ohmigod. Wendy, you're here too?

But yeah. It's so easy to just completely avoid the question by claiming today's feminists are mean women who want to kill babies and force women into *sigh* work.

Also, I love how Smeyer goes on and on about choice (she claims the Twilight cover represents "choice", but I thought it represented the fact that WA's fruit is the apple)), when Edward makes the decisions for her, save a few times.

bandersnatch brings up a great point.

Twilight is not an anti-feminist book. There are in fact many powerful women vampires in the book. Alice, Rosalie, Victoria, Jane, etc. They are both powerful and full of wisdom.

I think it is ignorant to say that Edward is controlling Bella by, "dismantles her car so she can't see her friends? Locks her in his house for the same reason? Or how Bella jumps of a cliff (literally) just to 'hear his voice in her head'?".

um hello have you even read the book? Edward does those certain things to keep Bella safe. If you actually read the text you would discover that Bella will do things to keep Edward safe.

I guess that Edward is wrong...he should just let Bella die instead of looking out for her. Right?

Another thing I wanted to bring up is the idea that Bella is anti-feminist. Oh hey, that's your interpretation of the text. When I read the book I did not think of Bella as a pathetic character. She is clumsy and Edward will catch her before she falls. This doesn't make her helpless. I would want someone to catch me if I were to trip over something as well whether it be a male or female...I just don't feel like falling on my face, thanks.

Also keep in mind that Bella is a teenager, she has found love and it's a great thing. She doesn't disrespect herself as a woman by falling in love, she is just going through the motions.

In closing to my rant I would like to say keep an open mind. Stephenie Meyer is an amazing writer and has multiple valid points when discussing the issue of her book.

I love how everyone always assumes that if you have problem with Twilight, that you have a problem about a teenager falling in love. Hardly. It's just that there's kind of a gap between "having a problem with a relationship in which the boyfriend dismantles the girl's car so she can't see her friends" and "I H8 LOVE"

All Bella is is an obsession with Edward. She ceases to exist when he's not around and has nothing else in her life that she takes real interest in that Edward does not try to control. No hobbies, no ambitions, no ideas about ANYTHING that doesn't involve him, no interests.

really wendy? i'm not examining their characteristics in depth of each vampire. i'm looking at the bigger picture of how they are powerful and knowledgeable.

abusive relationship? yeahhh that's exactly it, you have made a profound literary analysis. HOORAYY!

oh and let's take a look at all the fans that exist for twilight, yeah i think there's been a great response to the book.

too bad that you're too busy being a feminist nazi to explore the literary gold that is present. but have fun!! :]

i

What disturbs me is that the Twilight universe reflects our own. It's very sexist. While the Twilight world 'ups' the fantasy level, obviously, it does so in a way that only ups the sexism, too. Maybe it's because Bella lives in a small, back woods town that's supposed to represent the 'real traditional America.'

Twilight is not feminism. It's faux-feminism. We don't really need women trying to justify their right to stay in and be mothers. That happens a lot. Now, having Bella decide to be a mother while say, going to school or do something else productive would've been a better plot.

I really don't think Twilight related situations/events can ever be compared to reality....
Edward dismantles her car and locks her in his house so she can't see a werewolf, the long-standing rival of a vampire. Not really a feminist issue, in my book... Regardless, I think Edward was totally justified in his over protectiveness when it came to protecting his true love from a freaky werewolf.

If this about Bella 'not being able to make her own decisions'...she did. She compromised with Edward on many fronts and made many empowering choices throughout the saga.

I think we should all just enjoy the books and not try to analyze it too much. Like Wendy said, this is fictional book with fictional characters and Bella made the right choices for HER. THAT to me, is empowering.