I have a great many friends who read, and since the release of "Breaking Dawn" I have heard over and over again the argument that Meyer is supporting the right to "choose" to be a wife/mother rather, that Bella "chooses" to take on that role as just one choice out of many that she could make, as if the author and the story itself openly support the idea of Bella having freedom of choice.
I myself support all choices for women, which in my mind include the stay-at-home mother and/or wife roles. However, while I would like to give Meyer the benefit of the doubt, it's highly unlikely that she meant to support any form of feminism in the Twilight Saga novels, due to her rather obvious religious/cultural influences.
When I was also under the influence of that same religion/culture, I said the exact same things that my friends are saying now about the "choice" to be a submissive wife and mother. EXACTLY the same things. Like a parrot. Like a robot. Usually with the exact same words that others used, and without thinking much about what "choice" or "freedom" meant.
In the context of Meyer's upbringing, the argument of "Why can't we choose to be wives and mothers?" is not actually an argument for freedom of choice. It's a thinly disguised attempt to justify the sexism inherent in the system.
Why does Edward insist that they get married before sex?
Because Meyer's religion says so.
Why does Bella "choose" to be a wife and mother?
Because Meyer's religion says to.
Why isn't anyone in the Twilight Saga gay?
Why do they all end up as couples (something that is made painfully obvious by the kitchen scene in the movie)? Why is no one allowed, by the book, to be independently single? (There's Charlie, but he's a "victim" of the "evil" concept of divorce.)
Why does Bella have the baby?
Because she's a character who chooses her own path -- or because these are all the things Meyer was told to do and say and become by her culture? When does Bella ever do something that is against the rules of Meyer's upbringing?
There is no word more greatly abused by Meyer's church than the word "choice." They force their members into tiny little boxes and then pressure them to say they "chose" those boxes -- the only boxes that are allowed.
For the choice of "wife and mother" over other options to be an actual, legitimate *choice*, all of the alternative choices also need to be supported and treated as valid. But all of the other choices are looked down on and criticized by that belief system. In many cases, being a wife and mother is a great choice for the right person. But in Meyer's world, and in her fiction, it is only disguised as a choice, and in truth, there really is no other option.
They did get married before sex in the end, even though Bella didn't want to. Her choice was actually taken away from her. She got to be a vampire, but only because she submitted to those around her and did what they wanted first. How is that freedom?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Twilight & Meyer -- From the Inside.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10756
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I think you make a very good point about "what happenes when the 'choice' invoked was the ONLY possible option--is it then a choice?" We hear this a lot in the debates over prostitution amongst lower-income and marginalized women.
But, for the sake of argument, what if the response of the religiuos wives and mothers you mention is that the "choice" element played into it earlier in the process, when they chose their religious beliefs? After all, most feminists/humanists would agree that an adult has the right to choose amongst the various religious paradigms of the world.
Having made that choice, which WAS a genuine one, the women have agreed to accept the parcel of decisions that come along with it, even if those are, by their definition as religious tenets, *not* choices as we conceive of them.
I'm usually of the opinion that one should read/watch the thing they're criticizing before criticizing... but in the case of Twilight it all sounds just so horrid that I'm sure it would be a waste of my time and money to look at the damn thing.
That said I am going to see the movie with friends so we can heckle it MST3K style XD
I went to go see it with some of my friends today. They read the books just to see why it was so popular and we all went to go see it just to see how bad it is. While heckling it and discussing it with them I noticed a few things:
A) The movie played some lip service to feminism. She fought back when the men surrounded her, she suggested her friend ask the boy to the prom, and some other things I can't think of atm.
B) She is not 'in love' with Edward, she is addicted to him and he to her. That's all there is to it and I can see why the relationship devolves into an abusive one.
And C) Seriously? Diamonds... *snicker* it's hard to take a vampire seriously if he's gets all bedazzled every time he steps in the sunlight.
It's always a tricky question: how do we know that people or characters aren't just *choosing* to follow the same path that they are being told to?
I think the main litmus test is to ask the question, "do they ever deviate from the path, even in little things?" It's hard to take (say) any single moment and analyze it in terms of whether it's following a pattern: a single scene concerning abortion in a TV show, a person's decision to wait until marriage for sex.
The question to ask is always "how is the entire narrative/life constructed?" Stories that meet every demand of, or lives that never deviate from, an ideology -- well, it gets harder to make the case that they are "choosing" anything other than their submission.
People who are free buy items individually wrapped, vote for candidates, occasionally wear polka dots with stripes; people who are captive buy items in box sets, vote straight-party tickets, and wear the same outfit everyday. It is often easier to do the latter, but it is rarely (if ever) free.
Twilight sounds like it's a little too pat; the characters all "choose" to be what was first chosen for them too often and too consistently. That's what irks feminists.
So I'm not a "free" person because I vote straight Democratic? Never mind the fact that I agree with the Democratic party over the Republican one on virtually every issue. I'm "captive" simply because I associate myself with a party, and I'd be better off voting against my values by choosing Republican candidates from time to time. And what the fuck does buying individually wrapped vs. in bulk have to do with anything? Buying in bulk is good for the environment, I don't see what it has to do with conformity.
Maybe if you didn't jump to so many stupid, bigoted assumptions, people would take you more seriously. I really liked your comment up until that moment, when you lost all credibility.
to add to this,
I get a distinct sense of her religious/cultural mindset in the fact that almost all of her Native American characters have very Semitic names. Isn't there a Mormon belief that the Native Americans are actually the lost tribes of Israel?