Are people who dislike Twilight "obsessed" with Twilight?

[Heather]

I gave this 1 star because it was poorly written w/ insipid characters. Beyond that I don't think about them other than when someone tries to tell me I have to like them. Or how romantic Bella and Edward are. As a mother, that just makes me angry.

[Alex]

Jocelyn wrote: "Whether I "embarrass" myself, Mickey, is a choice that belongs to me, not you. It's also a matter of opinion. Clearly, to you, I made a fool of myself. Others might not think so"

I think that you've done the exact opposite of embarrassing yourself.

[Mickey]

I've been thinking for a while about something I wrote here a few pages back and since it's been brought up lately as evidence that I'm mocking, belittling and excoriating haters, I actually would like to put it in its proper context and talk about it. Before the usual suspects start opining about what I'm going to say, this is a fan matter, particularly a fan who has been here for a while.

I wrote: Perhaps we fans are partly to blame for encouraging this kind of behavior. There was a thread once where one poster (a hater) was explaining why she kept coming back to Twilight threads and she said that on threads for other books, when she started complaining about the books, others would eventually just ignore her and continue discussing what they were interested in discussing. Twilight fans tend to get their books out and start explaining point by point when a hater appears. (Oh, you think it's pathetic that Bella was upset when Edward left? You think Bella was suicidal and catatonic? You think blank slate characters are signs of an author's incompetence? You find the writing too purple? Let me indulge you by taking your position seriously...) So, are we encouraging obsessiveness in haters by responding to them as we do?

First off, this is far from making fun of haters. I've seen haters paraphrase typical fan dialogue (although this is different as it's through the thoughts of a fan responding to a hater), and it is usually misspelled on purpose or with the intent of making fans sound immature. (Ex: TWILIGHT IZ DE BEST EVA!!!!). I didn't choose the silliest arguments I've heard either. It's the typical hater fare around here.

It brings me back to some quirks about this board that I've just noticed. Fans don't talk to each other. I think it was this thread that I've talked about reading other fans' posts and knowing exactly what their views of Meyer's writing or Bella's depression (and knowing them well because they have said it several times), but not knowing their views on other aspects of the book, because there's only a few conversations that go on here.

I realized as I was complaining about this that I've never had an actual conversation with another fan. Fans and haters get paired off and fans spend their time nicely discussing someone's objections to the book/author/fans. Now, if someone enjoys that sort of thing, that's fine. But how many fans are just going through the motions and are uninterested? It stopped being interesting to me a while ago.

I remember one thread that sticks out in my mind because I had high hopes for its topic. It was called Assumptions about Twilight fans. Within the first fifty posts, a hater appeared who asked another poster out of the blue to 'tell him why she liked Twilight, using literary terms' in order to convince him that Twilight was good. That was the end of the talk about assumptions (except for the people who post after reading the first post, of course). Looking back, I think the proper response would've been to tell him we were talking about something else, instead the next five or so pages was devoted to this man until he finally started posting excerpts from Henry V and calling the two women who had shouldered the brunt of talking to him something like "shallow, mindless b*tches". Nothing of interest happened after he appeared to derail the conversation.

My paragraph was not a slam at haters, but thinking about the norms that we fans have gotten used to. In other threads, fans discuss things with each other- beyond objections to the book. Fan stuff: what did you like best, what do you think of this character, what do you think of this part, etc. Suppose we started talking about things that might interest us? (And if you really want to have your 65th conversation about how weak Bella is, you can do that too.)

Fans, what do you think the status of the Twilight threads are? Cassie posted her observation that there were a lot of one star and two star people posting and that didn't seem proportional to the actual numbers. Is this a place where fans, as well as haters, get their Twilight needs met?

[Amy]

Even though I haven't really participated much in this discussion, I have been reading it. Only true, avid readers can feel so much passion for a book - one way or the other. In an age where reading is cast aside for the flashy technology of video games, movies, etc. it is refreshing to come here to a group of people who feel as strongly about the written word as I do. For the case of Twilight, we should all agree to disagree and let it go. Nothing new is being said about the book - one side or the other, and these discussions are just creating animosity amongst a group of people who really do have something great in common: a love for reading. You don't like Twilight? That is fine. You love Twilight? That is fine. I just wish people would have more discussions about other books so they show up more frequently under the discussion tabs! The main discussion page for me is pretty much all Twilight series, Harry Potter series, The Hunger Games series, and regrettably, 50 Shades of Grey. Please everyone - I know you have read other books, so please go start more discussions about different books so we can see something new said about a book!

[[deleted user]]

Mickey wrote: "Is this a place where fans, as well as haters, get their Twilight needs met?"

It's where any reader of Twilight gets to meet, isnt it? Or at least anyone who has a strong enough opinion to care, pretty much.

[Cassie]

Jocelyn wrote: "It's where any reader of Twilight gets to meet, isnt it? Or at least anyone who has a strong enough opinion to care, pretty much. "


You would think so, but I don't think that's usually how it plays out. (Not just here, but most, if not all, forums involving Twilight)

Anyone with a strong enough negative opinion seems to enjoy the discussions just fine. Anyone with a strong enough positive opinion has to additionally have a strong enough sense of determination and stubbornness to avoid being chased away by oh so intellectual insults, that aren't really insults on the surface, but nonetheless, are insulting.

[Ni]

I didn't love it...but I think Twilight was fine...

[Amy]

I just discovered there's a list for worst books ever. I don't agree with that list, because I know people that participated clearly:
1) Don't have anything better to do.
2) Cannot say they 'love' books.
3) Probably offend people, it said something along the line of, 'some people's opinions are stupid' or 'if they are...'

[Angie Elle]

I've responded to a couple of posts, but I don't think I've ever answered the question at hand.

No, I don't think that disliking Twilight makes you a 'hater.' To me, a hater is someone who is not willing to listen (even if they don't agree with) other people's opinions, or simply cannot fathom why someone else would like the book. We're a diverse culture with diverse interests. Is that not enough?

Speaking for myself here, part of the frustration comes in where if you are a Twilight fan, you can't find a thread that's not permeated with negative responses. There really is nowhere to go where you can just enjoy the book and discuss it with other people who do. I don't mind reading the back and forth debates, as I do find them interesting, but I don't need to see it in every single thread that exists.

There was a thread I saw once titled something along the lines of 'Things You Enjoyed About Twilight.' Clearly this thread was written in good spirit, but someone had to chime in and say 'that it ended.' Really? You couldn't just pop in, read the topic, and then leave? You had to put a snide comment in there? That's where the haters separate themselves from the people who just dislike it, IMO. Someone who dislikes it may read that thread because they're genuinely curious as to why people like the book. A 'hater' has to make a snarky comment at every opportunity and just can't let it go.

Again, JMO.

[Amy]

Angie wrote: "I've responded to a couple of posts, but I don't think I've ever answered the question at hand.

No, I don't think that disliking Twilight makes you a 'hater.' To me, a hater is someone who is not ..."

I agree. There really isn't a single Twilight thread that hasn't been tainted by negativity. I remember the "Things you enjoyed" thread. Clearly, it was directed at people who DID enjoy it. If you didn't enjoy it, stay out of it. I think that's where the backlash on Twilight haters comes from. Many threads on Twilight have tried to discuss positive points about the book/series, but then someone has to throw in their negative comments. If they truly hate the series, stay out of it. If I hate a book, I stay away from the discussions.

[Amy]

Amy wrote: "Angie wrote: "No, I don't think that disliking Twilight makes you a 'hater.' To me, a hater is someone who is not willing to listen (even if they don't agree with) other people's opinions, or simply cannot fathom why someone else would like the book."
I remember the "Things you enjoyed" thread. Clearly, it was directed at people who DID enjoy it. If you didn't enjoy it, stay out of it. I think that's where the backlash on Twilight haters comes from. Many threads on Twilight have tried to discuss positive points about the book/series, but then someone has to throw in their negative comments. If they truly hate the series, stay out of it.

The thing that hit me about that, is definitely that a hater would say something like that. But sometimes they don't mean to be negative just to annoy the fans, they are just bantering & not that example, but sometimes the banter can be laughed at. Of course, a thread that's not expecting banter might mean the people in it act defensive- and we all no haters feed on that. So yes, they are obsessed.

[Mickey]

Angie wrote: "Speaking for myself here, part of the frustration comes in where if you are a Twilight fan, you can't find a thread that's not permeated with negative responses. There really is nowhere to go where you can just enjoy the book and discuss it with other people who do. I don't mind reading the back and forth debates, as I do find them interesting, but I don't need to see it in every single thread that exists."

I agree that the essential sameness of the threads is what frustrates fans. Constantly discussing other people's problems with Twilight isn't very interesting. That's such a narrow range of discussion.

[Mickey]

Cassie wrote: "You would think so, but I don't think that's usually how it plays out. (Not just here, but most, if not all, forums involving Twilight)

Anyone with a strong enough negative opinion seems to enjoy the discussions just fine. Anyone with a strong enough positive opinion has to additionally have a strong enough sense of determination and stubbornness to avoid being chased away by oh so intellectual insults, that aren't really insults on the surface, but nonetheless, are insulting."

I think you have a point there, Cassie. I don't think antis see that there is a problem, because all their Twilight needs are being met. Fans spend a lot of time talking to antis about their problems, taking even the silliest arguments (without any comment about just how silly they are) and giving back reasoned and intelligent responses.

It feels a lot of time like antis do not want to allow any discussion that they are not the center of. Throughout this thread, I've come to the realization that the most interesting people to talk to are the other fans, so I started responding to their posts instead of responding, as one usually does, to the posts made by "the other side". I don't want to have another discussion about whether Bella was attempting suicide or whether Twilight is antifeminist. I've had those. I would just be repeating myself.

I think the only way to really change this cycle is to step outside of it. I'd like to have discussions about Twilight that interest me for a change and don't focus on other people's objections.

[Amy]

Mickey wrote: "Cassie wrote: "You would think so, but I don't think that's usually how it plays out. (Not just here, but most, if not all, forums involving Twilight)

Anyone with a strong enough negative opinion ..."

Great point. Maybe if all just ignore the negative comments, we can carry on a discussion about Twilight around the negativity.

[Amy]

Peace wrote: "just wondering does have to be twilight topic type of thing or can someone change the topic about somthing else?"

Depends what's book discussion you are in- other books by Meyer have been mentioned here, for comparison. But preferably stick to the author's books ;)

[[deleted user]]

Just out of curiosity--can't fans start their own thread that has a tag of something that resembles, IF YOU ARE NOT A FAN PLEASE STAY OUT OF THIS, or something. This is coming from an anti, so I'm not exactly sure.

Also--personally, I'm always looking for different opinions. It gives everything a much bigger perspective, whether it's positive or negative. and almost all threads contain both, not just Twilight or Fifty Shades of Grey. At least one person will always come up and say, "You know what, I really didn't like this book, here's why," or "I really liked this book everyone seems to hate, heres why." If it ever gets really repetitive...well, no one's forcing anyone to read the threads either, right? They could also do themselves a favor and simply ignore it. This may be just me, though.

[Diane]

If I recall correctly, there was a thread or two (maybe more) like that. Of course that it didn't stop the antis from commenting.
One was made around the time some really disrespectful guys have taken to hanging around the twilight threads and "having fun". It was a mess.

I can understand people having an opinion but it's frustrating to have interesting discussions derailed and turn into the a debate that was the topic of some other thread.

[Dorothy]

Jocelyn wrote: "Yeah, same here. Writing isn't terribly important to me, I was just narrowing the topic to the prose itself. My fault for being vague :) I'm just very critical of things, and I notice a lot of stuff that other people usually ignore.

I have enjoyed badly ..."

I didn't think the characters and plot of Twilight were bad, just that they were... kind of non-existent. The series was somewhere between the first draft of a manuscript and its outline, some of the books having more depth than others. I had no problem with the execution of Harry Potter, but had a huge problem with the execution of Twilight. It was as though you could see what Meyer was trying to convey, but she never quite got her point across.

My problems with Harry Potter are so varied and small, like a series of paper-cuts instead of a single gaping wound. At some point, JKR's editors got a lot more lenient. Things that didn't need saying got said and things that did need saying sometimes went awry. Not big things, but things that were noticeable nonetheless. There was also some... lumping, I guess you could say, going on. Things that happened seemed to happen all at once--like basically all the couples being declared in the sixth book.

But yeah, I ignore a lot to just enjoy a book. The only things I have a hard time ignoring are continuity and endings. I need things to make sense. And I need a proper ending.

[Dorothy]

Amy wrote: "Even though I haven't really participated much in this discussion, I have been reading it. Only true, avid readers can feel so much passion for a book - one way or the other. In an age where readin..."

Ha! It does seem like the only books people want to talk about are these, right? Even Divergent, which is pretty big right now, is shadowed by Hunger Games, Twilight, etc. You know what book series I want to talk about? The Sword of Truth Series. I absolutely LOVED the characters, but the story (eleven freaking books--are you kidding me?!) is next to infuriating. Sadly, I don't think many people got as far as I did in the series, lol. No body to talk to.

[Dorothy]

Amy wrote: "I just discovered there's a list for worst books ever. I don't agree with that list, because I know people that participated clearly:
1) Don't have anything better to do.
2) Cannot say they 'love' ..."

I'm not a fan of best/worst polls when it comes to entertainment. I have a lot of unpopular loves and hates when it comes to television, movies, music and books. I don't like being told my opinion basically doesn't matter.

Eh, that was the long-winded answer. The short answer is that I think consensus results are bogus. No one has the exact same opinion as anyone else (and you should all be really proud of me right now because I withheld a really terrible political joke. That's right, I am literally patting myself on the back, lol).

[Dorothy]

Jocelyn wrote: "Just out of curiosity--can't fans start their own thread that has a tag of something that resembles, IF YOU ARE NOT A FAN PLEASE STAY OUT OF THIS, or something. This is coming from an anti, so I'm ..."

I agree with Diane. All it does is attract the people who want to antagonize. If a child is told they can't have something, it's only going to make them want it more.

Also, the reason Twilight and FSoG get so much hate is, ironically, because they get so much love. People with no life think it's funny to get super-fans riled up. Then you have the people who need to hate whatever is popular because "we won't let anyone decide what we like!" *snort* Then there are the people who couldn't care less until they have that thing they don't like shoved down their throats every five seconds by fans. And then you have the people who genuinely want to discuss the negative aspects of the book.

I'm sure there are a lot more stages between, but you get the gist. The more popular a book is, the more unpopular it has the potential to be. I'm not quite sure why Harry Potter escaped the hate. Maybe because the fans didn't care about haters? Or because they were too young? Hmmm....

[Gerd]

Jocelyn wrote: "Just out of curiosity--can't fans start their own thread that has a tag of something that resembles, IF YOU ARE NOT A FAN PLEASE STAY OUT OF THIS, or something."

There've been threads like that, and it never works.
For one there's the problem who decides who is or isn't a fan?

And then most people that tag their threads "Fans only" seem to say: Please no critical comments. Which just begs for it.

And lastly, as seen in the example of the "What's good about twilight" thread, it gets just ignored by those people that dislike twilight on a principle.

[[deleted user]]

You guys are all right, I guess. I won't ever be 100% sure because I'm not a fan, but yeah, telling people to not criticize a book begs for it even more.

[Alex]

Dorothy wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: " I'm not quite sure why Harry Potter escaped the hate. Maybe because the fans didn't care about haters? Or because they were too young? Hmmm.... "

It's actually pretty simple, us "haters" have been trying to tell you. There's a strong anti-feminist subtext to Twilight that's hard to miss. People that don't warm too well towards outmoded portrayals of men and women tend to get frustrated with it. There's also a contingent of people who don't understand how such terrible writing can be so popular.

There's a similar groupthink thing going on withTwilight as happened with Harry Potter, non-readers are latching on to a franchise because, for some reason it's become faddy to do so. The difference with HP is that Rowling built her audience slowly and whilst Rowling is not the greatest author ever the books are pretty charming and inoffensive and they've been noted for imcluding a female character who has been an incredibly good role model for young girls. It's hard to find too much positive to say about Twilight and it's genereally regarded as being quite awful. Harry Potter just never got such a bad reputation.

[[deleted user]]

Dorothy wrote: "the reason Twilight and FSoG get so much hate is, ironically, because they get so much love."

That's actually quite true. In many of the Twilight rants I've read, there's a lot of the "why on earth is this series so popular?" Conversely, though, there are also many people who picked up Twilight with the intention of becoming a fan. Their friends or family raved about it, and the more they hear about it, the more they hoped to fall in love with it like so many fans. Then they get disgusted and go all,"Sriusly???"

Also--I don't think Harry Potter has escaped the hate. I have met enough Harry Potter haters to last a lifetime. (I'm not saying it's frustrating, btw, just a general statement.) Like Twilight, there are reasons to both hate and love it. Hate: it's unoriginal, many times the prose is bad, Rowling tells instead of shows, many of her characters are stereotypes, her plot sometimes can be predictable, etc. Love: The characters are endearing, the plot is suspenseful and complex, the pacing is quite fast, etc. But yes, it doesn't nearly have the bad reputation Twilight does.

@ Alex

Yeah, I agree. Feminists just find Twilight....offensive. Like, "WTF is this, insulting my intelligence????" The gender roles are very....old-fashioned, I guess you could say, pushed way back into the 1800s. Almost every single female character in the book is either 1) pathetically devoted to her man, 2) a stay-at-home mom with no ambitions in life, or 3) both. Even Leah Clearwater, who I personally deemed the female character with the most potential, hangs onto Sam and refuses to get over it. There are existing women who do not pine after the "love of their lives" 100% of the time, which Meyer doesn't really seem to get. And, since feminists had worked for a really long time to fight for their rights and instill a sense of equality in America that a woman can do more than stay at home and raise kids, they get annoyed when they read Twilight.

[Amy]

(PSST: books become more popular if they have movies- I don't know about you, but I do watch films instead of, or as well as. Twilight I haven't done that...)

I think I'm somewhere between 'people who couldn't care less until they have that thing they don't like shoved down their throats every five seconds by fans'/'people who genuinely want to discuss the negative aspects of the book'...

Quote from Alex: [The Harry Potter series is] noted for including a female character who has been an incredibly good role model for young girls.
Umm... Ginny? Jokes, but I love that girl! There are some girls who don't want a role-model- they don't want to have to be clever, succeed or do anything more than find a guy who'll stay at home. In a class, we discussed this. More boys thought leaving the woman at home was sexist, than girls. So maybe, Bella is just one of them. And Edward isn't "modern" & has escaped the people who police that. Obviously, the book is, but sometimes society is. Then again, who cares about society? It's messed up. I don't know what the moral of that was.

[M.R.]

I really, really loathed Twilight and (I think) this is my first post in the Twilight boards. From a feminist perspective, it's a huge backward leap. The writing is awkward, the characters flat, the plot slow. It's not "good literature." I like ragging on it, and occasionally do so on my blog.

But you know what? Everyone knows that. Every possible objection has already been made, and every fan has been exposed to the ragging. There's really no point in diving into fan boards for the sake of hating. I happen to think Twilight is really crappy literature, but I honestly don't care if someone else likes it. I mean, I've read every Star Trek book, and the vast majority of those are poorly written, but I like them anyway. Personal preference often has nothing to do with objective quality, and it doesn't need to. People who trawl through fan boards looking for opportunities to make a snide remark just need to find something more productive to do. The horse is dead; stop beating it.

[Cassie]

Jocelyn wrote: "Almost every single female character in the book is either 1) pathetically devoted to her man, 2) a stay-at-home mom with no ambitions in life, or 3) both."

Ha. I don't think that's true at all. Unless 3 characters are almost every single female.



What I think is mostly strange is that almost ever single person who didn't rate the books highly must make it painfully clear that they don't like the series by providing a long list of reasons they don't like them before actually getting to the point.
(EX: "Twilight is problematic. It has feminism things, there's a typo on page ###, Alice bribed a guard with money that doesn't exist, *quotes Stephen king*, *quotes some blog post someone wrote*, bland plot, adjectives, verbs, traditional roles, blah blah blah. But to answer your question, Bella's eyes are brown.)

Even here, the same people are providing lists in almost every post before actually saying what they have to say, unless they are discussing what they already said.
I don't know if it's a ploy to get people to start talking about what they want to talk about instead, or it's just some crazy habit.

either way, it works. So congratulations, I guess.

[Gerd]

Cassie wrote: "What I think is mostly strange is that almost ever single person who didn't rate the books highly must make it painfully clear that they don't like the series by providing a long list of reasons they don't like them before actually getting to the point."

I think the point is there why they don't like twilight, or in the cited case why many feminsts do not like the novels - so they do get to the point pretty quickly.

It could actually, and with the same amount of truth to it, be stated that every one that rated twilight highly starts his posts with gushing over some aspect or other of the book, and why they totally love this or that or Edward, before getting to the point... :)

[Cassie]

Gerd wrote: "It could actually, and with the same amount of truth to it, be stated that every one that rated twilight highly starts his posts with gushing over some aspect or other of the book, and why they totally love this or that or Edward, before getting to the point..."

Except that I don't see nearly as much evidence as that.
But you can still say it if you want.

[Gerd]

Cassie wrote: "Except that I don't see nearly as much evidence as that."

As do I regarding the opposite. *shrugs*

[Taylor]

Yeah I see all thhheeee tiimmmeeee it's sooooooooo wired :( I LOVEEEEE Twilight :) <3<3

[Amy]

Taylor-jamie wrote: "Yeah I see all thhheeee tiimmmeeee it's sooooooooo wired :( I LOVEEEEE Twilight :) <3<3"

Hmm? All I got was you're a fan. What's wired?

[Don]

I, for one, don't hate these books, but I'm not a huge fan of them for reasons I won't go into here - mostly because that is not the topic of this particular discussion.

You should read what you enjoy! As long as you're reading then I'm thrilled. You can spot a non-reader three sentences into a conversation with the person, or, as someone else once put it...

“It is what you read when you don’t have to that determines what you will be when you can’t help it.” –Oscar Wilde

As far as posted reviews and discussion threads... Don't let people's negative opinions anger you. If the review is thoughtful and it gives you some info that may help to decide that to read and what not to read, that is cool. Someone who gets nasty, rude, vulgar, or whatever else is just proving themselves to be simple minded. The person above who said that "haters love to hate" is correct. Does that make Twilight better or worse? Neither. If you loved the books it is a wonderful thing. As long as you understand that not everyone has to love them, then all the negative BS from "haters" can only be there to get a rise out of you. If you let that happen, the idiots win.

Don't let the idiots win.

Happy reading!

[Heidi]

Mickey wrote: "Fans, what do you think the status of the Twilight threads are? Cassie posted her observation that there were a lot of one star and two star people posting and that didn't seem proportional to the actual numbers. Is this a place where fans, as well as haters, get their Twilight needs met? "

I don't think you will ever get a serious discussion about Twilight without people piping in with a nasty comment. It's just not in the cards. I enjoyed the books because of the simplicity. To me its on a different plane of exsistance. Kind of like a movie you watch and say why didn't he/she do this or that? My Fiancees response? "Because thats not in the script".

[Alex]

Amy wrote: "There are some girls who don't want a role-model- they don't want to have to be clever, succeed or do anything more than find a guy who'll stay at home."

Do you condone this? I can't say I find that particularly aspirational or very inspiring as an attitude. No, actually, I find it downright reprehensible. if you want to help teach the next generation of women to be stayathome layabouts with no ambition beyond reproducing themselves, then by all means keep giving them Twilight to read.

[Heidi]

Alex wrote: "Do you condone this? I can't say I find that particularly aspirational or very inspiring as an attitude. No, actually, I find it downright reprehensible. if you want to help teach the next generation of women to be stayathome layabouts with no ambition beyond reproducing themselves, then by all means keep giving them Twilight to read. "

I don't think its right to dictate what someones goals are in life. If someones main goal in life is to be a house wife and mother, then good for them. Its ok to be not aspirational or very inspiring, it's not your life. Just because one person wants to be that, doesn't mean that somehow that person is going sprout a movement of all women being "stayathome layabouts with no ambition". If that were the case we would of never grown out of the 20s.

[Amy]

Alex wrote: Do you condone this? I can't say I find that particularly aspirational or very inspiring as an attitude. No, actually, I find it downright reprehensible. if you want to help teach the next generation of women to be stay at home layabouts with no ambition beyond reproducing themselves, then by all means keep giving them Twilight to read.

I'm not the teacher. So, I'm not condoning anything? Does a pupil stand up & say, "Wow! You aspire not to do anything, and the guys actually expect more of you!" No, pupils don't. They don't control what you learn or others opinions. Or do you? It's not black or white so trying to control others opinions would be morally wrong. So, they ARE my generation- and I aspire to be more than that. Yay, me?

[Cassie]

Desiring to control what other women choose to do, whether it's to have a successful career or stay at home and raise a family, seems like the opposite of feminism.


I'm not completely sure that I want a career. I don't see the appeal of it. I work at Walmart just so I can have money for food and such, but if I manage to marry a guy who can afford food and necessities for the both of us, I'd gladly stop working and focus on keeping a good home.
As long as I'm not ridiculing other women for having careers, I don't see any harm in my decisions.
I find it insulting that there are people who find it wrong.

But of course, I do believe that people are ignoring the fact that most of the women in Twilight do indeed have professional trainingor careers.

[Amy]

Thankyou Heidi & Cassie (:

(view spoiler)[Twilight or that class wasn't anti-feminist. As I said, more boys (actually all I think) thought females should be given the same rights (we were talking about Nature/Nurture- subtopic: gender. Since equal rights genders more equal? No? Yes? etc. Everything was opinion. As I said, nothing is black & white in that. You can examine all stakeholders- media, literature (which is all you seem worried about), employment & much more! Not all girls though that, just less girls than boys- which if all the boys thought one thing, it'd be impossible for more girls to think that. Less did, and I was just making a point that Bella isn't actually as far-fetched. Cassie is right, no where does it say only males work in Twilight or anything, so it is just picking hairs. OK, Bella's a big hair. But so? You don't know the whole story- and should our teacher have congratulated the boys for their opinion, and the majority of girls- then the few girls who though women could cope with equal rights & should follow old-fashioned stereotypes (kitchen etc.) would suffer punishment? That would not further their education, they would think it's partly sexist & not being allowed your own opinion? Should ANYBODY be told that? Male OR Female? (hide spoiler)]

With that, I'm not gonna talk about it anymore. This started on Page 1, and I'm finishing it- Page 9.

[Taylor]

Amy wrote: "Taylor-jamie wrote: "Yeah I see all thhheeee tiimmmeeee it's sooooooooo wired :( I LOVEEEEE Twilight :)

Hmm? All I got was you're a fan. What's wired?"

WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

[Heidi]

Amy wrote: "There are some girls who don't want a role-model- they don't want to have to be clever, succeed or do anything more than find a guy who'll stay at home."

I don't have a role model. I don't want to have to be clever. I don't think there are people out there that don't want to succeed, but I could be wrong. I found my guy, and I don't want kids. I do work, but I think my life is good. It could be better, it could be worse. I'm happy. I'm sorry I'm not inspirational. Thats just the cookie cutter life of most woman meets man of Disney charaters (add in marrige).

[Amy]

@Taylor-Jamie... I didn't mean it in a bad way... Just, what's 'wired'? You said seeing something was wired. What did you see that was 'wired'? I don't get it...

[Alex]

Cassie wrote: "Desiring to control what other women choose to do, whether it's to have a successful career or stay at home and raise a family, seems like the opposite of feminism.


I'm not completely sure that I want a career. I don't see the appeal of it"

No, the issue is fundamentally one of not controlling women's ability to have whatever aspirations or lack-of aspirations they want. However, if you read only 25% of my posts regarding how I feel about Twilight and feminism and you pick and choose which sentences you comment on in isolation this is unlikely to be a very rounded argument. I can hardly summarise Beauvoir every time I post, can I?

Please, don't let me stop you from living the patriarchal dream. Don't educate yourself, don't have a career, spend your entire life cleaning and organising a house for your man and child. I would hate to be accused of being unfeminist so I'll gladly support your right to do that, but in return I think you should allow my right to think that's a little bit sad and to maybe be allowed to tell other people that I think they should have aspirations and goals in life. Deal?

[Heidi]

Alex wrote: "I would hate to be accused of being unfeminist so I'll gladly support your right to do that, but in return I think you should allow my right to think that's a little bit sad and to maybe be allowed to tell other people that I think they should have aspirations and goals in life. Deal? "

You can think its sad to be a house wife. I think that you in turn you are sad for passing judment on people. My Step Mother was a house wife for a long length of her life. My Grandma was one. As was my Great Grandma and those before her. That doesn't mean they didn't have any aspirations or they were uneducated or even did anything with thier lives. Thats just but a fraction of someones life. Its not who they are.

[[deleted user]]

Cassie wrote: "Desiring to control what other women choose to do, whether it's to have a successful career or stay at home and raise a family, seems like the opposite of feminism.


I'm not completely sure that I..."

It's not that I have any problem with stay at home moms. My favorite character in Harry Potter is a stay at home mom (Molly Weasley). My mom used to be a stay at home mom. But when almost every single female major character in the series is a stay at home mom, or a girlfriend whose life revolves almost 100% around the love of their lives, I have a problem with that. I just felt like Meyer decided to give every female character a boyfriend because she found it romantic, not because she had any real, legitimate reason for doing so. (And btw, I'm aware that what I said there is an opinion.)

Like I said--when every single female character, or almost very single one, is a stay at home mom/girlfriend whose life revolves around the boyfriend, that seems to be a little more than a coincidence. I'm not saying Meyer deliberately did that to send out an antifeminist message, but like Alex said, it's the subtext of it that's kind of hard to ignore. It's mostly gender roles, not just the fact that, oh, that ONE female character has a boyfriend, omg she's a weak pathetic coward!

[Alex]

Heidi wrote: "You can think its sad to be a house wife. I think that you in turn you are sad for passing judment on people. My Step Mother was a house wife for a long length of her life. My Grandma was one. As was my Great Grandma and those before her. That doesn't mean they didn't have any aspirations or they were uneducated or even did anything with thier lives. Thats just but a fraction of someones life. Its not who they are. ."

Your argument is basically "here is a list of people who were housewives, therefore being a housewife is an Ok thing"

My argument is "Women have been deprived by the patriarchy for hundreds of years from being anything other than wives or mothers, so it's a positive thing to encourage them to realise that they can - and even should if they want to live an authentic existence - have goals and aspirations beyond that"

It's not that I think it's categorically wrong to choose to be a housewife or a stay-at-home mum, but I think it's categorically wrong to make that decision on the basis that so many women are being led to make it ... and that basis is largely "yeah, this is what women have always done so therefore it's a pretty good thing to do, it's what women "ought" to do. Having babies is natural etc etc etc That sounds quite close to what you're saying re: your stepmother, grandmother and also comes courtesy of every Disney movie ever produced.

Also, I would criticise any man that didn't have aspirations to educate himself. I don't think it's very authentic to expect someone to look after you and to pay for you. I think we should strive to live life in as meaningful and purposeful way as possible.

[Heidi]

Alex wrote: "My argument is "Women have been deprived by the patriarchy for hundreds of years from being anything other than wives or mothers, so it's a positive thing to encourage them to realise that they can - and even should if they want to live an authentic existence - have goals and aspirations beyond that"

If that is thier goal or asperation to be a house wife - yes I think its ok. I also think its ok to have goals and aspirations beyond that as well. What I'm saying is it shouldn't matter if someones apirations or goal is to be a house wife. Nor should it matter if someone wants to be more then that.

[[deleted user]]

Dorothy wrote: "Jocelyn wrote: "Yeah, same here. Writing isn't terribly important to me, I was just narrowing the topic to the prose itself. My fault for being vague :) I'm just very critical of things, and I noti..."

Haha, that's exactly what I mean by "bad" plotting, because they're nonexistent. At least in my view. :)

It's true that Meyer's prose can sometimes dance around the actual point. Like the sentence, "the look she leveled at me was a glare." She could have simply said, "she glared at me," instead of needlessly and pointlessly complicating the sentence further. However, I didn't think that it disrupted or detracted from the overall pacing of the books. It is a very common newbie mistake for authors to try to find a fancy way of saying things instead of just getting to the point. My main praise for Meyer's writing is not that it's actually GOOD, but that it improves. I just felt that in comparison to HP, she takes a lot more time to let the reader kind of, you know, catch their breath before moving on.

But eh, to each their own. I can see where you're coming from quite well.

[[deleted user]]

Heidi wrote: "Alex wrote: "My argument is "Women have been deprived by the patriarchy for hundreds of years from being anything other than wives or mothers, so it's a positive thing to encourage them to realise ..."

It shouldn't matter, but I do think there IS a problem when the majority, if not all, of Twilight's female characters are angsty girlfriends/housewives. A housewife here and there is okay. A housewife every single time you turn to look is not okay. It just kind of bothers me that not only does Meyer decide to do this, she decides to romanticize it, like it should be the ideal of women to try to imitate. Not having a boyfriend, or not being a damsel in distress, does not make you any less of a female, which Meyer doesn't seem to be getting.