I'm a bit behind in my reading of the posts, but I'm going to post this anyway fwiw. Sorry if it's behind the times. Some thoughts.
I've just rewatched Deliverance and enjoyed it a lot more than the last time, when I found I just wanted to sink through the sofa at the Avon-Meegat scenes - nngh!
These are my thoughts:
1. Avon is the one identified by Meegat as 'Lord' simply because he is the one who speaks the Words of the Prophecy she has been waiting for - 'Who are you?'. Anyone might have said it, but Avon does.
2. Jenna is captured by the scavengers because a. Gan told her to wait, b. She agreed to wait, c. They were both stupid enough to separate.
3. They can be forgiven for doing such an incautious thing because a. The planet surface has lethal radiation and is unlikely to house threatening fauna, b. Zen had been able to identify no life signs.
4. The scavengers went for Jenna because a. Who in their right mind would attack Gan with just polystyrene rocks :-), and b. Yes, they may need a healthy female to join the tribe.
5. Jenna is not a feeble resourceless character. She frees herself from her restraints and is very unlucky to be spotted by one of the tribesmen as she exits the tent. If anything, Vila is the feeble one, since he makes enough fuss when captured to alert the whole tribe (and see below).
The way I see the episode is as giving the writer, the viewers and the B7 crew a chance for amusement at Avon's expense. It's early in the series and we have all had the chance to see how seriously he takes himself. For once he finds himself in a situation where he just can't hide his discomfiture. And on the other hand, he plainly can't resist letting the flattery carry on for a bit - and the others can see this too. It does show his human side; his actions deflate his own action hero/clever clogs persona for a moment, and even Blake can't resist making him squirm with a bit of good natured sarcasm at the end.
I don't think Terry Nation would be entirely unaware of a potential Freudian interpretation of the rocket, although I think he'd have let it ride as a bit of wry humour. His topmost thought would have been to flatter us by giving us the opportunity to think - _rockets_ that's _really_ old technology (letting us identify with Blake's crew in the XXXth century, not the unsophisticated people of the planet, and not 20th century TV viewers). In the late seventies, and especially in TV programmes, any sexist nuances (for better or worse) wouldn't have been taken as seriously as now, or even recognised for what they were, as I think has already been said. It's another opportunity for the writer to send Avon up.
Regarding leaving Meegat and her people behind, I think strangely it's a sign of respect. It will be several lifetimes before the rocket reaches destination (500 years in fact), and the new people will be a different generation. Meegat's people are dying out, but they have fulfilled their life's mission. They presumably cannot reproduce (in sufficient numbers to remain viable - Meegat may well be one of the very few young people left - 'Our numbers grow smaller, more die'). It seems fitting for them to end their lives on the planet which bore their civilisation. Where else would they want to be? My impression was that they had some resistance to the radiation (living underground?), and would be able to live out their lives as they had done before. Moving to another planet would not prevent the people's death, because the damage was done to their race when the first bombs dropped centuries ago. Meegat's responsibilities as priestess are still to her people even now. It's unthinkable that she would leave them, or that they would leave the planet.
I agree with someone else who said that Avon is gentle with Meegat, but not misogynistic or sexist. The gap between her society and his is so great that it would be largely irrelevant to try to explain to her that he is not a god. Her definition of a god is someone who appears as if by magic and can operate the technology and set off the rocket - which in fact does define Avon. It's to his credit that he doesn't try to explain, thus enabling her to retain her position and dignity by performing her role in accordance with her people's traditions. Admittedly she does go overboard when he appears <g>, but by all accounts they have waited several generations for this ('_all_ of my life, as those before me waited'), so she can justifiably feel pretty good to be 'the chosen one' herself - in a religious not any other way. I agree with Cheryl that Avon on the whole is anything but sexist in this episode. It's to all their credit that they go along with what she wants them to do - when Gan says 'We are just men from a spaceship', Vila adds 'with problems of our own' - this is the last thing they need at the moment.
I don't agree that Meegat's people would have worked out how to operate the switches by now. There would have been religious restrictions on doing so, which would automatically temper any natural curiosity. And who's to say they would have been wrong; you would only get one chance to do it right, at the risk of destroying the future of the race.
The only sexist attitude I can identify is Vila's 'You're enjoying this, aren't you?' Yes Meegat is attractive. Yes Vila is jealous of the attention Avon is getting, but IMO Avon behaves impeccably throughout - and there is attraction on both sides between him and Meegat, as shown by Jenna's reaction when she enters the room. Despite this, Avon _doesn't_ take his relationship with Meegat further because he is too aware of the fact that it would be taking advantage of her.
More examples: Avon raises her from her knees not once, but twice. 'Forgive me' 'I forgive you' He does everything in his power to counter her subservience.
I can see the same potential for sexism arising if roles were reversed, but would Jenna behave as respectfully if faced with a young attractive and unworldly priest before whom she is in a similar position of power? And what derisive/patronising asides would you get between her and Cally? I hope Jenna would behave as Avon has. This is a power thing, not a gender thing.
Finally it's quite a poignant moment when Avon replies to Meegat 'That seems like a poor reward somehow.' (Can't believe I'm presenting him as self-deprecating but that's the way it reads. He's only my _second_ favourite character after all:-)
It may be that he is all too aware of the fate that awaits her.
This would make it into a very sombre tale; also very in keeping with Terry Nation's writing, especially in B7. IMO any misogynistic agenda would have been the last thing on his mind.
Jan B
Wendy:
Let's face it, in most TV sci-fi, the default position for women is as helpless rescuee.
Me:
I'd say that's true for TV sci-fi in the sixties, seventies and early eighties (Tarzan and Jane scenarios?!), but less so now. And in B7 Vila was always more likely to sprain his ankle than the female characters :-) In this respect the series could be seen as ahead of its times.
Jan B _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
----- Original Message ----- From: jan b ceri99@hotmail.com
I've just rewatched Deliverance
Me too. Yesterday, in fact.
- Avon is the one identified by Meegat as 'Lord' simply because he is the
one who speaks the Words of the Prophecy she has been waiting for - 'Who
are
you?'. Anyone might have said it, but Avon does.
Yes, I noticed that. Which made me wonder a bit about the number of people who seem to have said that it's because of his air of masculine nobility :).
- Jenna is captured by the scavengers because a. Gan told her to wait, b.
She agreed to wait, c. They were both stupid enough to separate.
Fair enough, but she was still set up by the writer to be captured. Sorry, I'm with the Marxist brigade on this one.
. Yes, they may need a healthy female to join the tribe.
But no one actually *says* that, do they? Perhaps they needed food :)...
- Jenna is not a feeble resourceless character. She frees herself from
her
restraints and is very unlucky to be spotted by one of the tribesmen as
she
exits the tent. If anything, Vila is the feeble one, since he makes enough fuss when captured to alert the whole tribe (and see below).
But again, her attempt to escape fails, and it is Avon and Co. who rescue her in the end (and IIRC, almost nobody on the lyst said that Jenna was feeble or resourceless-- just that she was the one that was captured).
There was something else I noticed there, though. At that point, we get an interesting sequence of scenes:
1) Meegat falling at Avon's feet.
2) Jenna cutting her way through the tent and making it out, only to find herself at the feet of one of the tribesmen.
3) Cally on the Liberator, flat on the floor with Ensor standing over her.
4) Back to Avon, lifting Meegat up.
Now, I am in no way trying to equate Jenna or Cally with Meegat (I'm sorry, but the woman still strikes me as a bit of a dishrag), but it does suggest that some people may have been right about the sex-and-power metaphors going on here (And yes, Avon does lift Meegat up, but in the context it seems he is the one who has to give her authority to stand).
So what we get are two scenes of a woman (and yes, yes, you lot, a very capable woman who's just a bit out of her depth) being dominated by a force-wielding man, and a third of a woman falling at the feet of another gun-wielding man (yes, yes, voluntarily, but the point is, she's down there and he's up here-- and she was informed by Kashel [male] to abase herself before him). This theme is only broken in the very powerful scene of Servalan subtly twisting the knife with Travis-- and as Neil (and Erving Goffman) suggest, this only serves to throw the other scenes into sharper relief.
The way I see the episode is as giving the writer, the viewers and the B7 crew a chance for amusement at Avon's expense. It's early in the series
and
we have all had the chance to see how seriously he takes himself. For once he finds himself in a situation where he just can't hide his discomfiture. And on the other hand, he plainly can't resist letting the flattery carry
on
for a bit - and the others can see this too. It does show his human side; his actions deflate his own action hero/clever clogs persona for a moment,
Interesting reading. Watching the Meegat scenes over, I didn't see *any* of the overt embarrasment or sense of humility and responsibility that a lot of people have said they did. He's a bit disconcerted when she actually drops at his feet (but so are Gan and Vila) but he recovers quickly, and for the most part seems to display irritiation, wariness and suspicion (and as a result keeps his gun drawn for the most part... oh, wait, here come the phallic-symbol brigade... DUCK!!!).
and even Blake can't resist making him squirm with a bit of good natured
sarcasm at the end.
Blake's statement seemed to me to have little to do with Meegat, and more to do with leadership in general (if anything, since he's left Meegat behind, the statement could be taken as a double-edged comment on the *abdication* of responsibility).
recognised for what they were, as I think has already been said. It's another opportunity for the writer to send Avon up.
I don't see how he's sending Avon up, anywhere.
Regarding leaving Meegat and her people behind, I think strangely it's a sign of respect.
So if I whipped out a gun and shot you right now, that would also be a sign of respect :)?
It will be several lifetimes before the rocket reaches
destination (500 years in fact), and the new people will be a different generation. Meegat's people are dying out, but they have fulfilled their life's mission. They presumably cannot reproduce (in sufficient numbers to remain viable - Meegat may well be one of the very few young people left - 'Our numbers grow smaller, more die'). It seems fitting for them to end their lives on the planet which bore their civilisation. Where else would they want to be? My impression was that they had some resistance to the radiation (living underground?), and would be able to live out their lives as they had done before. Moving to another planet would not prevent the people's death, because the damage was done to their race when the first bombs dropped centuries ago. Meegat's responsibilities as priestess are still to her people even now. It's unthinkable that she would leave them,
or
that they would leave the planet.
Jan, Jan, Jan... remember what happened to the *last* person who started reading a lot of backstory into Deliverance...:).
operate the technology and set off the rocket - which in fact does define Avon. It's to his credit that he doesn't try to explain, thus enabling her to retain her position and dignity by performing her role in accordance
with
her people's traditions.
Hang on, what about that exchange at the end: "Did she really think you were a god?" "For a while...[cold smile]" which suggests that he did disillusion her.
this episode. It's to all their credit that they go along with what she wants them to do - when Gan says 'We are just men from a spaceship', Vila adds 'with problems of our own' - this is the last thing they need at the moment.
Vila also twice says that she is "insane" and "mad" for falling at Avon's feet.
I don't agree that Meegat's people would have worked out how to operate
the
switches by now. There would have been religious restrictions on doing so, which would automatically temper any natural curiosity.
But hang on a mo. Leaving aside my anthropological cavils at the thought that religion would "automatically temper any natural curiosity" (Einstein was a believer, folks), there are religious restrictions on it, it seems, but it's also stated that these were put in place by male ancestors, and that the people must wait for a male deliverer (and yes, it's explicitly stated as such) to come and switch them on. Which seems to bring in more support for the Marxist-Feminist position. And before anyone says that it could have been her rota and there could be male priests, I'd reiterate that *we don't know that.* For the purposes of the story, she might as well be alone.
Avon is getting, but IMO Avon behaves impeccably throughout
Well, no, he doesn't kill her or rape her, but beyond that, what exactly does he do? He *does* leave her behind, remember, and at the end, on board the Liberator, he shows more concern for the rocket's future than hers.
- and there is
attraction on both sides between him and Meegat,
That's very true. They hold hands-- he faces down a primitive for her-- and then later on there is *tons* of eye contact. You can't say there isn't anything going on between those two.
Despite this, Avon _doesn't_ take his relationship with Meegat further because he is too aware of the fact that
it
would be taking advantage of her.
He doesn't physically do it, but he doesn't seem to be doing much to discourage her attraction.
More examples: Avon raises her from her knees not once, but twice.
'Forgive
me' 'I forgive you' He does everything in his power to counter her subservience.
Hmmm... he does raise her, true, but he seems pretty damn flattered by her subservient attitude, if you ask me. And his "I forgive you" implies that he's the one with the power to give forgiveness-- if he wants to place her on an equal footing, why doesn't he say "nothing to forgive"?
I can see the same potential for sexism arising if roles were reversed,
but
would Jenna behave as respectfully if faced with a young attractive and unworldly priest before whom she is in a similar position of power?
See what Neil said earlier about such reversals presupposing the original power relation.
derisive/patronising asides would you get between her and Cally? I hope Jenna would behave as Avon has. This is a power thing, not a gender thing.
Now hang *on!* You can't separate power from gender, a point which I recall has been made by Neil, Una, Alison and myself among *many* others on this list.
Finally it's quite a poignant moment when Avon replies to Meegat 'That
seems
like a poor reward somehow.' (Can't believe I'm presenting him as self-deprecating but that's the way it reads.
It does read that way when you see that scene, but it's undermined by the next scene, on board the Liberator, when he is terribly concerned about the rocket, but only mentions Meegat briefly-- and when prompted by Cally at that. Which stands in sharp contrast with the earlier scenes in which he was holding her hand, making eye contact etc.
It may be that he is all too aware of the fate that awaits her.
This would make it into a very sombre tale; also very in keeping with
Terry
Nation's writing, especially in B7. IMO any misogynistic agenda would have been the last thing on his mind.
I thought it was agreed in earlier posts on this thread that Nation was not promoting a misogynistic agenda, but that he was unable to rise above the sexism of his culture at the time-- which given that Nation is usually quite good at doing that, isn't really very forgivable.
Let's face it, in most TV sci-fi, the default position for women is as helpless rescuee.
Me:
I'd say that's true for TV sci-fi in the sixties, seventies and early eighties (Tarzan and Jane scenarios?!), but less so now.
That isn't in dispute, but now isn't at issue.
I'd like to raise another interesting point here. Another thing I've been doing lately is rereading "The Lady of Shallott" (sp?), and a few interesting parallels between that and Deliverance cropped up, viz:
The Lady of Shallott, in the poem, is a woman who lives in a castle, forbidden by a curse to look down on Camelot, and consequently (as for some silly reason she lives next door to it) forced to live in isolation from the world, viewing it through a mirror placed opposite the window. This idyll is interrupted when Sir Lancelot, all unwitting, blunders into view, and she is so struck by his masculine appearance that she runs to the window to look... and brings the curse upon herself. Dying, she climbs into a boat and sets herself adrift, floating into Camelot just as she dies. Lancelot's reaction, upon seeing her corpse, is to remark: "She has a lovely face/God in his mercy send her grace," and getting on with his life (admittedly he has no idea that he was responsible for her death, but it does seem a bit of a callous response in any case).
So what we have is: a virginal woman, isolated from the world. A (rather masculine) man blunders in unwittingly and performs an act which, although it affects him little, changes her life totally. At the end of the story, he expresses little regret for her death. Hmmm... we *do* know that Terry Nation knew his Arthurian legend...
Fiona (who regards Nation as one of the underrated writers of our day)
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
From: jan b ceri99@hotmail.com There was something else I noticed there, though. At that point, we get an interesting sequence of scenes:
- Meegat falling at Avon's feet.
- Jenna cutting her way through the tent and making it out, only to find
herself at the feet of one of the tribesmen. 3) Cally on the Liberator, flat on the floor with Ensor standing over her. 4) Back to Avon, lifting Meegat up.
I say, old thing, jolly well spotted.
This theme is only broken in the very powerful scene of Servalan subtly twisting the knife with Travis-- and as Neil (and Erving Goffman) suggest, this only serves to throw the other scenes into sharper relief.
I don't think I was the one to make that point. In fact I largely ignored the S/T scenes because they are mainly there to lay down the background for Deliverance and pave the way for the next ep.
Interesting reading. Watching the Meegat scenes over, I didn't see *any*
of
the overt embarrasment or sense of humility and responsibility that a lot
of
people have said they did. He's a bit disconcerted when she actually drops at his feet (but so are Gan and Vila) but he recovers quickly, and for the most part seems to display irritiation, wariness and suspicion (and as a result keeps his gun drawn for the most part... oh, wait, here come the phallic-symbol brigade... DUCK!!!).
Another good point. Several CJ types have cited Avon's response to Meegat as a central attraction of the episode, but it really is a very small part of the whole. Still, CJs do seem to have a talent for getting a lot of mileage out of precious little:)
See what Neil said earlier about such reversals presupposing the original power relation.
I don't think I was the one who said that either (may have been Una?).
Neil
Neil wrote:
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
See what Neil said earlier about such reversals presupposing the original power relation.
I don't think I was the one who said that either (may have been Una?).
I don't think I've ever said anything that coherent in my life. But I'm quite happy to accept the attribution if it helps.
Una
----- Original Message ----- From: Neil Faulkner N.Faulkner@tesco.net To: b7 blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 8:12 AM Subject: Re: [B7L] Deliverance (still!)
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
This theme is only broken in the very powerful scene of Servalan subtly twisting the knife with Travis-- and as Neil (and Erving Goffman) suggest, this only serves to throw the other scenes into
sharper
relief.
I don't think I was the one to make that point. In fact I largely ignored the S/T scenes because they are mainly there to lay down the background
for
Deliverance and pave the way for the next ep.
Actually you didn't refer to this scene specifically, but I was referring to your well-thought-out explanation of how just because the cowboy isn't shooting the indian it doesn't make him less of a cowboy.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
Interesting reading. Watching the Meegat scenes over, I didn't see *any*
of
the overt embarrasment or sense of humility and responsibility that a
lot
of
people have said they did. He's a bit disconcerted when she actually
drops
at his feet (but so are Gan and Vila) but he recovers quickly, and for
the
most part seems to display irritiation, wariness and suspicion (and as a result keeps his gun drawn for the most part... oh, wait, here come the phallic-symbol brigade... DUCK!!!).
Another good point. Several CJ types have cited Avon's response to Meegat as a central attraction of the episode, but it really is a very small part of the whole. Still, CJs do seem to have a talent for getting a lot of mileage out of precious little:)
See what Neil said earlier about such reversals presupposing the
original
power relation.
I don't think I was the one who said that either (may have been Una?).
Neil
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
Actually you didn't refer to this scene specifically, but I was referring
to
your well-thought-out explanation of how just because the cowboy isn't shooting the indian it doesn't make him less of a cowboy.
<blush> She thought it was well-thought-out.
Makes it all seem worthwhile, somehow...
Neil
jan b, Fiona:
derisive/patronising asides would you get between her and Cally? I hope Jenna would behave as Avon has. This is a power thing, not a gender thing.
Now hang *on!* You can't separate power from gender, a point which I recall has been made by Neil, Una, Alison and myself among *many* others on this list.
And of course we all know that many people saying something makes it true :)
Gender is fairly straightforward; power is a complex combination of lots of factors. Gender can be one of those factors, but it doesn't have to be the defining one. Treating it as the defining factor every time there's a power imbalance between a male and a female doesn't combat sexism; it promotes it.
Mistral
----- Original Message ----- From: Mistral mistral@centurytel.net To: B7L blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [B7L] Deliverance
Me:
Now hang *on!* You can't separate power from gender, a point which I
recall
has been made by Neil, Una, Alison and myself among *many* others on
this
list.
And of course we all know that many people saying something makes it true :)
Right, not always :), but I see Neil, Una and Alison (if not myself...) as intelligent people, and if they're saying something I'm going to listen :).
Gender is fairly straightforward
Really? *I* don't see it that way. There are fascinating variations in gender roles and relative status from society to society, which suggests there's more to it than just eat-drink-man-woman.
; power is a complex combination of lots of factors. Gender can be one of those factors, but it doesn't have to be the defining one. Treating it as the defining factor every time there's a power imbalance between a male and a female doesn't combat sexism; it promotes it.
Not disagreeing with you on that, but I have a problem with saying that power doesn't enter into gender relations. It may not be sexism (Travis and Servalan, oo-er!) but to deny that there's a power aspect to *all* relations, including gender ones, is kind of hard.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Fiona Moore wrote:
Now hang *on!* You can't separate power from gender, a point which I recall has been made by Neil, Una, Alison and myself among *many* others on this list.
And of course we all know that many people saying something makes it true :)
Right, not always :), but I see Neil, Una and Alison (if not myself...) as intelligent people, and if they're saying something I'm going to listen :).
Oh, I always listen to them (and to you as well); just don't always agree. ;-)
Gender is fairly straightforward
Really? *I* don't see it that way. There are fascinating variations in gender roles and relative status from society to society, which suggests there's more to it than just eat-drink-man-woman.
Sure; I said gender, not gender roles. Leaving out orientation, it's just male/female/other - pretty straightforward. As for the complexity of gender roles, ISTM that one problem in this discussion has been one side appears to be trying to oversimplify or restrict the roles that a female character can play without being defined _solely_ by her gender. Factoring in of gender doesn't bother me; making it the only thing that counts does.
; power is a complex combination of lots of factors. Gender can be one of those factors, but it doesn't have to be the defining one. Treating it as the defining factor every time there's a power imbalance between a male and a female doesn't combat sexism; it promotes it.
Not disagreeing with you on that, but I have a problem with saying that power doesn't enter into gender relations. It may not be sexism (Travis and Servalan, oo-er!) but to deny that there's a power aspect to *all* relations, including gender ones, is kind of hard.
I'm a little confused; I think we're at cross purposes here. I agree that there is a power aspect to all relations. Sally's got what I meant exactly right - just that gender isn't always the most significant factor in the mix. I'll grant that it usually is in the mix somewhere, but I won't go so far as to say that it _always_ is. For example, a father putting his small son and daughter to bed. That's not enough for me to say that gender is a factor at all; in absence of specifics, I won't agree that one's a sexist transaction and the other isn't, even though the father clearly has the power in both cases.
Similarly, the imbalance of power in Deliverance isn't to my mind _caused_ by gender; if Jenna had set off the rocket, she would still have had more overt power than Meegat, and the plot wouldn't have been much different. Jenna not being the one who's always trying to assert her superiority, however, it wouldn't have been nearly as amusing to see her mistaken for a god. I'll grant you that I'd feel significantly different about this ep if I weren't in the 'embarrassed Avon' camp; this is where, for me, details of a transaction can make an enormous difference.
Mistral
----- Original Message ----- From: Mistral mistral@centurytel.net
Sure; I said gender, not gender roles. Leaving out orientation, it's just male/female/other - pretty straightforward.
Actually, that's sex. Sex is the biological bit; gender is the social expression of those biological traits. Rereading your last with that little revision of technical terms: OK, it reads.
of gender roles, ISTM that one problem in this discussion has been one side appears to be trying to oversimplify or restrict the roles that a female character can play without being defined _solely_ by her gender. Factoring in of gender doesn't bother me; making it the only thing that counts does.
Only Wendy did that. Most of the other posters-- Neil, Iain, Sally, etc.-- have been bringing in areas of class, power, literature... it's fascinating!
Servalan, oo-er!) but to deny that there's a power aspect to *all* relations, including gender ones, is kind of hard.
I'm a little confused; I think we're at cross purposes here. I agree that there is a power aspect to all relations. Sally's got what I meant exactly right - just that gender isn't always the most significant factor in the mix. I'll grant that it usually is in the mix somewhere, but I won't go so far as to say that it _always_ is. For example, a father putting his small son and daughter to bed. That's not enough for me to say that gender is a factor at all; in absence of specifics, I won't agree that one's a sexist transaction and the other isn't, even though the father clearly has the power in both cases.
Now whoa there! I didn't say that a situation involving power relations and differing gender roles was inherently sexist! There is a difference, I think, between something involving power and something involving the abuse of power. E.g.: two people of different races interact. This is not necessarily racist. But to say that it is devoid of racial connotations of power is to deny that these exist in a culture.
But to take your example: I wouldn't say that a father putting his small daughter to bed is sexist, but I would say that gender and power are involved. Why? Because the relationship between a father and daughter, in this culture, does carry certain expectations of gender roles and power relations attatched to these gender roles, regardless of whether these are *directly* involved or not.
Similarly, the imbalance of power in Deliverance isn't to my mind _caused_ by gender;
Again, though, I think Wendy was the only one saying it was. Most other people in the discussion, inc. your humble servant, were more interested in what role gender played in the imbalance of power.
Oh, and re the Jenna point: most people (yes, including myself until I watched the episode back) seem to be forgetting that Meegat's instructions were to look for a man. If Jenna or Cally had turned up, they would have been ignored, cos they didn't fit the terms of the prophecy.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
And of course we all know that many people saying something makes it true :)
Right, not always :), but I see Neil, Una and Alison (if not myself...) as intelligent people, and if they're saying something I'm going to listen
:).
Yeah? Can I interest you in some cut-price car insurance?
Gender is fairly straightforward
Really? *I* don't see it that way. There are fascinating variations in gender roles and relative status from society to society, which suggests there's more to it than just eat-drink-man-woman.
As I understand it, there is a fine semantic difference between gender and sex. Sex is biologically determined and depends on what chromosomes you carry (usually XX for female, XY for male, but with aberrant variations like XXY and XYY.) Gender is culturally - or ideologically - determined, and doesn't necessarily correlate with biological sex. It is possible, though rare, for individuals to be of a different gender to their sex - I've heard of one case of a 'woman' who actually possessed fully functioning testes. Phenotypically she was female, and lived her life as such, but genotypically 'he' was male (I'm deliberately playing around with the pronouns here, since such individuals challenge the artificial constraints of the language). This condition was not diagnosed until s/he was middle-aged, IIRC.
; power is a complex combination of lots of factors. Gender can be one of those factors, but it doesn't have to be the defining one. Treating it as the defining factor every time there's a power imbalance between a male and a female doesn't combat sexism; it promotes it.
Not disagreeing with you on that, but I have a problem with saying that power doesn't enter into gender relations. It may not be sexism (Travis
and
Servalan, oo-er!) but to deny that there's a power aspect to *all* relations, including gender ones, is kind of hard.
This can be further complicated by what you mean by sexism. Some of the comments on this list seem to operating from the assumption that sexism includes any discrimination on the basis of sex, whether comitted by a man or woman. This is a valid position. But there are some (guess who) who would say that within a patriarchal society, only men can be sexist, because their discrimination is ideologically codified and thereby sanctioned. This doesn't require the man to be in a more powerful position: if we take the (not uncommon, these days) situation of female boss/male employee, then his opposition to her orders can represent a degree of sexism to their interaction. Even if he does what he's told, but does it his way (because it's *his*) then that could be taken as a manifestation of sexism. But if she makes unreasonable demands on him *because* he's a man, then that is not sexism but a reaction to it.
Neil
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
OK, I've lost track of who's snipping whom, but this comes from a dialogue between Neil and Fiona:
As I understand it, there is a fine semantic difference between gender and sex. Sex is biologically determined [...] Gender is culturally - or
ideologically - determined, and doesn't necessarily correlate with biological sex. It is possible, though
rare, for individuals to be of a different gender to their sex
Whereas I would say that there is an immense semantic difference between gender and sex. I would say that transsexuals are people who believe that in a real sense, their gender is discordant with their bodies and sex of assignment. However, there are an infinite number of gender roles and ways to perform them--Soolin and Servalan don't perform femininity in the same way, for instance. Kerrill's chromosomes certainly haven't changed between the beginning and the end of City at the Edge of the World but her gender performance has.
-(Y)
I suggested this topic a while back.
Would President Sarkoff be the best of the B7 characters to have as a neighbour?
__________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
Servalan meets JR
What happens next?
__________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
-
Dana Shilling -
Fiona Moore -
Jacqueline Thijsen -
jacquispeel＠netscape.net -
jan b -
Mistral -
Neil Faulkner -
Una McCormack