Given that I took Game of Thrones to task with my last post, I thought it was fair to do a little follow up and to acknowledge that things seem to have gotten a bit better for the women in Westeros (and across the sea). Or, you know, things [...]]]>

Given that I took Game of Thrones to task with my last post, I thought it was fair to do a little follow up and to acknowledge that things seem to have gotten a bit better for the women in Westeros (and across the sea). Or, you know, things have gotten worse for everyone so it’s hard to tell.

I’m immensely enjoying what it happening with Sansa. I think the writers have given the character the opportunity to show strength and grace under extreme pressure. She never falters in declaring her love for King Joffrey, yet we can see her rebellion building. She is much more interesting and likeable than last season.

One of the things that is interesting me about this show is how each of the female characters embodies an archetypal member of society. Sansa is educating us on what it is like for noble women, the trials and tribulations. The scene last episode between Sansa and Cersei as they discussed Joffrey was perfection — well-written, well-acted. A++.

Arya. She is obviously the great hope for this show. I mean, they could still kill her because they have killed beloved characters before, but I would be very surprised and disappointed if they did. They’re setting the character up as too shrewd and self-preserving to lose her head (no pun intended!) in a pointless battle/argument. She will be the one who continues House Stark.

But Danaerys is annoying me. Enough with the speeches! I really enjoyed when the merchant cut her down to size and reminded her that she has no ships and no one knows who she is. She needs to chill on her delusions of grandeur. Also, I find her plot line boring. Sorry. I keep waiting for her to serve a greater purpose to the show, but we may be waiting for awhile.

Catelyn is also very archetypal in the sense that she is the classic, older good woman, but I still enjoy her. She is really being fleshed out as a character. I particularly enjoyed her scene with Jaime Lannister right at the end of the last episode — I think both actors had a chance to really work it with the dialogue (and those opportunities are limited on this show) and I’m curious to see what she ends up doing with the sword. Also, Catelyn has a female knight now, which just rules.

I’m starting to like Cersei. I’m not sure what’s happening. Mind you, I empathize with women who are victims of their circumstances. For example, I have always been sympathetic to Betty Draper (feel free to take me to task on this), although I haven’t seen the new season yet.

I haven’t decided how I feel about this new Wildling girl yet. Just when I was starting to get weary with all of her comments about sex (zzzzz), she turned out to be really crafty and interesting. I have hope for her yet.

In all, I’m super glad to see that the show is starting to do something useful with their female characters. I appreciate that the women are very much part of the action and central to the plot lines. We have a better understanding of their strengths and weaknesses and, despite the fact that women are a commodity in Westeros, they are central to the war effort, regardless of side.

I think the men have had a rough go of it recently. Aside from a select few — Tywin and Tyrion Lannister, Robb Stark, Luwin (Bran’s tutor) — we are starting to get the strong sense that these men are all just a bunch of little boys with armies, if we didn’t already know that. It’s different, but not particularly positive. Theon is being set up as nearly a despicable character as Joffrey, which was very surprising to me. Inevitably they will both go down in a disgusting fashion, and it kind of appalls me how much I look forward to it.

Game of Thrones seems to be following its pattern from last season — finish the season with stronger, more dramatic characters and plot lines than the start. I look forward to it. Here are some things I’m wondering about:

1. A main character (or two) has to die at the end of the season. Who will it be?

2. What is going to happen when Stannis and his ships arrive at King’s Landing? Is this the beginning of the end for the Lannisters?

3. Will Danaerys stop whining?

4. When will Arya be Queen? (Whatever, you want it too.)

If you’re very into Game of Thrones, I would highly recommend checking out episode recaps. I relied on them heavily the first few episodes to keep the characters sorted. Now I just appreciate another person’s insights into the episode. For example, last night, I just had to hear who the internet thought the two little bodies were. Anyway, check out The A.V. Club for all your television needs, but particularly Game of Thrones. They offer newbie recaps for people who haven’t read the books and expert recaps for those who have.

I’m not going to speculate on the possibility that people are getting more comfy with feminism. Apparently it is still a “radical” position (haaaa!).

But I do appreciate that the [...]]]> I couldn’t/can’t decide if Jess’ “feminist rants” comment was a joke with or against the feminists, but I’m taking it as my own.

I’m not going to speculate on the possibility that people are getting more comfy with feminism. Apparently it is still a “radical” position (haaaa!).

But I do appreciate that the writers keep getting all meta on the fact that Jess, IRL, would be the most annoying person ever.

Carry on.

Women outnumber men on the @PnP_CBC panel. Someone might want to correct that tomorrow, in interests of consistency. #cdnpoli

— Susan Delacourt (@SusanDelacourt) May 7, 2012

@SusanDelacourt Don’t make me start me rant about the few [...]]]> I saw a little exchange on Twitter a few days that got me thinking:

Women outnumber men on the @PnP_CBC panel. Someone might want to correct that tomorrow, in interests of consistency. #cdnpoli

— Susan Delacourt (@SusanDelacourt) May 7, 2012

@SusanDelacourt Don’t make me start me rant about the few months I spent as a chase producer. Women tend to say no. Men say yes. — Laura Payton (@laura_payton) May 7, 2012

@SusanDelacourt Most chase producers are women and do their best to find women to be on the panels.
— Laura Payton (@laura_payton) May 7, 2012

Susan Delacourt is a political writer for the Toronto Star and Laura Payton is a political writer for the CBC. @PnP_CBC is Power and Politics, a panel-based show that debates the issues of the day.

Delacourt and Payton’s exchange got me thinking about women as pundits.

Somewhere along the way, I ended up as a very (very) minor league pundit in Calgary on women’s issues. Because of my writing/blogging, work with Take Back the Night and my radio show, I occasionally get requests for things related to feminism, such as a guest column or comment.

Most recently, the weekend news anchor for Global Calgary called me out of the blue (still unclear how she got my private cell phone number) and asked me if I would comment on the brutal assault of a sex worker in Calgary. I was initially uncertain (“I’m not sure what I’ll have to say,” I said,) but I decided it was too interesting an opportunity to pass up.

So this is a picture of me, on TV:

I figured no one would see it. It was scheduled for the 11 o’clock news, and seriously, do people still watch TV news at that hour? Apparently so. They also watch it in the morning and at noon the following day, when the clip that I appeared in also aired.

The people who saw it included several coworkers and my publisher, my boss’ boss. And my boyfriend’s entire immediate family. Generally, people had nice things to say about my clip. I think it went fairly well.

But this is not to say that I wasn’t nervous. I was so nervous. I Googled “what to wear on TV” (no patterns) and “how to put on make up for TV” (apply liberally) and “should I wear my glasses on TV” (no, fool). I Googled a statistic on violence against sex workers before I left the house, and on the way there, I listened to pump up music in the car. Which, if you’re wondering, is a potent mix of Adele and Kanye (don’t hate).

I suspect that many women don’t say yes to appearing on panels because it’s scary, y’all. Giving your opinion and inviting people to misunderstand it (frequent) or personally attack you (often) is intimidating, even when you know your facts.

A lot of people I know hate Margaret Wente, like hate her. I’ve devoted plenty of space on the internet to poking fun at her and disagreeing with her myriad of bizarre opinions, but I don’t hate Wente. I admire the woman’s swagger. She writes whatever she damn pleases and it lights up every liberal under 35 like a pinball machine and it’s so glorious. I love it. When Maisonneuve lets someone who spent a month writing poetry attack Wente’s privilege, Wente wins. (Let me spell it out for you: if you can write poetry for a month, you’re privileged; hat tip to Panic for this point.) Also, the guy devotes most of the column to personally attacking her, which renders his argument completely ineffective on anyone who doesn’t already agree with him.

The point is that pundits are lightening rods for public rage. When people are mad about The State of Our Country, they yell at that clueless idiot who writes a column in the paper. Once you understand this, as Wente and Andrew Coyne and Christie Blatchford and other columnists do, you can’t lose. None of them care about what you think because they can’t care or it will destroy them.

But knowing that requires foolish self-confidence and healthy self-awareness. Women are conditioned to be agreeable, considerate, modest and caring — the polar opposite qualities required to be a successful pundit. Opinionated women have a tough go of it.

Also, when you’re a woman, you have the pleasure of being criticized randomly for your appearance. This week Jezebel published a decent essay on the Drudge Report running a photo of Hillary Clinton’s makeup-less face. When one of the most powerful women in the world is reduced to criticisms of her looks, in addition to her policies, what hope do us younger, less established women have? (For the record, Hillary Clinton released a statement that basically said she did not give a shit, because she is bad ass.)

It’s probably easier to keep our mouths shut. Which means that they win. Which means we should probably calm down about Margaret Wente and start thinking about how we can get more women’s voices in opinion pages and on TV.

They can’t represent you, so why are you expecting them to? I guess because it’s easier to accuse other people of “hating themselves” than it is to actually put your face and name on something you believe in. I respect the courage in that, even if I don’t agree with your opinion.

That’s what John Doyle, TV critic at the Globe and Mail, thinks. Before the start of season two, Doyle wrote that Game of Thrones is basically about men on horses, magic, and women. Silly stuff for silly boys. I thought his characterization of the show was a little unfair.

Game of [...]]]>

Obviously she is my favourite

Is Game of Thrones “screaming for the teenage male”?

That’s what John Doyle, TV critic at the Globe and Mail, thinks. Before the start of season two, Doyle wrote that Game of Thrones is basically about men on horses, magic, and women. Silly stuff for silly boys. I thought his characterization of the show was a little unfair.

Game of Thrones season one was strong. It had interesting characters, intricate plot lines (a good mix of intrigue and blood/gore), and good acting. I really loved it. It was one of my favourite new shows last year.

But I’m starting to see Doyle’s point, at least when it comes to the female characters. I’ll let Doyle say why, because he said it first:

“And the depiction of relationships is only one step away from pornography – slight, bosomy women overpowered by huge, growling guys. Women seem to spend an undue amount of time on their hands and knees. I’d speculate that women viewers feel differently about Game of Thrones.”

After watching the first two episodes of season two, he’s right, I do feel differently. The women on Game of Thrones have a bad deal.

Crazy stuff is going down in season two: Joffrey is king, the Starks are in disarray, the Nights Watch guys are definitely going to find out what’s beyond the wall, and we’re meeting a bunch of new characters with plots for the throne. Right now, five different men claim to be king.

All of these good plots involve mostly men. And the women? Well, we see more sex workers than anyone else.

Catelyn Stark and Sansa Stark have mostly disappeared. Arya Stark and Daenerys get a few minutes here or there. Cersei Lannister is probably the most well-represented woman on the show at this point. But we see plenty of sex workers getting nailed from behind (sorry, but it’s true) and giving blow jobs. And none of it is relevant to the plot.

On Game of Thrones, it seems as if women are used as a device to amuse and gross us out. Every episode we are treated to degrading, overly sexual and weird treatment of women, often a sex worker. We’ve seen incest, abuse and maltreatment. Not once, that I can think of, have we seen sex used in a positive, romantic or interesting way. Women are used to titillate us through pornographic scenes at the brothel, or to horrify us through depictions of abuse. They’re also exploring the oh-so-original-genre of “woman as evil temptress” through this new ginger-haired witch who seduces Stannis in the most recent episode.

The only women who seem to escape the worst abuse and ickiness are the Starks. This is, of course, because they are the women of Ned Stark, the ultimate martyr of the show. And since sluts can’t be good people, it would never do to have them degraded. Obviously!

Women are also used to define the power of men around them. If a character is seen treating a woman in a brothel like garbage, we are supposed to know that he is Rich and Important. And given the way these women pop up around the powerful men as much as the swords and horses, they almost feel like another accessory. One can collect women.

I don’t have a problem with sex workers. I have a problem that the women are being used to titillate and aren’t actually fully realized characters for the amount of screen time that they get.

The real kicker to all this sex is that none of it is necessary. It mostly doesn’t advance the plot. And more importantly, Game of Thrones is fake. It might pull on some aspects of medieval history, but it is a fantasy show. This is not how “it was.” There is no factual, legitimate reason why all the women of working age have to be dumb sex objects. They’re there to titillate us when we get bored with all the dialogue.

You could argue that Game of Thrones is trying to send a message about women. Maybe there’s a point to constantly depicting women being abused at the hands of weak, pathetic men. And not all of the men are bad. After all, we’ve seen Jon Snow and his Nights Watch friend wrestle with whether or not to rescue some of the women forced to have children with their father. We have also seen Tyrion Lannister treat his one preferred companion with a fair amount of respect.

But I don’t know. It doesn’t detract from the fact that there are naked, abused women everywhere for no reason at all. I’m over it. I know we’re supposed to like Theon Greyjoy, but the guy has a storied history of pushing around idiotic whores (I hate that term, but it’s how they are depicted). I find his character, among many others, to be a total waste of space. I don’t think he was the “star of the episode.”

Game of Thrones needs to pull back on the violence against women and the naked women. It needs to work with some of its established strong female characters and move us forward, without all of the sex.

Related Reading:

Girl Power — Washington Post: For a different perspective, this TV writer posits that the most recent episode was all about strong women. I think she misses the important point that these women are almost exclusively defined as powerful in terms of sex, as defined by men. So, no dice.

Marnell is also a self-described feminist. She is very upfront about her brand of feminism (that she should be able to do whatever she wants, regardless of [...]]]> Cat Marnell is xojane.com‘s beauty and health editor. She’s also a self-described drug addict who is happy to detail how her Republican psychiatrist father ruined her life. (#GenYProblems)

Marnell is also a self-described feminist. She is very upfront about her brand of feminism (that she should be able to do whatever she wants, regardless of her gender) and that attitude appears in her writing. She is not shy about the messy, controversial details of her life and they feature prominently in her articles. Marnell has written about using Plan B as birth control and how her addiction forced her to resign from Lucky magazine.

Despite her scary stories and problematic opinions (thinness is a feminist choice?), there is something feminist about Marnell’s writing. She belongs to this new group of women who “over-share” the sad, messy details of their lives in acts of grotesque honesty. It’s a hard reaction to the fact that most women’s stories come in the form of a romantic comedy or some other kind of sanitary, sweet story.

It’s feminist to write about your problems because women are supposed to be perfect. This is like introductory stuff. You never hear about women’s messy lives unless they are reformed, recovered, and/or saved (usually by a guy, obviously). There are no Don Drapers.

But I’m concerned about the way in which Marnell’s openness about her vulnerabilities may actually be reinforcing them. (There’s also the obvious issue of glamorizing them.) I’m not a doctor or a psychiatrist or her mom. But I don’t know, if my writing career were dependent on telling you all my deepest and darkest secrets, I’d go work in a factory, or somewhere else that has nothing to do with writing.

Marnell idolizes her boss, feminist icon Jane Pratt, and says that she is given lots of freedom to take risks and make mistakes. Of course she is. Pratt is using Marnell like her cash cow. Pageviews and unique visitors are what sell ads. The more sensational Marnell is, the more people read her stuff. And Marnell delivers on this promise. In addition to the posts about Plan B and her ongoing discussion of drug use (which is actually fascinating), Marnell once devoted an entire “health” column to how she is a bitch. People loved it because she showed them her weak side.

And online confessional writing is built on shilling weakness. There are many publishers and business owners out there making money on the legions of under-paid 20-somethings who are willing to write personal stories on the internet about sex, drugs and shame for clicks. Thought Catalog thrives on this model. So does Gawker Media.

And this is where the feminism ends. When you’re regularly tearing yourself down in public for money because you are encouraged to, that’s exploitation. We’re not helping women. Confessional writing has reached the point where total self-humiliation and self-immolation is necessary for success. That’s terrifying.

Gen Y are frequently criticized for their total lack of propriety and general sense of self-importance. But as media jobs dry up, one has to work harder to stand out from the crowd. To write that blog that will get them a job. Websites like xojane.com, Thought Catalog and Gawker Media prey on this. They find the writers that are underemployed and desperate, and push their desperation to the breaking point. If you’re in therapy or are afraid to leave your apartment because of that post your wrote about your ex-boyfriend, maybe there’s something wrong here.

No one is arguing that people aren’t responsible for their own actions and decisions. And I do believe that many of these writers enjoy sharing their truths. There’s an anti-secrecy thing happening.

But I can’t ignore the sense I have that writers like Cat Marnell are actually being exploited in the name of feminism and truth bombs.

Sometimes I worried that I’d been chosen not in spite of my inexperience but because of it. Hiring women in their early 20s with little or no background in journalism was a tactic that worked for the site’s owner twice before, and I expected to be a victim of the same kind of hazing my predecessors were subjected to as they learned how to do their jobs — and how to navigate New York — in public. I’d once heard someone refer to us as “sacrificial virgins,” which didn’t seem too far off.

— Emily Gould on working at Gawker

Related reading:

True confessions in new women’s lit — The Guardian

In Defence of the Confession — The Walrus Blog

Exposed — New York Times Sunday Magazine