[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Sexism, division of labor
Jennifer Boggess Ramon
boggles at earthlink.net
Mon Jul 22 02:41:50 UTC 2002
At 7:02 PM -0500 7/21/02, A. Vulgarweed wrote:
>
>I like Molly, but I actually find Minerva McGonagall far more compelling as
>a character.
Ditto. I wish we got to see more of her, and in particular, more of
her mentorship relationship with Hermione. How many hoops did she
have to jump through to get her the Time-Turner? I don't see her as
a weak or two-dimensional character (which apparently makes us
unusual around here); I just wish we saw more of her, as I don't
think she's as well fleshed out as, say, Severus and Sirius. (I also
wish we saw more of Sprout, and anything at all of Professor Vector.)
>Was she ever in love? Did
>she have children? Was there a Tragedy? Is she happy with her place in
>life, did she once have other ambitions? Will she be Headmistress? Has she
>done important Transfiguration research? Has she published in professional
>journals? Has she invented techniques? I wanna KNOW, dammit! (If JKR won't
>tell us, there's always fanfic!)
So Mote It Be, sister! ;) I would want to add "What's her
sexuality?" to the list of questions, but I have no illusions that
_that_ would ever be part of canon. Molly's sexuality, on the other
hand, is pretty clear; unless she and Arthur have a Fillfeather's
Fabulous Marital Assistants catalog and a box of goodies hidden
discreetly under their bed, she's clearly het and vanilla. We can
make no such assumptions about Minerva! And I'm afraid I'm the sort
of feminist who is just as concerned that women have access to their
authentic sexual selves as I am that they have equal access with men
to economic and political power. (Yes, I do see their right to
freedom from gender-related violence as more important, but I also
see all three as intimately related, so I see no point in ignoring
the first two in exclusive favor of the latter.)
>See, I was born without the "maternal instinct" gene. Never felt it as a
>child (never had or wanted any baby or child dolls), have never felt it
>since, and at 33, I think if it was ever going to kick in, it would have
>started by now. I'm part of a small but significant minority that way--not
>all women *should* be mothers, trust me!--and I think if the Strong Mother
>archetype is seen as the *only* or *most important* archetype for girls,
>how is that any kind of improvement over that Victorian "angel in the
>kitchen" bill of goods?
I wholly agree, although I _was_ born with a functioning "mama" gene
and further socialized into the role by two late siblings whom I
cared quite a bit for. Not all women can be or should be mothers, so
empowering the Mother archetype is at best going to help a majority
of women, not all women. Similarly, not all women survive to reach
the Crone age. If we want to empower women _as women_, the role that
we need to empower, must instill respect for, is that of Daughter.
*Every* woman is someone's daughter, and can symbolically become
daughters to others. Moreover, one can be a father's daughter or a
mother's daughter or both; the role allows one to be in relationship
to either gender equally, which (for example) "wife" does not. After
all, the role of sonship is already a major player in male
inheritance and at least one world religion; surely daughters deserve
the same respect.
>See, I disagree. I think the co-ed World Cup Quidditch games might make
>some kids (boys, even - gasp!) who hadn't really thought about it before
>wonder *why* the real-world equivalent is men-only, when clearly it doesn't
>*have* to be.
Again, I agree - since the HP books are, at their core, the story of
a boy, their role ought to be (IMHO) less one of building up girls
with good role models (although I think Hermione is adequate for an
"in" for girl readers to identify with, if they need one; most girls
by the age they're reading them have adjusted to identifying with
male heroes when they need to) and more one of presenting powerful,
respectable women for young *male* readers to accept and respect. In
that, I think both Molly and Minerva succeed decently. I hope that
the female Quidditch stars fall in that category - a boy who reads
about a gripping sports match in which female players are critical
and then goes back to his all-male soccer team may, just may, wonder
why there are no kick-ass girls on his team. I really do believe
that half of feminism is educating men - and better start when
they're young!
>There's really no excuse
>for Quidditch not being co-ed, and so the fact that the Slytherin team
>isn't stands out - it's seen as an abberation, a typical prejudiced nasty
>Slytherin eccentricity. (I realize the Celluloid Thing "corrected" this - I
>think maybe it shouldn't've.)
FWIW, the comment about there being no girls on the Slytherin team is
made in CoS, unless my memory is failing me. The shots from the CoS
trailer with Draco in the Quidditch robes don't show any females on
the Slytherin team, so I think they got it right in the Second
Celluloid Thing.
>I've seen this argument around a lot, and I don't get it either, Cindy. I
>think there *is* respect for childbearing and always has been. It's respect
>for the *woman herself*, independent of the children she may or may not
>bear, that's the issue.
There are a number of people who don't respect childbearing, and I
have no objection to raising the cultural level of respect for
childbearing and (more importantly IMHO) childrearing. A lack of
respect for mothers certainly can translate into a lack of respect
for women. I just don't think that that should be our sole, or even
primary, focus. A lack of respect for women who have sex, for
instance, is just as culturally widespread, if not more so, and just
as damaging to women, IMHO.
>I'd also point out that what Hooch teaches is not a traditional "female"
>subject, nor is McGonagall's (I wouldn't think - hard to know about
>Transfiguration, right? But it was also Dumbledore's subject.)
And, I would suggest, Potions is the sort of subject that in the
common culture seems to be a "witchy" subject more than a "wizardly"
one. Snape doesn't seem to feel his masculinity is threatened by
stirring a cauldron all day . . .
--
- Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!
More information about the HPFGU-OTChatter
archive