1. Amber's review of *Twilight*.
2. Does Facebook cause cancer?
3. GMU to withdraw from the Persian Gulf.
4. Basketball lender of last resort.
Assorted links
Previous post: A Great Depression for rich people
Next post: Markets in everything
Our Books
Modern Principles of Economics
Launching The Innovation Renaissance
The Great Stagnation: How America Ate All the Low-Hanging Fruit of Modern History, Got Sick, and Will(Eventually) Feel Better
Create Your Own Economy: The Path to Prosperity in a Disordered World
Discover Your Inner Economist
Good and Plenty: The Creative Successes of American Arts Funding
Judge and Jury: American Tort Law on Trial
Markets and Cultural Voices: Liberty vs. Power in the Lives of Mexican Amate Painters (Economics, Cognition, and Society)
The Voluntary City: Choice, Community, and Civil Society (Economics, Cognition, and Society)
Creative Destruction: How Globalization Is Changing the World's Cultures
Changing the Guard: Private Prisons and the Control of Crime
What Price Fame?
In Praise of Commercial Culture
Entrepreneurial Economics: Bright Ideas from the Dismal Science
Contact Us
Re:Twilight
It’s interesting that the critic believes that readers want to identify with the main character because her life is everything that every (idealistic) girl wants. And yet, among her takeaway lessons of the book are. Roissy et al must be having a field day.
“Having guys follow me around and sneak into my house and fling me around like a sack of potatoes is romantic. (No, it’s abusive and scary.)
- It’s not his fault that he scares me, it’s just that I make him so hungry/mad …. (Abusive!)”
I do wish, however, that the reviewer had not reflexively and unthinkingly proclaimed that the book “reinforces a sick, patriarchal view of sexuality”.
In fact, the opposite is true. Patriarchal societies seek to suppress, control and sublimate precisely the sort of wild streak of female sexuality that the female protagonist displays. Traditional elderly male patriarchs (and her father) would hardly approve of the choices she makes, or perhaps even the fact that she has the freedom to make them.
The book describes a post-patriarchal post-judgmental state of affairs, where young women defy convention and follow only their own turbulent desires. Patriarchal societies, by contrast, seek to steer young women into arranged marriages with respectable boys from good families, molding them into dutiful wives and mothers who uphold the social order.
Both the book and patriarchal values can justifiably be criticized, but it is downright silly to make the claim that the former reflects the latter; the truth is very nearly the exact opposite.
Spoiler: I said that the book promotes a patriarchal view of sexuality in part based on my knowledge of the other books, in which Bella’s desire is stifled until marriage. And even then, sex with her inappropriate husband eventually kills her! Only as a married vamp can she fully embrace physical intimacy with her beloved—and that comes at the cost of her ability to have children.
“[Edward] loves Bella because of how she smells.”
That’s appalling and implausible. What sick, immature, and twisted person would make life-changing decisions that could hurt other people based on smell?
漆彈
家教
ç¿»è¯
醫å¸ç¾Žå®¹
æ±½è»Šå ±å»¢
ç«¥è£æ‰¹ç™¼
Comments on this entry are closed.