Welcome to Gaia! ::

1) Pretty much true. That is kinda creepy.

2) I laughed at that one. I don't get how that would count as abuse
though.

3) True, though Bella could still go to college if she wanted, and her
friends were pretty dang nerdy and weird.

4) Bella was independent, until she met Edward (whose a vampire).
Rosalie is materialistic, but doesn't she basically do whatever she
wants anyway?

When a mother loses her child, it's a very heartbreaking thing. I think
Esme had some reason to feel that way. Rosalie is just a b***h in
my opinion. And it was Bella's choice to keep her baby alive.
She could've killed it if she wanted to. But yeah, it does promote
unsafe sex.

True, but he was a werewolf...
True, both of the guys were being extremely selfish. Edward's is more
like, natural for him considering the circumstances (not saying it's
right or anything), but Jacob was pushing it pretty far.


I agree that there are a lot of kinda bad things in the book, but it's
really silly when people take that stuff seriously. I mean, it
makes more sense for vampires and werewolves, but if someone thinks
that this stuff is ok, then they need to talk to their parents or
something. I guess it would make more sense for a little kid to think
that it's ok, but for older teens, they should really know better
anyways.

I'm also curious now, because seeing as this is from Stephanie Meyer's
brain, I wonder if she's spilled some of her own dramatic experiences
or thoughts onto the paper subconsciously? Maybe she had boy troubles
when she was younger.

You know, I have to say that all of the things you said are true. These themes definitely are present in the book, and it might cause problems with some fangirls. But with the majority of the population I think most people know what's fiction and what's not. Obviously, Twilight does not resemble real life AT ALL (because of the things you pointed out and the whole vampire/werewolf thing), but I do agree that some girls might be tricked into thinking about it that way.

Twilight should only be considered as a completely fictional story, but you shouldn't let these negative themes take away from your enjoyment of the book either.

:]

Here’s my two cents. My responses will be in WHITE to denote SPOILERS for Breaking Dawn. If you haven’t finished Breaking Dawn, don’t read this.

It is NEVER acceptable fore a boy to follow you or watch you while you sleep. This constitutes stalking and is NEVER alright, even if he is handsome.

It’s not okay for a boy to watch you sleep? Pardon? Who made up that rule? I don’t like my fiancé watching me sleep. I don’t like anyone watching me when I sleep. But I don’t think it’s wrong. I think the bigger issue is Edward breaking and entering, not watching her sleep.

2) it is unacceptable for a boy to remove the engine from your car, therefore preventing you from going anywhere. This constitutes abuse and is VERY unhealthy in a relationship.

Agreed. Unless someone is legitimately unstable and would be a danger to him/herself and others on the road. But isn’t hiding the keys easier?

3) It is NEVER acceptable to give up dreams, aspirations or other social contact in order to be with a man. Ie; Bella gives up College and the prospect of furthering herself academically and for the chance of being highly qualified because of Edward. She starts to spend less and less time with her own friends as every waking minute is filled with being with Edward.

And yet women do it all the time in real life. Feminism is about women having the ability to choose. So what’s wrong with Bella’s choice, as long as it was her own? Edward encouraged her to go to college. And it’s not as though Bella won’t ever go, since she has the rest of eternity. Let’s not forget that Bella didn’t really have any close friends to begin with in Forks, so it’s not as though she were making a real sacrifice in the first place. And again, it was Bella’s choice. Edward didn’t point a finger at her and say “Bella, I demand you stop socializing with your friends!” I just don’t think she had a big desire to in the first place.

4) NONE of the female characters in the books are strong willed OR independent. They all rely on a male counterpart to rescue them, they are all superficial and obsessed with material things such as looks and clothes.

They are also all obsessed with only being with a man, and preferably having children. Esme longs for children so much that she basically commits suicide because she loses hers, Rosalie is the pinnacle of baby obsession. Bella goes through with a pregnancy despite the fact her child poses a grave threat to her very life. The books are in this respect promoting the ridiculously outdated beliefs of Pro-life (aka the rights of the child before the rights of the mother) and even promoting teenage pregnancy.

Also, many of the female characters endure all kinds of abuse from boyfriends, because the male "loves" her. Emily is even physically abused when Sam attacks her, leaving her face horribly scarred forever. Edward and Jacob are both emotionally manipulative in order to get Bella to do what they want, and Bella is AWARE of this, yet does nothing.

Whoa. I thought you read Breaking Dawn. Bella ends up as the savior, no? Edward, and everyone else would have been goners without her. And not only that, but she ends the book as the strongest vampire in her coven.

Also, they guys in the book can be superficial at times too. What about how entertained they are with their cars?

While I agree with you that almost all the female characters in the book get paired off, they aren’t all obsessed with having children. Alice doesn’t have children (or any expressed desire to have them), and Bella was perfectly okay with the knowledge that she wouldn’t be able to have children once she became a vampire before she became pregnant. But Bella chose to keep her child. And that’s okay. I’m pro-choice too, but really, you’re being very close-minded. Not everyone chooses abortion because that’s not the right choice for everyone. Even a mother who could die because of the pregnancy/birth. Should she have to give up her right to choose the life of her child over her own? I don’t think so. Also, keep in mind that the author of this book is a Mormon. I would imagine that she is pro-life. She is also a mother. All of the mothers I’ve ever talked to would give their lives for the lives of their children in a heartbeat. It’s not an uncommon sentiment.

As for promoting teenage pregnancy, Bella is 18 or 19 when she becomes pregnant. She’s legally an adult. Many people choose to start families early in life. Though Bella didn’t choose to become pregnant, she was married and had the resources to care for a baby, so I see nothing wrong with it.

Additionally, Sam didn’t attack Emily because he was mad at her, so I’m not sure an accident constitutes abuse. My fiancé and I were wrestling once and he accidentally elbowed by face and gave me a bloody and swollen lip. Was that abuse? Yes, I think both Edward and Jake have a tendency to be emotionally manipulative, but it would be difficult to find a human being who is in love and not somewhat emotionally manipulative. I know I can be, and I know in the past my fiancé has been. It’s not a nice feeling, but it happens in relationships. None of them are perfect, after all.

You guys are really thinking deep about some of these points, and your counterarguments are very thought provoking. Thankyou. That said. let's get right back into it. These are disjointed as I answer as I remember/see the points again.

Feminism isn't the right to choose, it is the right to equality. Just because Bella chose not to go to College doesn't make it acceptable. The ONLY reason she did choose this was to be with Edward, not because she wanted to travel the world first or take time off; so that she could be with Edward as a vampire as soon as possible. It's that Bella abandons her ambitions and decides not to purse her education--that's crazy anti-feminist and "women belong in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant" talk.

The only reason that Bella didn't have close friends in Forks was because she was too obsessed with being with Edward, she didn't want to have a social life outside of him. That doesn't sound like an "independent" woman to me. She sounds entirely obsessed and overly dependent on Edward, this of course leading to her absolute depression in New Moon when he leaves, because he is the only aspect of her life having rejected everyone else to be solely with him. And then, later on in New Moon, it is proven that there are people in Forks that are suitable to be really close friends with, Bella just hadn't bothered looking because Edward was there.

I'm not saying that a woman doesn't have the right to keep her baby if she wants, and in fact I am 100% Pro-choice, but wouldn't ever think of having an abortion myself. This is a touchy subject, I agree. All I am saying is that SMeyer has an obligation to think about the messages she is sending through her books. And that is that a soon-to-be mother, no matter her age or her mental capacity to be a mother should devote herself entirely to protecting the child's rights above her own. I guess the reason I am so opposed to the situation in the book is because Bella had never given any indication to wanting to be a parent, and had never shown the maturity to be able to cope with being a mother. Bella's pregnancy also only lasted about .. a month. Not enough time for a girl with previously no maternal instinct to do a complete 180, in fact her decision to keep the baby feels entirely forced by Meyer to promote her own personal beliefs, even if it contradicted Bella's character.

And yes, compared to the other female characters, Alice doesn't have desire to have children. But she is still a ridiculous superficial barbie. Rather than having children, her goal in life is to go shopping, plan and go to parties, and dress Bella up. rolleyes

With the Sam and Emily thing, I'm not taking the event at literal "species" value. You have to look at it not as "Oh, he is a werewolf, and that kind of thing happens sometimes, it's okay though because it was an accident." If I remember correctly, werewolves explode into animals when they are angry, and are then not in control of their actions?? Taken somewhat abstractly, this could be interpreted as "when a guy becomes angry he isn't himself, he turns into another person/ something else. This other person is the one who hurt me, and my man was in no control over his actions, so I can forgive him." Isn't that exactly what victims of partner abuse say to defend their partners? Being elbowed while playing is not the same as when a boyfriend "explodes" in a fit of anger and attacks you.

And also, Being a vampire didn't make Edward disable her truck to stop her going somewhere he didn't want her to go. It didn't make him break into her house and stare at her all night, or disregard her opinions about going to prom. The feminism issue is about characters' behaviour, not their species. And yes, I should have bee more clear on this point. Obviously, a partner who watches you sleep can be very romantic to some people. What I did fail to mention was that I have issue with Edward watching Bella sleep WITHOUT HER CONSENT. Aka, going to her house without her knowledge to stare at her, follow her home (without her knowledge), and yes, breaking into her room to be nearer to her. Then she is fine with this behaviour, if it comes from Edward.

The relationships and feminist stuff is the point. That's what Meyer is writing about. She's not really writing about vampires or werewolves--she's writing about sex and relationships. The vampire stuff is just on the surface. It's her themes that are so disturbing and twisted. Being a fantasy novel does not excuse the leads from acting in ways that compromise a woman's right to equality.

Haha, I can imagine SMeyer ignoring my email all together. Or she would just say "I didn't intend to have these themes in my book, so it doesn't matter." Obviously it does matter, even if they aren't influencing anyone, the fact that her books ARE so misogynistic, anti-feminist and sexist is still terrible, demeaning and unacceptable.

...Have you read The Host? I've read it once, but now I'm curious as to if there's more weirdness in there too. (There probably is.)

Whether or not the books are unacceptable, I just ignore the bad stuff, not only because I don't see it, but because it's everywhere in the media, and those two statements walk hand in hand together. Girls don't see the bad stuff because we live in a world where it happens all the time, and it's portrayed as ok. And then the girls want to be pretty or whatever, so they follow all of those stereotypes because they learn, consciously or not, that that is how they're supposed to be to be attractive.

The brainwashing just goes on and on until somebody learns something different. But, even when you do learn something different, when everything else around you tells you otherwise, you're tempted to reconsider a few things.

I honestly think you should show this to Stephenie, because she'd probably pay attention more than anybody. When you show it to the fans, they just turn their heads and wonder what the hell you're talking about.

So basically, the law of everything (and not just Twilight) is, DON'T GET YOUR LOVE ADVICE FROM ANYTHING EXCEPT EXPERIENCE, INTUITION, YOUR OWN LOGIC, AND A FEW SELF HELP BOOKS MAYBE. IF YOU USE SELF HELP BOOKS, GET SEVERAL DIFFERENT ONES FOR DIFFERENT OPINIONS AND CHOOSE WHAT FITS YOU. OH, AND YOUR PARENTS PROBABLY HAVE GOOD ADVICE TOO.

While we obviously disagree on many points, I do have to ask you how feminism is NOT about women and their ability to choose. That goes hand in hand with equality. How? What was it that made women unequal? What rights did women lack and have to fight for? Women were oppressed by a lack of choice. Women could not vote. Women did not have the career choices they have today. Feminism is about choice.

I also agree that many of the "anti-feminist" sentiments in the book are not exclusive to the Twilight series. I see it in almost every aspect of modern society. Pressure to be "beautiful", men being the leaders/protectors, women being associated with mothering/babies. It's absolutely nothing new, and doesn't offend me in the least. And trust me, I'm by no means a "women belong preganant and barefoot in the kitchen" type. I don't even like babies. But the fact that other women might doesn't make me feel pressured to be the same, either.

ok to be very blunt why do u think about this when ur reading? thats a little weird i mean i have NEVER thought of the book like that and i find it weird u did