Fear, desire and fembots (by Suzie)

       

      Whether high-priced call girls or Real Dolls or female robots, some men seem fascinated with the idea of a woman who will serve (and service) them without the requirements of a relationship.

       The latest issue of Bitch magazine has a fascinating article on "the evolution of the artificial woman." Not all serve men. Author Tammy Oler suggests the Cylons of the updated "Battlestar Galactica"* "come closest to embodying the cyberfeminist ideal of gender/identity liberation," as posited by Donna Haraway in "A Cyborg Manifesto."
      Gender stereotypes also take a beating in the new "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles," a television show that takes up the story after the second "Terminator" movie. In terms of feminism, the show is not perfect, by any means. But it does feature the strong single mother Sarah Connor and adds the female terminator Cameron, sent from the future to protect Sarah's son, John, who can save "mankind" from the bad robots. 

       What Oler says about the movie "RoboCop" could apply to "BSG" and "The Sarah Connor Chronicles": They explore what it means to be human - and whether humanity is worth saving.
        Oler also talks about how pop culture combines the fear of women and machines in its depiction of artificial women. That's true of "BSG," in which the female Cylons are much more sexualized than the males. In "The Sarah Connor Chronicles," however, Cameron's beauty rarely matters in regard to the plot. She doesn't appear programmed as a femme fatale.  She is learning to perform gender.
        To set up the clip below: A ballet teacher told Cameron that "dance is the hidden language of the soul." This intrigued her. (It also intrigued fans who knew that the actor Summer Glau had been a ballet dancer.) We hear Sarah Connor talk about what separates terminators from humans, as Derek, a human who has fought the robots, watches Cameron with awe and fear. This is a "male gaze" with a twist. Viewers know that the watcher could just as easily be a woman and the terminator could be a man. The terminator can dance freely because she holds more power, including the power to explore her self.

*If you're a fan, check out the "BSG" link. The video is hilarious.

Into the wild with BSG (by Suzie)

         Even if you never watched the new “Battlestar Galactica,” you may find the following interesting. I want to comment on gender, ethnocentrism and disability in the finale.
         Spoiler: The remnants of a human civilization and their Cylon (cyborg) allies settle on our Earth. They break into groups around the planet. Of the main characters, one woman dies of cancer, as expected. Another vanishes into thin air, not as expected. One goes off with her husband and child. Another is with her husband. A third is with a male lover. Three men end up on their own, but no woman does. Our society has a hard time imagining women on their own, not in relation to men.
         A man alone in the wilderness can prove his “masculinity,” i.e., traits that have been associated with men, such as strength and independence. Women may explore nature for various reasons, but they usually do it despite traditional notions of femininity.
         Artists often have depicted women in nature, usually for the pleasure of the male viewer, such as a naked nymph bathing in a stream. A fascinating commentary on this is Swedish photographer Annika von Hausswolff’s series “Back to Nature,” crime-scene-style photos of dead women in natural surroundings. Her work, which I saw as part of the Global Feminisms exhibit, may remind men that women in the wilderness can become prey because of their gender. Men may attack other men, but their gender is unlikely to be the main reason.
           Once, when I found myself in the neighborhood, I visited Yellowstone National Park in the late fall. I remember looking back on a trail, seeing a man ascending, and feeling a moment of panic. I was relieved when a ranger came along. Not all women think this way, but there are enough of us to make it an issue. For example, Melissa McEwan at Shakesville writes about TV shows that make some women uncomfortable by ignoring the risk of sexual assault.
           Back to BSG: The humans and Cylons decide to give up technology before heading into the wild, except for a few tricks they will teach the preverbal humans already inhabiting the planet. For more on the colonialism of the Colonial fleet, check out Hoyden About Town.
           It might seem odd for cyborgs to give up technology, but these wanted to be more human, and some felt love and devotion for humans. They already had given up the ability to reproduce and resurrect through technology. One of the show's themes was how enemies could leave war behind. In the end, the Cylons who had remained at war and who valued themselves as creatures of technology were all killed, and no one seemed to mourn this huge loss of life. The robots that looked less human went off on their own, but again, no one seemed to care.
         Amanda at Skepchick brings up the disability angle:

And then 39 thousand people all together decide to give up all technology? … 
 In one fell swoop, they created new disabled people and guaranteed deaths for others. What happened to those without good vision or hearing that was previously fixed with glasses and hearing aids? What about the diabetics? What about those with curable cancer?

           Without my glasses, I can’t find my glasses. And I hate the thought of whittling a catheter for myself. I have incurable cancer, but I’d still like to live a bit longer. Although there are people with disabilities who head into the wilderness and give up technology, we can’t afford to valorize and romanticize it the way others do. The BSG finale would have been no happy ending for the likes of me.

Men who play with dolls (by Suzie)

          Although I want to revisit “Dollhouse,” which airs tonight, I hope those who don’t watch the TV show will stay with me for the broader discussion of sex and relationships.
          An article on Daily Kos calls “Dollhouse” meta-fiction.

It's not about guys with a brain washing machine who can make someone behave how they want. It's about what it means that guys with a brain washing machine use that device to satisfy shallow, mostly sexual, fantasies. ... I suspect that there's still a lot of folks who think the point of this show is watching [star and co-producer Eliza] Dushku in her underwear. I think -- I hope -- they're going to be shocked.

          But what point are they going to get? So far, a number of fans seem to think the Dollhouse isn’t that bad. They may like the staff and clients who aren't violent. They seem to identify more with men who pay for sex than the women who provide it. They identify with corporate workers who rationalize their actions. To be blunt: They identify more with the abuser than the abused.

          One episode showed the madam with a male doll, longing for a real relationship. It reminded me of the captain in “Star Trek: Voyager,” who decides she would rather have a holographic man with flaws, rather that one tailored to her tastes. That story stood out to me after seeing so many Star Trek men use holographic women without concern that they might be too perfect. (I’ve commented before on female robots and other forms of artificial intelligence that service men in popular sci-fi.)
          I know some women want sex with no attachments and no concern for the other person, but I lose patience with the number of male sci-fi fans who express this desire. Maybe it’s the longing of the master or boss who wants work done without having to think of his slave or subordinate.
           Consider this thread on Whedonesque, the popular blog on the works of Joss Whedon, co-producer of “Dollhouse.” M said the Dollhouse could be great “for giving people an emotional outlet." But who provides that outlet and at what cost to their own emotional psyche?
           The argument turned to sex work, and DM gave a standard argument: "I know prostitutes who love their work. Sex, meeting new people, the strength from giving happiness to someone who might not be able to find it elsewhere." I’m sure women like that exist, but what about the ones who don’t love their work or didn't choose it?
           DM responded that clients have no responsibility to find out the circumstances in which people entered or remain in prostitution. I assume these are the same people who don’t care if their clothes are made in sweatshops or their diamonds funded conflicts. 
           I suggested they didn’t think men needed to care whether the prostitute liked her job or not. R said:

That's close to what I was suggesting, but actually I was suggesting that no one should deny themselves the pleasure of sex even if the sex worker, regardless of their gender, isn't really enjoying it.

         "Regardless of their gender" obscures the fact that there are many more men who pay for female prostitutes than vice versa. But I see this argument all the time: Some people insist that such-and-such isn’t about gender because it happens to men, too.

          R took me to task, saying: “… it's kind of a cheesy shortcut to take an argument about sex and turn it into an argument about gender.” Wow, who would mix sex and gender? But I’m capable of turning an argument about anything – let’s say Chihuahuas – into an argument about gender.
         Earlier, M suggested that “the Dollhouse could be seen as a better alternative” to prostitution because the dolls have their minds wiped after each assignment and are not supposed to remember.      

         Who gets aroused, who gets off, despite the very real possibility that the other person isn't enjoying herself and may even be so harmed that it would be better if the memory could be wiped from her mind? 

         R said he never intended to use a prostitute. But he argued that there are plenty of bad jobs.

... any job that involves, to use your phrase, "servicing others" is a soul-deadening proposition. Serving drinks, driving a cab, juggling geese, cleaning houses, whatever - they're all bad, soul-deadening jobs. Unless they involve sex or sexuality in some way, we tend not to talk about the "consequences" in grand, ominous terms. 

          Well, we do if we're socialists. More to the point: Around the world, too many men force themselves sexually on women, with no concern for the women, or with the intent of hurting them. Why would I be happy that men can pay for this? 

          I've decided that “Dollhouse” would make a great boyfriend test. A woman would be forewarned if the potential said: "Well, heck, this is no different from all the prostitutes who have serviced me and really loved it. … OK, maybe they didn't love it, but at least they didn’t get hurt … and not everyone loves their jobs ... and I have needs ... and they consented, more or less … and no one can say what's right or wrong … and slavery isn't necessarily bad."

         ###

        Yes, all of these are taken from real comments. But I don't mean to imply that all fans react this way. I'm grateful that many don't. Check out Ladybusiness's analysis.

         Giandujakiss has a disturbing video set to the song "It Depends on What You Pay," from "The Fantasticks." I was horrified by this song, which I had never heard before, but felt better after I heard this NPR interview with the writer. 
         Giandujakiss also mentions the Star Trek captain, but I swear I thought of this on my own, which just indicates what a geek I am.
          Want more? Read my older posts on Dollhouse here and here.