sigelphoenix

I finished the last two episodes of Firefly yesterday. So that thing I said before about waiting for ratzeo to come home so we could watch it together? Um, right, yeah. XD;;; But hey! Rewatching is also good, so I can view it more objectively -- and by "objectively" I mean "more solid than a soupy puddle of fangirlish glee."



First of all, zinjadu was right, and I did really really like "Heart of Gold." It just ... guh. That, along with "Objects in Space" and "The Message" ... hell, the last three episodes are just a string of tear-jerkers. T_T I was also struck, during the extended nekkid scene (just a touch gratuitous, hm), that Mal is all smooth lines. I mean, he doesn't have hard muscle lines, and his hands aren't rough or scarred. I know they couldn't do a whole lot to alter Nathan Fillion's body just to look more battle-roughened, but it was kind of jarring. I was all, "Who sanded down the Captain? Why is he so smooth and shiny? o_o"

Simon, on the other hand? Tell me again how the soft little doctor got so cut? :o I love how, in the middle of Joss Whedon's high-falutin philosophical commentary on "Objects in Space," he stops to say, "I won't mention how good Sean looks without his shirt." XD (The only other time he really gets distracted is when Simon and Early have their conversation about the midget, which apparently he loved.)

And speaking of the commentary ... shiny! *_* I kind-of-but-not-for-sure thought he was pushing an existentialist message with the episode, but hearing him talk about it really clarified things for me (especially the dichotomy of River versus Early, which I totally missed). I especially love the moment where Early gets his angriest (I think) and hits Inara. Why? Not because she tried to fight him, like Simon or Mal, but because she tried to assign meaning to him ("I know you're tired."). Everything is an object to be examined by him -- even humans -- and for one of them to turn around and judge him is the highest offense. And then compare that hostile reaction to the way the crew's evaluation of River hurts her, because she cares about them as separate, autonomous people. It just ... works so well.

And then there's that moment where River floats down to Mal, and it is perhaps the cutest River scene ever. She's just so ... tiny in that suit, and it's a real Papa!Mal moment.

How much do I love Simon? SO MUCH. I mean, yeah, it's the fact that he's grown -- the ease with which he tells Kaylee his med school stories, the way he didn't back down and cower when Early appeared -- but also, the fact that he didn't change too much. His 'attack' on Early at the end is so similar to the way he threw himself on the Alliance spy in the pilot. And that's literally what he does, for River. He can't rush in and save the day, he just throws himself at whatever danger is threatening her. He's not that strong or fast. He just loves her enough. It's so ... ARGH I LOVE HIM. T_T

And speaking of characters without physical strength -- I really love Inara's scene with Burgess in "Heart of Gold." Yes, she's steely, and she stood up against him. But I doubt she'd planned to really use the knife, and she certainly can't take a full-on blow to the gut from a physically fit man. I love how the writers showed her courage, but didn't try to make her do too much, as a sort of "Hey look she's just as good as Nandi!" She's different, had different experiences, doesn't have those skills. I'm just really impressed with how all the non-fighter characters -- Inara, Simon, Kaylee, and kind of Wash -- react realistically to physically dangerous scenarios. They can't fight as well as the others, they do feel fear, but they also do what they can.

And finally ... I am a sucker for Mal/Inara. So deliciously angsty. And the obstacles in their relationship are actually real, and not the usual romantic plot devices. I remember when I felt unenthusiastic about Inara and the pairing during the pilot (Morena Baccarin really wasn't doing as well as she did later on, and I saw more UST when she and Kaylee said "Hey you" than when she was with Mal), and I wondered if I would get into either of them. But I have crossed over to the fangirl side of the Force, heh. And I really, really get Inara's character.

Am now reading Finding Serenity ... need to get comic miniseries ... and need to somehow hold out until September 30. >_<



I also stumbled across this today: A neo-feminist's view of abstinence.



The writer starts off by saying that she doesn't want to have sex until marriage -- and not because she's a conservative. Good, I think, because I do agree that women "readily accept society's portrayal of sexual norms," and I hate the fact that choices about sex are so influenced by what is taken to be the mainstream. (Actually, I think men suffer just as much from pressure to conform, but that's not what she's talking about here. Though she should be.)

She then goes on to say: "What I am is a neo-feminist. Definition: 'One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground.'"

Also good. But what does that mean for her choices about sex? Apparently, that she won't have sex because of what other people would think about her.

Huh?

Read what she says about sexual relationships that (gasp) don't last forever and ever: "Regardless of why the relationship died, you are now one of many women whom he could point out on the street. 'See her?' he can tell his buddies. 'She's cute, huh? Yeah, I had her.' I never want to be 'her.'"

First off, way to stereotype men. Because all males are the 'brag about sex' type, and completely lack a sense of privacy or respect.

Second of all, if that's what you think about men ... you still want to get married, why? Last I recall, getting married won't magically change a man's personality. In fact, giving him the title of 'husband' would be a nifty way of exacerbating his misogynist characteristics, because that title has been used as a justification of abuse of wives for centuries. So, good plan, that whole waiting-for-marriage-because-men-apparently-suck.

Thirdly, the "I never want to be 'her'" bit makes me really uncomfortable, because it perpetuates the division of 'good' and 'bad' women. The 'dirty whore' versus 'virtuous wife' dichotomy is not a new idea, okay?

And finally ... Last I heard, feminism is about not letting others (especially men who unfairly hold power over you) determine your worth. If someone tried to say that he "had me," then I, as a feminist, would introduce my boots to his balls. I would not, as a "neo-feminist," let that scare me from engaging in an activity that is neither dangerous nor psychologically unhealthy.

The writer talks about women who either do have non-marital sex, or at least do not plan to wait until marriage for sex, as wanting it "so badly" that they'll engage in this unhealthy behavior. In actuality, the elevation of sex to something so vaunted that it determines a woman's worth (the totemization of the hymen is also not a new idea) indicates, to me, an unhealthy fixation on sex. Yes, those of us who don't hold to virginity-until-marriage won't make a herculean effort to protect our hymens from our physical desire. But that often means that, in turn, we won't make a herculean effort for sex. When you don't make something such a big deal, it's remarkable how much the obsession with temptation goes away.

She stated at the beginning of the article that she is reasonably physically attractive, so she isn't "bitter about not being offered the chance to have sex." I don't think unattractiveness is the problem -- the problem is that she is attractive, and that's somehow intimidating to her. You can respond to an obsession with sex in two ways: one, by pursuing it with single-minded intent, but also by holding to abstinence with single-minded intent. There are lovely ways of maintaining a healthy lifestyle -- either with or without sex -- that depend more on what the individual wants than some high-flying moral proclamations.

Oh, and don't miss her final line: "Women give it up as if it's nothing. When in fact, it is everything."

PLEASE TO NOT JUDGE ME BY MY HYMEN KTHX.

I swear, this is just another instance of how so-called extreme radicalism can circle back to become reactionary. Sex is tied to virtue? Check. A woman's 'virtue' is more important than a man's? Check. Sex is a dangerous act? Check. Marriage is a sprinkling of magical fairy dust that cures all the evilness of teh sex? Check. There is one 'good' choice about sex for everyone? Check. Restrictions on a woman's choice are for her own good? Check. A woman should give a flying fuck about what men or other women think about her private sex life? Check. So please stop calling it "neo," okay? And please, please don't try to say that it's "feminist."