Does 'Twilight' send out unhealthy messages about relationships?

[Le Jacquelope]

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1316297/twilight_does_it_portray_an_unhealthy.html?cat=38

Damned multi page articles. This one's darned good, though.

 

[Pure]

small excerpt

This is an excerpt from Nya Bruce's article, whose URL is in the first posting.

Bella is the epitome of the "save me I'm weak, I will gladly die for you" type of protagonist. She falls in love with the hero, Edward Cullen, despite the fact that he treated her with disgust for their first several meetings. In fact he behaved as if he hated her and yet she is attracted to his poor behavior anyway. He warned her away from him and tells her that being his friend isn't a good idea, implying that he may be one of the "bad guys". Edward even warned her that that he wasn't sure if he would be able to bring her back alive after their first real outing together.

He is quick tempered, controlling and obsessive to the point that he watches her constantly when she isn't aware. Edward even admits that he watches her as she sleeps! And yet Bella remains enamored of him even after he refers to himself as a predator and her as prey - literally speaking. Poor Bella is so dazzled by his striking good looks and the fact that he has saved her life that she doesn't care that he may be unable to stop himself from killing her. She loves Edward so much after a very short period of time (weeks if not a month or two) that she is willing to die for him.

Whoa! As I said before I read fantasy for what it is, but these are teenage girls we are talking about. Is this the message that we want them to take away from reading this book? And they will take a message away from it. Reading Twilight, the message is very clear. Love is obsessive. Love is dangerous and the danger is thrilling. Love is controlling. And most of all, love is a willingness to die for or even at the hands of the object of your affection. As long as he loves you (and is good looking enough), his hurting you is acceptable.

I'll admit that for a lot of women, we deep down like a take control sort of man. The man who looks out for us, who will protect us touches on a secret feminine fantasy. But this sounds a bit like an abusive relationship to me. The question is can a teenager tell the difference?

What may be fantasy in a grown woman's mind is just that, a fantasy. In reality if a man wants to control us the way Edward controls Bella the last thing that will cross any modern woman's mind is "isn't he romantic". And face it, if a man you've known for a week or two tells you he's been watching you sleep, a restraining order not a confession of undying love is all that he's likely to get. But will a teenage girl high off the sheer romanticism of reading Twilight and desperate for a love so romantic as the one that she has just read, ignore or misinterpret the danger signs of an unhealthy abusive relationship?

 

[OhMissScarlett]

Bella is the epitome of the "save me I'm weak, I will gladly die for you" type of protagonist. She falls in love with the hero, Edward Cullen, despite the fact that he treated her with disgust for their first several meetings. In fact he behaved as if he hated her and yet she is attracted to his poor behavior anyway. He warned her away from him and tells her that being his friend isn't a good idea, implying that he may be one of the "bad guys". Edward even warned her that that he wasn't sure if he would be able to bring her back alive after their first real outing together.

He is quick tempered, controlling and obsessive to the point that he watches her constantly when she isn't aware. Edward even admits that he watches her as she sleeps! And yet Bella remains enamored of him even after he refers to himself as a predator and her as prey - literally speaking. Poor Bella is so dazzled by his striking good looks and the fact that he has saved her life that she doesn't care that he may be unable to stop himself from killing her. She loves Edward so much after a very short period of time (weeks if not a month or two) that she is willing to die for him.

Whoa! As I said before I read fantasy for what it is, but these are teenage girls we are talking about. Is this the message that we want them to take away from reading this book? And they will take a message away from it. Reading Twilight, the message is very clear. Love is obsessive. Love is dangerous and the danger is thrilling. Love is controlling. And most of all, love is a willingness to die for or even at the hands of the object of your affection. As long as he loves you (and is good looking enough), his hurting you is acceptable.

I'll admit that for a lot of women, we deep down like a take control sort of man. The man who looks out for us, who will protect us touches on a secret feminine fantasy. But this sounds a bit like an abusive relationship to me. The question is can a teenager tell the difference?

What may be fantasy in a grown woman's mind is just that, a fantasy. In reality if a man wants to control us the way Edward controls Bella the last thing that will cross any modern woman's mind is "isn't he romantic". And face it, if a man you've known for a week or two tells you he's been watching you sleep, a restraining order not a confession of undying love is all that he's likely to get. But will a teenage girl high off the sheer romanticism of reading Twilight and desperate for a love so romantic as the one that she has just read, ignore or misinterpret the danger signs of an unhealthy abusive relationship?

Very well said, Pure. I think it's a bad example to any impressionable person who lacks experience in relationships, not just teenagers. Those of us who know what an unhealthy relationship is, can see the stories for what they are, an original author's rendition of over-indulgent Mary-Sueish fanfic. But, sadly, I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who are going to take this as the be all, end all version of love they've been looking for.

ETA: If anyone has teenagers who are reading this, it might be a good opportunity to talk to them about making good choices when in a relationship with a person who is controlling and how not to give yourself entirely to another person.

 

[Guest]

I started a thread about my daughter's take on this.

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=627666

Here's the first post.

TWILIGHT, from a teen's point of view.
This would be my daughter again.

"If you're the parent of a teen, you've heard all about it. It's about vampires.."

Uhm, my parents had never even heard of it except in these kinds of rants.
Everywhere I look. TWILIGHT! Am I the only sane person left? Bram Stoker would be spinning in his GRAVE if he saw this stuff!

Why am I mad?

Because I'm constantly being thought of as weird because I think vampires are cool but not Twilight. And I think I just made some people mad because I told them, truthfully, everything that I thought was wrong with Twilight after the teacher started yammering about it in class. It's the biggest joke in the world.

Stephanie writes with all the depth of a two-year old with a typewriter.
The plot is the BIGGEST load of a steaming pile of dog poo. "Ooh, I'm in love with a vampire who isn't a vampire!"

She has NO idea about the ORIGINAL vampire myths. Or werewolf/lycanthropic myths at all.

-Vampires don't sparkle, they burn, and dust.

-They can't kill themselves by throwing themselves into cars.

-Love? Er..define that. Van Helsing's Dracula had three wives. Three. Does that define love to you? No, that defines LUST.

-Werewolf and vampire legends would hardly ever meet. Vampyre legends began in the little previous-Soviet-Union countries with all the letters in their names and they kinda look like miniature over-easy eggs. Werewolves were heard of pretty much everywhere, but the most important one that kicked everything off was in Gevaudan, France, where a large wolf-like creature attacked people. It wasn't scared off, and it seemed to have bulletproof fur. There were at least three of these. And now they're associated with Native American Skin-walker myths.

It's crappy Disney love. She likes him because he's hot...and he likes her because she smells good.

My point being, every teenage girl wants to go find a sparkly pixie vampire of their own now. And, plus..it just emanates sexism.

"No, Bella, you can't do this yourself. I'm take these parts from your car so you can't see your friend, and I'm gonna watch you while you sleep so you can never ever leave and I'm isolating you from your friends and family."

And every four pages is about how hot he is. Plus, Stephanie has horrible, shallow characters. The only one I could identify with was Jacob, and that's because Bella was, in a sense, saying

"I like you, you love me...but I like this hot guy more, so shoo, go away, I never wanna see you again." And he, unlike Edward, never tried to get hit by a car. Did I mention he's not even a werewolf? He just happens to be able to become a wolf. Yeah..that's a werewolf alright[/sarcasm]

And yet, every girl in the world loves this. And every person in the world thinks that I should love it, and I'm supposed to love it because I think vampires are cool.

In fact, one of my friends, I was talking to her, and it went like this.

"I thought you liked vampires, though?"
"They aren't even vampires. They're pixies. She changed everything!"
"Oh. Hehe." She then proceeds to hand me a Christian magazine that states things about Twilight.

They have a baby before marriage.
It incorrectly states that the vampires believe by doing good deeds, they'll be saved..
Not to mention all the explosive un-anatomically correct blood during the 'birth'. It just pops out of her stomach. WITH BLOOD AND GORE. If birth actually happened like that..."

I'm just enjoying the thoughts of my just-turned 14-year-old.

Impressionable, certainly, as young teens. But not complete idiots.

As long as they have a bit of grounding, I think they can manage Twilight.

____

 

[OhMissScarlett]

I'm just enjoying the thoughts of my just-turned 14-year-old.

Impressionable, certainly, as young teens. But not complete idiots.

As long as they have a bit of grounding, I think they can manage Twilight.

____

I'm glad your teen gets it. My teenage brother had a similar take on it, but I can only remember how I felt about boys when I was a teenager. I'd say I was very much an at-risk teen. I was looking for love in all the wrong places and the boys who paid me the most attention were not always the ones who had my best interests in mind. I know some teenage girls who would look at this story and find no problems with it, from a literary or emotional standpoint. I don't know which is worse!

 

[Guest]

I'm glad your teen gets it. My teenage brother had a similar take on it, but I can only remember how I felt about boys when I was a teenager. I'd say I was very much an at-risk teen. I was looking for love in all the wrong places and the boys who paid me the most attention were not always the ones who had my best interests in mind. I know some teenage girls who would look at this story and find no problems with it, from a literary or emotional standpoint. I don't know which is worse!

Our kids are hampered by the fact that I'm a middle school teacher and my husband is a high school teacher.

We know things.

 

[3113]

I started a thread about my daughter's take on this.

Tell your daughter she's far from alone. My husband knows a 13-year old who, after being pressured by friends to read it, put it down and plaintively said to her mother: "Mom, I can't finish it." She then explained, pretty much as your daughter did to my husband all the things wrong with it. My husband also knows a 14 year old who loved the books...until the last one. After finishing that one she stated unequivocally: "Stephanie Meyers should die and go to hell!"

In the end, this is one of those "phenomena" books that certain people or kids love and no one understands why. We don't understand why because they're BAD books. Badly written, bad plot, bad characters, bad everything. But they've captured the zeitgeist of a large enough demographic and so can't be ignored. Don't we all remember seeing or reading at least one such book that we HAD to read because everyone in our high school group was reading it (or seeing the movie?). And it was a terrible book with terrible messages, but given our crazy hormones, our low self-esteem, our narcissism and/or need for peer acceptance we lost all ability to analyze and thought..."This is so cool! So wonderful!"

This is not new. No, it's not healthy for a girl's teen image, but it's not new. In fact, it's pretty simple and painfully straightforward. The Edward character falls for her unconditionally. There is nothing she can do that will make him stop adoring her. He's all hers and she, to him, is all he wants or ever will want. How much better is that then the truth that these girls are just now finding out as they enter into high school. That boys are, well, boys. Human kids with their own selfish needs, not fairytale princes. That they can be fickle and mean, stupid, obnoxious. That the hot sexy girl will get every guy's attention and other girls get totally ignored no matter how hard they try and try and try. That horny teen boys want sex and they'll dump a girl if she won't put out, but they'll also leave if she does put out because they got what they wanted and it's time to move on!

Of course the "obsessive" and "romantic" guy seems attractive. He's sexy as hell and not going anywhere, doesn't want anything from them, doesn't expect anything from them. The girl gets to feel that she's special, important, unique, desired...and she doesn't have to do any work at all to get all that.

Lazy bitches.

This is an ancient fantasy. Back in the middle ages French women were reading about the same damn fantasy guys in King Arthur stories which were all the rage. Men fighting and dying and obsessed with their women--who did nothing but got into trouble and needed to be saved. And I'm afraid that bad message or not, we're in a Catch-22. If Bella had been a girl who had to make an effort and prove herself smart and worthy of this guy's obsessive love, the book might not have become popular. If the vamps had been vamps and not pixies, it might not have been popular--because it's a lot harder for readers to excuse their love of Edward the character if he is killing and feeding on people and only coming out at night. On and on. It just has all the elements of lazy romantic fantasy (i.e., what the reader wants the reader gets)--with a very typical "lazy romantic fantasy" heroine.

Fifteen years from now you'll see women discussing the "Twilight" phenomenon from their youth, reminiscing about it. And they'll likely all say: "I re-read it" (or re-saw the movie) "What were we thinking? It's so stupid!"

 

[Pure]

note to miss scarlet

the excerpt i posted is from nya bruce's article, whose URL started the thread.

 

[Pure]

i think one has to remember that the movie is somewhat 'preteen'; my 12 yr old niece loved it (we saw it together). there is no sex, just steamy approaches.

yes, the vampire is sanitized, and some rather humorous lines occur where he says his diet is a bit like being on tofu; you can survive, but the hunger is always there. his-- and his friends'-- diet is only animals, btw. he is sanitized but sexy, a bit like Jonas bros. or the male lead in high school musical.

as far as ms bruce's points, i think they apply against any number of dashing and handsome figures in romance stories and novels. the possessiveness, etc. of course it's "abusive," the woman is going to 'lose herself'. but that's the point, isn't. this is not egalitarian politically correct construction, but unconscious yearnings of one lover to submerge 'identity' or surrender 'will.'

===

you can see that the basic plot problem is how the human can survive the vampire; the usual solution is to get bitten, and 'go over' in short order.

the author appears to be dragging out both the sex and the going over.

the general plot is quite familiar: for some set of monsters/aliens etc, a segment are friendly to humans, and undertake to protect humans from their bloodthirsty cousins.

 

[3113]

he is sanitized but sexy, a bit like Jonas bros. or the male lead in high school musical.

Good point. And you're quite right that the main audience for this doesn't really go much beyond 14 and are usually in the pre-teen part where they go to concerts featuring young men who aren't MEN. They want that "Edward" type. Sexy but not threatening, clean-cut, romantic, glittery, just beyond their reach. Someone to dream about having--but if they were face to face with them, they wouldn't know what to do with them (which is another reason they want the boy to take charge. They, the pre-teen, wouldn't know what to do!).

There's one or several such boy-band types every time a new group of girls hits that demographic--including Frank Sinatra in his time, Elvis and the Beatles. Clean cut, wearing suits, cute, funny, charming, singing about love--just enough on the "bad" side to have parents disapprove, but not bad enough to really scare the girl. An "imaginary" boy (boys) girls can scream and squeal and faint and sigh over.

Edited to add: There's a male equivalent of this all, the sexy woman who takes charge and teachers the boy everything, but it's not as popular as action movies and games, and you won't find it in any current novels. Used to be the old pulp standard. It's what still sells comic books like Catwoman with her skin-tight leather outfit and whip.

 

[freshface]

She has NO idea about the ORIGINAL vampire myths. Or werewolf/lycanthropic myths at all.

You have a fourteen year old who knows the word lycanthropic and can use it properly in a sentence? How are you raising this poor child?

 

[Guest]

You have a fourteen year old who knows the word lycanthropic and can use it properly in a sentence? How are you raising this poor child?

She was reading very young. Just turned four. She taught herself.

Now she's begun to go through every Isaac Asimov book she can find at ours, the school's and the town libraries.

 

[3113]

Now she's begun to go through every Isaac Asimov book she can find at ours, the school's and the town libraries.

Ah! A classical education. The girl is destined to be a scholar.

 

[Guest]

Ah! A classical education. The girl is destined to be a scholar.

She is beginning to understand the enormity of the task.

But it brings up other things, and as she was reading a few days ago she suddenly looked up and said - "Who's Kurt Vonnegut?"

I smiled and handed her my dog-eared copy of "A Man Without a Country".

 

[SlickTony]

Another classic example of a book that's a bad influence is Ethel M. Dell's The Sheik which got made into a movie with Rudolf Valentino in it. Even if you haven't read it it has permeated the female zeitgeist just enough to do a certain amount of damage. All the girls taking up with guys from the Middle East and south Asia. QED.

 

[The_Fool]

She is beginning to understand the enormity of the task.

But it brings up other things, and as she was reading a few days ago she suddenly looked up and said - "Who's Kurt Vonnegut?"

I smiled and handed her my dog-eared copy of "A Man Without a Country".

When she brings up Harlan Ellison, it's time for a strong intervention....

 

[Guest]

When she brings up Harlan Ellison, it's time for a strong intervention....

So many books, so little time -

 

[OhMissScarlett]

the excerpt i posted is from nya bruce's article, whose URL started the thread.

Ah, I see that now. I could actually wear my glasses, that would be helpful.

 

[cloudy]

Another classic example of a book that's a bad influence is Ethel M. Dell's The Sheik which got made into a movie with Rudolf Valentino in it. Even if you haven't read it it has permeated the female zeitgeist just enough to do a certain amount of damage. All the girls taking up with guys from the Middle East and south Asia. QED.

I really hope that you didn't mean this how I'm reading it.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I really hope that you didn't mean this how I'm reading it.

I'm hoping not, too.

 

[SlickTony]

Oh, dear, I guess I've put my foot in it. I was married to a Middle Eastern man for four years, and lived in his country, and it was a big mistake on my part, and I literally had to flee. I just meant that girls get swept up in the romance of it all and then find themselves unable to surmount the radical cultural differences they meet up with. Cultural differences are important challenges, and often you find yourself slapped in the face with them even when you marry someone who appears to be of a similar cultural background to yours. I should not let my unhappy experience lead me into prejudice. Anyway, my niece just married a guy from Egypt, and he seems to be a swell fellow, for all he's a lobbyist for Lieberman. If I've offended anybody here, please accept my apologies. Sometimes I forget what a cosmopolitian place this is.

 

[SlickTony]

Damn, it looks like I done kilt this thread...sorry.

 

[cantdog]

Damn, it looks like I done kilt this thread...sorry.

Any Twilight thread should be brief. Killing early is better.

 

[3113]

Damn, it looks like I done kilt this thread...sorry.

Put a stake right through it's heart--but don't worry. It'll rise again. The Undead always do.

 

[3113]

I just meant that girls get swept up in the romance of it all and then find themselves unable to surmount the radical cultural differences they meet up with.

Getting back to it, as I recall, the original "Sheik" movie (don't know about the novel) had the hero as a white British guy (educated at Oxford) who just lived among the Egyptians as their Sheik. Really, people were too prejudiced back then to see the white girl being swept off her feet by a *real* Egyptian. And obviously a good white girl would know in her heart that this guy was white and educated in the west. She'd never have really fallen for him otherwise. Right?