Reflections on Gender Roles and Domestic Violence

Today I came upon a very interesting video about domestic violence-- by women. It got me thinking. (A dangerous pastime, I know.)

In our culture, most boys are told at some point to "never hit a girl." Now, I stand behind that 100%, except for one thing-- why single out girls? Shouldn't all children be told simply, "don't hit"? It doesn't matter if it's a boy hitting a girl, or a girl hitting a boy, or girls hitting girls or boys hitting boys. Hitting is wrong, period.

How many of us have watched movies-- romantic comedies, dramas, etc.-- where a woman slaps a man for some reason? With the exception of self-defense, that strikes me as very wrong. Why is it that, as a society, we don't react the same way to women hurting men as we do to men hurting women?

In an earlier blog post I talked about feminism, and how it's often misconstrued to mean that women are better than men and maligned by people who don't understand it. I'll reiterate-- true feminism is simply the assertion that women and men are equal. Perhaps a more accurate term would be human-ism (although the word "humanist" is already used to mean other things). Feminism is important because women, historically, have often been treated as though they were less than full persons. But perhaps it is eve more important to emphasize that all human beings are equal. They all have innate human rights. And they all feel pain.

I'm not denying that men and women are possessed of different general propensities and predispositions; however, I have lately come to the conclusion that the cultural imposition of gender stereotypes is generally harmful. "Men are strong." Well, so are women. "Women are sweet and gentle." So are men. All these cultural stereotypes do is inhibit people-- humans-- from expressing the full range of their personalities. And, in the case of domestic violence, it can lead to the marginalization and downplaying of the suffering of fully half of the population. In our society, men aren't supposed to be so weak as to be able to get beat up by a woman.

The way I see it, the bottom line is that cultural gender stereotypes are damaging to people of both genders. Sure, men and women do have feminine and masculine qualities, but there's no need to impose them in the exaggerated way that our society does. If people are allowed to be who they really are in every respect, the world will be a better place-- where people don't hit other people, regardless of their gender.

Ever After: An Analysis

Spoiler alert: In this post I dissect one of my favorite movies. If you are one of those unfortunate souls who has not seen it, consider yourself warned that I'm going to give away a lot of the good stuff.

I wrote awhile back about one of my favorite novel adaptations of Cinderella, Just Ella. Well, as much as I love Margaret Haddix's retelling, my absolute favorite Cinderella retelling is the movie version Ever After. Aside from the fact that I was once told that I look like Drew Barrymore, I like Ever After because the protagonist is in possession of a spine. As you might have inferred from my previous posts, I tend to favor female characters with spines. Eowyn, Lucy Pevensie, and Mulan are some of my favorites. Docile protagonists bore me. And irritate me. Take Rapunzel, for example. She had that long hair for how long? And it never occurred to her that she might cut it off and climb out of the tower? Or Cinderella in the conventional retelling, whose primary virtue was being a doormat. Seriously, the girl was a wimp. In all fairness, Prince Charming was a bit of a spazz himself when he didn't notice that Cinderella's stepsisters had cut off chunks of their feet in order to fit into the glass slipper and a couple of doves had to inform him of the fact. Even so, one would think that if Cinderella had had half a brain she would have been able to figure out her own escape from her stepfamily, instead of having to wait for her fairy godmother to make everything better.

But back to Ever After. It's set in the real world, for one thing-- there's not an ounce of supernatural interference. It's set in France in the late 15th or early 16th century. For another, the protagonist doesn't have a stupid name like "Cinderella"-- it's Danielle. And for one more thing, there are numerous historical references in the movie. Thomas More's Utopia and Leonardo da Vinci (along with his Mona Lisa and several other of his delightful inventions) make an appearance-- in fact, at one point Danielle quotes Utopia in a rousing manner. But we will get to that. Let's get into the good stuff. :)

Danielle de Barbarac

As mentioned above, our protagonist has several advantageous possessions, including a spine and a brain. We first meet Danielle when she is ten years old. She very much a tomboy, regularly "whipping" the stable boy-- and getting covered in mud in the process. Her father, Auguste de Barbarac, travels frequently, but when he is home he reads to her from grown-up books. At the beginning of the movie, he presents Danielle with a copy of Thomas More's Utopia. Unfortunately, Danielle's father dies shortly after marrying the Baroness Rodmilla de Ghent. In this scene we begin to see the contrast between Danielle and her stepmother. Upon seeing her new husband dead, the Baroness wails, "You cannot leave me here!" However, the Baroness soon adjusts to her new environment. Her coping mechanism is control-- she domineers over everyone and everything. Her main goal in life is power, as we will see later on.

Since this is a Cinderella story, the Baroness reduces Danielle to the level of a bondservant. But Danielle retains her spunky character. At various points in the movie, she berates the Prince of France while throwing apples at him, poses as a noblewoman to save one of the De Barbarac bondmen, passionately quotes Utopia to Prince Henry, climbs a cliff in her underwear, and threatens to skewer the evil Pierre Le Pieu. In short, Danielle is a perfectly capable heroine who does not need saving of any kind.

Prince Henry of France

Prince Henry is a typical impetuous teenager. We first meet him when he runs away from home using-- cliche of cliches-- knotted bedsheets. Henry has no particular goals in life; his primary objective is to avoid the responsibilities of becoming king. He is aimless, insipid, and arrogant. He first meets Danielle in the courtyard of the royal palace. Danielle is in a heated argument with the driver of a prison cart containing the bondman Danielle has come to rescue. When Henry asks Danielle what her rationale is for saving an accused thief from punishments, she quotes Utopia at him: "If you suffer your people to be ill-educated, and their manners corrupted from infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them-- then what is to be said, sire, except that ye first make thieves and then punish them?" Henry is blown away by Danielle and insists on knowing her identity. Since Danielle is not, in fact, a noblewoman, she tells Henry that she is the Countess Nicole de Lancre, expecting never to see him again. Henry is captivated, however, and takes up a full-time job as Danielle's stalker. Together they have a series of delightful adventures-- including a library, a broken carriage, and a caravan of gypsies-- and, since this is Hollywood, they fall in love. But more than falling in love, Henry is inspired by Danielle. He acquires a purpose in life. At one point Danielle says to him, "You have everything, and still the world holds no joy." Henry realizes that he has the power to improve the lives of his subjects, and resolves to do so. If anyone is saved in Ever After, it is Prince Henry. Danielle saves him from a life of apathy and helps him to find purpose.

The Rescue

Unfortunately, Prince Henry eventually discovers that he has fallen in love with a commoner and rejects Danielle-- after she has been through hell to see him, no less. With his newfound self-assurance, he informs her: "I am the Prince of France, and you are a servant." Henry proceeds with his previously arranged marriage to a Spanish princess, and the Baroness de Ghent sells Danielle to the lecherous Pierre Le Pieu. Fortunately, Henry chickens out of the marriage when the Spanish princess bursts into tearful hysterics at the altar. At this point we expect Henry to run to Danielle's rescue, and rush he does. Danielle doesn't need it, however. Before Henry makes it to Monsieur Le Pieu's manor, Danielle has freed herself at sabre-point and is strolling on her way.

At this point the two reconcile and live (presumably) happily ever after. But there is a lot to think about in this movie. Who did the real rescuing here? As I mentioned above, I am of the opinion that Danielle saves Prince Henry from a life of apathetic stuck-up-ness. That's why I'm so fond of this movie. It's funny, it's romantic, and the heroine is a real heroine, not a prize for the prince who can slay the dragon.