Sonia Charlotta Reini

Bertha Mason is definitely the most interesting character in Jane Eyre. Wide Sargasso Sea was a fantastic “prequel”, shall we say.

Whilst Victorian men undoubtedly desired women to be the “angels of the house”, I think it’s a little harsh to throw “most 21st century men” into the same category (that is, assuming we’re talking about Western-cultured men?).

Bertha was probably one of the best early representations for second-wave feminism around the 1960s and 1970s, but I feel now that we are experiencing the third-wave, where women can choose if they want to be “Susie homemaker” or not (because there’s actually nothing wrong with that, if it’s what you desire), Bertha may be a bit out-dated.

Having said that, there are of course some silly men out there who expect women to be the “angel” and not the “madwoman”.

Sorry for the rant! Loved the article!

I really enjoyed this article! Feminism is always quite a hot-topic.

My only issue with this type of thinking is the fact that these warrior-types are problematized because they display mainly “masculine” characteristics. Are the abilities to fight, drink and sleep around inherently masculine? Perhaps they are emphasized more with men, but surely these are traits that can be associated with most women as well. I know it’s a two-way problem, as some men who are emotional or tender are labeled “feminised”. Society shouldn’t place gender labels on any human characteristics.

Xena doesn’t fight and drink like a man. She fights and drinks like a tough chick.

I fully agree on the sexualisation of women though. It’s completely ridiculous!

I don’t know if men are actually objectified just as much. Women wear too-tight shirts for no apparent reason in almost every single film (not just these types), whereas when men wear the spandex-suits, it is for a reason, a reason which is explained to the audience. Women aren’t given that treatment. But I do agree that men going shirtless is getting ridiculous, but again, they’re objectified by lack of clothing, not the clothing that is put on them.

The thing is, men are much less likely to be objectified in films than women are. In terms of superhero films, the only example I can think of is Thor, with his mandatory topless scenes. Even outside the realms of superhero films, men are often only objectified by lack of clothing (which is the same with women). My point is that, especially in these types of films, women are hyper-sexualised through their costumes, for no good reason, and men are not.

This is one of my favourite books ever, and probably the only one I’ve read more than three times. I feel like every time I re-read it, I discover a whole new layer to it. Good choice!

I’ve never read the books, so I can only go by what I see on screen, but overall it was pretty good. One of the best elements of this films (and its predecessor) is the costume design and the role that fashion plays in the story. Quite clever.

Completely agree with you on this.

Knowing that you don’t necessarily need to enjoy “the films you study” in order to appreciate their existence was a refreshing realisation. I suppose I was quite lucky to go to a university where we studied both canonical and noncanonical films (The Devil Wears Prada comes to mind).

Nice article.

I understand where you’re coming from in terms of the unnecessary violence, but at the same time I think they are quite necessary in order to serve the main purpose of horror films: to scare. Slasher and horror films use violence to give you a “safe scare” (much like roller-coasters do) and the violence is not supposed to be sad or tragic like real-life violence, but rather exaggerated or even comical.

I do see what you mean though. Slasher films aren’t for everyone.