I am very intrigued by this commentary and the comments. I however a reader of all the novels and a watcher of True Blood see it very differently. To me the attraction of Sookie Stackhouse is her ability to remain true to herself, sometimes yes wavering but who doesn't, in spite of all the evils around her! Sookie who tries with every ounce of her being to walk the path taught to her by her grandmother is surrounded by evil and yet keeps her values. Also I think it is a good message that we c
I would just like to say that alan ball (showrunner of the show) specifically said that the fight for vampire rights in True blood was NOT an analogy with the fight for gay rights and that the people who were seeing that in the show were misinterpreting it.
@JukeLane He can say whatever he wants but it doesn't change the fact that it is so clearly a major thread in the entire series from the intro, to the way that vampire rights is played out. If it wasn't intentional, then he majorly failed as a writer because that is the take away from the show.
@feministfrequency True Blood is based off the Southern Vampire Mysteries by Charlaine Harris. Alan Ball may have put his own spin on the plot, but Sookie and the rest are fairly on par with their characters.
If anything, Ball's been putting more of an open spin on it. Tara's not even remotely as prominent in the novels as she is in the TV series. Neither is Lafayette. There is/was no "Jesus."
@feministfrequency The premise of the show is that Sookie's your stereotypical Southern girl. Southern girls get raised in a conservative political and religious environment. At the same time, she's been raised by her grandma to be a strong, independent woman.
And frankly, I fail to see how Sookie isn't an independent woman. She has her own job, her own faults, her own opinions and her own issues. She has the guts to walk up to two old-ass vampires who could rip her to shreds and tell them,
@feministfrequency "No. I'm not going to be with either of you. I love you both, but it's not going to work."
There have been times where she's flat out ripped Eric a new one.
Eric, in the series and the novels, is a douchebag. If he became a non-douchebag, he would not be Eric.
Bill was raised in Civil-War era, and reflects it as such. He's always trying to "protect" her because he thinks all the drama she's in is his fault. Presumptuous, but self-loathing.
The thing about Lafayette being stereotypical (the same is said of Kurt on Glee) is that while it may be true, that image is CELEBRATED. It's not shunned or mocked or anything like that .These shows are making gay characters who are likeable, not gay characters who are just kinda off to the side and boring.
If it is offensive to use vampires, werewolves, faire, etc as a metaphor for minorities and the homosexual community. Then wouldn't it be equally as offensive to compare minorities to mutants in X-Men.
@neosoontoretro No it wouldn't be offensive to make the comparison to mutants in X-Men because there isn't a long historical mythology that says mutants are inherently and almost always evil. The mutants in X-Men are comparable to humans with human emotions, feelings and capacities for good and bad. The vampires in True Blood are inherently evil and the few who try to overcome their "nature" are just that, trying to overcome it. Very different comparisons.
@feministfrequency Hmm... did you see the show? The vampires in True Blood aren't the same as the vampires on Buffy. Vampires in True Blood are as inherently evil as the human on the series. Many of the humans are portrayed as ignoranted, bigoted, and filled with hate. Furthermore, mutants have in fact been portrayed as inherently evil in many stories dating back to when they first started publishing pulp magazines.
@neosoontoretro Vampire and mutant mythology is drastically different, especially in terms of popularity and popular appeal. And yes I have seen every episode of True Blood and the vampires are inherently evil, without a doubt, although there are humans with questionable actions it isn't even comparable since the point being made about vampires is that it is in their "nature" to behave in violent, sadistic, murderous, manipulative ways. That point is plainly obvious in the narrative.
@feministfrequency And even thou vampires were commonly portrayed as evil it came a point where they usually portrayed as beautiful creatures. While mutants were usually portrayed as hideous.
@feministfrequency Also, what about Bill? Is he not the prime example of a vampire who overcomes his nature. If you haven't notice the theme of show is for both vampires and humans to overcome their own nature.
@neosoontoretro Yes, there are two vampires that are shown to try and overcome their "evil tendencies" Bill and Jessica. But if you follow the series, Bill was lying the whole time and his motives are questionable.
@feministfrequency Bill was lied to Sookie about how they met. However, it is later revealed in flashbacks that Bill feed off humans but didn't kill them. He later finds out about True Blood which would help him to "mainstream" in society.
@neosoontoretro Yes, so back to my original point, there are only two main vampires on the show who are struggling with being evil and trying to "mainstream". But they are still struggling to fight their malicious tendencies.
I've never thought of Tara as hypersexualized in any way. I thought she was within bounds of normalcy. However, I do agree that she is agressive, but that's because she's grown up in an environment where she has had to fight for everything, and being agressive is a necessity in that environment.
I think the comparison of vampire rights to civil rights and queer rights actually highlights the fact that to be fighting against these people having their rights is SILLY. It emphasizes the fact that all people are people and that everyone should have rights. It belittles the debates about it, yes, but it also makes a statement saying "Look how silly this is. It's utterly ridonkulous! We should cease arguing about it and just do it"
I absolutely love you. Everyone I know loves this show. EVERYONE! My friends, my family, random aquaintences, people I regularly chat with on the internet, everyone. I am hard-pressed to find ANYONE who is willing to say anything negative about True Blood, and it's usually something stupid about hair, makeup, or how much they hate various female characters (which is sexist in of itself).
Thank you so much for addressing . . . basically everything I've been saying about the show all this time.
Sookie always come's back to Bill *SPOILER* but during the last season, she left him high and dry. Though she's way more badass in the books, and she is a female character to look up to, unlike Bella.
Lafayette is an interesting and complex character. Some of the stuff he does even though stereotypical, aka prostitution, is actually realistic considering his class and lack of opportunities. However TB doesn't confront this; they don't discuss why he or others do this and they don't show other black or gay men to show it doesn't apply to everyone. Stereotypes may exist for a reason but he embodies so many that he does become offensive, and again they never discuss why he is like that.
The books are so very different though, and Eric is quite lovely. And Sookie is hilarious, strong and fun in the books! Ok this is about the TV show, but still, I think this should more be a comment on HBO and ALL it's shows.
HBO shows are full of stereotypes and gratuitous sex and voilence. Why? It's popular.
I think these comments are good, but also outdated since a lot of the characters have evolved a lot since season two. I am suprised you didn't mention anything about Jason.
I've only seen one episode and this video, but I don't like how everywhere we see either "sluts are slutty to be manipulative" or, as seen in Tara, "pity her, she's promiscuous because she had a messed-up childhood" - I'm not denying that that actually exists IRL, just annoyed that media always says "the only reasons women would have multiple sexual partners is because they're prostitutes or because no one loves them".
How I see the gay/black metaphor is that many people who are against these groups view them as monsters. I do agree that it would send a stronger message if Sookie stopped putting up with being manipulated by all these vampires. It should be noted however that this series is based (somewhat loosely) while the writers take a lot of liberties with the story I think removing the bill/sookie element this early would alienate fans of the books.
I have to admit, I really like True Blood, so make of that what you will. But I agree with your comments on Erric. He's a bad guy, and he loves it. It also annoys that a lot of women seem to really like him. At least in my limited experience anyway, maybe you have a forum or something you can reference from. I only found your videos today.
@Disthron I think most of the women who like him are probably fans of Alexander Skaarsgard. If Eric was played by someone unattractive, I doubt many people would like him.
I think Tara is an awesome character and you dont give her enough cred. She has stood up against Bill on many occasions and even tells Sookie what an asshole he is. She kicks ass and I dont see her has a stereotype. Whats wrong with a strong black woman? I think the actress handles it realistically, not stereotypically. And Tara isn't that promiscuous. She enjoys sex, which in her life, enjoyment doesnt come around often. If she was a hoe, shed be doing Eric and Bill.
I'm curious of your current opinion, now that we know Bill really was being creep-manipulative (not in a pretend, romantic way) and Sookie dumped him.
The books are so much more nuanced about it. I LOATHE twilight and nearly every other vampier media out there. It's just not a story that is attractive to me. I adore the Sookie Stackhouse series. It's the same love I had for Buffy. It's nice to see a female lead who isn't taken in by the Oh so dark and mysterious vampire so much that she wants to be one. Both female leads when presented with these dark lovers respond similarly, "screw that!" Where bella is all, "TAKE MEEE"
I love Tara for exactly the same reasons you state, good and bad. She MAY fit into the stereotype, however as an African-American woman I feel what makes that stereotype not ok but... more than a stereotype is that you see where her behavior comes from. Writing her character this way never came off as the writers saying the stereotype or Tara's behavior is acceptable. I suppose it's more important to me that she's relatable. Even within her stereotypical character are real things I can relate to
I think your analysis of True Blood could be a lot more nuanced, and doesn't give the show the credit it deserves. The character of Lafayette resonates with a LOT of genderqueer folks out there, in that his character is actually very complex in regard to his gender. I think it's important not to get too carried away about condemning the use of "stereotypes" in representations of queer characters, as that argument often masks a valorization of "normal" (gender conforming, white, rich) LGBT peeps.
I hate how the gay community is portrayed on tv - its either the totally flambuoyant fashionista male or there is no gay character in the show . What happened to diversity and rejecting cliches? Have writers become so bored that they cant imagine a normal guy or lady being gay?
@PompamooseMagique I wouldn't say there are "a lot" of gay characters in the Doctor Who universe but they do have a few genuine portrayals, which I have to say, is very refreshing.
@feministfrequency Yeah, fair point there could be more gay characters, but it's a very high profile show here in the UK so it's very cool the way it deals with gay characters, and, actually female characters I think,
@PompamooseMagique While I love DW it definitely is not without a fair share of serious criticism including how some of the female characters are portrayed but that is far more complex then a comment box will allow. I can't actually recall any queer female characters though, I think it's all men right? (not to take away from those male representations at all).
@feministfrequency well there were briefly some old age gay women who were kind of bit parts in the episode "Gridlock" (sheesh, I need to get out more) but out of interest, as a fan of the show, what female characters would you feel are majorly misrepresented, if that's the right phrase?
@PompamooseMagique Well it actually had a few good episodes dedicated to Lafayette and his boyfriend. Sometimes that even made me uncomfortable because I'm not used to the blantant usage of gay men in tv (its a good thing) So I would give props to this show for even focusing on Lafayette's story.
About Sookie being the white blonde, virginal woman who always goes back to her man. I've only seen like two episodes of the show, but I've read several of the books. The interesting thing in the book is that while book Sookie is white, blonde and virginal, she is also portrayed as lower-class and unapolagetic for it, with a strong moral and work ethic. She also dumps Bill's ass the first time he betrays her trust, and doesn't take him back, and she has other relationship as well.
Does anyone else feel that it's disturbing when you realize these books (Twilight and True Blood) were written by females? and then especially that the author of Twilight is also a Mormon who decides that it's wrong to include graphic sex scenes in the book because of her faith but then depicts a demonized and satanic creature as a love interests? just putting it out there...
I like your videos, even when I disagree, but I think you're really, really over-simplifying. Saying that it's almost as bad to link LGBT and minorities to vampires as the sexism/racism it's responding against? Seriously? The whole point is that the vampires are -viewed- as evil. I don't even like the show, but this just seems to be taking offense for the sake of it. And considering how many of my gay friends love Lafayette, your defense of the Gay Black Man seems unnecessary and unasked
@cigansky I love LaFayette too, that isn't actually the point. Also, the difference is that vampires are in fact evil, mythological, fictional creatures. Queer folks are actual human beings who are socially demonized and oppressed in our society. I find the comparison to be extremely problematic.
@feministfrequency - Waaait wait wait... So YOU like LaFayette, my gay friends like Lafayette, basically everyone likes Lafayette... And yet we're still supposed to blame the writers for writing a supposedly stereotypical gay character? What the hell kind of standard is that? And vampires -are- fictional creatures - which means True Blood gets to write them any way they want. In this case, not evil. Does every vampire by definition have to be count Dracula?
Video sparked a little debate between me and my girlfriend. She was a fan of the show until she decided to pick up the pulp novels their biased on. She argues that you place too much blame on the writers of the show and not the source material, seeing as they go out of their way to add characters like Tera to balanced the overwhelming victim complex Ms. Harris has.I'd however argue if they're willing to change things, why keep that close to the source at all. I don't feel like nods to better are
I wouldn't mind the "I need to protect you" bit if he'd stop saying it all the time. Protecting family is one thing, but the way he goes on and on about it, he's basically saying she needs a man around to keep her safe. Really?
youre right, but i actually enjoy the show besides all of that, for once i dont care about political correctness and all that although i often criticise that
im aware of the story being cheap but its just hot somehow and i like the entertainment... but of course it could be wayyyy better... but until theres a show like that with better characters and story line, im gonna go on watching this :)
@lillerbutton I still watch the show too, I'm not saying not to watch it, just want to point out some elements of it that we should recognize while we are watching. Also, this isn't about political correctness, that is a term used to defend the status quo against people who are challenging dominant power structures. This isn't about being PC, it's about being a fan and simultaneously enjoying media and being critical of it.
@feministfrequency good that we agree on this :) theres so much out there thats not right in various ways but no one can live isolated, so good to enjoy but still question these things
You drew up a lot of valid points, that I found myself agreeing with, while I'd never even considered them before, but I think that it's unfair to put the show writers at too much fault, as the subject material (Southern Vampire Mystery novels) are mainly to blame. I sort of imagine that the head writer of the show is reading through them, occasionally going "Lafayette does WHAT?" or "Wait, Sookie turns out to be a fairy princess? (Spoilers)" But yeah, I don't think I can watch this show now.
Here's the thing, I do call my self a feminist but ashamed or not I am a bit of an addict. I don't know, I guess for all the things that goes wrong for the show, I do see a lot of good to it. I could go on and on but my explanatory skills are relatively shit- like, I absolutely agree with you on a lot of things her. Also, this may sound lame, but as a woman of colour, it would be nice to see a non while female lead to a vamp show for once :/
I'm very interested in your interpretation of the show, which, on the whole, I can see where you're coming from. But I really disagree that the writers have in any way intentionally made this a male dominated show, there are so many strong female characters, and frankly sometimes a show can be enjoyable without it needing to break social boundaries. Although I agree there are flaws with the representation of women, mostly the show shows strong female roles and storylines.
How exactly is it "feminist" to criticize Lafayette for being "stereotypically feminine"? Lafayette is a strong, multi-dimensional working-class character who frankly shows how kick-ass he is when he takes on rednecks in one of the first episodes. The fact that he engages in prostitution to survive, which many working-class gay youth actually do, isn't stereotypical - it's a realistic portrayal of what people with limited options do. And showing that is a good thing, not a bad one.
While I think this is sound and inspiring critique from the analytical perspective you're taking, I feel it seriously falls short of the shows philosophical stance.
Well, since this is a disagreement over semantics, know there is a difference in being a virgin and being virginal. If you want to get literal, then you can't say Sookie was a virgin for the whole first season, can you?
I would have to disagree with your assertion of Sookie's archetypical White, female blonde virginal portagonist. Let's forego for a moment the truth that there is nothing "wrong" with being blonde, female, or White, and let's examine the only non-physical quality you listed, "virginal." Sookie is anything but virginal. She wouldn't even be considered traditional.
It's interesting how women seem to degrade themselves by just permiting that men have to protect them and just because theyre fragile..I completely agree with u..
Ive been watching most of ur videos and I truly have to agree with you point of view..
Lafayette seems to be a stereotype at first but he's not, he's surprisingly multi-layered. At first, he's comical relief, but then you see that he works three jobs to support his mom in a nursing home, that he wears makeup and parties, deals V and gets into trouble because he's trying to attain, even in his imagination, the grand lifestyle he's always wanted. Every time he tries to rise above he finds himself stuck in his old house with second hand knick knacks and moth eaten furniture.
Bill is totally annoying for all the reasons you mentioned and his relationship with Sookie is incredibly demeaning to her as a character and to women. The writers think they're making Sookie empowered and independent, I see that's their intention, but they really just end up making her look thoughtless, selfish, and obsessed with her boyfriend.
The fact that vampires are seen as evil and killers makes the debate more stirring. The writers are giving us a picture of something we're familiar with and putting a new twist on it: racism. But is it so close minded with vampires or is it just common sense to not grant them equal rights? I think if vampires were real, something very close to what's unfolded on the show would take place. They're not equating it to gay or minority rights, they're letting the topic stand on its own.
I think it's great that you're looking at True Blood in an analytical way because while an entertaining show, it does have its flaws. However, I think you're misunderstanding the writer's intentions. Alan Ball and other writers have continuously said that they are not trying to equate vampire rights with gay or minority rights; that would not be a fair comparison. They're trying to paint a realistic and honestly clutching argument: if vampires were real, would we give them equal rights?
@lolorobs8217 The creators can say anything they want about their intentions, I think what ends up mattering the most is what actually gets produced and put on the screen. Also, I have big doubts that they really aren't making the comparison, just look at the opening credits.
@feministfrequency I find your post fascinating, that's why i'm commenting way too much on it, haha. But I think that you're misreading what the creators are putting out there. The opening credits show that the show is set in this already deeply divided area, still recovering from the wounds of racism and bigotry past (and in some cases still present) and now there's this new breed of racism. It's somewhat similar, but doesn't suggest vampire's rights is equal to gay or minority rights, imo.
I agree with what you say about Eric, and it ties in to what I wrote you moments ago about Veronica Mars and how that show at times shrugs off rape as a fun little joke.
Also, I find it pathetic how an Iraq veteran is presented, as well as Christians. First time the Iraq vet was introduced he was so one dimensional (dumb and messed up) and continues to be that way. Also, two different characters used the term "with us or against us" as some brave left wing commentary that in truth is empty.
@TomerMMHA I feel like Terry's character is actually pretty good, at least for a secondary character, they've tired to humanize him and give him some depth.
@feministfrequency Yes, I liked his character (not that I watched beyond season 2), but at least the first time they showed him, he was totally cardboard. Same is true for a lot of the stuff in True Blood. And I think what I said about the whole political theme is true. It's not a left-right thing. It's just that there are more sophisticated ways for writers to criticize those they don't agree with. And we should admit that even if the unsophisticated critics are on our side of the aisle.
Eric is interesting. As long as you don't forget that he's a monster, he's a great character. The show may not portray him as the villain but the audience should still understand that he is.
Good villains are not ones where the show says "You see this guy? Look how bad he is!" and portray all of his actions in a negative light. Good villains are complex multidimensional characters too.
But that may be asking too much from the viewing audience.
@Beelzeboogie I agree that I like villains to be complex characters but I don't think that is what they've done with Eric, because he is SO sympathetic, the audience can't help but be drawn to him and attracted to him, even when he's doing horrible stuff. So he isn't really a villain anymore and his horrible actions like assault is ignored or forgotten.
I honestly never looked at it as vampires are evil and are often representing blacks and gays. I always just thought wow how great is it that there trying to equal rights and it reflects what's happening in the gay community at the moment. Thanks for showing me this side.
i find the show very different then the Sookie Stackhouse book series. In my belief i would like to see True Blood more like the books. Of course there is going to be flaws in a television show, books, movies, whatever else, but as a result in this show i would like to see the writers read the fan mail that gets sent into them and read all the feed back. The auther of the Sookie Stackhouse series, in my opinion, needs to be one of the writers. Anyway the show has flaws just like anything else.
I stopped watching this show this season after Bill starts having "sex" (looked more like a rape scene) with his maker and takes her head, breaks her neck and turns it around so it's facing the floor. This whole show has become "gorno" another excuse to watch women being tortured for the sake of it. Very disappointing but not surprising.
Do you know the character Sophie Anne? So, SHE is supposed to be stronger than Eric. That girl was the only vampire on the show who was strong enough to not be dominated by men. BUT Alan Ball, who created the HBO show , made her WEAKER than Eric, so the only strong vampire in the books (until now at least) that wasn't dominated by men, was TOTALLY dominated by Eric. That made me so pissed off! In the books she's strong and "diva", but in the show she's only diva.
Its strange that vampires are equated with Blacks and gays on this series. I have heard many people compare vampires to white people. Pale skin, aristocratic,allergic to the sun and predatory.I do agree that comparisons with vampires are offensive and that they are evil. It is in their nature to kill and abuse humans we are their prey. As a Black male I find Lafayette offensive unfourtunately he is a fan favorite, paticularly with Black women.
@kmensah3 I find myself in a bind because while I think Lafayette embodies so many stereotypes he is one of my favourite characters on the show and he is one of the most emotionally complex characters on the show.
@feministfrequency I hear you on Lafayette, even I have to admit he is an "interesting" charachter. The ambiguity you feel I thnk is by design. Just wish they could make a complex charachter without portraying such a negative charachter. Good analysis of the show!
@kmensah3 this comment you left is entirely wrong.
not all white cultures are aristocratic only certain cultures, white people are not allergic to the sun...... like really, and ALL cultures have a predatory adaptiveness, not just whites.
I read most of he books, but watched very little of the show. I do like book Sookie. In her narration she calls out Bill's b.s., but to his face too. She can be pretty stupid at times, yes.
Book Tara's been abused as a child, but more depressed than angry. Owns a clothes shop.
A bi girl appears later. She wasn't a stereotype...to me anyways. A bit weird, and running from trouble, but monogamous and a pretty good friend to Sookie.
I agree with everything you said. It really irks me how everyone just falls in love with Sookie (Mary Sue much?) and how she has no personality or character traits except for her psychic abilities, which don't even count. And for some reason she falls for the creepy vampires that have no respect for her. Urgh.
The books are straightforward and lack depth, but the show takes artistic liscense. I enjoy the allegorical elements of the show, even though it's potentially "offensive." In the pursuit of equal rights and sensitivity, the show allows a widening fan base to encounter thoughts and ideas that encourage compassion. After the first season, the writers opted to tone down the civil rights aspects, and amp up the sexual tension. I think it's a liberating show for both genders and orientations.
I love True Blood, but I am kind of disappointed in it. I think they could have followed the plot line of the book much more and maybe it might have been more interesting.
I think that you hit the nail right on the head on all points. The one gay representation on the show that I actually didn't find a lot of issues with would be that of the gay vampire that the idiot brother killed.
Another note is that the show is really pretty much a gory porno with plot that happens to be about vampires.
Firstly, totaly agree sookie and bill are rather lame characters. and twilight does have some problems, though it should be noted that short of something like a slayer, or a female vampire or witch, you arein't going to find a female friendly vampire story. vampires are almost always dominate personalities, so if the story is about a male vampire then the female characters are going to be comparatively weak. i like true blood, but there are better vamp stories out there.
(White 17 year old girl) I accept/understand some of your points, but you seem to look too far into some and not appreciate others. I love Trueblood; I think the social metaphors are justified. Although there are clearly some anti-feminist features all of the characters have an inner strength. Try viewing Sookie's ability as a disability (wouldn't you be traumatised by hearing everyone's thoughts as a kid?). I agree the Eric plot it Creepy! Finnaly, think: nothing is wholly one dimensional.
(Full disclosure, middle-class white hetero male, if it matters to you.) You left out jason stackhouse as the typical ignorant, bigoted, ripped but dim-witted, trigger happy, bang anything that walks, emotionally repressed white male who needs women to be his moral compass. The gender roles seem born out of a total lack of imagination rather than a chauvinist agenda. Same with the parallels to the rights movement, which break down when considering vamps are portrayed as demi-gods. out of space.
@sandwichman1600 The video was so long already that I couldn't go into all the characters. I completely agree with your analysis of Jason, although I'd just like to add that Jason's progression through the current season is kind of interesting, won't have a comment on it until the end of the season though.
Second, Sookie didn't get punished for sticking up for herself, she got 'punished' for going out into the woods alone, at night, without anyway to defend herself against any potential threats (wild animals, creepy supernatural monsters, etc.). Which is stupid for anyone, not just women.
@feministfrequency While that is true, I think you could've represented what you wanted to say in a clearer way. Instead of "blaming" people who worked on the show, I think you should instead look at the author of the original Sookie Stackhouse series (I seriously prefer the books to the show, Sookie's portrayed a bit differently). She wrote things the way she did for a reason. When reading the books, I saw that Sookie does, admittedly, show many aspects of the stereotypes you described, but she
@feministfrequency also displays independant characteristics such as the encounter with the murderer at the end of the first book. She stood up for herself without being 'punished', and Bill didn't need to come to her rescue, she held her own. And as for the situation with the Maenad, she's attracted by any form of violenve/aggression, so if Bill had stormed off instead, then HE would've been attacked as a message to Eric, so in reality it's not so much a "Sookie got punished" situation as a "Th
@feministfrequency e Maenad wanted Eric to get a message" situation. She implies (in the book) that she would've gone after anyone connected to Eric. It just happened to be Sookie because she didn't bring anything to defend herself with.
(If all of this doesn't make sense I apologize, with the character limit I couldn't go back to read what I wrote as this computer won't open Word at the moment so I had to continue thoughts in multiple posts.)
@CrystalGazer95 Because we don't have a lot of space to really discuss this, I'll keep it short. I did not read the books, I'm discussing the show specifically, which more people will watch then will read the books (probably). The writers of the show decided to have Sookie attacked instead of Bill (it could easily have been him if they had wanted) there is intention behind what happens in television and movies and we should be critical of that.
Excellent video- just one quick point: Your point about Sookie constantly returning to Bill is valid, but you should consider the fact that Sookie first drank Bill's blood on the night that they met (and as you know, drinking a vampire's blood makes the person have romantic fantasies about the vampire). If you consider the fact that Sookie may be intoxicated and that her relationship with Bill is really a product of that event, it completely colors the way that we examine their relationship.
I haven't seen "True Blood" yet, so I can't really comment on it specifically, but considering that vampires are born vampires, or people transformed into them by other vampires, i.e. they have no control over it—how is it fair to say that they are all inherently evil and therefore undeserving of rights? How is that any different than saying that black and queer people are inherently lesser beings and therefore undeserving of rights? They may kill for survival, but so do most organisms.
@YourMyTubeSpace The vampire mythology is of demonic fictional creatures who have no soul, who kill without remorse etc. etc. They are not real people in the world, they are part of a story written by someone, somewhere (namely Hollywood). Real oppressed peoples in the world are humans, not some fantasy character created for entertainment value. It is perfectly acceptable for me to say that vampires are evil creatures, it is part of the mythology of a FICTIONAL being.
@feministfrequency Yes, but in a solely fictional context, the distinction between reality and fantasy doesn't exist. In the world of "True Blood", vampires ARE real people. And I'd imagine that if they hypothetically existed they'd want equal rights as well; after all, they're sentient beings which are literally derived from humans. To call all vampires "evil" is to ignore their capacity to overcome their malicious tendencies (see: Angel from Buffy), as all humans also have.
@YourMyTubeSpace Vampires did not overcome there malicious tendencies in Buffy, the two vampires who were not evil had souls (or a chip in his head physically stopping them from being evil).
@feministfrequency Vampires are only as evil as the creator wants them. Most of the vamps in buffy were evil because that is what Joss wanted them to. In TB, vampires do have souls, and have the potential to be good or evil just like humans.
@PyroJulian Yes, the creators can do anything they want with vampires of course but I agree and disagree, although it appears that vampires in TB have the ability to not be evil (where in Buffy, there has to be some sort of intervention for that to happen), there is really only one vampire that we've been introduced to that is "mainstreaming" and trying to not be evil. The far majority of them are still framed as "evil/bad"
This was a really interesting analysis. I have to admit that I love True Blood, and that while I agree with some of your points, I disagree with others. Your first point about equating minorities with evil creatures I would agree is problematic. I also agree that Bill and his need to protect Sookie is tiresome. That said, I think Sookie is pretty awesome. She saved Bill's life and killed the main villain of the first season, I have yet to finish the second season so I can't say much about it.
Um...... the reason sookie got "punished" was because the maenad was attracted to the violence and the maenad made them mad (controlled their emotions).
@comedycreator100 The reason sookie gets punished is because the writers decided to; the story didn't just appear out of nowhere. It was conceived and written by a group of people, they could have written it so that she walks home and Bill get to wallow in being a jerk, instead they wrote it so Sookie has to be "saved."
Thank you for this, I had an immediate reaction to this show as a stereotype-fest and people got mad at me for it! I'm glad to see someone else who feels the same way. The other dealbreaker with True Blood=Fucking awful dialogue.
lady stands up for herself, shes independant , shes proving her point and out of no where a monster appears she runs :O oh she falls ! oh horray the man protects the female in distress and she runs back to him! WOW what the hell where the writers thinking about when they wrote this! seriously its not logical!
This is another excellent piece. However, your narrative will be stronger if you stop saying “really” and “kinda.” Your opinions are bold, so speak them without diminishing or overemphasizing.
curious, have you read any of the books? dont come down on the shows writers too much, as they are following the story and characters as created by the white female writer that originally developed them, and is still writing books expanding the universe. And this books will eventually be made into episodes. Charlaine Harris.
@ABitOfBravado also, villainizing queer men (not the case with Lafayette of course) is a hollywood trope that has been used for decades so their are plenty of violent queer men but they are usually framed as bad/evil. (see my Caprica video for an example)
@ABitOfBravado your analysis gets a little bit fuzzy by events that happen to LaFayette in the second season, but regardless of that, just because he defends himself doesn't change the fact that he embodies many stereotypical traits of queer men and black men.
This past season, the prime villains were a religious group made up of prejudiced white people. Another example of an oppressive, patriarchal group being portrayed as villainous in their persecution of minorities. Sure the show falls into some stereotypes, but that's true of anything. Overall it's much progressive than you're giving it credit for.
And as a woman, I do not live in "constant fear" of violence on a "daily basis". This sounds like a personal issue and frankly pretty paranoid.
@raccoonnine 1 in 4 women will experience sexual violence in their lifetime; 1 in 4. That is a huge number and those women are often emotionally scarred for the rest of their lives following that experience. It is lucky that you are a woman who does not live in constant fear of violence on a daily basis, but please watch your comments for those readers who are or will be victims--calling them "paranoid" really isn't a respectful way of responding to their claim of living in fear.
@raccoonnine i think what she meant was that women have to have a higher sense of mortality because it is women who get raped mostly and are mostly victims of things like domestic abuse and stalking, so women do have to be more careful about these things. it's not really something that men worry about, in comparison to women at least.
@raccoonnine i think that it's not so much fear of constant attack, but awareness of the possibility of constant attack. for example, for my late class, my mother told me to always wear pants (?), and to have my phone in hand when walking to the bus stop. however, she expresses no concern to my brother in law when he walks home after a night shift, because my sister has the car.
I found some of your other videos interesting but am skeptical about this one. First, a huge point of the show has been precisely that the vampires in this show aren't really monsters so that comparison seems invalid. Last season the real villain was a white man who was stalking and murdering women for their perceived promiscuity who is ultimately killed by the female protagonist. Or how about Jason? Another example of a masculine ideal, but who the other characters roundly disapprove of.
I believe you overanalyze this. Don't be so harsh to us guys :)
I believe should spent more trying to look for things that unite us rather than to constantly point out everything that set us apart. i dont live in the US but is it really that dangerous to live there as a Female ?
Srsly you know this show has been nominated for GLAAD Outstanding Drama Series (as well as numerous emmys and golden globe) awards two years running now, right? If you are correct in your analysis of the allegory - wouldn't GLAAD just hate this show? Is it possible that writers and creators can somehow adopt and take liberties with old stories and ideas and repurpose them, maybe even playing with conventional perceptions about both ideas and occurences, just to make for interesting television?
@darkchildtwo SO u are missing the point, it's not about "liking" a show but about analyzing the content and information that a mass amount of people are consuming as the media directly impacts perception.
This is why you need to read the books, cause she does get sick of bills shit in there and ditches him. Also Jessica doesnt exist. Also Tara is totally different in the books, much much better.
In season one, Bill and Sam try to "protect" Sookie. But, in the finale, Sookie saves herself and them. This object lesson was forgotten come season two.
In season 1, almost every mention of racism by Lettie May (Tara's mum), and several by Tara were framed as the products of their own demons, rather than them calling out oppression. Icky. (And what happened to the Black community shown in the pilot?)
It'd be a better show without Sookie/Bill as the centre of the world.
I disagree with a lot of what you said. First, True Blood theme isn't that minorities groups or homosexual community are monsters, but still need to be treated equally. True Blood theme is that vampires are no better or worse then humans. Millions of millions of years ago human beings was nothing more then primal and vicious beings that only lived by instinct.
@feministfrequency The show is an metphor how we shouldn't judge people when we ourselves are no better. You claim that the show was offensive because it was comparing vampires with minorities. The show the theme and metaphor is that minorities and homosexual are not better and no worse then everyone.
@1rayman2 Correct that queer folks and people of colour are no better OR worse then anyone else, problem with True Blood's analogy is that Vampires (a mythic non existent creature) is in fact worse, they have to resist their desire to murder and harm other people.
@feministfrequency But everyone has to pull back his desires when he lives in a social group or civilization, if humans wouldn't control themselves we could not live as a society :3
@feministfrequency Uh, don't know how much attention you've actually given the show, but humans are portrayed as having to resist those very same proclivities. It's one of True Blood's hallmarks, to show that often humans have far darker desires and engage in far more despicable actions than vampires do.
I really enjoyed your "Bechdel Test" video but I had a hard time sitting through this one. I only made it through the first couple of minutes. You seemed rushed and unfocused and it was dull. Anyways, I really hate this show but I do want to point out that the theme/comparison of this show/book is about Humans and Vampires and who truly is the "monster". Of course you could metaphors for the civil rights movement, gay movement, any oppressed movement but ....
You're saying that because vampires are generally attracted by violence and because they can make trouble into the world, they don't deserve civilian right ?
Then I think we can just say the same thing about humans, after all. ;)
@feministfrequency And you're wrong, just like you're wrong for saying that portraying a homosexual character as having flaws is immoral storytelling!!
Oh man they're using mythical creatures as an analogue to episodes of the history of human experience, classic scifi/fantasy trope BUT ITS WRONG BECAUSE THIS TIME ITS VAMPIRES N VAMPIRES ARE WRONG GUYS.
Oh and she's getting out of the car in the middle of a dark forest and then she gets hurt THEY MUST BE REINFORCING THE PATRIARCHY OMG GUYZ!!
So I think that the novels and shows that are showing supernatural "monsters" getting human and civil rights are not offensive, but actually a reflection of how when it comes to "us" or "them", humans stand together, no matter of what prejudices we might have once had.
Which is the exact thing that people who have dealt with racism and hate crimes have tried to make other people understand in the past.
The show is obviously supernatural, but the basic underlining message is still the same. We are all human beings, whether we're white, black, gay, straight, short, fat.... jewish.... whatever.
I don't agree with your first comment. I think that this series (as well as the Anita Blake book series where Vampires do have legal rights) portrays a very important point relating to the civil and gay rights in our society.
True Blood is just saying that all human and undead beings are still "beings". They still love, hate, rage and laugh and in those ways they are the same as all of us.
@mas88rus i wouldn't have brought up the anita blake series as it is just another misogynistic piece of media. if you pay close attention to all of the books, any female character with any overt trace of femininity in them is either raped, mauled, or killed. the message isn't as positive as you'd think.
i agree with you on many points. female lead s are either dominated by the males or come off as bitchy and overly agressive.
i love lafaiettes(spelling?)personallity, and he is a strong character, but i do agree that he is portrayed as a highly steryotypical version of a black gay man.
@xxBoyMeetsGirlxx Nothing wrong with being "bitchy" and overly aggressive. However most often those kinds of women are "put in their place" :P I think there needs to be MORE aggressive women out there that are the heroes and sidekicks and the ones that get things done. Also note that bitchy is a "nice" term men (and women) use against women to lessen the things they are saying. "They are being like a bitch, a yappy female dog, and thus are to be ignored."
While I agree with a lot of what is being said (Sookie being helpless and boring) I have problems with the idea that TV should protray the world as it SHOULD be rather than as it IS or as it's perceived to be. The same argument is used to suppress drug use, prostitution or violence. The show uses clichee's consistently, Sookie and Jason are contrasted by Tara and Lafayette. I am actually wondering whether the show uses overly stereotyped characters as social commentary.
I love that you're making videos about this kind of thing. I would absolutely love to hear you talking about Big Love. (Or any number of things, like female presence on TV as opposed to movies.) Keep up the good work. Looking forward to your next video.
that would allow us to look through the eyes of the kinds of people who would have persecuted ethnic minorities and homosexuals at a time when they were portrayed in a similar way, and how difficult it can be to separate the propoganda and long held beliefs, no matter how false, to allow an open mind and engage as equals with those persecuted as evil, and about the kind of strength of character it takes to do so.
I am very intrigued by this commentary and the comments. I however a reader of all the novels and a watcher of True Blood see it very differently. To me the attraction of Sookie Stackhouse is her ability to remain true to herself, sometimes yes wavering but who doesn't, in spite of all the evils around her! Sookie who tries with every ounce of her being to walk the path taught to her by her grandmother is surrounded by evil and yet keeps her values. Also I think it is a good message that we c
colleen305 1 month ago
I find it really funny that when Lafayette got together with Jesus, he stopped the drug dealing and the prostitution.
shanaleex 5 months ago 13
I would just like to say that alan ball (showrunner of the show) specifically said that the fight for vampire rights in True blood was NOT an analogy with the fight for gay rights and that the people who were seeing that in the show were misinterpreting it.
JukeLane 5 months ago 4
@JukeLane He can say whatever he wants but it doesn't change the fact that it is so clearly a major thread in the entire series from the intro, to the way that vampire rights is played out. If it wasn't intentional, then he majorly failed as a writer because that is the take away from the show.
feministfrequency 5 months ago 35
@feministfrequency True Blood is based off the Southern Vampire Mysteries by Charlaine Harris. Alan Ball may have put his own spin on the plot, but Sookie and the rest are fairly on par with their characters.
If anything, Ball's been putting more of an open spin on it. Tara's not even remotely as prominent in the novels as she is in the TV series. Neither is Lafayette. There is/was no "Jesus."
Simim23 5 months ago 4
@feministfrequency The premise of the show is that Sookie's your stereotypical Southern girl. Southern girls get raised in a conservative political and religious environment. At the same time, she's been raised by her grandma to be a strong, independent woman.
And frankly, I fail to see how Sookie isn't an independent woman. She has her own job, her own faults, her own opinions and her own issues. She has the guts to walk up to two old-ass vampires who could rip her to shreds and tell them,
Simim23 5 months ago 9
@feministfrequency "No. I'm not going to be with either of you. I love you both, but it's not going to work."
There have been times where she's flat out ripped Eric a new one.
Eric, in the series and the novels, is a douchebag. If he became a non-douchebag, he would not be Eric.
Bill was raised in Civil-War era, and reflects it as such. He's always trying to "protect" her because he thinks all the drama she's in is his fault. Presumptuous, but self-loathing.
Simim23 5 months ago 10
The thing about Lafayette being stereotypical (the same is said of Kurt on Glee) is that while it may be true, that image is CELEBRATED. It's not shunned or mocked or anything like that .These shows are making gay characters who are likeable, not gay characters who are just kinda off to the side and boring.
snowheyoh321 5 months ago 39
@snowheyoh321 I think Lafayette's character has gotten fuller and more complex since I made this video.
feministfrequency 5 months ago 30
If it is offensive to use vampires, werewolves, faire, etc as a metaphor for minorities and the homosexual community. Then wouldn't it be equally as offensive to compare minorities to mutants in X-Men.
neosoontoretro 6 months ago in playlist Feminist
@neosoontoretro No it wouldn't be offensive to make the comparison to mutants in X-Men because there isn't a long historical mythology that says mutants are inherently and almost always evil. The mutants in X-Men are comparable to humans with human emotions, feelings and capacities for good and bad. The vampires in True Blood are inherently evil and the few who try to overcome their "nature" are just that, trying to overcome it. Very different comparisons.
feministfrequency 6 months ago
@feministfrequency Hmm... did you see the show? The vampires in True Blood aren't the same as the vampires on Buffy. Vampires in True Blood are as inherently evil as the human on the series. Many of the humans are portrayed as ignoranted, bigoted, and filled with hate. Furthermore, mutants have in fact been portrayed as inherently evil in many stories dating back to when they first started publishing pulp magazines.
neosoontoretro 6 months ago 4
@neosoontoretro Vampire and mutant mythology is drastically different, especially in terms of popularity and popular appeal. And yes I have seen every episode of True Blood and the vampires are inherently evil, without a doubt, although there are humans with questionable actions it isn't even comparable since the point being made about vampires is that it is in their "nature" to behave in violent, sadistic, murderous, manipulative ways. That point is plainly obvious in the narrative.
feministfrequency 6 months ago
@feministfrequency And even thou vampires were commonly portrayed as evil it came a point where they usually portrayed as beautiful creatures. While mutants were usually portrayed as hideous.
neosoontoretro 6 months ago
@feministfrequency Also, what about Bill? Is he not the prime example of a vampire who overcomes his nature. If you haven't notice the theme of show is for both vampires and humans to overcome their own nature.
neosoontoretro 6 months ago 2
@neosoontoretro Yes, there are two vampires that are shown to try and overcome their "evil tendencies" Bill and Jessica. But if you follow the series, Bill was lying the whole time and his motives are questionable.
feministfrequency 6 months ago
@feministfrequency Bill was lied to Sookie about how they met. However, it is later revealed in flashbacks that Bill feed off humans but didn't kill them. He later finds out about True Blood which would help him to "mainstream" in society.
neosoontoretro 6 months ago
@neosoontoretro Yes, so back to my original point, there are only two main vampires on the show who are struggling with being evil and trying to "mainstream". But they are still struggling to fight their malicious tendencies.
feministfrequency 6 months ago
@neosoontoretro overcomes? is that what that was? I think that both the books and the series prove that he hasn't overcome anything.
princesssookeh 5 months ago in playlist More videos from feministfrequency
I've never thought of Tara as hypersexualized in any way. I thought she was within bounds of normalcy. However, I do agree that she is agressive, but that's because she's grown up in an environment where she has had to fight for everything, and being agressive is a necessity in that environment.
MissLissaLindsey 6 months ago 3
I think the comparison of vampire rights to civil rights and queer rights actually highlights the fact that to be fighting against these people having their rights is SILLY. It emphasizes the fact that all people are people and that everyone should have rights. It belittles the debates about it, yes, but it also makes a statement saying "Look how silly this is. It's utterly ridonkulous! We should cease arguing about it and just do it"
MissLissaLindsey 6 months ago
I absolutely love you. Everyone I know loves this show. EVERYONE! My friends, my family, random aquaintences, people I regularly chat with on the internet, everyone. I am hard-pressed to find ANYONE who is willing to say anything negative about True Blood, and it's usually something stupid about hair, makeup, or how much they hate various female characters (which is sexist in of itself).
Thank you so much for addressing . . . basically everything I've been saying about the show all this time.
Give1Take2 6 months ago
Sookie always come's back to Bill *SPOILER* but during the last season, she left him high and dry. Though she's way more badass in the books, and she is a female character to look up to, unlike Bella.
giivo1 7 months ago 4
Lafayette is an interesting and complex character. Some of the stuff he does even though stereotypical, aka prostitution, is actually realistic considering his class and lack of opportunities. However TB doesn't confront this; they don't discuss why he or others do this and they don't show other black or gay men to show it doesn't apply to everyone. Stereotypes may exist for a reason but he embodies so many that he does become offensive, and again they never discuss why he is like that.
SkyStained 7 months ago
The books are so very different though, and Eric is quite lovely. And Sookie is hilarious, strong and fun in the books! Ok this is about the TV show, but still, I think this should more be a comment on HBO and ALL it's shows.
HBO shows are full of stereotypes and gratuitous sex and voilence. Why? It's popular.
hornbydragonsfan 7 months ago
I think these comments are good, but also outdated since a lot of the characters have evolved a lot since season two. I am suprised you didn't mention anything about Jason.
Morbidemind 8 months ago 4
I've only seen one episode and this video, but I don't like how everywhere we see either "sluts are slutty to be manipulative" or, as seen in Tara, "pity her, she's promiscuous because she had a messed-up childhood" - I'm not denying that that actually exists IRL, just annoyed that media always says "the only reasons women would have multiple sexual partners is because they're prostitutes or because no one loves them".
Kaetlebugg 8 months ago
How I see the gay/black metaphor is that many people who are against these groups view them as monsters. I do agree that it would send a stronger message if Sookie stopped putting up with being manipulated by all these vampires. It should be noted however that this series is based (somewhat loosely) while the writers take a lot of liberties with the story I think removing the bill/sookie element this early would alienate fans of the books.
KrissytheWorldWithin 8 months ago
I have to admit, I really like True Blood, so make of that what you will. But I agree with your comments on Erric. He's a bad guy, and he loves it. It also annoys that a lot of women seem to really like him. At least in my limited experience anyway, maybe you have a forum or something you can reference from. I only found your videos today.
Disthron 9 months ago
@Disthron I think most of the women who like him are probably fans of Alexander Skaarsgard. If Eric was played by someone unattractive, I doubt many people would like him.
VocabWord 8 months ago
I think Tara is an awesome character and you dont give her enough cred. She has stood up against Bill on many occasions and even tells Sookie what an asshole he is. She kicks ass and I dont see her has a stereotype. Whats wrong with a strong black woman? I think the actress handles it realistically, not stereotypically. And Tara isn't that promiscuous. She enjoys sex, which in her life, enjoyment doesnt come around often. If she was a hoe, shed be doing Eric and Bill.
Jellobabysnumber1fan 9 months ago
I'm curious of your current opinion, now that we know Bill really was being creep-manipulative (not in a pretend, romantic way) and Sookie dumped him.
markmatson 9 months ago
The books are so much more nuanced about it. I LOATHE twilight and nearly every other vampier media out there. It's just not a story that is attractive to me. I adore the Sookie Stackhouse series. It's the same love I had for Buffy. It's nice to see a female lead who isn't taken in by the Oh so dark and mysterious vampire so much that she wants to be one. Both female leads when presented with these dark lovers respond similarly, "screw that!" Where bella is all, "TAKE MEEE"
ammre 9 months ago 4
@ammre So true. Sookie is a much stronger character in the books. I think she's amazing!
hornbydragonsfan 7 months ago 2
I love Tara for exactly the same reasons you state, good and bad. She MAY fit into the stereotype, however as an African-American woman I feel what makes that stereotype not ok but... more than a stereotype is that you see where her behavior comes from. Writing her character this way never came off as the writers saying the stereotype or Tara's behavior is acceptable. I suppose it's more important to me that she's relatable. Even within her stereotypical character are real things I can relate to
antiquebeast 9 months ago 3
Turns out Bill had ulterior motives to being so protective of Sookie. Aside from being vampire-creepy, of course.
cormano64 10 months ago
I think your analysis of True Blood could be a lot more nuanced, and doesn't give the show the credit it deserves. The character of Lafayette resonates with a LOT of genderqueer folks out there, in that his character is actually very complex in regard to his gender. I think it's important not to get too carried away about condemning the use of "stereotypes" in representations of queer characters, as that argument often masks a valorization of "normal" (gender conforming, white, rich) LGBT peeps.
shayeagain 10 months ago 6
I hate how the gay community is portrayed on tv - its either the totally flambuoyant fashionista male or there is no gay character in the show . What happened to diversity and rejecting cliches? Have writers become so bored that they cant imagine a normal guy or lady being gay?
patsybob 10 months ago
@patsybob You should watch Doctor Who, lots of varied gay characters in that.
PompamooseMagique 10 months ago
@PompamooseMagique I wouldn't say there are "a lot" of gay characters in the Doctor Who universe but they do have a few genuine portrayals, which I have to say, is very refreshing.
feministfrequency 10 months ago
@feministfrequency Yeah, fair point there could be more gay characters, but it's a very high profile show here in the UK so it's very cool the way it deals with gay characters, and, actually female characters I think,
PompamooseMagique 10 months ago
@PompamooseMagique While I love DW it definitely is not without a fair share of serious criticism including how some of the female characters are portrayed but that is far more complex then a comment box will allow. I can't actually recall any queer female characters though, I think it's all men right? (not to take away from those male representations at all).
feministfrequency 10 months ago
@feministfrequency well there were briefly some old age gay women who were kind of bit parts in the episode "Gridlock" (sheesh, I need to get out more) but out of interest, as a fan of the show, what female characters would you feel are majorly misrepresented, if that's the right phrase?
PompamooseMagique 10 months ago
@PompamooseMagique Well it actually had a few good episodes dedicated to Lafayette and his boyfriend. Sometimes that even made me uncomfortable because I'm not used to the blantant usage of gay men in tv (its a good thing) So I would give props to this show for even focusing on Lafayette's story.
Jellobabysnumber1fan 9 months ago
About Sookie being the white blonde, virginal woman who always goes back to her man. I've only seen like two episodes of the show, but I've read several of the books. The interesting thing in the book is that while book Sookie is white, blonde and virginal, she is also portrayed as lower-class and unapolagetic for it, with a strong moral and work ethic. She also dumps Bill's ass the first time he betrays her trust, and doesn't take him back, and she has other relationship as well.
ergomyeggo 10 months ago 2
Does anyone else feel that it's disturbing when you realize these books (Twilight and True Blood) were written by females? and then especially that the author of Twilight is also a Mormon who decides that it's wrong to include graphic sex scenes in the book because of her faith but then depicts a demonized and satanic creature as a love interests? just putting it out there...
87meshell87 10 months ago
I think your thinking into this series a little too much, but nonetheless I love your videos. Subscribed for sure :)
9900484 11 months ago
@9900484 I think people don't think enough sometimes...
87meshell87 10 months ago
@9900484 The problem with our society is people NOT thinking about what values television and media propel!
missbraindamage 10 months ago
I like your videos, even when I disagree, but I think you're really, really over-simplifying. Saying that it's almost as bad to link LGBT and minorities to vampires as the sexism/racism it's responding against? Seriously? The whole point is that the vampires are -viewed- as evil. I don't even like the show, but this just seems to be taking offense for the sake of it. And considering how many of my gay friends love Lafayette, your defense of the Gay Black Man seems unnecessary and unasked
cigansky 11 months ago 5
@cigansky I love LaFayette too, that isn't actually the point. Also, the difference is that vampires are in fact evil, mythological, fictional creatures. Queer folks are actual human beings who are socially demonized and oppressed in our society. I find the comparison to be extremely problematic.
feministfrequency 11 months ago
@feministfrequency - Waaait wait wait... So YOU like LaFayette, my gay friends like Lafayette, basically everyone likes Lafayette... And yet we're still supposed to blame the writers for writing a supposedly stereotypical gay character? What the hell kind of standard is that? And vampires -are- fictional creatures - which means True Blood gets to write them any way they want. In this case, not evil. Does every vampire by definition have to be count Dracula?
cigansky 11 months ago 2
@cigansky All the vampires on the show are "evil" and some are trying not to be... well actually only two or three are trying not to be.
feministfrequency 10 months ago
Video sparked a little debate between me and my girlfriend. She was a fan of the show until she decided to pick up the pulp novels their biased on. She argues that you place too much blame on the writers of the show and not the source material, seeing as they go out of their way to add characters like Tera to balanced the overwhelming victim complex Ms. Harris has.I'd however argue if they're willing to change things, why keep that close to the source at all. I don't feel like nods to better are
WillisRude 11 months ago
I wouldn't mind the "I need to protect you" bit if he'd stop saying it all the time. Protecting family is one thing, but the way he goes on and on about it, he's basically saying she needs a man around to keep her safe. Really?
5chocolatedragon 11 months ago
i forgot to say: i think you're doing awesome videos!
lillerbutton 11 months ago
youre right, but i actually enjoy the show besides all of that, for once i dont care about political correctness and all that although i often criticise that
im aware of the story being cheap but its just hot somehow and i like the entertainment... but of course it could be wayyyy better... but until theres a show like that with better characters and story line, im gonna go on watching this :)
lillerbutton 11 months ago
@lillerbutton I still watch the show too, I'm not saying not to watch it, just want to point out some elements of it that we should recognize while we are watching. Also, this isn't about political correctness, that is a term used to defend the status quo against people who are challenging dominant power structures. This isn't about being PC, it's about being a fan and simultaneously enjoying media and being critical of it.
feministfrequency 11 months ago
@feministfrequency good that we agree on this :) theres so much out there thats not right in various ways but no one can live isolated, so good to enjoy but still question these things
lillerbutton 10 months ago
You drew up a lot of valid points, that I found myself agreeing with, while I'd never even considered them before, but I think that it's unfair to put the show writers at too much fault, as the subject material (Southern Vampire Mystery novels) are mainly to blame. I sort of imagine that the head writer of the show is reading through them, occasionally going "Lafayette does WHAT?" or "Wait, Sookie turns out to be a fairy princess? (Spoilers)" But yeah, I don't think I can watch this show now.
jymkata 11 months ago
No thoughts on Sam's character?
lookit87 11 months ago
Here's the thing, I do call my self a feminist but ashamed or not I am a bit of an addict. I don't know, I guess for all the things that goes wrong for the show, I do see a lot of good to it. I could go on and on but my explanatory skills are relatively shit- like, I absolutely agree with you on a lot of things her. Also, this may sound lame, but as a woman of colour, it would be nice to see a non while female lead to a vamp show for once :/
midgysamurai15 11 months ago
I'm very interested in your interpretation of the show, which, on the whole, I can see where you're coming from. But I really disagree that the writers have in any way intentionally made this a male dominated show, there are so many strong female characters, and frankly sometimes a show can be enjoyable without it needing to break social boundaries. Although I agree there are flaws with the representation of women, mostly the show shows strong female roles and storylines.
Billiee 11 months ago
@Billiee I don't believe I ever said the show was male dominated, the video was mostly about individual character representations.
feministfrequency 11 months ago
How exactly is it "feminist" to criticize Lafayette for being "stereotypically feminine"? Lafayette is a strong, multi-dimensional working-class character who frankly shows how kick-ass he is when he takes on rednecks in one of the first episodes. The fact that he engages in prostitution to survive, which many working-class gay youth actually do, isn't stereotypical - it's a realistic portrayal of what people with limited options do. And showing that is a good thing, not a bad one.
dirtyboypdx 1 year ago 155
@dirtyboypdx You = hero.
DonnaQuel 11 months ago
While I think this is sound and inspiring critique from the analytical perspective you're taking, I feel it seriously falls short of the shows philosophical stance.
hallofreaks 1 year ago
Well, since this is a disagreement over semantics, know there is a difference in being a virgin and being virginal. If you want to get literal, then you can't say Sookie was a virgin for the whole first season, can you?
rycor814 1 year ago
I would have to disagree with your assertion of Sookie's archetypical White, female blonde virginal portagonist. Let's forego for a moment the truth that there is nothing "wrong" with being blonde, female, or White, and let's examine the only non-physical quality you listed, "virginal." Sookie is anything but virginal. She wouldn't even be considered traditional.
rycor814 1 year ago 3
@rycor814 In the first season Sookie is LITERALLY virginal, that was part of her story arc.
feministfrequency 1 year ago 4
It's interesting how women seem to degrade themselves by just permiting that men have to protect them and just because theyre fragile..I completely agree with u..
Ive been watching most of ur videos and I truly have to agree with you point of view..
Good job,clear ideas..great!:)
Rosieuchiha 1 year ago
It's not just 'black' people who deal with racism. It's all people of color!
Love the rest of the videos I've seen, however.
yyeitivsrj 1 year ago
Lafayette seems to be a stereotype at first but he's not, he's surprisingly multi-layered. At first, he's comical relief, but then you see that he works three jobs to support his mom in a nursing home, that he wears makeup and parties, deals V and gets into trouble because he's trying to attain, even in his imagination, the grand lifestyle he's always wanted. Every time he tries to rise above he finds himself stuck in his old house with second hand knick knacks and moth eaten furniture.
lolorobs8217 1 year ago
Bill is totally annoying for all the reasons you mentioned and his relationship with Sookie is incredibly demeaning to her as a character and to women. The writers think they're making Sookie empowered and independent, I see that's their intention, but they really just end up making her look thoughtless, selfish, and obsessed with her boyfriend.
lolorobs8217 1 year ago
The fact that vampires are seen as evil and killers makes the debate more stirring. The writers are giving us a picture of something we're familiar with and putting a new twist on it: racism. But is it so close minded with vampires or is it just common sense to not grant them equal rights? I think if vampires were real, something very close to what's unfolded on the show would take place. They're not equating it to gay or minority rights, they're letting the topic stand on its own.
lolorobs8217 1 year ago
I think it's great that you're looking at True Blood in an analytical way because while an entertaining show, it does have its flaws. However, I think you're misunderstanding the writer's intentions. Alan Ball and other writers have continuously said that they are not trying to equate vampire rights with gay or minority rights; that would not be a fair comparison. They're trying to paint a realistic and honestly clutching argument: if vampires were real, would we give them equal rights?
lolorobs8217 1 year ago 2
@lolorobs8217 The creators can say anything they want about their intentions, I think what ends up mattering the most is what actually gets produced and put on the screen. Also, I have big doubts that they really aren't making the comparison, just look at the opening credits.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency I find your post fascinating, that's why i'm commenting way too much on it, haha. But I think that you're misreading what the creators are putting out there. The opening credits show that the show is set in this already deeply divided area, still recovering from the wounds of racism and bigotry past (and in some cases still present) and now there's this new breed of racism. It's somewhat similar, but doesn't suggest vampire's rights is equal to gay or minority rights, imo.
lolorobs8217 1 year ago
I agree with what you say about Eric, and it ties in to what I wrote you moments ago about Veronica Mars and how that show at times shrugs off rape as a fun little joke.
Also, I find it pathetic how an Iraq veteran is presented, as well as Christians. First time the Iraq vet was introduced he was so one dimensional (dumb and messed up) and continues to be that way. Also, two different characters used the term "with us or against us" as some brave left wing commentary that in truth is empty.
TomerMMHA 1 year ago
@TomerMMHA I feel like Terry's character is actually pretty good, at least for a secondary character, they've tired to humanize him and give him some depth.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency Yes, I liked his character (not that I watched beyond season 2), but at least the first time they showed him, he was totally cardboard. Same is true for a lot of the stuff in True Blood. And I think what I said about the whole political theme is true. It's not a left-right thing. It's just that there are more sophisticated ways for writers to criticize those they don't agree with. And we should admit that even if the unsophisticated critics are on our side of the aisle.
TomerMMHA 1 year ago
Eric is interesting. As long as you don't forget that he's a monster, he's a great character. The show may not portray him as the villain but the audience should still understand that he is.
Good villains are not ones where the show says "You see this guy? Look how bad he is!" and portray all of his actions in a negative light. Good villains are complex multidimensional characters too.
But that may be asking too much from the viewing audience.
Beelzeboogie 1 year ago
@Beelzeboogie I agree that I like villains to be complex characters but I don't think that is what they've done with Eric, because he is SO sympathetic, the audience can't help but be drawn to him and attracted to him, even when he's doing horrible stuff. So he isn't really a villain anymore and his horrible actions like assault is ignored or forgotten.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
I honestly never looked at it as vampires are evil and are often representing blacks and gays. I always just thought wow how great is it that there trying to equal rights and it reflects what's happening in the gay community at the moment. Thanks for showing me this side.
hexponi 1 year ago
i find the show very different then the Sookie Stackhouse book series. In my belief i would like to see True Blood more like the books. Of course there is going to be flaws in a television show, books, movies, whatever else, but as a result in this show i would like to see the writers read the fan mail that gets sent into them and read all the feed back. The auther of the Sookie Stackhouse series, in my opinion, needs to be one of the writers. Anyway the show has flaws just like anything else.
dreamsicle1997 1 year ago
I stopped watching this show this season after Bill starts having "sex" (looked more like a rape scene) with his maker and takes her head, breaks her neck and turns it around so it's facing the floor. This whole show has become "gorno" another excuse to watch women being tortured for the sake of it. Very disappointing but not surprising.
shEvoDEevolution 1 year ago
You're absolutely right about Sookie.. she hasn't been a compelling character in her own right since Season 1.
jumpoutatree 1 year ago
Do you know the character Sophie Anne? So, SHE is supposed to be stronger than Eric. That girl was the only vampire on the show who was strong enough to not be dominated by men. BUT Alan Ball, who created the HBO show , made her WEAKER than Eric, so the only strong vampire in the books (until now at least) that wasn't dominated by men, was TOTALLY dominated by Eric. That made me so pissed off! In the books she's strong and "diva", but in the show she's only diva.
girlsnextdoorkendra 1 year ago 4
you havn't read the books have you? The books are so much better
BuffySummers1990 1 year ago
Its strange that vampires are equated with Blacks and gays on this series. I have heard many people compare vampires to white people. Pale skin, aristocratic,allergic to the sun and predatory.I do agree that comparisons with vampires are offensive and that they are evil. It is in their nature to kill and abuse humans we are their prey. As a Black male I find Lafayette offensive unfourtunately he is a fan favorite, paticularly with Black women.
kmensah3 1 year ago
@kmensah3 I find myself in a bind because while I think Lafayette embodies so many stereotypes he is one of my favourite characters on the show and he is one of the most emotionally complex characters on the show.
feministfrequency 1 year ago 32
@feministfrequency I hear you on Lafayette, even I have to admit he is an "interesting" charachter. The ambiguity you feel I thnk is by design. Just wish they could make a complex charachter without portraying such a negative charachter. Good analysis of the show!
kmensah3 1 year ago
@kmensah3 this comment you left is entirely wrong.
not all white cultures are aristocratic only certain cultures, white people are not allergic to the sun...... like really, and ALL cultures have a predatory adaptiveness, not just whites.
boantal 1 year ago
I read most of he books, but watched very little of the show. I do like book Sookie. In her narration she calls out Bill's b.s., but to his face too. She can be pretty stupid at times, yes.
Book Tara's been abused as a child, but more depressed than angry. Owns a clothes shop.
A bi girl appears later. She wasn't a stereotype...to me anyways. A bit weird, and running from trouble, but monogamous and a pretty good friend to Sookie.
Heathenette 1 year ago
I agree with everything you said. It really irks me how everyone just falls in love with Sookie (Mary Sue much?) and how she has no personality or character traits except for her psychic abilities, which don't even count. And for some reason she falls for the creepy vampires that have no respect for her. Urgh.
LisaNikkole 1 year ago
Jesus comes along though. He's a good character so far.~
YolandaGirl 1 year ago
@YolandaGirl I LOVE the courting that is happening between Jesus and Lafayette!
feministfrequency 1 year ago 6
The books are straightforward and lack depth, but the show takes artistic liscense. I enjoy the allegorical elements of the show, even though it's potentially "offensive." In the pursuit of equal rights and sensitivity, the show allows a widening fan base to encounter thoughts and ideas that encourage compassion. After the first season, the writers opted to tone down the civil rights aspects, and amp up the sexual tension. I think it's a liberating show for both genders and orientations.
shanzie08 1 year ago
I love True Blood, but I am kind of disappointed in it. I think they could have followed the plot line of the book much more and maybe it might have been more interesting.
zombiesatemypetdino 1 year ago
I think that you hit the nail right on the head on all points. The one gay representation on the show that I actually didn't find a lot of issues with would be that of the gay vampire that the idiot brother killed.
Another note is that the show is really pretty much a gory porno with plot that happens to be about vampires.
uberpinguin 1 year ago
Firstly, totaly agree sookie and bill are rather lame characters. and twilight does have some problems, though it should be noted that short of something like a slayer, or a female vampire or witch, you arein't going to find a female friendly vampire story. vampires are almost always dominate personalities, so if the story is about a male vampire then the female characters are going to be comparatively weak. i like true blood, but there are better vamp stories out there.
LurkingGoblin 1 year ago
(White 17 year old girl) I accept/understand some of your points, but you seem to look too far into some and not appreciate others. I love Trueblood; I think the social metaphors are justified. Although there are clearly some anti-feminist features all of the characters have an inner strength. Try viewing Sookie's ability as a disability (wouldn't you be traumatised by hearing everyone's thoughts as a kid?). I agree the Eric plot it Creepy! Finnaly, think: nothing is wholly one dimensional.
TookItHomeToJenny 1 year ago
(Full disclosure, middle-class white hetero male, if it matters to you.) You left out jason stackhouse as the typical ignorant, bigoted, ripped but dim-witted, trigger happy, bang anything that walks, emotionally repressed white male who needs women to be his moral compass. The gender roles seem born out of a total lack of imagination rather than a chauvinist agenda. Same with the parallels to the rights movement, which break down when considering vamps are portrayed as demi-gods. out of space.
sandwichman1600 1 year ago
@sandwichman1600 The video was so long already that I couldn't go into all the characters. I completely agree with your analysis of Jason, although I'd just like to add that Jason's progression through the current season is kind of interesting, won't have a comment on it until the end of the season though.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
I find flaws with your statements.
First "evil" is almost entirely subjective.
Second, Sookie didn't get punished for sticking up for herself, she got 'punished' for going out into the woods alone, at night, without anyway to defend herself against any potential threats (wild animals, creepy supernatural monsters, etc.). Which is stupid for anyone, not just women.
CrystalGazer95 1 year ago 2
@CrystalGazer95 This story is fiction and this scene could have been written in any number of ways.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency While that is true, I think you could've represented what you wanted to say in a clearer way. Instead of "blaming" people who worked on the show, I think you should instead look at the author of the original Sookie Stackhouse series (I seriously prefer the books to the show, Sookie's portrayed a bit differently). She wrote things the way she did for a reason. When reading the books, I saw that Sookie does, admittedly, show many aspects of the stereotypes you described, but she
CrystalGazer95 1 year ago
@feministfrequency also displays independant characteristics such as the encounter with the murderer at the end of the first book. She stood up for herself without being 'punished', and Bill didn't need to come to her rescue, she held her own. And as for the situation with the Maenad, she's attracted by any form of violenve/aggression, so if Bill had stormed off instead, then HE would've been attacked as a message to Eric, so in reality it's not so much a "Sookie got punished" situation as a "Th
CrystalGazer95 1 year ago
@feministfrequency e Maenad wanted Eric to get a message" situation. She implies (in the book) that she would've gone after anyone connected to Eric. It just happened to be Sookie because she didn't bring anything to defend herself with.
(If all of this doesn't make sense I apologize, with the character limit I couldn't go back to read what I wrote as this computer won't open Word at the moment so I had to continue thoughts in multiple posts.)
CrystalGazer95 1 year ago
@CrystalGazer95 Because we don't have a lot of space to really discuss this, I'll keep it short. I did not read the books, I'm discussing the show specifically, which more people will watch then will read the books (probably). The writers of the show decided to have Sookie attacked instead of Bill (it could easily have been him if they had wanted) there is intention behind what happens in television and movies and we should be critical of that.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
Excellent video- just one quick point: Your point about Sookie constantly returning to Bill is valid, but you should consider the fact that Sookie first drank Bill's blood on the night that they met (and as you know, drinking a vampire's blood makes the person have romantic fantasies about the vampire). If you consider the fact that Sookie may be intoxicated and that her relationship with Bill is really a product of that event, it completely colors the way that we examine their relationship.
ShiftIntoBlue 1 year ago
I haven't seen "True Blood" yet, so I can't really comment on it specifically, but considering that vampires are born vampires, or people transformed into them by other vampires, i.e. they have no control over it—how is it fair to say that they are all inherently evil and therefore undeserving of rights? How is that any different than saying that black and queer people are inherently lesser beings and therefore undeserving of rights? They may kill for survival, but so do most organisms.
YourMyTubeSpace 1 year ago
@YourMyTubeSpace The vampire mythology is of demonic fictional creatures who have no soul, who kill without remorse etc. etc. They are not real people in the world, they are part of a story written by someone, somewhere (namely Hollywood). Real oppressed peoples in the world are humans, not some fantasy character created for entertainment value. It is perfectly acceptable for me to say that vampires are evil creatures, it is part of the mythology of a FICTIONAL being.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency Yes, but in a solely fictional context, the distinction between reality and fantasy doesn't exist. In the world of "True Blood", vampires ARE real people. And I'd imagine that if they hypothetically existed they'd want equal rights as well; after all, they're sentient beings which are literally derived from humans. To call all vampires "evil" is to ignore their capacity to overcome their malicious tendencies (see: Angel from Buffy), as all humans also have.
YourMyTubeSpace 1 year ago
@YourMyTubeSpace Vampires did not overcome there malicious tendencies in Buffy, the two vampires who were not evil had souls (or a chip in his head physically stopping them from being evil).
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency Vampires are only as evil as the creator wants them. Most of the vamps in buffy were evil because that is what Joss wanted them to. In TB, vampires do have souls, and have the potential to be good or evil just like humans.
PyroJulian 1 year ago 3
@PyroJulian Yes, the creators can do anything they want with vampires of course but I agree and disagree, although it appears that vampires in TB have the ability to not be evil (where in Buffy, there has to be some sort of intervention for that to happen), there is really only one vampire that we've been introduced to that is "mainstreaming" and trying to not be evil. The far majority of them are still framed as "evil/bad"
feministfrequency 1 year ago
This was a really interesting analysis. I have to admit that I love True Blood, and that while I agree with some of your points, I disagree with others. Your first point about equating minorities with evil creatures I would agree is problematic. I also agree that Bill and his need to protect Sookie is tiresome. That said, I think Sookie is pretty awesome. She saved Bill's life and killed the main villain of the first season, I have yet to finish the second season so I can't say much about it.
ninekinds 1 year ago
Um...... the reason sookie got "punished" was because the maenad was attracted to the violence and the maenad made them mad (controlled their emotions).
comedycreator100 1 year ago
@comedycreator100 The reason sookie gets punished is because the writers decided to; the story didn't just appear out of nowhere. It was conceived and written by a group of people, they could have written it so that she walks home and Bill get to wallow in being a jerk, instead they wrote it so Sookie has to be "saved."
feministfrequency 1 year ago
Thank you for this, I had an immediate reaction to this show as a stereotype-fest and people got mad at me for it! I'm glad to see someone else who feels the same way. The other dealbreaker with True Blood=Fucking awful dialogue.
Drakelah 1 year ago
@Drakelah Not as bad as twilight.
the dialogue and characters suck!!!!!!!
comedycreator100 1 year ago
lady stands up for herself, shes independant , shes proving her point and out of no where a monster appears she runs :O oh she falls ! oh horray the man protects the female in distress and she runs back to him! WOW what the hell where the writers thinking about when they wrote this! seriously its not logical!
patsybob 1 year ago
This is another excellent piece. However, your narrative will be stronger if you stop saying “really” and “kinda.” Your opinions are bold, so speak them without diminishing or overemphasizing.
oddestnotions 1 year ago
curious, have you read any of the books? dont come down on the shows writers too much, as they are following the story and characters as created by the white female writer that originally developed them, and is still writing books expanding the universe. And this books will eventually be made into episodes. Charlaine Harris.
shadweagle 1 year ago 2
@ABitOfBravado also, villainizing queer men (not the case with Lafayette of course) is a hollywood trope that has been used for decades so their are plenty of violent queer men but they are usually framed as bad/evil. (see my Caprica video for an example)
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@ABitOfBravado your analysis gets a little bit fuzzy by events that happen to LaFayette in the second season, but regardless of that, just because he defends himself doesn't change the fact that he embodies many stereotypical traits of queer men and black men.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
This past season, the prime villains were a religious group made up of prejudiced white people. Another example of an oppressive, patriarchal group being portrayed as villainous in their persecution of minorities. Sure the show falls into some stereotypes, but that's true of anything. Overall it's much progressive than you're giving it credit for.
And as a woman, I do not live in "constant fear" of violence on a "daily basis". This sounds like a personal issue and frankly pretty paranoid.
raccoonnine 1 year ago 55
@raccoonnine 1 in 4 women will experience sexual violence in their lifetime; 1 in 4. That is a huge number and those women are often emotionally scarred for the rest of their lives following that experience. It is lucky that you are a woman who does not live in constant fear of violence on a daily basis, but please watch your comments for those readers who are or will be victims--calling them "paranoid" really isn't a respectful way of responding to their claim of living in fear.
loveincommunication 1 year ago
@raccoonnine i think what she meant was that women have to have a higher sense of mortality because it is women who get raped mostly and are mostly victims of things like domestic abuse and stalking, so women do have to be more careful about these things. it's not really something that men worry about, in comparison to women at least.
alexavasquez1992 1 year ago 2
@raccoonnine i think that it's not so much fear of constant attack, but awareness of the possibility of constant attack. for example, for my late class, my mother told me to always wear pants (?), and to have my phone in hand when walking to the bus stop. however, she expresses no concern to my brother in law when he walks home after a night shift, because my sister has the car.
wednesdayschild91 11 months ago
I found some of your other videos interesting but am skeptical about this one. First, a huge point of the show has been precisely that the vampires in this show aren't really monsters so that comparison seems invalid. Last season the real villain was a white man who was stalking and murdering women for their perceived promiscuity who is ultimately killed by the female protagonist. Or how about Jason? Another example of a masculine ideal, but who the other characters roundly disapprove of.
raccoonnine 1 year ago 44
I believe you overanalyze this. Don't be so harsh to us guys :)
I believe should spent more trying to look for things that unite us rather than to constantly point out everything that set us apart. i dont live in the US but is it really that dangerous to live there as a Female ?
torhagen 1 year ago
Srsly you know this show has been nominated for GLAAD Outstanding Drama Series (as well as numerous emmys and golden globe) awards two years running now, right? If you are correct in your analysis of the allegory - wouldn't GLAAD just hate this show? Is it possible that writers and creators can somehow adopt and take liberties with old stories and ideas and repurpose them, maybe even playing with conventional perceptions about both ideas and occurences, just to make for interesting television?
hrothgarvonmt 1 year ago
You don't like the show, don't fuss about it. At least it's better written than Twilight
darkchildtwo 1 year ago
@darkchildtwo SO u are missing the point, it's not about "liking" a show but about analyzing the content and information that a mass amount of people are consuming as the media directly impacts perception.
asanteosu5 1 year ago
...I'm not sure if you're kiding or not...
Torin88 1 year ago
This is why you need to read the books, cause she does get sick of bills shit in there and ditches him. Also Jessica doesnt exist. Also Tara is totally different in the books, much much better.
SLBuck1981 1 year ago
Thank you.
In season one, Bill and Sam try to "protect" Sookie. But, in the finale, Sookie saves herself and them. This object lesson was forgotten come season two.
In season 1, almost every mention of racism by Lettie May (Tara's mum), and several by Tara were framed as the products of their own demons, rather than them calling out oppression. Icky. (And what happened to the Black community shown in the pilot?)
It'd be a better show without Sookie/Bill as the centre of the world.
thisisamyfox 1 year ago
I disagree with a lot of what you said. First, True Blood theme isn't that minorities groups or homosexual community are monsters, but still need to be treated equally. True Blood theme is that vampires are no better or worse then humans. Millions of millions of years ago human beings was nothing more then primal and vicious beings that only lived by instinct.
1rayman2 1 year ago
@1rayman2 the show is a metaphor... it is not about a comparison between vampires and humans.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency The show is an metphor how we shouldn't judge people when we ourselves are no better. You claim that the show was offensive because it was comparing vampires with minorities. The show the theme and metaphor is that minorities and homosexual are not better and no worse then everyone.
1rayman2 1 year ago
@1rayman2 Correct that queer folks and people of colour are no better OR worse then anyone else, problem with True Blood's analogy is that Vampires (a mythic non existent creature) is in fact worse, they have to resist their desire to murder and harm other people.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency But everyone has to pull back his desires when he lives in a social group or civilization, if humans wouldn't control themselves we could not live as a society :3
Bifour 1 year ago
@feministfrequency Uh, don't know how much attention you've actually given the show, but humans are portrayed as having to resist those very same proclivities. It's one of True Blood's hallmarks, to show that often humans have far darker desires and engage in far more despicable actions than vampires do.
rubbd 1 year ago
@feministfrequency
I really enjoyed your "Bechdel Test" video but I had a hard time sitting through this one. I only made it through the first couple of minutes. You seemed rushed and unfocused and it was dull. Anyways, I really hate this show but I do want to point out that the theme/comparison of this show/book is about Humans and Vampires and who truly is the "monster". Of course you could metaphors for the civil rights movement, gay movement, any oppressed movement but ....
ZomBEEandJesus 1 year ago
You're saying that because vampires are generally attracted by violence and because they can make trouble into the world, they don't deserve civilian right ?
Then I think we can just say the same thing about humans, after all. ;)
Psyche670 1 year ago
@Psyche670 No, I'm saying that comparing oppressed peoples to evil demons is offensive.
feministfrequency 1 year ago
@feministfrequency And you're wrong, just like you're wrong for saying that portraying a homosexual character as having flaws is immoral storytelling!!
Oh man they're using mythical creatures as an analogue to episodes of the history of human experience, classic scifi/fantasy trope BUT ITS WRONG BECAUSE THIS TIME ITS VAMPIRES N VAMPIRES ARE WRONG GUYS.
Oh and she's getting out of the car in the middle of a dark forest and then she gets hurt THEY MUST BE REINFORCING THE PATRIARCHY OMG GUYZ!!
hrothgarvonmt 1 year ago
So I think that the novels and shows that are showing supernatural "monsters" getting human and civil rights are not offensive, but actually a reflection of how when it comes to "us" or "them", humans stand together, no matter of what prejudices we might have once had.
mas88rus 2 years ago
Which is the exact thing that people who have dealt with racism and hate crimes have tried to make other people understand in the past.
The show is obviously supernatural, but the basic underlining message is still the same. We are all human beings, whether we're white, black, gay, straight, short, fat.... jewish.... whatever.
mas88rus 2 years ago
I don't agree with your first comment. I think that this series (as well as the Anita Blake book series where Vampires do have legal rights) portrays a very important point relating to the civil and gay rights in our society.
True Blood is just saying that all human and undead beings are still "beings". They still love, hate, rage and laugh and in those ways they are the same as all of us.
mas88rus 2 years ago
@mas88rus i wouldn't have brought up the anita blake series as it is just another misogynistic piece of media. if you pay close attention to all of the books, any female character with any overt trace of femininity in them is either raped, mauled, or killed. the message isn't as positive as you'd think.
SilverValkyrie 1 year ago
i agree with you on many points. female lead s are either dominated by the males or come off as bitchy and overly agressive.
i love lafaiettes(spelling?)personallity, and he is a strong character, but i do agree that he is portrayed as a highly steryotypical version of a black gay man.
xxBoyMeetsGirlxx 2 years ago
@xxBoyMeetsGirlxx Nothing wrong with being "bitchy" and overly aggressive. However most often those kinds of women are "put in their place" :P I think there needs to be MORE aggressive women out there that are the heroes and sidekicks and the ones that get things done. Also note that bitchy is a "nice" term men (and women) use against women to lessen the things they are saying. "They are being like a bitch, a yappy female dog, and thus are to be ignored."
Maverynthia 1 year ago
While I agree with a lot of what is being said (Sookie being helpless and boring) I have problems with the idea that TV should protray the world as it SHOULD be rather than as it IS or as it's perceived to be. The same argument is used to suppress drug use, prostitution or violence. The show uses clichee's consistently, Sookie and Jason are contrasted by Tara and Lafayette. I am actually wondering whether the show uses overly stereotyped characters as social commentary.
trueamnisias 2 years ago
Have you read any of the books? I find Sookie is portrayed a lot stronger in the books than the show. You should definitely check it out.
Stephaniek236 2 years ago
I love that you're making videos about this kind of thing. I would absolutely love to hear you talking about Big Love. (Or any number of things, like female presence on TV as opposed to movies.) Keep up the good work. Looking forward to your next video.
SuperKC 2 years ago
that would allow us to look through the eyes of the kinds of people who would have persecuted ethnic minorities and homosexuals at a time when they were portrayed in a similar way, and how difficult it can be to separate the propoganda and long held beliefs, no matter how false, to allow an open mind and engage as equals with those persecuted as evil, and about the kind of strength of character it takes to do so.
williscool76 2 years ago
@williscool76 I don't have a problem with creating an analogy to the struggle of oppressed people, but I am troubled by the comparison of human