I wasn't going to write about
The Avengers again for awhile both because I didn't have much more to offer (see my
review and
spoiler-discussion) and because I didn't want my blogging to turn into 'all
Avengers all the time'. But I would like to take a moment to single-out a specific element that the film does quite well. There has been much hand-wringing this week about whether or not
The Avengers (and specifically its two major female characters) qualifies as 'feminist'. Pundits are understandably upset about the lack of more female lead characters and the fact that the film fails the Bechdel Test. Merely presenting a couple strong female characters doesn't automatically make your product feminist in nature nor does creating a sausage-fest with a token love interest make your film inherently misogynistic, although the latter does make me roll my eyes a bit more often than not. But the way Joss Whedon and company present their female superheros merits acknowledgment primarily because of what they don't do: In short, they don't draw one damn bit of attention to it.
Throughout the film, Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) is presented as intelligent, cunning, resourceful, physically powerful and well-trained in the various arts of armed and unarmed combat. But none of this is ever emphasized. None of this is ever celebrated or highlighted. At no point does anyone express shock that Widow can kick a certain amount of ass. At no point does anyone question whether she can or will be brave enough to handle herself during the climactic battle. When she does her various (no spoilers) heroics, she does it purely because she's the only one who isn't otherwise distracted and it has to be done. Yes, she wears a form fitting outfit, but at no point does anyone comment on that, be it through dialogue or suggestive leering. None of the male Avengers try to hit on her, nor do any of them feel the need to push her out of the way of danger (and, unlike most films involving a token tough chick, she doesn't get wounded during the finale and taken out of commission). In short, she is treated not like 'one of the boys', but as an equal member of the team. Again, this is simply accepted as just the way things are.
Agent Maria Hill (Cobie Smulders) isn't given much to do, nor really are any of the major SHIELD team members who appear in the film. But again her gender is never mentioned or even acknowledged. That she is a female who is among the leaders of SHIELD is simply taken for granted. And, as I mentioned in my review, Joss Whedon does a neat thing when we finally enter the SHIELD aircraft towards the end of the first act. Without any kind of acknowledgment whatsoever, Whedon fills out the SHIELD rooster with about 50% female agents. None of them are dressed provocatively, none of them act either in a stereo-typically feminine fashion nor in a stereo-typically macho way. They are just people doing their jobs who happen to be women.
I reiterate this point because A) I've always said that social progress comes when you don't have to make a big deal about it and B) a
recent study shows from
Social Psychological and Personality Science I'm correct. In short, efforts to 'feminize' role models in the areas of science, technology, engineering and mathematics actually reduced girls' interest in those fields. Attempting to attract female interest in what are now somewhat male-dominated fields by showing theoretical female scientists or mathematicians who were dressed in pink, wore conventional make-up and expressed interest in fashion magazines made young girls less interested than would-be female role models who just dressed like everybody else and just happened to be women pursuing said educational/career pursuits. So basically, condescending to young girls, while also promoting gender-specific stereotypes was less helpful than merely showing off successful scientists and/or engineers who just happened to be women. In other words, drawing attention to gender stereotypes in-fact perpetuated and encouraged gender-role bias. I know, you'd think that would be a no-brainer.
Tens of millions of young women will likely see
The Avengers this summer in America alone, let alone the countless millions who will see it worldwide. They will be seeing a story where the idea of an extra-capable female superhero, one who is neither sexualized nor defined by a love interest, is so un-noteworthy that it doesn't even warrant acknowledgment. And while
The Avengers 2 could use a few more female characters (and/or minorities too), the female representation on display is the very best kind. The women in
The Avengers are absolutely equals to the respective men in their fields, and Whedon knows that this is not something that needs to be noted or explained. That Black Widow is as capable as the (to be fair, non-super powered) heroes is a given, because otherwise she wouldn't be there. That the various female SHIELD agents are there purely because they are good at their jobs is a given, because otherwise they wouldn't be under Fury's command. In that specific sense, showing off female equality and making it seem like no-big-deal,
The Avengers is probably the most feminist film you'll see all summer.
Scott Mendelson
Follow Scott Mendelson on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/ScottMendelson
We, as a culture, will have gotten past the hangups of gender discrimination when we get to the point that it doesn't matter what a person's gender is, just that they can do the job with the abilities they possess. Something that the Avenger movie does rather well.
You know that the Avengers is a still running comic book, right? And that the original members in the comic book are not the original members in the movie? There's no Hawkeye or Black Widow - it's Antman and the Wasp. Captain America wasn't even an original member. If I recall correctly, Hawkeye and Captain America weren't even on the same Avengers team.
Joss Whedon and Marvel (correctly) gave themselves leeway in establishing a new Avengers canon. They could have used this opportunity to a greater effect, and they didn't. That's what the author is lamenting.
And don't dismiss it as if it is "some sort of quota" - there is real, objective value in having "more than one" underrepresented character; they provide solid role models that resist normalizing pressures from media in positive ways. The interactions and behaviors towards the female character are great, but they are only a step towards "neutral." What's wrong with making positive steps?
Whoa there, tiger. Let's back up.
Black Widow is a strong character. She totally kicks ass in this movie, and I agree that she is spared much of the infantalizing that female action heroes are often subjected to. Progressive, maybe. But feminist? Granted, the f-word is a wobbly signifier these days, but there's a major condition of this film that I believe is being overlooked: male gaze. This film is made for men, by men. Johansson and Smulders's are stereotypically hot. They are totally dressed for sexual appeal (as are the men...). This film is located very, very much within the bounds of normative cultural space. And I wouldn't say that Johansson's femaleness isn't directly acknowledged. She simply wouldn't be Black Widow if she weren't hot. It's part of her prowess; it's part of the way she captures her prey and the information she needs. The fact her objectification can even be overlooked points to the very invisibility of a visualist culture that is distinctively ant-feminist.
I have much higher hopes for the f-word.
She was also injected with a similar serum that was used on Captain America, but that wasn't shown in the film.
I really wish they gave more backstory to Hawkeye and Black Widow. They just put them in there without any history.
Does that include the stereotypical pink coloring of the Huffington Post Women's Blog?
I would also never judge any woman who chose to see any movie for any reason. I do know that I'm actually surprised that my wife isn't an unofficial member of 'Loki's Army' considering Hiddleston-as-Loki is very much her type (think Cumberbatch-as-Sherlock or Rickman-as-Snape).
I don't want to live on this planet anymore. This article is just... sad. Making a deal out of nothing.
Frankly it sounds like you are neither a woman nor someone interested in/affected by this "sad" issue of feminism (did you perhaps click on it because the movie title "The Avengers" was in the title?). This article is actually explaining a larger societal problem at large, and how it's being helped through the media in examples of movies like The Avengers, and yet you can't find it important. Glad you could help the cause!