This is a must-see for anyone who’s a little creeped out by the idea of a decades-old vampire hanging around a high school trolling for girls. More specifically, for anyone appalled at how Twilight is being sold to us as romance.
Stephanie Zvan is one of the hosts for the Minnesota Atheists' radio show and podcast, Atheists Talk. She serves on the board of Secular Woman. She speaks on science and skepticism in a number of venues, including science fiction and fantasy conventions.
Stephanie has been called a science blogger and a sex blogger, but if it means she has to choose just one thing to be or blog about, she's decided she's never going to grow up. In addition to science and sex and the science of sex, you'll find quite a bit of politics here, some economics, a regular short fiction feature, and the occasional bit of concentrated weird.
Oh, and arguments. She sometimes indulges in those as well. But I'm sure everything will be just fine. Nothing to worry about. Nothing at all.
Wow that was actually really well done.I don't know how many of his lines were taken out of context (haven't watched it, not really interested) but he seemed really creepy!I confess to being a Buffy fan (mostly the later seasons) at one point in time.
Way creepy, and a big part of the reason I'm not much of a Buffy fan is that I have a certain sympathy for the vampires. The rest has to do with it being set in high school and not Sarah Michelle Gellar being one of those actors I don't find very convincing. This worked, though.
Well, I was kind of opposed to Buffy for a long time, but then I started watching reruns, and I was hooked! Buffy didn't actually spend much time in school. And, she loved two vampires, and she had gay friends and teen angst, plus she TOTALLY KICKED ASS!!! But, to each her own. I suppose I could use my own sales pitch and watch/read Twilight so at least I would know what I was making fun of! p.s. watch Buffy!
My sis loved it — and Angel, and Xena and Hercules in fact. She has I'm pretty sure every season of all four series on DVD. I can't bring myself to give Buffy a chance though, despite her recommendations. Not after I heard they actually did an episode with the real, no joke, Dracula. And killed him.Sorry, but after reading the book as a kid, and getting hooked on the Castlevania video games, I can't let anyone dis the Big D.Twilight = no interest. None whatsoever. Not even remotely piqued. I'm obviously not in the proper 14-year-old-girl demographic though.
Wow. I like neither Buffy nor Twilight, but this is GREAT. And it really highlights both how hilariously campy some of Buffy's lines are, and how CREEPY Edward is. Really creepy. And I don't understand the sex symbol thing. All that lighting and makeup makes him look seriously ill, and being watched while I sleep is NOT sexy.
Yeah, Super Mon, the teen angst wasn't a selling point for me. Thanks so much for finding this, though. It's beautiful.Jason, you're even further from the demographic than you think. Try 12-year-old girls. As I explained it at a party a couple of weeks ago, Twilight is the Jonas Brothers in paper form.Sci, I was really impressed with how the mashup brought out the best of both, too. It's as though Buffy didn't have villains ridiculous enough for her dialog (and Edward definitely didn't have a love interest old or assertive enough for his).
I actually mostly watched Buffy for the vampires, especially Spike, which was why I liked the later episodes better. I was happy to see the actor (James Marsters I think? shame on me) again in a few episodes of Torchwood, cool as ever.
Be careful! I have been told, in all seriousness, that because skeptics should do nothing to alienate a potential demographic, Twilight-bashing is streng verboten!. . . .Pretty well done, though.
The funny thing about that is that the Twilight demographic is my target market for novels. Only I'm going for the girls who want to read about girls doing something.Also, Buffy fans are no less rabid. Still, I haven't gotten where I am (where am I again?) by avoiding pissing people off. Neither, I note, have any of the people who actually give that kind of advice. They just piss of different people.
The funny thing about that is that the Twilight demographic is my target market for novels. Only I'm going for the girls who want to read about girls doing something.Apparently, many girls in the Twilight demographic are growing up like I did: constantly admonished on multiple levels to be demure and domestic before anything else and surrounded by women who stay at home with the babies instead of becoming PIs or attorneys. I've read avidly since the age of two, and I could've used more books about girls really doing something as a child, right from the get-go. :)I forgot to say this on your last fiction post, but if you ever publish a novel, I am so buying it.After NPR ran its story on the "Twilight Phenomenon" several months ago, I got curious and read Occupation: Girl's lengthy and hilarious synopsis. (It's a little like what a Twilight synopsis would read like if it were written by ERV.) The plot and the themes disclosed freaked me out. I already own more books of dubious taste than I can handle; I don't need to purchase or read a series aimed at tiny tots in which an eighteen-year-old young woman gives up college to become a dependent on a creepy, possessive, eons-old boyfriend she met as a minor in high school– whom, by the way, she begs to kill her ASAP before she reaches her early twenties and becomes "too old" to be sexually worthy. The fuck? Seriously?
One of the people who told me that science communicators shouldn't bash Twilight (because doing so would fright the villagers) also said, "Isn't it wonderful that these books are getting young women to read?" By this point, I had decided that tuning out the person in question would be better for my blood pressure, so I never got to ask, if books are so influential, why is it a priori so absurd to suggest that they'll affect how people handle relationships?
Oh, Juniper. That link is beautiful. Thank you. I mean, the books still suck, but that at least provides some entertainment from the terrible material. Interestingly, some of the books I liked best growing up, the ones with the female characters who did stuff, were from the 50s and 60s or from the late 1800s or early 1900s. Admittedly, a lot of the details weren't very progressive, but there were very few passive girls. I see the various types of princess books and wonder what the hell anyone was thinking putting those out.I should maybe also note, though not for any particular reason I can think of, that my first book and the others I envision so far in this universe all have two point of view characters, one male and one female. Nobody's passive, and everybody's wrong about something important.Blake, it does make you wonder why they think people should read, doesn't it?
Can't watch the link here in school, but I have been rather interested in this whole twilight phenom – especially after recently watching an episode of Boston Legal in which they sue a toystore for selling hooker-dolls to young girls. I tend to think that this notion of hyper-sexualizing children is just fucking repulsive. They will get started plenty early enough without whore dolls and pedophilic vampires…It might not be so horrifying to me, if there was some sort of sensible sex education going on. But as it stands, encouraging the little ones to fuck younger and younger is just a recipe for disasters – lots and lots of them…
You're welcome, Steph! You have no idea how excited I was to have an excuse to share that loltastic link with you!I should maybe also note, though not for any particular reason I can think of, that my first book and the others I envision so far in this universe all have two point of view characters, one male and one female. Nobody's passive, and everybody's wrong about something important.This sounds wonderful. I look forward to them all.
Wow that was actually really well done.I don't know how many of his lines were taken out of context (haven't watched it, not really interested) but he seemed really creepy!I confess to being a Buffy fan (mostly the later seasons) at one point in time.
Way creepy, and a big part of the reason I'm not much of a Buffy fan is that I have a certain sympathy for the vampires. The rest has to do with it being set in high school and not Sarah Michelle Gellar being one of those actors I don't find very convincing. This worked, though.
Well, I was kind of opposed to Buffy for a long time, but then I started watching reruns, and I was hooked! Buffy didn't actually spend much time in school. And, she loved two vampires, and she had gay friends and teen angst, plus she TOTALLY KICKED ASS!!! But, to each her own. I suppose I could use my own sales pitch and watch/read Twilight so at least I would know what I was making fun of! p.s. watch Buffy!
My sis loved it — and Angel, and Xena and Hercules in fact. She has I'm pretty sure every season of all four series on DVD. I can't bring myself to give Buffy a chance though, despite her recommendations. Not after I heard they actually did an episode with the real, no joke, Dracula. And killed him.Sorry, but after reading the book as a kid, and getting hooked on the Castlevania video games, I can't let anyone dis the Big D.Twilight = no interest. None whatsoever. Not even remotely piqued. I'm obviously not in the proper 14-year-old-girl demographic though.
Wow. I like neither Buffy nor Twilight, but this is GREAT. And it really highlights both how hilariously campy some of Buffy's lines are, and how CREEPY Edward is. Really creepy. And I don't understand the sex symbol thing. All that lighting and makeup makes him look seriously ill, and being watched while I sleep is NOT sexy.
Yeah, Super Mon, the teen angst wasn't a selling point for me. Thanks so much for finding this, though. It's beautiful.Jason, you're even further from the demographic than you think. Try 12-year-old girls. As I explained it at a party a couple of weeks ago, Twilight is the Jonas Brothers in paper form.Sci, I was really impressed with how the mashup brought out the best of both, too. It's as though Buffy didn't have villains ridiculous enough for her dialog (and Edward definitely didn't have a love interest old or assertive enough for his).
Jason — if you are a serious fan of our man Vlad, you should score a copy of Fred Saberhagen's novels. Start with "The Dracula Tape."
Ooh, ooh, yes. What D.C. said. I love those books.
I certainly am, and I certainly will! Thanks for the tip, D.C.!
it took me a disturbingly long time to realize the clips were from different shows (and where the heck is the harry potter coming in???)
I actually mostly watched Buffy for the vampires, especially Spike, which was why I liked the later episodes better. I was happy to see the actor (James Marsters I think? shame on me) again in a few episodes of Torchwood, cool as ever.
Be careful! I have been told, in all seriousness, that because skeptics should do nothing to alienate a potential demographic, Twilight-bashing is streng verboten!. . . .Pretty well done, though.
The funny thing about that is that the Twilight demographic is my target market for novels. Only I'm going for the girls who want to read about girls doing something.Also, Buffy fans are no less rabid. Still, I haven't gotten where I am (where am I again?) by avoiding pissing people off. Neither, I note, have any of the people who actually give that kind of advice. They just piss of different people.
Now you're making me wonder who my target audience is — probably people who make and watch videos like these. . . .
Yep, that sounds about right. 🙂
The funny thing about that is that the Twilight demographic is my target market for novels. Only I'm going for the girls who want to read about girls doing something.Apparently, many girls in the Twilight demographic are growing up like I did: constantly admonished on multiple levels to be demure and domestic before anything else and surrounded by women who stay at home with the babies instead of becoming PIs or attorneys. I've read avidly since the age of two, and I could've used more books about girls really doing something as a child, right from the get-go. :)I forgot to say this on your last fiction post, but if you ever publish a novel, I am so buying it.After NPR ran its story on the "Twilight Phenomenon" several months ago, I got curious and read Occupation: Girl's lengthy and hilarious synopsis. (It's a little like what a Twilight synopsis would read like if it were written by ERV.) The plot and the themes disclosed freaked me out. I already own more books of dubious taste than I can handle; I don't need to purchase or read a series aimed at tiny tots in which an eighteen-year-old young woman gives up college to become a dependent on a creepy, possessive, eons-old boyfriend she met as a minor in high school– whom, by the way, she begs to kill her ASAP before she reaches her early twenties and becomes "too old" to be sexually worthy. The fuck? Seriously?
One of the people who told me that science communicators shouldn't bash Twilight (because doing so would fright the villagers) also said, "Isn't it wonderful that these books are getting young women to read?" By this point, I had decided that tuning out the person in question would be better for my blood pressure, so I never got to ask, if books are so influential, why is it a priori so absurd to suggest that they'll affect how people handle relationships?
Oh, Juniper. That link is beautiful. Thank you. I mean, the books still suck, but that at least provides some entertainment from the terrible material. Interestingly, some of the books I liked best growing up, the ones with the female characters who did stuff, were from the 50s and 60s or from the late 1800s or early 1900s. Admittedly, a lot of the details weren't very progressive, but there were very few passive girls. I see the various types of princess books and wonder what the hell anyone was thinking putting those out.I should maybe also note, though not for any particular reason I can think of, that my first book and the others I envision so far in this universe all have two point of view characters, one male and one female. Nobody's passive, and everybody's wrong about something important.Blake, it does make you wonder why they think people should read, doesn't it?
Can't watch the link here in school, but I have been rather interested in this whole twilight phenom – especially after recently watching an episode of Boston Legal in which they sue a toystore for selling hooker-dolls to young girls. I tend to think that this notion of hyper-sexualizing children is just fucking repulsive. They will get started plenty early enough without whore dolls and pedophilic vampires…It might not be so horrifying to me, if there was some sort of sensible sex education going on. But as it stands, encouraging the little ones to fuck younger and younger is just a recipe for disasters – lots and lots of them…
You're welcome, Steph! You have no idea how excited I was to have an excuse to share that loltastic link with you!I should maybe also note, though not for any particular reason I can think of, that my first book and the others I envision so far in this universe all have two point of view characters, one male and one female. Nobody's passive, and everybody's wrong about something important.This sounds wonderful. I look forward to them all.
DuWayne, I don't often say this, but amen.Juniper, you never need an excuse.