Does Xander accept being emasculated to be one of Buffy's "slayerettes?" Willow uses that term in this epsiode as she and Xander affirm that they are choosing to be by Buffy's side, choosing to be in danger and fight for right. Both X and Willow emphatically agree that they want to be "slayerettes" for Buffy. The feminization of Buffy's title, the Slayer, is at once both bonding them into a unit and somewhat linguistically demarcating them as weaker, as the female partners. But by embracing the designation, Xander becomes one of the gang and perhaps by being inclusive, "-ettes" loses the derogatory connotations that it might otherwise imply.
A couple other snippets of conversation stand out:
- Buffy, giddy under the influence of a weakening spell, is aided by Willow and Xander, refers to Xander as her "Xander-shaped friend," and says it's as if he's not even a boy because he's so nice and isn't just trying to date her (which he'd been trying to get the nerve up to do). Although the audience knows that he is still attracted to Buffy, she becomes the unattainable dream girl, as alluded to in season 6 by Xander's financee, who knows that Xander's first allegiance is to Buffy. To be a man in Buffy's life, he chooses to not be someone who she thinks of as "a guy." Both times when Xander does get a serious love interest, the females involved are not actually friends with Xander or, significantly, with Willow and Buffy. Is part of being a man in the next wave dependant on checking your hormones at the door?
- In an especially interesting exchange, Xander says that Willow is like his best guy friend, but who understands girls. Does Xander pick up on Willow's sexual ambiguity long before Willow realizes she's gay? (and before the writers decide that, based on interviews). And does having a friend of the opposite gender require that there be no sexual tension, that the "friendness" of the relationship completely trump any awareness of other vibes? (Willow and Xander's one epically mistimed kiss in season 2 almost proves how dangerous it is to imagine a physical relationship with your "friend." Do new age men have to only notice a female's intellectual attributes if they are to be real friends?
- All these seemingly emasculating concerns are juxtaposed against a plot line involving cheerleaders. Buffy, Cordelia, Amy and a bevy of others bounce around in short skirts, which Xander panting on the sidelines. Xander is obviously enjoying the view, but does Whedon unwittingly divide women into "my friend" (Buffy, who Xander chooses to not actively pursue so they can be friends) and "my eye candy," girls who he'd gape at and date, but not "friends" (When we get to season 3, we can argue about whether Xander buying newly-destitute Cordelia a prom dress is about friendship, or about something else; I'll argue that's not indicative of the depth of their relationship)
- If Giles is the role model for manhood in an age of female power, note that he both guides Buffy and takes orders from her (last episode he does that). He places himself in danger for her, and insures her safety as best he can--but always conceding that she's stronger and more able. And notably, Giles' only male friend (Ethan) is a destructive force in the Buffy-verse; Giles is only safe around women, it seems.
i know your probably saying this, but the role of manhood in society- especially at a middle class level IS different. While males are allowed to have more "female feelings" and females are allowed to have more "male feelings". This has lead to an allowance for gender crossing that seems unique in the middle class. So is this what Whedon is mirroring or do you think this is immaterial.
ReplyDeleteIt is material, and an apt observation, especially because the show is so aggressively middle/upper middle class. But do you think that teenage boys are as comfortable with that as they will (probably) become later in life? When I look at the teen age boys I know...hmmm...the type of relationship I tend to have with at least some boys seems to bring out a degree of emotional honesty that proves your point, but I'm not sure how easily they reveal that side at this point in their lives. Interesting to consider.
ReplyDelete