"Billy" and "Family"

[Himiko]

Personally, I always thought that Billy literally "infected" men with misogyny, not that he brought latent misogyny out of these men, but that obviously it appeared in different forms depending on the experiences/ feelings of these men (so, Wes and Gunn are both infected, and because they both have romantic feelings towards Fred, it's Fred that they go after- similarly, whilst Gavin Park isn't a misogynist, as far as we know, he and Lilah hate each other, so he attacks Lilah, etc.). When he tries to infect Angel, we know what the demon inside of him is like - he mocks Buffy after sleeping with her, one season later on AtS, I seem to recall he threatens to rape Fred whilst trapped in his cage, and we're supposed to believe he's somehow immune to misogyny? I saw it as more similar to what happened to Eyghon in "The Dark Age" when it tried to possess Angel- Angel already has a demon inside him, and it doesn't welcome other things trying to set up shop in there, hence why he was able to dispel Eyghon, and hence why Billy's control/ power does not work on him.

I have to wonder whether Billy had any hand in developing that power of his, BTW. Seeing as he is a very blatant misogynist, and seems to get off on the effects of his power. More worryingly, one doesn't have to look very far on the internet to come across people who happily spout off and sound like they might as well be quoting Billy, but are deadly serious.

Similarly, I never saw "Beauty and the Beast" and "Family" portraying all men as beasts, merely using the supernatural elements of the show as a metaphor for looking at domestic abuse and patriarchal families/ society respectively.

"Wild at Heart", I never even thought of as being particularly heavy on gender issues. I'd never seen the commentary, however, and I have to say that is a particularly unhelpful and sexist comment from Joss and Jane- even within the concept of the episode, since Veruca is also shown as predatory to the extent of murder, and Willow nearly curses her and Oz before realising that she can't hurt Oz- you might as well say that it's showing all women to have a beast inside of them.

But yeah, I don't find the actual episodes mentioned to be sexist at all on their own, depending on how you read Billy's powers. The remark, yes.

 

[Kana]

In regards to Billy, I'm pretty much going to carry over what I wrote on my thread.

Lilah seems to think Billy brings out an already innate 'primordial misogyny' in men. Angel seems to believe this theory and claims that he was immune to the effects of his touch because he lost the hatred it was suppose bring out.

Wesley worries that Billy brought something to the surface that was deep inside of him.

Fred argues that it was something that was done to Wes rather than the something inside of him. Her truth lies in the fact that Wesley doesn't want to kill her when the effects wore off.

So who is responsible? In the Angelverse, do all men have a latent misogynistic tendencies?

I personally believe that overall it was something done to them. Billy transfered his own hatred of women onto the men he touched.

Most of the men would rationalize the feelings they were having (of course doubting the concept of a magically induced hatred of women) and search for their own psyche to make sense of it. This is what I believed happened to Wesley. He never wanted to hurt Fred but she makes him nervous, and awkward. Unwittingly she brings out his insecurities, as do most women. His need to reassert control, was something, ironically forced upon him, yet his frustrations were most likely real and so closely linked to the feelings Billy transferred, it was difficult for him not to believe that this hatred was a part of him.

I also don't believe so readily in Angel's claim to virtue either. While I don't believe that misogyny is something inherent in all men, I believe all of us at one point or another are given to the frustrations and insecurities that come from encountering sex to which we are attracted. Not only that, we do at times succumb to petty disputes that arise from past bitterness and memories of failed love. I don't believe Angel is above this and we only have to look at his interactions with others but this doesn't necessarily equate to this so called latent misogyny.

This really follows on to the idea that I don't really believe in a singular trait of misogyny that exists without context and mood. It is often linked with formed attitudes or control issues, or a myriad of complex emotions such as inadequacy, sexual frustions etc and the rage that may arise from these and of course social conditions.