Why is Mal anti-companion?

POSTED BY: akredhead
UPDATED: Thursday, December 28, 2006 01:27
VIEWED: 17411
PAGE 7 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

AGENTROUKA

Friday, August 25, 2006 7:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by FellowTraveler:

I guess I'm looking at it from a Jayne point of view. I have no problem with the institution. If a gal or guy chooses freely to earn their living having sex (or using sex in combination with other skills), it's no business of mine.

Interestingly enough, when Jayne says "funny whoring stories", Inara is not bothered. She good-naturedly rebukes his nosy prying, but not the word. I think she's aware of the difference in attitude with which Jayne uses the word.

Quote:

Mal doesn't seem like a man given to parsing words or that particularly sophisticated (say, like the good doctor). In his eyes (IMHO), Inara and all companions are really just well educated, well paid, highly skilled, officially sanctioned, pretentious prostitutes. No better than the "whores" in HOG. In fact, worse, because at least the HOG girls/guys (again, my opinion of his POV) are honest about it.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I feel like I've argued the same thing over and over for a while, and a lot of it comes down to individual perception.

I'm not out to convince anyone. Sharing opinions is nice, but let's just agree to disagree about this. :)

RUGBUG

Friday, August 25, 2006 7:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by FellowTraveler:
I can acknowledge that there is a difference of degree. However, there is a difference between a Triple Crown winner and a mustang, but they're both horses. Admittedly, not the best analogy. Not suggesting women beasts of burden.

Clearer analogy would be a Triple Crown winner and any other racing Thoroughbred. Same thing, but

Although the analogy falls apart because you can't train any TB to be a triple crown winner. They're born, not made. (Admittedly training comes into the equation, but the athleticism, speed, heart, etc need to be there from the beginning.)

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:

I think this de-personalizing of sex in Inara's mind is a bit of a smokescreen that she needs because of her mysterious past,

Hey M4P,

I think the de-personalizing of sex is just a need for the job. How can you have sex with so many different people, and for money, if it means something?

IMHO, the 'verse's view of sex/companions/whores is not exactly progress. It gives women (are there male companions, or only boy whores...who from the indications in HOG were for men, not women) who choose to sell sex more control than history has allowed, but it's still not exactly healthy. The Guild is, evolutionarily, a giant corporate pimp. Client choice has been given to the women and there is less social stigma, but it's still sex for money. I, personally think true progress is when women won't need to use sex for money or power.

on another note: all I can hear in my head right now is Julia Robert's in Pretty Woman with her frightened, "I say who, I say when, I say WHO." (Interesting sidenote: that character approaches more of the 'companion'definition....)

***************
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

MAL4PREZ

Friday, August 25, 2006 7:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by RugBug:
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
I think this de-personalizing of sex in Inara's mind is a bit of a smokescreen that she needs because of her mysterious past,

I think the de-personalizing of sex is just a need for the job. How can you have sex with so many different people, and for money, if it means something?

This is excellent! It's something I've been thinking about (that fic again) but I haven't worked it out completely...

I have this theory in the back of my head that Inara is somewhat different than other Companions. They are able to separate themselves from the job. But Inara, deep inside, doesn't quite believe this thing that she's outwardly convinced herself of is true - that sex is just sex. Hence her blushing at Ath's comment (and he says "Few in your line of work do that..."), and also - she falls apart over Mal and Nandi.

Honestly, at this point I can't separate what's there in the series from what I've created for my fic, so take the following with a grain of salt...

I think Inara may have been driven to become a Companion by mysterious events, as in her childhood. And part of her being on Serenity is that her profession doesn't actually fit her. Her training that sex is something impersonal is eating at her from the inside, because it really isn't enough for her.

Must stop and think more...

-----------------------------------------------
I'm the president. I don't need to listen.

OHIOBROWNCOAT

Friday, August 25, 2006 8:14 PM

I am not sure Mal is anti-companion. He's anti-alliance. He calls her a whore (chronologically) in OOG when they first meet only after she said she supportted the Alliance. He calls her a W in the pilot not to upset her but book. There's more but I hope I started a new line of thought.

GOLDY

Friday, August 25, 2006 10:51 PM

Jumping into this very long, yet highly interesting thread. I have some thoughts below, which may or may not be coherent. *g*

Quote:
Originally posted by RugBug:
The Guild is, evolutionarily, a giant corporate pimp. Client choice has been given to the women and there is less social stigma, but it's still sex for money. I, personally think true progress is when women won't need to use sex for money or power.

I would disagree with that. Firefly has never been about presenting a Utopian society (arguably, like Star Trek was), but about reflecting true humanity. I simply do not believe that we will ever reach a time period where there will be no such thing as a sex trade. That's like envisioning the world without war or famine or a rich/poor dichotomy. All things that Firefly has touched upon in some way.

In that sense, then, the Guild *is* a symbol of progress, because it gives a measure of power and security to those that do choose sex as a living. Instead of being punished for being a "whore," Companions can be seen as not only vital members of society, but as prestigeous women, well-schooled and educated. One of my favourite details is the medical appointment that Inara has in Ariel. That's huge, because it shows respect not only for Inara, but for her clients as well. What's not progressive about that?

Quote:
Originally posted by RugBug:
I think the de-personalizing of sex is just a need for the job. How can you have sex with so many different people, and for money, if it means something?

Well, we don't know for certain, but I would argue that sex *does* mean something under Companion tradition. There's certainly many spiritual aspects of it - we've even seen Inara refer to the tea and the music as a sort of "ritual." Maybe by our standards today, we have to equate de-personalizing sex with that trade, but I wouldn't say that's so in Inara's time. Inara *does* see sex as something sacred (or, at least, spiritual), something that has healing powers. Why must sex be seen as something that's dirty? I think that's the whole point of Companioning tradition - to take the "dirty" *out* of paying for sex.

Which brings us back the Mal question, and really what this thread is about. No, I don't think Mal is "anti-Companion," I think he comes across that way in order to justify to himself some sort of moral highground when he uses that word against Inara. If he can make her work seem dirty, if he can make it seem like something to be ashamed of, then he doesn't have to feel guilty about her wanting to give up something she obviously feels very tied to.

RUGBUG

Friday, August 25, 2006 11:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Goldy:
Why must sex be seen as something that's dirty? I think that's the whole point of Companioning tradition - to take the "dirty" *out* of paying for sex.

Believing that sex shouldn't be paid for and that it's "dirty" are two totally different things. I don't believe sex is dirty and yet I don't think it should be paid for. Paying for sex takes the whole "spiritual" aspect away from it. It no longer becomes about two people being as close as they possibly could be, but rather about pleasure alone. The rituals, etc are to approximate the closeness, comfort etc that two people in love find in sex. (The pleasure part, well that's there regardless, if it's done right.

) Sex that is paid for is artificial...and therefore not as good, nor should it ever be considered as good as

And what about male companions (comp-Man-ions?)? If this really is progress, there should be companions for everyone. The only progress we see in the 'Verse is a destigmatization paying for sex. I just can't think that's a good thing (although it is an interesting concept).

***************
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

GOLDY

Saturday, August 26, 2006 1:09 AM

Quote:
Sex that is paid for is artificial...and therefore not as good, nor should it ever be considered as good as

Heh. I think that's just going to have to be one of those things that's completely subjective depending on the way you're looking at it. What I was trying to get at, I think, is that the Companion culture doesn't see their trade as something that's shaming. Love aside, what's wrong with paying someone who is intelligent and cultured to spend a night with you?

Quote:
And what about male companions (comp-Man-ions?)?

Weeeeeellll. That can really only be speculation, since we just don't know one way or another. But I assume there are male Companions. Probably far fewer male than female Companions, since women have historically played the "whore" stereotype. We just really haven't met any other Companions besides Inara.

WALKERHOUND

Friday, September 8, 2006 8:20 PM

let's say i get off work and i want a little snack.

A. i could stop by Wal-Mart and pick up the no name brand Bigbox-O-chock ( price $4.99+tax)

B. i could go to lady frufru godivas boutique chocleters to the stars and pick up a (insert French word)chocolate (insert German word) liquor (inset Swiss word) truffle, in a cedar box with satin bow and a little hand calligraped card with the life history of the little old Swiss dude that made the thing (price my weeks pay check +tax)

now ether way i've got my self some chocolate the question is whether there is any deference between the two? and the answer is yes and at the same time no. starting with price and working your way up to prowcived value(this i think is were the deference between good/skilled whore and registered companion really kikes in) there are clearly many many deference’s in the two products, but at the end of the day it's plant fats sugar and coco.

(ya i know the point's been made but i was really proud of the example )

Quote:
Believing that sex shouldn't be paid for and that it's "dirty" are two totally different things

Quote:
that the Companion culture doesn't see their trade as something that's shaming. Love aside, what's wrong with paying someone who is intelligent and cultured to spend a night with you?

exactly, and that's the cruces of the argument. you don't have to believe sex is dirty to believe that it is only appropriate in vary nearly defined instances (i.e when you have found your "other" your soul mate ect ect.). now for somebody to be a companion or for that matter a whore by choice (as apposed to by necessity, every body seams to be talking about "making the choice" to be a companion or a whore. what about all those caught by circumstances especially among the "whore's"?) then you have to have a...loser definition of when it is "appropriate" to engage in the sex act. in other words off course the companion culture (in other words the guild) would teach that having sex with some one for other than pure love is not shaming, but if your coming form a culture that doesn’t necessarily believe that then the fact that it is taught as such by the guild is not going to be a especially compelling argument (agine it would be hard for them to carry on there avowed calling with a deferent philosophies

). I kind of think this is more ware Mal is coming from, he doesn’t approve of sex for higher as such (for a number of reasons, but well…latter for that) but he dose recognize that when times are hard and you have lost every thing else you have (and boy dose he understand what that's like) then you may have nothing left to sell but your body. The thing, or one of them at lest is that Inra doesn’t have to be a companion (whore) to survive she has other options where as say the HOG girls probably don’t have a lot of alternative’s income wise. Well in his mind anyway.

sorry for the length on, especially as i need to cut it off and get to work now (i'll be back latter with the rest....try to contain your excitement

cause more poorly spelled rambling is coming soon)

BROWNCOATJIM

Thursday, September 28, 2006 8:38 PM

As I have said in some other posts, Joss wrote this show for bright people, so they could draw their own conclusions.

By modern society's standards, the show is surely pro-feminist, scattered with very powerful female characters (which is just so damn well done in War Stories when kaylee locks up, she is never demeaned by her actions, she just--as a person--doesn't have combat in her, a point driven home by the fact that a 16 year old girl turns out to be the friggin' Terminator), but remember, as Americans, we are only a couple of hundred years, or less even, out of the frontier world. Speaking as a damn Yankee (becuase I know that in some Southern States the time frame is shorter--God Bless the Sovereign Nation of Texas, I have always felt they just rent some land here, and live as they damn well choose!), we are only a hundred or so years away from having walked around with guns on our hips like hats on our heads.

There was no room for the weak woman in the frontier world, never mind what you saw in the movies. Darwin nailed it, folks--the strong survived. And so it is that the women in Firefly were strong like our own great-great grandmothers had to be. They had to work, fight, and survive just like the men, and carry a narl inside of them for nine months.

Women as weak and defenseless is a modern entertainment notion, and I love to see a woman in the movies or TV grow a big ol' pair and keep her clothes on and kick some ass for herself ( I will never forget Aliens--"get away from her, you bitch!).

But why was Mal so anti-Companion? I don't think Mal really gave a rat's ass one way or another regarding being a Companion or not, it was just something for him to needle Inara about and he felt just as jealous as all hell about it with her. He was anti-Inara-being-a-Companion is all, I think.

WE'RE GONNA CRASH? I DON'T WANNA CRASH!

MISSTRESSAHARA

Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:27 PM

Because he loves her and wants to pull at her pigtails.

Joss said it, not me.

If I'm a bitch, then life just got interesting

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE