Thank you! I relate most things back to Ms. Valenti... she's just incredibly amazing and her work is definitely so relevant. 

 I completely agree. I love that Twilight makes girls want to read (yay reading!) and, to an extent, I don't have so much of an issue with younger-ish girls reading it (Disney princesses didn't really ruin any of us), but I think it's important that the issues it raises are discussed. It creates a great start for some really important conversations.

 Well, I think it's important that we all look closely at what we're reading and, more importantly, what our children read. I don't think this should be exclusive to people with an English or literary background. Thanks for your comment!

 Haha, that always happens to me too! "It's just not... good..." never seems to satisfy people! Having it on paper makes it so much easier... 

 You're definitely welcome- thank you for reading! I definitely think it's important to pay attention to the kinds of messages Twilight is sending, especially now that the movies are reaching an even larger audience. 

 Thank you so much! I agree, so often Bella has ideas or plans and someone is always around with a better plan, or a reason why hers isn't so awesome. She had the potential to be a great heroine, but SMeyer took that away when she gave Bella's power of choice to Edward. 

 SMeyer had the potential to write a really awesome, feminist, fantasy novel and she just... ignored it. What is most important for me is not that people don't read Twilight, but that they know what they're reading. So, go ahead, be happy and in love, and read Twilight. Just do it recognizing that Bella and Edward are not the ideal that SMeyer presents them as. 

Thanks for your comments!

Wow. Okay. Just... wow. 

I don't think I've ever been so offended. 

I was, initially, very flattered by your comment, but some of the things you said were not just condescending, but downright offensive. 

I was going to respond. I actually have typed a number of responses ranging from polite to seriously bitchy, and I think this one is the most appropriate. I'm not going to respond to your arguments. I will tell you, however, the next time you want answers from someone you should probably not assume they're been hurt, or attacked, or are bitter, are too feminist (not possible), or are too English Lit major-y... You should probably be nice. Because, you know what? I just think you're a bitch now. And I don't give a flying fuck whether or not you agree with me, because you're obviously a jerk. 

I would argue that the "real debate" ended when j...0713 reverted to ad hominem. That was, as they say, uncalled for.

"Bloggers will be attacked now and again for their views and some of these attacks may feel personal to them but that should not yield them from continuing with a debate."

Except that it's a blog and I will react to insults how I see fit. I assure you, I typed and retyped and deleted and rewrote my response a number of times. I was not offended that she took views different from my own, I was offended by what she inferred about myself and my life. I felt personally attacked and I don't feel like that requires a debate. She thinks I'm a bitter, feminist who hates love. I was angry, I felt the need to respond, and, since then, I've felt the need to move on. 

this proves that you're incapable of understanding literary texts or arguments. Journalist 0713 made a very valid and well-reasoned argument to which you are unable to respond because they've proven you wrong.  In saying they're a bitch and a jerk you've embarassed yourself and shown yourself up as someone who is incapable of sustaining a reasoned argument. Your interpretation of Twilight is immature and your attitude to other is stupid. So shutup, you don't know what you're talking about.

You spent a long time on that? My God.
I can see where you've got your ideas from but all you've done is read the text with a feminist filter on your reading without reading the text for what it is - there's no in depth analysis at all you've just picked random parts from the books to suit your argument which actually don't at all on closer inspection

I was surprised to see no coherent responses to your reply, and so I'll try responding with my opinions.

1: The problem in 1 is not that it portrays Bella as a damsel in distress, so much as a damsel in apathetic acceptance. She seems to think of doing some chores around the house as a "thank you for room and board," and that's not problematic. It is, however, a bit problematic when the chores are stereotypical womanly chores while her manly police chief father watches sports and drinks beer. If he did dishes and she chopped firewood, it would feel like she was simply helping out. Instead, it felt like she gravitated toward the gendered role due to it being her proper role, and that was icky. I don't remember her watching cooking shows, reading books, or experimenting with new recipes. I don't remember anything that suggested she cooked out of a love of cooking, and I suspect she didn't love it.

2: Yeah, stalking is creepy.

3: The problem with Jacob isn't only that it was the handsome, suddenly-grown-up male friend that she hung out with. There's also the question of, what happened to those people she befriended at the school? What happened to people she knew before moving to this town? She made Jacob into a rebound-friend. It doesn't have to be sexual to have the connotation that she needs a man to hold her together.

4: This point was a bit exaggerated, sure. As far as I see, the problem isn't for Bella, but in the example provided by Bella being warned family/friends that Edward seems dangerous and her then ignoring them. I'm scared of girls being in absuive, controlling relationships, warned by people who care for them to get out while they can... thinking of Twilight, and convincing themselves that it's not dangerous as long as it's true love. It doesn't matter if Edward means well, the behavior is still disturbing and problematic.

5: I seem to remember points an instance when Edward references to her infatuation with him being equivalent to intoxication, and takes her keys away. Her response was essentially to giggle, agree, and think to herself that she would never disobey him. So, sure, Edward isn't overtly controlling her with sex. He may not even be doing so intentionally! But she is allowing herself to be controlled by him, and that's creepy if nothing else. I think it's dangerous and thing to warn people away from, but that is belief and not necessarily fact.

You pointed to how Edward encourages Bella to stay in school, get an education, choose her own path in life, and not become a monster frozen in time. Her choice was to say no, I don't want to do all that, I want to be with you and the same age as you forever. If he had been 23 when he was turned, would she have felt the same? Would she still have wanted to be turned asap, or would she have been willing to experience a little more of life? Was it that she feared death, or was she simply so vain as to hold her physical appearance as more important than everyone else she had ever known and cared about?

6: Bella is 17. Yes, she grew up quickly thanks to her parents being neglectful of her emotional needs, but she hasn't had much varied experience in life. She's quite accustomed to caring for the home while other people go around living more active lives. I wouldn't mind her choice if I thought she actually had the experience to decide that freely. As it is, her life's calling might lie in being a potter and traveling around the country, and because she chose so early, she may never know this. Immortality means that she may eventually discover it, but readers aren't likely to be immortalized by vampires, and so it does provide a bad example.

7: The main point, being in bold, is that Edward truly loves Bella. As I see it, the problem is again in the example that this provides. All the previous points and problems are somehow brushed aside because it's fiction, it's fantasy, and it's romantic? Stalking is all right, as long as it's done for love. "This is a love story. This is what true love looks like."

Twilight features characters who make dubious choices; Bella wanting to abandon her friends and family for the sake of immortality made it impossible for me to strongly relate to her throughout the series. Stalking your loved one, or abandoning friends and family to spend all your time with your loved one, are held as examples of true love. If the characters only had the desire to do so, I could relate. But Edward actually stalks Bella. Bella begs Edward to kill her because being older than him is now one of the most terrible things she can imagine. I don't relate to this! I'm freaking disturbed by this, and I am disturbed by the idea that millions *do* relate to it.

If I thought that all the people who read this did see it a merely a book, merely an idea, I would be happy. This would be an interesting story with odd characters, and the makings of many conversations about what people are willing to do out of love. Some of the girls who gather at book-signings, line up for movies, and go to see the celebrities cry out "I want to marry you, Edward!" They mean it. These girls are not in love with a person who protected them from attackers, or held them in a close embrace. They're in love with the idea of such a person... they're in love with the *ideal* of love, and this is the example they're currently clinging to. If they're not going to treat it as merely a book, then for their sake---and for the sake of younger girls who have not yet made their mistake---I'm going to treat as more than merely a book too.

A little context: I am 22, a female college graduate who focused on visual arts. I took only one feminist theory class in my time, and while I took a few philosophy courses I never took anything in English lit. I read a lot, and quite a few of the books I read are better than Twilight---I suggest Tamora Pierce's books as being lovely for young adults. I'm in a long-term relationship with a male, and I do most of the cooking and cleaning while he holds the steady job that pays for most of our bills. This is not my ideal, but it's where I am in life right now.

I wish there were more books that were, like Twilight, engaging and interesting to a majority of readers that featured a wider range of people. I wish there were house-wives and house-husbands, people with one job, two jobs or no jobs regardless of gender, based only on their interests and motivations. I know there are small amounts of people who do accurately fit gender roles, but the vast majority do not, and throwing the roles out of our expectations would be wonderful. Unfortunately, I don't trust that it will ever happen.

Ignore her she's desperate to prove she's clever, but unfortunately she was starved of oxygen at birth as now spends most of her time in a basement shouting "RUTH! BABY! RUTH!"

ps. your arguments are sound xx 

Thank you! 

I read all four in four days to pass some time at a terribly slow job. I don't have any problem with people reading them, I find it bothersome that so many girls read it and idolize the kind of relationship Bella and Edward have. Read it, but don't aspire to live it. 

 You definitely raise a valid point, but that doesn't change that Charlie (male) can't cook and Bella (female) can. Regardless of what reasoning SMeyer gives, the fact remains that Twilight is chock full of men and women maintaining traditional gender roles and stereotypes. 

I know I've missed a few points, and this is definitely one that I wish I would've added. Edward says on numerous occasions that Bella would probably just die if Edward weren't around to save her. 

Modern feminism is pretty focused on how the idea of purity is really detrimental to women. It asks that we judge women not by their intelligence or character, but by whether or not they have a hymen. I should have gone into more detail and I apologize for the confusion. If you're interested in seeing a little bit more of where I'm coming from, "The Purity Myth" by Jessica Valenti would be a great place to start. 

You have got to be kidding me. Ever heard of revirgination? 
http://www.revirgination.net/
http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu/2272.html
http://jezebel.com/5015408/when-being-a-born+again-virgin-requires-surgery
Seriously. All of the honor killings because of women not being virgins when they are married? Never heard of them? Read something other than that sparkly vampire crap and maybe you just might learn something.

 Thank you!

 Thank you!

 Trust me, the series only gets worse. Don't bother with it. 

Thank you for your comment! I really appreciate finding all these kindred souls!

 I appreciate your advice, but, let me assure you, I have no desire to work as a writer or a critic. My interest in English is purely in the history and preservation of; I intend to work as an archivist.

I wrote this because I was annoyed and I wanted to write an impassioned appeal of way this series is detrimental to young girls. It would be rather pointless if it wasn't, therefore passionate. 

I don't believe Mormons are "pretty sad people." I have a number of very close friends who are Mormons and they're wonderful people. Meyer's Mormon propaganda is disturbing, but I hardly find her an accurate representation of Mormons as a whole. 

A woman without a man would be a woman! Likewise, a man without a woman would be a man. They would both be people. They could both be happy, with friendships and familial relationships that are lifelong. Dating, or marriage, are not necessary components of happiness for all people.

As a nineteen year old English education major, I could not agree more with this article. I found Edward to be controlling as well as Bella to be perfect. She said in the book that she was ugly. Blah blah blah. All of the men in the book wanted her. Even the hottest guy in the whole school who didn't talk to anyone wanted her. She was bloody perfect! It was sickening.

I loved what you wrote. I agree with it, and I couldn't have said it better myself.

Thank you, my friend. Thank you!

You claim to be an English Lit major that wants to be a librarian. Why can't you proofread, or better yet, spell correctly in the first place. I have to assume you are a retard. Please teach your children to proofread...retard. By the way, you should be cooking some dinner or ironing a shirt. You know...something useful. Retard.

Ok, so the Twilight books are rubbish, but consider the wonderful service that Stphenie Meyer has performed for bloggers. There's no need to think of an original subject on which to post, just endless repetitions of the same criticisms, echoing endlessly across the Internet. And if you are an English major, you need to check your grammar a little more closely before posting - "for whom she cooks and cleans for"; how many "fors" do you think are required in that phrase?

This article made my day! I think that what most of the people who have commented negatively on your article have failed to realize, is that you are arguing about how anti-feminist this book is! I loved how you put what I have been telling my friends for years into words! Twilight is the exact opposite of a strong female lead and it kills me how so many people think otherwise! There are so many other books out there that deserve the attention that this series has gotten!

One of the other things that I think Twilight teaches young girls is spousal abuse. Bella is constantly saying that Edward could kill her at any moment etc. but its okay because he loves her. Stephenie Meyer is practically preaching that a man can hurt you as long as he truly loves you!

 AH this is amazing. i read twilight, and you have to admit that there was something about the books that pulled you... easy to re-read, but i found it great to look through someone elses eyes. i will definitely be sending this to my friends and those who, like me, couldn't put the book down but unlike me, found their relationship the ultimate want... BTW, i've noticed that their love doesn't change through out their time on stage. no healthy relationship doesn't change. i think you have written something completely mindblowing. something that makes you wanna clap or something. GREAT JOB! it's not just the ideas, but also the way you wrote it.... please write a book or something. would read:D and maybe you could add a few... well i dunno. perfect milk maids and abusive step mothers?

like pokahontas (WHICH ACTUALLY MEANS SPOILED ONE) the idea of a 'perfect' woman has been exploited, and fit-NOT TO FIT THE TUNE OF HAPPINESS- but the perfect republican, beer drinking, deer shooting man who needs someone to clean up the mess he leaves in his wake. five stars... you're on to something

Another thing to note is the Glittery eczema... but you are so right i knew i didn't like the books but i couldn't put a finger on why.

As someone entirely in the same boat as you, when I found this via StumbleUpon I had to make an account for this website just so I could comment. I too am a 19-year-old female English major, and I get asked the same question, and get the same strange looks when I give the same answer.

Well, sort of. You are a brave soul for having read the entire series. Me? I got halfway through book one and couldn't go on because of the feelings of rage it inspired. Also, when someone asks me why I don't like Twilight, it's all I can do not to fly into a blind fury. It completely inceses me for all the reasons you mentioned.

That said, I have to say that this is one of the most well-articulated articles on the Twilight Saga and why it sucks that I have come across. You outlined your points in a clear, concise way, which is sometimes really hard to do when talking about an issue that pisses you off.

So yeah, I applaud you. Thank you for putting into words what I couldn't (at least not as eloquently), and thank you for being an informed, intelligent human being who realizes that there is something not right here, perhaps even disturbingly so.

Are you serious?  The fact that you are an English Lit major triggers the question "Have you read Twilight?"  I have to believe this occurs only within an extremely limited segment of the population.  I don't know anyone who would consider "Twilight" an important work of literature worthy of study or analysis.  It's pulp, junk food, fluff...and it will be utterly forgotten in a matter of years. 

As for arguments that "Twilight" promotes feminism, again, I think that hardly warrants attention.  I have never heard such an argument, and can't believe it needs debunking.  In fact, I ran a search for articles arguing that Twilight is pro-feminism, and could find nothing of the sort, only a slate of articles and blogs very similar to this one.

Why are we wasting our time studying such crap when there are matters of consequence that need attention?  I urge you to sharpen your analytical acumen pondering issues that have relevance beyond the teenage years.

 Let me tell you all the reasons that you are wrong.
Reason 1:
Bella is adored by everyone, this is true, but then again most children are adored by their parents. By saying that everyone liking someone who is genuinely nice and affectionate you're refusing to see Bella as an individual. Most people aren't despised, most people are widely liked - this is why friendship happens.
Stephanie Meyer has created a character that is rounded and likable, there's no problem with that as such people exist. Also so what if her dad drinks beer and cleans his gun (the majority of people, not just men, drink alcohol) and the man is a serving policeman, if he didn't clean his gun he would be neglecting his duty as a police officer.
Bella cooks and cleans because she has grown up with her mother who did none of these things and so learnt to do them for herself. Her mother, far from being some anti-feminist hair-brained 'free spirit' is actually very emotionally astute and strong willed. She is the one who left Bella's father because she wanted to pursue her own dreams and taught Bella to do the same. Also in the twenty first century cooking and cleaning are gender non-specific, and arguing otherwise does little to advance the 'feminist cause'.
Reason 2:
This isn't some random humdrum love story, Edward is a vegetarian vampire and Bella's blood sings to him and thus his interest in her transcends the ordinary nature of love. He is trying to understand the hold she has over him and is understandably confused about not being able to hear her thoughts. It may seem creepy but in no way does this make Bella or Edward not equal to each other - when he doesn't turn up at school she obsessively thinks about him and watches him in the lunch room: THEIR'S IS NOT AN ORDINARY RELATIONSHIP - and I think you need to understand that.
Also I see why you refer to Valenti, but her ideas are at best outmoded. Feminism has moved on - the only people who still see certain behaviour as gender-specific are those that haven't moved with the times, or are those desperate to prove that something is anti-feminist when there is little evidence to support this view. Stephanie Meyer, nor her readers, nor I, an English Literature student in ENGLAND at on of the best universities in the country see Bella as inferior to Edward. In fact in many ways Bella has more power over Edward (I will discuss this later)
Reason 3:
True enough Bella falls apart without Edward, but you've conveniently forgotten to mention that Edward also falls apart without Bella and upon hearing of her apparent death tries to commit suicide. At no point does Bella try to kill herself, in fact the second book shows her trying to move on with her life as best she can with a broken heart.
As for her relationship with Jacob, your reading of this is once again painfully simplistic - I know it seems textbook, but you're not actually doing as close a reading as you'd like to think - she does not need a man in her life, she has those already (Charlie, Mike Newton, Eric and Tyler) what she needs is a friend that understands her and who will help her move on. If it were the case that Bella simply needs a man in her life then she should, in true chick lit fashion, fallen for Jacob, but at no point does Bella have feelings for Jacob
Reason 4:
True Edward does at times seem reluctant to let her be around Jake and the other La Push kids but that's because (once again you've skimmed the most important parts of the book) they are werewolves, young ones at that, who are notoriously unable to control their tempers (frequently loose their tempers and cause each other serious harm - think what they could do to Bella...a human. She is vulnerable and considering the deadly rivalry between the la push kids and the Cullens it isn't as if they wouldn't have a motive to hurt her. Alice can see the future, she watches out for all the Cullens and pretty much everyone she knows but she can't see the future if the werewolves are involved and so that level of uncertainty for people who are used to knowing everything must be very unsettling.
Edward eventually decides that while he is really worried about Bella for several valid reasons that he loves her enough to not stand in her way and drops her off at the la push boundaries himself - are these the actions of an illogical abusive boyfriend? No. Once again your simplistic reading of the text has blindsided you. But let us continue...
Reason 5:
Edward witholds sex because he is afraid that he will kill her - to be honest, that's a pretty good reason. When he says he wants her to marry him first he does so because he knows she's as reluctant to marry him as he is to put her at risk. In making this deal they are equal and must both compromise with the other and meet each others needs. This is a very healthy attitude for any relationship and ensures that both partners meet the others respective needs - in the end they both get what they want and have an incredibly good marriage which is a partnership of equals. Stephanie hasn't 'thrown us back over 75years!' she is championing what feminism is supposed to be: equality between a man and a woman. If you actually thought about what you read before you make snap judgements you'd probably understand.
Reason 6:
Maybe Bella doesn't want to go to college. What Bella wants is to be made a vampire (who, incidentally, don't cook) and join the Cullen family. At no point in the Twilight saga does Bella have her dreams crushed - in fact she realises them. Rather than being pushed into doing something that a man thinks is best for her she does what she wants. You seem to be operating under the ridiculous assumption that cooking and cleaning = women, learning and job = men - do I really have to point out what's wrong with this? REALLY? The world of work and education is now laid bare for all to participate in, and men are now just as free to be stay-at-home dads as women are to go to work. You're clinging to an incredibly outdated stereotype, which in itself hinders sexual equality. The pinacle of sexual or gender equality is the freedom for either sex to do whatever they like with their lives. Just because Bella wants to do something that you don't, it doesn't make her a downtrodden fool...you are not all women.
Reason 7:
The conclusion to end all ill-thought out conclusions. Bella doesn't forsake education for family, she doesn't want to go to college as a human because that will postpone her becoming a vampire - there is quite literally all the time in the world for her to get an education once she's a vampire - look at Esme, Rosalie and Alice, they're all very well read and well educated (constantly in the educational system and engaging in independent learning outside of this) Bella may very well go to college once she has become a vampire and can control herself well enough around humans. Her reason for not doing so when most others do is because she's reluctant to age any more.
Bella neither desires nor expects Edward to invade her privacy. There are so many times throughout the saga when she says she's glad she has her mental block as her thoughts are private and she wants to keep them that way.
At no point does Bella submit to the will of man (ugh what a cliche) she doesn't go to college, she doesn't have an abortion, she becomes a vampire and she has sex with Edward as a human - at no point has she submitted.
Bella isn't a worthless nothing without a man and she doesn't believe herself to be either. She is heartbroken because the love of her life has left her, which is understandable, but the very fact that she persists in trying to move on with her life after his departure and build her own separate future from him shows that she knows her own worth.

After reading your post I'm actually shocked you're an English Lit major or whatever - yours is such a simplistic and prescriptive reading it's hard to believe. I can see how you've interpreted the text in the way you have but taking vague feminist assumptions ans transposing them on any text without giving any original thought or deeper reading is, to be frank, stupid.
Good day to you madam.

Hey you can criticize my punctuation all you, but I wrote that post after drinking two bottles of zinfandel, and it's still a better argument than yours. Sucks to be you eh?

Ludwig,

  If you choose to read this trash and think it's great fiction that's your decision. Why are you here spamming this board (for months, I might add)?

1. Bella is not a likable person. She's sullen, she complains all the time, she'd rude to her friends and yet everyone loves her. This is NOT GOOD WRITING.
  Her cooking and cleaning is not a big deal. But taken together with other things in the list, it represents a pattern that SMeyer has set up for what the "ideal woman" is supposed to look like and that is a woman who stays home, does everything for her man and happily lets him order her around.

2. It doesn't matter whether Edward is an oh-so-special vampire or an alien from Mars. IT IS NOT OKAY TO BREAK INTO A WOMAN'A HOUSE! Ever. This is not up for discussion. It's not okay. Further, that SMeyers frames this is terms of romance is distrubing because it's basically telling young girls that boundaries don't matter; their privacy doesn't matter. It's totally okay for a man to take whatever he wants as long as he claims to love you.

3. I think you read a different book than the rest of us because the second book was all about how 1. Bella became increasingly risk-taking and suicidal after Edward left and 2. how she uses Jacob, a perfectly nice guy (until books 3 and 4) to fill the void. Bella admits this up front. She KNOWS that she's using Jacob. She knows that he has feelings for her but she says she "needs" him anyway. She disregards what's good for him because she's selfish. And yes, she does have feelings for Jacob. She admits that she loves him (just not as much as she loves Edward.)

4. Edward disconnects the battery from her car. He forces her to go to his family's house for a weekend so she won't see Jacob (he even uses the word "kidnap").  He TRIES TO FORCE HER TO GET AN ABORTION in the 4th book. At no time does he respect her wishes or even *ask* her what she wants. At no time does he treat her like an equal who's decisions should be respected.
  And Bella is just as bad because, until the forced abortion in the 4th book, she never stands up to him. Because to SMeyer twu luv means doing whatever the man says, regardless of how you feel about it.

5. Edward is a prude who knows nothing about sex. There are plenty of ways he could have had sex with her without hurting her. Example:  Mutual masturbation. Oral sex. Bella on top. Any of these ways would have been more "safe" then what they eventually did (and lol forever over the pillow-biting BTW). And NONE of them require a wedding ring.
  What Edward did was blackmail Bella into marrying him, even though she didn't want to get married so young. He didn't respect her wishes to have sex or to be turned. Instead, he used her desire to extort a promise of marriage from her. That's not a healthy relationship. That's emotional abuse and blackmail.

6. Except Bella DID want to go to college before she met Edward. She was an honor's student, remember? She had admissions info for a bunch of colleges. It was only after she met Edward that not-college  suddenly became an option. Here SMeyer is again showing her fundamentalist Mormon bias--often girls in Mormonism only go to college to get married (it's called getting your MRS degree).

  Finally, so much more can be said about these books then are even touched on in the OP. Like about the priviledged lives the vampires live, about how everyone is white and those who aren't are the enemy and smell bad, about how all vampires become white when they turn (yes, this is true; look in the 4th book when Jasper talks about how he was turned) and about how all non-European/American (ie, non-white) vampires are "savages". There is so much sexism and racism in these books! Plus they are so badly written that it's literally LOL funny if it weren't so sad that young girls are actually reading the crap and thinking it's oh-so-romantic and great fiction.

~Allie

P.S. I am a 32 year old mom and I read all the books before I let my daughter read them. And she, at 12, recognized the sexism and female helplessness entrenched in the books.