Tuesday, November 23, 2010

'Little Red Riding Hood' is a misogynistic rape parable?

You do know, don't you, that Little Red Riding Hood, the classic fairy tale dating from the 14th century or more likely earlier, has "maleness" as its reference point and that it reinforces "male values"?  I mean, you were aware of that, right?

That view, which is as ludicrously simplistic as it is thoroughly unhelpful, has long been in vogue among certain feminist scholars.

Which purported male values does the beloved fable relate?  Hold onto something before you read this one: "Red Riding Hood," declared Susan Brownmiller in her loopy, screeching attack on maleness, Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape (1975), "is a parable of rape."

I'll pause while you rub your eyes and read that again.  Rape. Of course.

But wait, Ms. Brownmiller isn't finished: "There are frightening male figures abroad in the woods -- we call them wolves, among other names -- and females are helpless before them. Better stick close to the path, better not be adventurous. If you are lucky, a good, friendly male may be able to save you from certain disaster. . . . . In the fairy tale code book, Jack may kill giants but Little Red Riding Hood must look to a kindly huntsman for protection. Those who doubt that the tale of Red Riding Hood contains this subliminal message should consider how well Peter fared when he met his wolf, or even better, the survival tactics of the Three Little (male) Pigs. Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf? Not they." Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape, 309-310.

So firmly entrenched is the view that this little fairy tale is a byproduct of a misogynistic literary tradition that progressives have taken it upon themselves to rewrite it in order to correct its supposed errors: "In the second half of the twentieth century, a proliferation of revisions of 'Little Red Riding Hood' turned the tale around to teach a new lesson. Storytellers from the women's movement and beyond reclaimed the heroine and her grandmother from male-dominated literary tradition, recasting the women as brave and resourceful, turning Red Riding Hood into the physical or sexual aggressor, and questioning the machismo of the wolf." Catherine Orenstein, Little Red Riding Hood Uncloaked: Sex, Morality, and the Evolution of a Fairy Tale (2003).

Insisting that this fairy tale is misogynistic and reinforces male values is, of course, akin to looking at the world through a fun-house mirror.  If we fairly examine Little Red Riding Hood, we'd more likely discover that it is imbued not with misogyny but with misandry, because it taps into the worst stereotypes about males. 

The tale presents two male characters, the predatory wolf and the hunter/woodcutter who rescues Little Red Riding Hood and her grandmother. Why, exactly, must the predator in the tale be presented as male? With all due respect to Susan Brownmiller, in the traditional telling of the story, the wolf only wanted to eat the little girl and her grandmother, not mate with them. Female wolves eat, too, you know.  Yet male he is. And sometimes decidedly so. In the original Broadway run and in many subsequent productions of Stephen Sondheim's celebrated twisting of the fairy tale canon "Into the Woods," the Red Riding Hood wolf sports clearly discernible male genitalia (pictured above). Yep.  Because what better way to signal that someone is a predator than to show his dick?

In the Red Riding Hood world, males are of two types: predators, like the wolf, who need to be vanquished (as in "all men are rapists"), and gallant but disposable knights whose primary mission in life is to protect woman and girls from the bad men (think "only men can stop rape"). In this worldview, men who are worthy of surviving are merely supporting players to the female stars, caricatures with whom the audience isn't supposed to empathize.

With "male values" like that, who needs enemies?

Well, ladies and gentlemen, it is time for us to rewrite this venerable fairy tale the right way -- to update it so that it better reflects reality:

Little Red Riding Hood, a sophomore at a large, progressive university who lived off campus, was frequently warned by her grandparents, who raised her, to stay away from fraternity parties where alcohol was served.  The girl obligingly told the old couple what they wanted to hear, and they trusted her. And every weekend she ventured out to one or more frat parties where she got drunk, flirted, and engaged in sex play with one frat boy or another. 

At one of those parties, she met a new boy, the Wolf, and after teasing him and plying him with alcohol, she invited him back to her apartment since her roommate was away. There, they engaged in multiple rounds of consensual sex. 

The next morning, the young couple drowsily slumbered and didn't hear knocking on the front door. It was Little Red Riding Hood's grandparents, who'd been trying to call her for hours to no avail. Worried that something was wrong, they drove out to her apartment.  When no one answered the door, they used their own key to let themselves in.  Immediately, they saw Little Red's clothes strewn about the floor in the hall and they dreaded that she was in danger. They quietly slinked to her bedroom and slowly opened the door.

Little Red awakened, and sprung up in bed, covering her breasts with her arms.  The grandparents were shocked to see a naked boy lying next to her, and Little Red knew immediately that this scene would be completely unacceptable to the old couple.

"He raped me!" Little Red gasped.

The grandfather, filled with an uncontrollable rage, whipped out his .357 Magnum and, with one shot, killed the boy.

The Wolf was identified as a rapist in the next day's newspaper.  Little Red was simply called "the victim."  Her unnamed grandfather was lauded as a hero.  Parents protested the lax security on campus, and progressive students and professors protested the culture of hypermasculinity that breeds such incidents.  In the wake of the rape of Little Red, the university decreed that all incoming freshman males would be required to participate in sexual assault seminars, where they would learn how to better treat women.

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

So many of the fairy tales fit this mold, with men's jobs simply to serve the women.

And your revision could be ripped from today's headlines.

Anonymous said...

I love how you tore Feminism's favorite political tool to shreds.

Anonymous said...

This should be required reading at all schools.

Anonymous said...

Great revision. Now the story resonates in the real world.

Anonymous said...

http://www.fredoneverything.net/Rape.shtml

"To a feminist, everything sounds like rape. Peanut butter sounds like rape. Wallpaper sounds like rape. The dew on the flowers of morn sounds like rape...."

So, it's no surprise that the gender feminists would purloin the tale of LRRH for their own purposes.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 11:49: Exactly.

Stephen K said...

Having played the Baker in "Into the Woods", I very much appreciate the reference. One troop also performing this show swapped out Red's knife for a giant meat cleaver.

This story need not be rewritten at all. While both of you make a valid point on how this story can be viewed, the lesson to be learned transcends gender. Current classic versions are a lesson on not talking to strangers, and the dangers of not following the rules while absent supervision. I particularly like this story in that it also teaches children the danger in giving out personal information to strangers on the internet.

Original versions of this story included rape. Over generations we have already changed this bedtime horror story into a finely developed moral tale. As we have moved into an information hording society we are losing the point that principles are passed down through memory for a reason. They don't translate to media well. Every time we unilaterally decide to significantly alter or drop a principle, we are destroying thousands of years of research and fine tuning because we "think we know better". Truth is, for all the facts we store, the last 3 decades have been very effective at destroying all that work.

Here's a thought: Explain the real lesson after telling the story! Nothing better to avoid a child's confusion than doing some old fashion parenting.

Archivist said...

Stephen K, in my view, it's just a good, gripping story for kids. I only read "misandry" into it, and I revised it, to make a point in answer to feminist scholars. Feminists are able to read misogyny in a ham sandwich, and in LRRH it is singularly inappropriate.

Anonymous said...

My favorite interpretation is Little Red Riding Hood represents the clitoris, as she is red and hooded.

"I only read "misandry" into it"

Right, I never read misandry into it either. The only male human in the story is essentially good. The wolf wants to eat her because he is a wolf, not because he is male. Imho, he simply represents danger.

Although, I'm guessing that feminists think that it's misogynistic that the witches in fairy tales are females. As everything good must be female, as surely as everything bad must be male.

Regardless, I wouldn't try to argue with feminists about producing fairy tales, as it seems to be their realm of expertise.

However, there is a significant literary difference. While traditional fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time...", feminist fairy tales often begin with "According to a recent survey..."

Anonymous said...

The American Gender / Raunch community do not "Empower" themselves by the virtues of their Raunchy sexual preferences, they "Empower" themselves by attacking heterosexual males.

AfOR said...

Arguing with feminists is like wrestling with a pig.

You get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

Anonymous said...

Nov 23, 2010 1:32:00 PM

I find that insulting to pigs.

Archivist said...

1:27: Neverthless, the fact is that if you want to find a gender lesson here, it is more likely anti-male than misogynistic. As I said, I wouldn't bother if they hadn't opened the door to this nonsense.

Elly said...

archivist, you need to lighten up. My comment was cute and benign. No need to cut it from the thread.

Archivist said...

Elly, what are you talking about?

Elly said...

I'm talking about little miss muffit who sat on a tuffit and along came a spider --- the neighborhood's most notorious spider rapist.

Uh ... I mean --- in addition to little red riding hood.

Snark said...

"Storytellers from the women's movement and beyond reclaimed the heroine and her grandmother from male-dominated literary tradition, recasting the women as brave and resourceful, turning Red Riding Hood into the physical or sexual aggressor"
- quoting Catherine Orenstein.

Ah - so physical and sexual aggression is not inherently bad, according to feminists - it's only that THEY want to be the ones doing it, rather than men.

So, since feminists openly celebrate female sexual aggression, I can take it that they are not only rape APOLOGISTS, but rape CHEERLEADERS when ten women armed with knives rape an underage boy.

http://aimwa.in/perhaps-this-is-what-radical-feminists-want-to-happen-in-india

You go grrlz! Sexual aggression is so AWESOME when it's done by grrlz.

Anonymous said...

If American law enforcement were to be hit with a constitutional civil rights lawsuit that would break the perverted misinformation and "manufactured statistics Alliance between Gender feminists, and law enforcement"; the Gender / Raunch perverts who dominate American universities would be quickly "dis-Empowered".

Anonymous said...

Hi Elly!

Your post was deleted because there was good reason for it.

Anonymous said...

"Those who doubt that the tale of Red Riding Hood contains this subliminal message should consider how well Peter fared when he met his wolf, or even better, the survival tactics of the Three Little (male) Pigs."

...... Peter ran from the wolf who was shot by huntsmen. The only significant difference between the story of Peter and the story of Red was that the moral of his story was "Don't leave the yard" instead of "Don't leave the path" Dman, so they even think about what they're saying?!
And for the record, two out of three little pigs got eaten; hardly a triumphan display of male power.

Anonymous said...

Little Red Riding Hood has been around for centuries. It grew and involved in the French oral tradition as a story passed down from one generation of women to another as girls prepared for marriage and courtship. There's a version that was printed in the 19th century though it is much older called "The Story of Grandmother," where the huntsman does not figure in at all. The Wolf tells Red to remove all of her clothes and climb into bed with him. She outsmarts him and gets away. She is never devoured. It was told as warning to young women to be careful of men with bad intentions.

Wolves (whether you want to admit it or not) have always been seen as symbols of sexually predatory men, just as succubi and sirens are symbols of sexually predatory women. Hence the term "wolf whistle." Devouring is a metaphor for sex. There are many different versions of Little Red Riding Hood (some with the huntsman; some without), but the wolf as a rapist IS one interpretation of the story. It is not simply a "good, gripping story for kids." Fairy tales were never intended to be solely for kids. Kids commandeered them when they passed from the oral tradition to the printed page. Feminists did not hijack this story. This interpretation has been around forever (see "Little Red Riding Hood in the Oral Tradition" by Yvonne Verdier for more info) in retellings by both men and women. Watch Tex Avery's "Red Hot Riding Hood" cartoons or listen to the song "Hey There, Little Red Riding Hood."

P.S. And to an earlier commenter. Peter and the Wolf ends with Peter trapping the Wolf in a noose. The Hunters come and take the Wolf away to the zoo.

Archivist said...

Newsflash: every story has its origins. Some are more muddled than others. This one happens to be nothing more than a good gripping story for kids.

Devouring is a metaphor for sex? Actually, devouring is a metaphor for eating.

Save the analytical crap for college classes where impressionable people with not-fully-formed brains will buy it.

Anonymous said...

Actually, no. I repeat: fairy tales did not begin as children's stories. It's a fact that they existed for centuries in the oral traditions passed down by adult storytellers--Little Red Riding Hood included. How could it be simply a "good gripping story for kids"? What proof do you have of this, because clearly you know nothing about the history of this story. If you did, you would know how common the "rape parable" interpretation is. It's barely subtextual. See quote below:

"Now, there are real wolves, with hairy pelts and emormous teeth; but also wolves who seem perfectly charming, sweet-natured and obliging, who pursue young girls in the street and pay them the most flattering attentions. Unfortunately, these smooth-tongued, smooth-pelted wolves are the most dangerous beasts of all."

This passage is from Angela Carter's English translation of Charles Perrault's French version which ends with Red's death and doesn't include any Huntsman savior. Note the clarity of the moral: be careful around men you don't know because you can never tell who might be a "wolf." Are you familiar with the Perrault version, or any version besides the one you referenced (i.e. the Grimms')? If you were, you would know the history of these stories is much more complex than you seem to think. Have you actually heard the song the Wolf sings in Into the Woods or did you just see the photo? Because if you had heard the song, you would easily understand how eating can be a metaphor for sex.

You claim that the mission of this blog is to raise awareness about false rape accusations. Your cavalier dismissal of this story's history as a sexual morality tale undercuts your message and makes you look ignorant. If you choose to examine a fairy tale on this forum again, I suggest you actually research the fairy tale, not just critiques of it.

Archivist said...

No, you made up that quote, which makes you look ignorant and undercuts your mission. Moreover, it trivializes and grotesquely contorts the grand and glorious affection children around the world have had for fairies and fairy tales since the beginning of time.

Actually, only kidding. I have no doubt that what you are saying is correct.

Anonymous said...

Nov 29, 2010 1:54:00 PM

What would you recommend we read to our kids?

Let me guess, "Feminist Fairy Tales" by Barbara G. Walker

Am I right?

Anonymous said...

No. I would primarily recommend selections from a Complete Grimms and a Complete Hans Christian Andersen. Also some Charles Perrault. You have to know your child though. If they're squeamish, you might want to avoid the gorier stories. Read them yourself first.

Some of Charles Perrault's stories are better than others. I like the Grimms' version of Cinderella better, but Perrault's is the more popular. His Bluebeard, Sleeping Beauty are Puss in Boots are essential.

Andersen's writing style can be a little dense, so maybe depending on your kid, start them out on storybook versions of The Ugly Duckling, The Steadfast Tin Soldier and such. Do them a favor though and make sure they know the real Little Mermaid. Not just the Disney one.

Andrew Lang's "Color" Fairy series (The Yellow Fairy Book, The Blue Fairy Book) provide a nice international collection, but he sanitizes the hell out of some stories. If they want to know more about the background of these stories, Maria Tatar's The Annotated Classic Fairy Tales is great. If they want something funny, read them Roald Dahl's Revolting Rhymes. Hilarious. But again, check the squeamish factor.

Have fun. I hope your kids like them.