The Fallacy of Ophelia
Taylor Swift's "The LIfe of a Showgirl" shows thematic evolution, while still clinging to one harmful myth of the patriarchy. Which is really okay.
For decades now, Taylor Swift has been criticized by feminists for writing songs that uphold patriarchal values. While they are not wrong, what is important to understand, is that Swift has been writing music since she was 14-years old. Once again, say or think what you might about the Bible, it cannot be denied that it contains a great deal of wisdom. In 1 Corinthians, Paul writes that “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” (1 Cor 13:11).
Children act like children. It’s unrealistic to expect them to act any other way. While it is reasonable to expect and adult to not act like a child, it is not reasonable to expect a child to fully act like a grown adult. Although certain developmental benchmarks tend to be clearly defined for children, we tend to stop thinking in terms of “benchmarks” the older we get. The truth is, however, 20 year-olds see the world very differently than 50-year olds, which means it is reasonable to expect 20-year olds to act very differently than 50-year olds.
In their 20’s, 30’s and 40’s, women tend to have very similar experiences in each decade the same way men do. We learn through experience, so the older we get, the more our worldview becomes shaped by our own experiences, rather than by what we are taught by others. As children, we are taught certain things and we have no reason to refute them, because we don’t have enough experience to know any differently. As we age, however, we often learn that many of the things we were taught as children just aren’t true. It takes time, however, to discover that. That is called maturity.
As children, we see the world in black and white. We are taught that there are good people and bad people; both of which are clearly labeled and easily identifiable. Children are taught to see the world in a very uncomplicated light. Movies and stories are simplistic, with a very clear hero and very clear villian. Needless to say, we (and the people like us) are always the heroes, and the villians are always those who do not look, act or think like us. (Which, obviously gets very complicated for children of color or those who do not fall into the majority “norms.”)
Similarly, children in Taylor’s childhood were taught very clearly defined roles for men and women, boys and girls. Girls are wives and mothers, boys are husbands and fathers. Men and boys are “knights in shining armor” and women and girls are “damsels in distress”, waiting to be rescued by their knights. As children, we believe there will always be someone there to protect us, because generally there is. As children, we believe in the myth of the “protector and provider” because that is our experience. We are generally “protected and provided for” by parents, and so we have no reason to question that reality. It aligns perfectly with our real world experience.
In the Disney movies of Taylor’s childhood, women and girls couldn’t wait for their prince to come so they could be wives and mothers. Men and boys couldn’t wait to rescue their damsels in distrss so they could be white knights that lived “happily every after” with their adoring Queens by their side. Although we were literally told that these were fairy tales, we believed them. Because we wanted to. To this day, the idea of a white knight rescuing us from our tower of loneliness still remains desireable. Although these themes are very clearly present in Swift’s earlier music, it is unreasonable to criticize her for writing not only the only thing she knew at the time, but also what was developmentally appropriate for her age.
As she has grown and experienced heart-ache, heartbreak and betrayal, her lyrics have deepened and become more profound. That is what age and experience does. This is why, while younger women and girls and even men or boys may enjoy Swift’s music, they don’t necessarily grasp it on a deeply visceral level the same way women of Swift’s own age or older will. And, as Taylor ages and becomes wiser, so are her peers doing the same. That is why at every stage of her writing, women her age and older resonate so strongly with what she is writing - because they are all having essentially the same life experience at the same time. While older women are not currently experienceing the things she is, they can relate from the perspective of having already gone through the things she is currently writing about
That being said, older women who have gained even more wisdom and experience than Swift possesses at this stage of her life can find it is easy to throw stones at Swift, for what she does not yet know. What we seem to be much more hesistant to do, however, is to take a long, hard look in the mirror. I would argue that many of the situations that women complain about and lament the most are those in which we had a far larger hand in creating than we are willing to admit. So while, yes, The Fate of Ophelia does contain a very problematic and persistent lie of the patriarchy, instead of throwing stones at Swift, I think we need to look at how we ourselves continue to perpetuate it.
In 2024, Kansas City Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker ignited a firestorm of controversy due to comments he made in a commencement speech he gave at a small Catholic college. Feminists in particular took issue with the remarks he aimed specifically to the female graduates:
“For the ladies present today, congratulations on an amazing accomplishment. You should be proud of all that you have achieved to this point in your young lives. I want to speak directly to you briefly because I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolical lies told to you. How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.
“I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother….”
“She’s the primary educator to our children. She is the one who ensures I never let football or my business become a distraction from that of a husband and father. She is the person that knows me best at my core, and it is through our marriage that, Lord willing, we will both attain salvation.
“…Isabelle’s dream of having a career might not have come true, but if you asked her today if she has any regrets on her decision, she would laugh out loud, without hesitation, and say, ‘Heck, no.’
It’s not too difficult to see why women would be up in arms about this, specifically as he was addressing women who had just spent four years of their lives, not to mention tens of thousands of dollars on a degree that he was essentially proclaiming as worthless. What I beleive that proud feminists very conveniently overlook, however, is the truth of what he spoke that we don’t want to admit to.
Specifically: “I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother….”
First, I have absolutely no doubt that this is true. It is easy to be angry at Harrison Butker, when in reality he is merely repeating something that his wife not only has most certainly said on many occasions, but would agree to if she was there at that moment. Of course, it is easy for feminists to dismiss this as simply being “trad-wife propaganda” and claim that she is “brainwashed” by evangelical fundamentalist religion. But is it really only religion that “brainwashes” women? While I would certain agree that we have been and are “brainwashed” (meaning, socialized or programmed to act, think, feel or believe a certain way), I would absolutely disagree that churches are the only places where this messaging comes from. I would argue that Disney and other “secular” sources are every bit as guilty of promoting it, as are so-called “feminist” women.
For nearly eight years, millions of feminists avidly consumed six juicy, provocative seasons of The Handmaid’s Tale. Although the book it was based on was originally published in 1985, it seemed eerily prescient to the realities of an America currently living under the reign of a President with such seemingly strong ties to fundamentalist religion. We reacted with both shock and horror, as well as a certain “knowing” as Offred was clearly raped by Fred (not that he would call it that) in both the official “ceremony,” as well as later at Jezebel’s (which he would, once again, not consider “rape” but rather consensual sex with a willing participant), before genuinely raping her with his wife’s full consent and participation.
Regardless of what animosity we may have felt towards her, audiences certainly felt a high level of sympathy even for Serena Joy as she was first brutally spanked by her husband in front of her handmaid, and then had her finger cut off for having the audacity to read in front of a group of powerful men. We found it very understandable when Serena “went mad” and set her house on fire after having to give up “her” daughter because she realized the world she lived in was not safe for any girl to be raised in.
In other words, it was easy for us, an audience of largely feminist women to empathize and sympathize with even the most loathsome of Serena Joy’s actions, because - after all - she was driven to it by the men who fully controlled the world in which she lived.
What we are oh-so-conveniently ignoring in this narrative, however, is both Margaret Atwood’s (the original author) and Bruce Miller’s (the television creator) exploration and explanations of how they got here. In other words, it’s very easy to blame the men for the ultimate world of The Handmaid’s Tale, by conveniently ignoring the very early role that women played and why, which is what we all tend to do. We get mad at Harrison Butker for simply repeating something his wife has likely said a thousand times over, without ever really examining what is both problematic and universal about her original statements. It’s easy to chalk them up to being the result of being raised in fundamentalist circles, while conveniently ignoring how much and how often so-called “secular” women (particularly those who consider themselves to be “feminists”) promote this same message.
What women do not want to see or acknowledge about The Handmaid’s Tale was what made women give up their power and why.
If you will recall, the birth rate was declining. Unlike what is currently happening in real life (the birthrate is declining) this was not the result of fewer women wanting to have children and therefore voluntarily choosing to forego pregnancy. In both the book and the series The Handmaid’s Tale, women were either unable to conceive or gave birth to infants who died quickly outside the womb. This was chalked up by men to climate issues. Their reasoning for taking control of the government by force was to institute better climate and health policies. The reason women supported this action was due to a promise that cleaning up the environment would make them fertile once again, and thereby capable of once again having their precious babies.
Keep in mind that as much as men may complain about a declining birth rate, it’s not really the lack of babies that they care about, it’s a declining work force. It is women that want babies, men that want workers.
There is a verse in the Bible that I believe is probably one of the most mistranslated verses in the whole 66-book anthology. That being said, it’s easy to understand why it has been so mistranslated, because a literal translation doesn’t seem to make any sense. 1 Tim 6:10 says “for the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil”. First of all, the Western world uses the word “love” far too casually and to cover far too broad of set of circumstances. You love your wife and your children, but you also '‘love” hamburgers, football and bell-bottom jeans. I would like to believe that how someone feels about their wife or children is vastly different from how they feel about hamburgers, football or bell-bottom jeans, but in English, we are guilty of using a singular word to define a wealth of complex situations and emotion.
The Greeks, however, (much like modern-day Germans) had a wealth of words to describe a wide range of situations, relationships and emotions. Therefore, they also had a great number of words to define situations and relationships that English covers with the singular word “love.” Here are a few of the Greek words that we often translate simply as “love.” Notice how they form the root of many words that we still use today in English.
Philia: brotherly love or friendship
Eros: Sexual love
Agape: Unconditional or sacrificial love
Storge: familial love
Mania: obsessive love - such as that of a stalker
Ludus: Playful, non- committed love (what we might call a “crush” or “young love”)
Pragma: Based on duty, obligation or logic (from where we get the word “pragmatic”)
The Greek word used that was translated as “the love of money” is “philargyria”, which is essentially a compound word, hence the reason it was translated as “the love of money.” But, as a compound word, it is more complex than that. Essentially the word implies avarice or greed, with the word “avarice” itself having a complex background. In essence, I believe this verse to be much more accurately translated as “the obsessive pursuit of more. is the root of all evil.” Which makes it fairly easy to see why it wasn’t translated that way, because it doesn’t make sense. Until it does.
I believe that the way you find Truth is to find where multiple sources of information or disciplines align. When science, math and philosophy all agree or where Christianity, Buddhism and Islam all align or agree on a certain principle, there is probably Truth. One of the foundational principles of Buddhism is that desire is the root of all suffering. But by “desire,” I don’t think they mean simply having the thought “oh, I want that,” but rather a desire so intense that you are willing to give up your life, your freedom or all that you have to obtain it. Alcoholics know this desire, as do all addicts. Which ties right back into the verse I quoted yesterday, which was “what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, yet give up his own soul.”
What do you want so badly that you are willing to trade your life, your freedom and hte freedom of others to obtain? For Serena Joy, as well as so many other women, the answer is obvious.
A baby.
There is nothing wrong with wanting to have a baby, many people do. But what happens when that simple desire for a baby becomes so great that you are willing to exchange anything and everything to obtain one? Some women have literally been known to try and steal someone else’s baby. How many marriages have been destroyed by the soaring costs of IVF treatments or the growing obsession with having a baby? In The Handmaid’s Tale, what we don’t want to look at is what women were willing to trade their freedom for. What we don’t want to see or look at is that the totalitarian regime of Gilead was not possible without the willing participation and cooperation of enough women to make it happen!
Ironically I think The Handmaid’s Tale is the perfect example of the question “what does it profit a man (or woman ) to gain the whole world (your heart’s greatest desire) yet lose your own soul. In the end, Serena Joy did get a baby (Nichole) but couldn’t bear to see her raised in the environment she had helped create out of her own blind lust for a baby.
So what does that have to do with Harrison Butker and The Fate of Ophelia?
Well, Harrison Butker’s wife said it herself: she didn’t feel like her life truly started until she became a wife and a mother.
And that’s not just true of her, that is true of all women who have been raised to believe that our greatest role, our greatest gift to society is that of being a wife and a mother. So, of course, having been raised from the second you shoot out the womb to believe that that is your destiny, your greatest contribution to society, the thing that you and you alone (as a woman) are “gifted” to do, it just makes perfect sense that not only do we not feel whole or complete until we become a wife and mother, but also that we can become so desperate to fill those roles that we will willing trade our lives, our relationships, our very souls for the all-important baby that we beleive will finally make us whole.
Only it’s not true.
It’s a lie.
Is it a lie of the “patriarchy”? Perhaps. But it is also a lie that is spread most fiercely, not by men, but by women.
It was not the men of Gilead that wanted babies so badly, it was the women. The men wanted power. So the women (literally) made a deal with the devil (the men) to get what they wanted. Babies. But how did those women become so desperate in the first place? The same way we all do.
The first “toy” that most little girls have put into their arms almost before they can walk is a “doll” - or more accurately a baby doll. We literally give little girls babies almost the second they are born. Every time a woman asks another woman “so when are you going to settle down?” or “when are you going to have children?”, we are reinforcing the notion that the culmination of our lives is not (as Harrison Butker identified) our professional success or the multi-platinum albums we produce. Our lives don’t really begin and nothing else matters until we get married and have children.
And that’s not just a message perpetuated by religion. It’s everywhere. Clearly the “Friends” couldn’t just be single and happy and have fulfilling careers - they had to be mated up, paired off and sent off to have babies and families. Carrie Bradshaw couldn’t just go on living a fabulous, single life in NYC, enjoying casual sex and the occasional fling - she had to be mated up, along with every one of her friends, except Samantha. Samantha was allowed to remain single, but only as long as she kept desperately pursuing men. She couldn’t just be happy, single and content.
Thankfully, mother of four Kylie Kelce (among others) is changing the narrative on her Not Gonna Lie podcast. In addition to fellow mothers, she has featured women on her show such as Chelsea Handler, Drew Afualo and Charissa Thompson, who have all decided not to have children, and in some cases (Handler) not even get married. Which are all valid choices for women.
That being said, the pressure on women to get married and have children can be absolutely unbearable, but that pressure is rarely applied by men. It is most often applied by women! When we recognize how much pressure we put on each other to “mate up” and produce, it becomes completely understandable how women can become so obsessed with the idea of having a husband and children that we are literally willing to trade our lives, our freedom and even our very souls for the sake of having them. It also becomes easy to see why so many women feel like their lives didn’t really start until they got married and had children. You can get as mad as you want about Harrison Butker saying that, but it’s what most of us believe, and it’s not a myth that is perpetuated solely within the walls of fundamentalist religion.
Swift is now 35, directly in-between her 30’s and 40’s. 40s are generally considered to be “mid-life” and while men are famous for having a “mid-life crisis” in their 40’s, what is (I believe) less explored is that women frequently have a mid-life awakening. In fact, it is possible that the reason so many men have a mid-life crisis is specifically because of the women in their lives having a mid-life awakening.
For most women, their 20’s and 30’s are largely consumed by mating, bearing and raising children. By age 40, however, most children are either grown and gone or old enough to largely fend for themselves. This is the time when women begin to look around, take stock of their lives and start to think about what they want to do with the rest of it. Sometimes when a woman’s children leave the house, it suddenly reveals just how much of their time, energy and attention their fully grown adult partner actually demands of them. In some cases, they may decide to rid themselves of that weight, while in others, they just simply stop contributing. Hence, the mid-life crisis on the part of men.
Most women still have mothers around in their 20’s and 30’s, but in their 40’s they may start to realize how short their own mother’s time is becoming. For many women, their 40’s are a time when the mantle of matriarchy slowly begins to shift from their mother to themselves. What’s interesting about Showgirl and the fact that 35 is the mid-point between a woman’s 30’s and 40’s, is that while Swift is still clearly clinging to to some of the romantic notions deeply imbedded in her youth, she also shows a growing understanding of the role she is already beginning to play, that will soon become even more pronounced. The role of matriarch.
In The Fate of Ophelia, Swift’s lyrics are clearly reminiscent of the Disney-esque notions of a “damsel in distress” just waiting for her “knight in shining armor to come rescue her.
If you’d never come for me, I might have drowned in the melancholy
all that time I sat alone in my tower, you were just honing your powers
If you’d never come for me, I might have lingered in purgatory
What’s interesting, however, is the juxtaposition of these lyrics with those in Father Figure, where she sings:
I was your father figure
We drank that brown liquor
You made a deal with this devil
Turns out my dick’s bigger
You want a fight, you found it
I got the place surrounded
You’ll be sleeping with the fishes before you know you’re drowning
Whose portrait’s on the mantle?
Who covered up your scandals?
Mistake my kindness for weakness
And find your card cancelled
I was your father figure
You pulled the wrong trigger
This empire belongs to me
Leave it with me
I protect the family
Remember, Taylor Swift is growing, she is maturing. She is constantly facing new challenges and each time she works or fights her way through another challenge or obstacle, she develops a new viewpoint, a new outlook and a new confidence.
Although Swift’s second album, released when she was just 20-years old was called "Fearless”, in Father Figure, Swift displays the kind of genuine fearlessness that comes from having spent a lifetime of having men try, and fail, to take her down or take her out. Just 6 years ago, she complained about how much more respected she would be if she were a man,
I’m so sick of running
As fast as I can (as fast as I can)
Wondering if I’d get there quicker
If I was a man
And this is the secret that Swift is learning.
Men have power because we give it to them.
You don’t “overthrow the patriarchy,” you just simply take your power back. You don’t need to complain about not being a man and not having their approval - because you don’t need it. Swift’s lyrics show a very strong progression from the innocent romantic notions of youth to the heart-ache and betrayals of adulthood to the growing understanding that we don’t need men’s permission. We don’t need them to “rescue us” we can rescue ourselves.
Ironically, in Opalite, on this same album, she sings that “you (ostensibly Travis) had to make your own sunshine” and that’s kind of the theme of the song, and realistically, the “answer” - if there is one.
No one can make you happy, you have to choose happiness. No one is coming along to “rescue you from melancholy”, you have to rescur yourself. It’s interesting that in The Fate of Ophelia, Swift sings that she “pledged allegiance to me, myself and I, right before you lit up my sky.” A pretty strong argument could be made that part of the reason her relationship with Travis finallly became what she was looking for was that she stopped waiting for someone to “make” her happy. It’s easy to believe that she is so happy because her knight in shining armor finally came and “rescued” her, but what if she is actually happy because she stopped waiting and found her own happiness. Travis didn’t bring her happiness, he simply became someone she could share her own happiness with.
In The Life of a Showgirl, Taylor Swift is a woman slowly putting to rest “childish things.” She is in the process of letting go of (although arguably not quite there yet), the childish, romantic notion of a prince that comes and saves and rescues you and slowly embracing the idea that SHE is reaching the age in which SHE has to be the “father figure.” That she now has an empire she has built that she has to manage and tend and care for herself, because she is no longer a child that can expect others to do that for her.
Whatever your thoughts, there certainly is a great deal on this album (as with all of Swift’s work) to ponder and consider, and in doing so, so much to learn about ourselves and the world around us.
I’d love to hear your thoughts.
What do you think about The Handmaid’s Tale and the idea that our zeal for babies can become so great that we would literally sell our souls and our freedom to have them?