Before you continue, however, it is maybe worth noting that you’ve uncovered the same problematic relationship between fiction and theory that other critics have stumbled upon in their interpretations of popular genre exercises, particularly the works of science-fiction. The majority of cultural theory has tacitly borrowed metaphors — like ‘capitalism is a dystopia’ and ‘media is a state-controlled religion’ — from the sci-fi genre in order to help illustrate and evaluate difficult concepts concerning class dynamics and other inequities during discussions of ideology. It is then no surprise that works of science fiction then seem to illustrate — if not symbolize — these very concepts that have been batted about in the more politically driven spheres of cultural studies. In fact, many of these concepts are very often on the surface of these texts — The Matrix and Hunger Games being prototypical examples — and are used to help sell the film as more socially important to audiences that might otherwise ignore the franchise for being standard genre fare — a point you bring up with respect to the gendering of science-fiction.

Therefore, instead of uncovering meaning behind this particular franchise, I think what you might have uncovered is a feedback loop between cultural theory and science-fiction, one that seems to be driving your own interpretations of The Hunger Games and its politics, but one that does not appear to be have changed with any consequence over the past several decades, even with this particular instance’s inclusion of a female protagonist in an all-white society.

That said, I enjoyed your post and look forward in reading its continuation!