Sexual violence and misogyny in SF/F

[Nerds_feather]

this comes from the RH thread, and was something we didn't really get into. before i outline my own views, i want to ask others for theirs.

my question is: how appropriate are things like explicit rape scenes or other forms of sexual violence? is contemporary SF/F (and particularly "grimdark" fantasy) misogynistic, whether intentionally or unintentionally? where should authors draw the line and for what reasons? what constitutes "too much," if anything?

 

[Colum Paget]

Actually, people wanting to see a discussion of this could do worse than look at a recent post on Ian's blog. I used to be pretty hard-line that 'rape was out', but I've become less and less so, and Kari Spelling's point that sometimes discussion of rape is needed in fiction, is a good one.

However, the question I guess is not "Is it there, or isn't it?". It's "What purpose is it serving?" Bearing in mind that some of your readers might have been through it, and might not want to relive the act all the time in fiction, what weight is that scene pulling to justify the cost of losing some readers?

The main objection, I think, is that it's used for by-the-numbers character motivation, to establish a revenge motive, far too much. Would others agree?

 

[Colum Paget]

On this matter, I'm curious where people think the 'line' is drawn. Is it just a matter of actual rape, or if someone deceives someone else, proclaiming a love for them that is false, is that rape, even if the consumation isn't violent? When does a deceptive relationship become too much?

 

[Brian G Turner]

I think the key issue is not the subject, but how the subject is handled.

The danger is that topics such as rape and sexual abuse can be used in a moment of lazy writing as nothing more than plot devices, with no corresponding depth behind the experiences. Even worse, that they can make the experience exciting, or the aggressor sympathetic.

In which case, it's the victim's experience and the consequences of this I want to see played out, not the act.

To be honest, I think sexual themes are especially handled badly with Gary Stu protagonists, not least consensual sex, because it often becomes nothing more than a physical act performed upon sexual objects. In doing so, it reduces the human experience and denigrates human relationships.

Overall, I think there's a tendency in sff to *avoid* being too realistic, and this is why I think writers such as George R R Martin and Joe Abercrombie are doing well - but realism can't be just about violence or societal relationships, it has to be about the ordinary human experience in an extraordinary setting.

Heck, I don't want veteran warriors to say "I'm tired of war" - I want them to have post traumatic stress and show it.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

The main objection, I think, is that it's used for by-the-numbers character motivation, to establish a revenge motive, far too much. Would others agree?

What I really hate is a variation on this: explaining why a powerful woman (whom you are supposed to hate, not sympathize with) has become so out of all bounds evil. She was repeatedly raped as a young girl.

Why do I hate it? Because it perpetuates the old idea that a woman who is raped becomes a "bad" woman, that she is so soiled and besmirched by the act that she takes some of the evil into herself.

Of course it's also a lazy, clichéd way for a writer to provide motivation without thinking out all the implications. The first time I saw it used it didn't bother me, but when I saw it used as a motivation again and again it made me angry.

I wonder how it makes women who have been victims of sexual violence themselves feel? Maybe they have a different reaction than I do.

 

[Colum Paget]

What I really hate is a variation on this: explaining why a powerful woman (whom you are supposed to hate, not sympathize with) has become so out of all bounds evil. She was repeatedly raped as a young girl.

Why do I hate it? Because it perpetuates the old idea that a woman who is raped becomes a "bad" woman, that she is so soiled and besmirched by the act that she takes some of the evil into herself.

Of course it's also a lazy, clichéd way for a writer to provide motivation without thinking out all the implications. The first time I saw it used it didn't bother me, but when I saw it used as a motivation again and again it made me angry.

I wonder how it makes women who have been victims of sexual violence themselves feel? Maybe they have a different reaction than I do.

I must admit I've not encountered this one. It's a pretty weird motivation, that. I could understand someone becoming evil from the TEMPTATIONS OF POWER!!! But, from rape?

Maybe I've not encountered it because I mostly read SF not F.

 

[Colum Paget]

# I wonder how it makes women who have been victims of sexual violence themselves feel?
# Maybe they have a different reaction than I do.

I think they would feel even worse than you, at least if rape is used for a revenge trope they get some revenge, but as you say this just tells them they're going to turn evil or something. But I do find this a weird trope for just that reason, where have you seen it?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

The title of the thread interests me as it implies sexual violence is purely against women, and whilst this is true, undoubtedly, the majority of cases, when commited against males it has a differing impact, one which strikes very centrally at the defined notions of masculinity.

I have a male rape story arc, and went to a lot of trouble to address the damage this does, and not trivualise it. Given that I write in a fairly light fashion, it would have been easy to have it as a throwaway theme, but, whilst not fully explored in the first book (it happens fairly near the end), it forms one of the central arcs of the sequel.

Sometimes, it seems that rape, as a subject, has been done an awful lot, but there are some excellent studies of it: Alice Sebold's Lucky is very well done. What I think is offensive is if it's a story arc that is done gratuitously, but without lasting impact. If a writer uses it, they really have to be prepared to take the consequences through and realise there is no easy solution to it.

 

[Colum Paget]

The title of the thread interests me as it implies sexual violence is purely against women, and whilst this is true, undoubtedly, the majority of cases, when commited against males it has a differing impact, one which strikes very centrally at the defined notions of masculinity.

I have a male rape story arc, and went to a lot of trouble to address the damage this does, and not trivualise it. Given that I write in a fairly light fashion, it would have been easy to have it as a throwaway theme, but, whilst not fully explored in the first book (it happens fairly near the end), it forms one of the central arcs of the sequel.

Sometimes, it seems that rape, as a subject, has been done an awful lot, but there are some excellent studies of it: Alice Sebold's Lucky is very well done. What I think is offensive is if it's a story arc that is done gratuitously, but without lasting impact. If a writer uses it, they really have to be prepared to take the consequences through and realise there is no easy solution to it.

I'd be quite afraid to use rape in a story at all, whether for a male or female character, and I don't think it tends to impact on any issues that would interest me. My main obsessions are not so much about what the world does to a character, as what a character does to the world (though a lot of what I write isn't what I think I intend to write).

 

[Nerds_feather]

The title of the thread interests me as it implies sexual violence is purely against women, and whilst this is true, undoubtedly, the majority of cases, when commited against males it has a differing impact, one which strikes very centrally at the defined notions of masculinity.

i think in practice, in SF/F, it's mostly male-on-female sexual violence. but this discussion does not need to be limited to that, by any means, nor was it my intention to limit it in such a way. i separated out misogyny from sexual violence on purpose. obviously sexual violence can be against males, or children, as well as women.

EDIT: or transsexuals, of course.

 

[Colum Paget]

How much darkness do people think is appropriate? What constitutes 'dark'? I generally write stuff that I think contains a lot of psychological darkness, but any sex is consensual. What crosses the line? What non-sexual stuff would be over the line?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I'd be quite afraid to use rape in a story at all, whether for a male or female character, and I don't think it tends to impact on any issues that would interest me. My main obsessions are not so much about what the world does to a character, as what a character does to the world (though a lot of what I write isn't what I think I intend to write).

An interesting way of viewing it, one I've never thought of, and my interest tends to be what the world does to the characters. It was a story arc I was very afraid of, but the situation the character was in, all the research I did led me to the concensus that it was very likely to happen in that scenario. that being the case, and once I accepted it (a lot of soul searching before I did) I was determined to handle it as best I could.
My point, is that it's not a story line that should ever be explored without the commitment to open and deal with the large can of worms, not least of which is the realisation that people in real life are dealing with the aftermath of such things. But there are other story arcs, too, that should be considered with the same delicacy, it doesn't mean they should never be dealt with.

Just seen the last post - gratuitous darkness does nothing for me, but darkness that's there to enhance the story and move it on, I have a fairly good stomach for.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

But I do find this a weird trope for just that reason, where have you seen it?

Not recently, so I can't remember all of them. Maybe they aren't doing it so much these days. But one example is Hart's Hope by Orson Scott Card, which has a particularly vile rape scene.

 

[Colum Paget]

Just seen the last post - gratuitous darkness does nothing for me, but darkness that's there to enhance the story and move it on, I have a fairly good stomach for.

I don't know if the darkness in my fiction is gratuitous or not, I do think the world is a pretty dark place. I guess I like a 'noir' sensibility, but I've never utilised rape or prostitution or anything of that nature in fiction yet, and don't think I would. Most of the 'noir' in my story is death and the preparedness of people to use one another and do harm to each other, but almost never in a sexual way.

In my interzone story: "Invocation of the Lurker" there were some elements that gave me a lot of pause though. The protag is a female outcast who wishes to get back 'in', and calls up a morally questionable power to help her do so. It asks what she's prepared to pay to get back into her society, and some of the things it asks her if she would do are sexual, and others are violent, but all of them 'won't buy what she wants'. The entity in question feeds off emotions and experience, and she undergoes a physical assault as the price of admission to the conversation. I wanted her to go through this so she'd already paid a 'price' and would feel a greater motivation to accept the final price for what she wants when it's presented to her.

What do people make of this setup?

 

[Gordian Knot]

How much darkness do people think is appropriate? What constitutes 'dark'? ...... What crosses the line? What non-sexual stuff would be over the line?

These kinds of questions are always difficult for me. How does one answer when the line between acceptable and not is different for everyone. With this in mind, my thought is that the author has to be the one who feels what they have written is appropriate for them.

Readers will agree or disagree as their tastes dictate. But as long as you, the writer, has been honest to your belief structure, you have nothing to apologize for.

 

[Colum Paget]

I'm going to pitch a rule at you, see what you make of it: Fiction isn't required to ape reality, and in some sense it ought to be 'fair'. So, if Red Sonja keeps getting 'married' to someone's horrific snake god, Conan should also get married to the occasional spider goddess. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. What do people think of that proposal?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

What do people make of this setup?

Colum, for me it would depend on how you wrote the scenes in question. Stated baldly, it sounds "iffy" from my point of view, but (as I am sure you know) with any idea, it's the way you execute it and the actual details that matter. If I read the scene in the context of the book, I might not have a problem.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I'm going to pitch a rule at you, see what you make of it: Fiction isn't required to ape reality, and in some sense it ought to be 'fair'. So, if Red Sonja keeps getting 'married' to someone's horrific snake god, Conan should also get married to the occasional spider goddess. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. What do people think of that proposal?

"Balanced" would be a better word than "fair," I think.

And isn't the point partly that we shouldn't be using certain plot devices so casually, no matter which gender they involve?

 

[Colum Paget]

Colum, for me it would depend on how you wrote the scenes in question. Stated baldly, it sounds "iffy" from my point of view, but (as I am sure you know) with any idea, it's the way you execute it and the actual details that matter. If I read the scene in the context of the book, I might not have a problem.

I'm going to barrage you with questions because I want to bring this into focus more. I did state it very baldly on purpose, so far no-one has commented on this aspect of the story at all, and I've been very surprised at that to be honest.

Is it the violence or the sexual suggestions that are iffy? Would it be the same if I switched the protagonist's gender? Does it make a difference that the 'entity' is possessing the body of another woman while it does all this (and is itself non-gendered). Are protagonists generally required to take a degree of physical abuse, and if so is that more problematic for female protagonists, or not?

 

[Colum Paget]

"Balanced" would be a better word than "fair," I think.

And isn't the point partly that we shouldn't be using certain plot devices so casually, no matter which gender they involve?

Ah, but I don't know what the point is, that's what I'm trying to find out through discussion! You are probably right, I think, that some things are verboten, but let's run with the idea a bit. Would people be more comfortable about rape if it occurred in fiction as much towards male characters as female ones?

While we're on the topic, are there any other treatments of female characters that you find bothersome? I'll start on that one, I dislike seeing female characters who are gruesomely killed off to provide tragedy, although this can be done well, I felt it was well done in 'The Prestige'. Apart from anything else, I feel this trope is both misogynistic and misandrenous, as it 'uses' the woman as a disposable plot-point, but implies the death of a man would be less 'tragic'?