Gratuitous Rape in Fantasy novels

[ZombieWife]

hope, it's an interesting topic you bring up. I do agree that it's a power issue.

 

[BetaWolf]

Let me say that what I write below is as a man. I am a father, son, and husband with no pretenses of dominating the strong women in my life. I fancy myself capable of imagining the world through a woman's eyes--I write a lot of female POVs--so take my comments with that disclaimer--or don't.

Aye, it is about power--and powerlessness. Legally, before the mid-1800s or so, sexual assault (as well as slander against women) was considered in many places an assault on the husband, eldest son, or father as the case might be. Since women often did not have a voice in court, it was probably for pragmatic reasons. It was a failure on the part of the patriarch to protect *his* womenfolk that needed to be rectified. Other ramifications were handled within the family presumably and within the community if it was a common criminal matter. But this notion also helps explain why women were considered spoils of war oftentimes.

That said, you don't have to write it that way. This is your fantasy world, which can resemble the reality we know--or our ancestors knew--as closely or distantly as you like.

In one of the societies that I am writing about, men are cloistered and susceptible to being treated as property, while women are the public face of society--indeed most men are organized into regiments of monastic warriors; while captives might become eunuchs. Women, especially those at the tippy top of society, have a great deal of control over their reproduction and sexuality, and monopolize political power--that is, they are the patricians.

What I deal with that is a man's issue is castration. When a powerful woman falls from power, the males of her household are often castrated. This is considered a supreme insult, especially if the male in question is a son or favored concubine.

Is this the male equivalent in terms of visceral fear? Eunuchs are treated with some sense of morbid curiosity in both history and literature. Many of our current idioms do come down to what is sometimes referred to as 'testicular fortitude' and not being up to standards of maleness (aggression, ambition, etc.) is implied to be rooted in 'not having the balls' or something similar. Sometimes ironically (or not), a woman who acts decisively is described as 'having a lot of balls'.

GRRM uses rape during the riot in King's Landing to exemplify the long-term effects of losing control over the 'mob'. Similarly, I have a scene where the favored son of the Consul of my capital city is castrated by the lower-class citizens who are rioting against an unpopular war and public scandal.

So I thought I'd offer up that comparison, which I admit is not a perfect one. I hope that it isn't taken as inappropriate, but I do it in good faith.

 

[Nerds_feather]

I think men are just as at risk as women of being raped!

I think it is an everyday risk, depending on where you are. Just as one is not at risk of frostbite in the amazon, one is not going to be at risk for every kind of rape everywhere one goes.

I think we've done a through job covering the angles of what it would mean for a character to be raped.

What about characters who do the raping? It was glossed over earlier in the thread, but I think that conversation kind of died when I pointed out that some of us know what its like to be on the receiving end.

I dont think that a rape as a villainous activity should be one dimensional. Part of my healing process was figuring out what motivated my attackers.

I can tell you, it wasnt the construction orange miniskirt and ripped black fishnets.* Most times its an Eye-for-an-eye mentality and trying to get-some-of-their-own-back.

These are the kind of things that help create and perpetuate a rape culture.



*joke. I have yet to wear said outfit outside of my imagination.

Have you read Liz Bourke's piece on "Realism, (Male) Rape, and Epic Fantasy?" Warning: very disturbing stuff inside. But she has a good point (one that's been made much earlier in this thread as well).

 

[Brian G Turner]

Have you read Liz Bourke's piece on "Realism, (Male) Rape, and Epic Fantasy?" Warning: very disturbing stuff inside. But she has a good point (one that's been made much earlier in this thread as well).

I read that, made a comment I realised afterwards was a bit too flippant, but when trying to calmly answer all the calls of my being mentally ill, Liz refused to approve my reply and then deleted it.

Oh dear, it seems I have stirred up the haters. The fact the the main foils to my statement are that I am “delusional” or “mentally ill” show an intellectual shallowness that undermines what should be an interesting and important discussion.

Joe Abercrombie is held accountable for a mere whisper of sexual assault towards the end of the third book in the First Law trilogy – yet, apparently, the fact that a protagonist is a torturer goes unnoticed for over half a million words by these critics. Does this therefore imply those accusing Abercrombie of being “rapey” are therefore supportive of torture? Because no one appears offended about *that*. Yet apparently no male torturer would ever suggest anything unpleasant to a woman, and when a fictional character eventually does, it is used to condemn the author. That’s the argument being used.

George R R Martin – well, accusations of misogyny are understandable, but the argument is not one of misogyny but of A Song of Fire and Ice explicitly using rape as being part of “grimdark”.

But even Fade’s grand denouement of my reply has difficulty in identifying actual examples of rape and instead veers off into applying modern Western social standards of sensibility to the topic of consent in arranged marriage and slavery. This simply feeds into the “historical realism” argument because those exact same issues apply through the same European mediaeval history GRRM is sourcing. Yes, he uses exaggerated violence, but in the 1.7 million words in the A Song of Fire and Ice series to date, there appear to be 2-3 actual offscreen rapes – yet these are used to condemn both the author, the series, and any modern fantasy story that includes anything of the subject on sexual assault.

I think the main problem isn’t “grimdark”, as much as people dislike having their comfort zone challenged. So criticisms fall into exaggeration and misdirection.

That is what I was trying to point out here – if fantasy novels contained a lot of male rape they would not be lauded for “realism” but instead condemned as “grimdark”. My perception was that the premise of the discussion here presumes otherwise and I disagreed.

The fact is that some people do not want to see mature content, or made to question the violence their heroes inflict.

I’m not saying every incidence is done well, but I do cheer the fact that the fantasy genre has grown up enough that we are forced to even have these grown up discussions about grown up subject matters. I can only hope future books handles the subjects better.

PS: Other people have thrown Scott Lynch into the “grimdark” camp. Because he swears. A lot. And no good fantasy novel should have swearing, right? Oh, and graphic torture.

Either I was deeply offensive, or else too reasonable.

I've noticed quite a few people throwing their weight into discussions on gender politics, but severely limiting any discussion.

 

[Nerds_feather]

I hadn't seen that. While some of the commenters are being uncharitable, I guess I read Liz Bourke's argument differently--she wasn't calling for more male rape in fantasy, but arguing that if you defend rape in fantasy as "realistic," then you should probably also include male rape--and basically no one does. The implication, then, is that male writers allow (A) female characters to be raped, but not (B) male characters, because (B) makes them a hell of a lot more uncomfortable than (A), and this double standard is kinda messed up. I don't think it's the same as calling for more male rape in fantasy.

As far as I'm concerned, personally, I dislike the overuse of torture as much as the overuse of rape. It lacks the gendered aspect, but it creeps me out nonetheless.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I would suggest that men aren't avoiding the subject of male rape because it's outside of their comfort zone, as Liz Bourke suggests, but instead because it's far less visible.

Anyone read the news this week and not seen multiple headlines about rape? When was the last time anyone saw a male rape headline?

 

[Mouse]

I've been trying to avoid this thread because it winds me up something chronic, but hey ho, I'm here now.

But what most men completely fail to understand is that most men never feel threatened sexually.

Neither do most women.

Whereas for a women, it's an everyday hazard.

No.

hope, it's an interesting topic you bring up. I do agree that it's a power issue.

Sometimes, it's just lust.

I hadn't seen that. While some of the commenters are being uncharitable, I guess I read Liz Bourke's argument differently--she wasn't calling for more male rape in fantasy, but arguing that if you defend rape in fantasy as "realistic," then you should probably also include male rape--and basically no one does. The implication, then, is that male writers allow (A) female characters to be raped, but not (B) male characters, because (B) makes them a hell of a lot more uncomfortable than (A), and this double standard is kinda messed up. I don't think it's the same as calling for more male rape in fantasy.

As far as I'm concerned, personally, I dislike the overuse of torture as much as the overuse of rape. It lacks the gendered aspect, but it creeps me out nonetheless.

I pretty much agree with all this.

Anyone read the news this week and not seen multiple headlines about rape? When was the last time anyone saw a male rape headline?

The other day. I read, (at work, I read a lot of news at work because I'm so incredibly bored), about those two guys who dragged that 15 year old lad into the loos at Debenhams (I think it was) and raped him.

 

[Abernovo]

I would suggest that men aren't avoiding the subject of male rape because it's outside of their comfort zone, as Liz Bourke suggests, but instead because it's far less visible.

Anyone read the news this week and not seen multiple headlines about rape? When was the last time anyone saw a male rape headline?

Er, apologies, Brian, but I think that's a non sequitur. Could the lack of male rape headlines be because it's outside of the comfort zones of certain reporters and newspaper editors (most of whom are probably male)?

I think you hit the nail on the head by saying it's less visible. Because it's hidden, doesn't mean it's not occurring.

But what most men completely fail to understand is that most men never feel threatened sexually. A chance of being beaten up, murdered - but never raped.

I might agree most (i.e. a number =/> 50%+1) men possibly don't feel threatened sexually, but I'd argue more do than many people realise.

I experienced the attention of a couple of dirty old men, of a similar type described by springs. Nothing happened, I evaded. Not the point. I hate public bathrooms, having been approached (if that's the word) in them more than once as a boy. Those places have a bad place in my mind.

The other sexual threatening I've experienced was during homophobic bullying. Now, as it happens I'm reasonably straight, but quite a few people people think (or have thought) that I'm gay, including members of my family and I've been given grief due to that. Actual sexuality makes no difference to homophobes, only perceived sexuality. In amongst the verbal violence, and the kicking that I got on a dark street one night, were threats and questions: would I like such-and-such? Thankfully, it stopped at threats and, when a car came up the road, I picked myself up took off. No, I didn't report it; certainly not after how a gay friend, who was attacked a few weeks before, was treated by the police.

I should make one thing clear. Neither the homophobic thugs, nor the dirty old men were necessarily gay. It was about power and abuse. Violence and subjugation, not sex.

So, should rape be addressed in fiction? Absolutely. But not gratuitously, and let's address the fact that it's about getting off on violence and intimidation, not sex.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

But male rape was still common in war time, Brian, and the writer can see what the Chronicler did not or would not.

Besides, I see it in newspapers all of the time, if you count little boys being forced to have oral sex with coaches, scout leaders, priests, etc.

It happens, it is happening in prisons every day, where else it happens we don't know (but we can make some good guesses), but we do know that it is frequent wherever men or boys are as vulnerable as females, and in situations where power and submission are the currency of life. When a little boy is kidnapped, even if people don't talk about it, everyone is thinking the same thing: has he been raped, is he being raped, will he be raped and killed by a sexual predator?

So why doesn't it appear very often in the same books where females are being raped, or threatened with being raped, or may have been raped? Females were the spoils of war. So were boys.


.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Well, male rape is a main theme in Brent Weeks' Way of Shadows, it's apparently covered in the second Peter V Brett book, plus we have the on screen depictions of male sexual threat in James Bond Skyfall and a recent episode of Game of Thrones.

So certainly it appears there's a movement to address imbalance in sexual violence.

I'm just not personally convinced that sexual threat against male characters is going to impact male readers the same way that the subject of rape might affect a female reader.

But a point to underline is that I would like to see writers treat any violence with as much due consideration as possible.

 

[Mouse]

Well, male rape is a main theme in Brent Weeks' Way of Shadows, it's apparently covered in the second Peter V Brett book, plus we have the on screen depictions of male sexual threat in James Bond Skyfall and a recent episode of Game of Thrones.

I know this thread is about fantasy... but I'm currently reading an m/m romance and the MC has just escaped from an almost-rape. That's the first I've read of it in fiction.

I'm just not personally convinced that sexual threat against male characters is going to impact male readers the same way that the subject of rape might affect a female reader.

Out of interest... Why?

 

[Nerds_feather]

I think the bottom line here, at least for me, is what is this act of violence doing for the story? Everyone draws the line at a different spot, but for me it's when extreme violence serves no purpose other than to establish "darkness." And I don't want to read about a male or female rape that's just there so the book seems edgy either. If an author includes this kind of terrible stuff, I want to feel as if the act of violence and its consequences have been explored in a meaningful way. I've encountered some cases in which it has; more in which it has not.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Out of interest... Why?

I don't think men are conditioned to expect sexual threat. Much of the act of dominance between human males has been transferred to vocalisation instead of action. Instead of mounting each other, men use words to feminise each other for social position.

If a man is attacked, he'll expect to be beaten up and nothing more. I may be wrong - that's just my impression.

Whereas too many of the women I know have at least been directly threatened sexually at some time in their lives. Those I know who haven't are a woeful minority.

I think the bottom line here, at least for me, is what is this act of violence doing for the story? Everyone draws the line at a different spot, but for me it's when extreme violence serves no purpose other than to establish "darkness."

I agree, but with the caveat that too often violence is presumed to have moral authority in ordinary fiction. I just think we need to think more carefully about the entire issue. But I may be going off-topic here...

 

[ZombieWife]

I'm sorry, Mouse, I disagree vehemently with some of what you said. As a woman, threat to my person (in a sexual manner) is omnipresent. If this is not your experience personally or with others who are of the female gender, then I can try to appreciate your point of view even if I do not hold to that POV myself.

I have never been raped, but whenever I see a strange man walking toward me on the sidewalk, I fear for myself. Sometimes, it's for a second. Other times, it's longer. It's a very kneejerk reaction. I don't feel as though I can control it.

When this topic comes up in classroom discussions (teaching at a university), most women in my class have the same type of experiences. It is an every-day hazard. I live in America, in a small town that is one of the safest in the country. It's still a hazard.

I'd like to live in a world/society/culture where this was not the case. I think most women would.

I don't think men are conditioned to expect sexual threat. Much of the act of dominance between human males has been transferred to vocalisation instead of action. Instead of mounting each other, men use words to feminise each other for social position.

Brian, I think you are onto something here. I feel as though I was conditioned (and still am conditioned) to expect a sexual threat. Here's an example: at on college where I taught, they held an orientation for the freshmen. They talked about crime. Do not steal. Do not drink and drive. Do not get into a fight. If you do, X, Y, or Z will happen to you.

When they discussed rape, they did not say, "Well, if you sexually assault someone, X will happen." They pretty much said, "Hey girls, don't get raped, okay?" This is not uncommon (at least here in the US.), and I find myself thinking, "Wow, I'm outraged," one minute and "This is just the way it is, deal with it" the next. It's uncomfortable.

As for men, I had a close friend from Bahrain (male) who came from a small town. He said that when boys reached a certain age, they were raped as a coming-of-age thing, a marking of territory, a show of dominance--like a really messed up version of freshmen hazing. My friend was a boy raped and when he got older, he was pressured to rape, some of his peers saying that if he did not, they would rape him again. He did not, but managed to avoid a second assault (thankfully).

I think here in America, men have to live up to this macho BS image. Perhaps rape means weakness to men? I imagine that's why so few men report having been sexually assaulted.

Back on topic, I agree that we should be more thoughtful in how we portray this. Again (as stated in a previous post), I don't think it's off limits, but I do think it warrants a special kind of consideration. Someone mentioned Prince of Thorns earlier. I found the book devoid of depth because of how it treated rape. It just felt like a guy with no soul wandering around raping and killing for the fun of it. I didn't find it "dark," I just found it "violent for the sake of being violent," and a bit too reliant on the fall-back rape tactic.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Zombiewife, I think it is incredibly sad you feel that way. On a night out here - and, given I come from Ulster this might surprise people, but we have a low (non sectarian related ) violent crime rate - I would be much more woried about violence than rape, and don't worry much about either. I have never walked around in fear of it, anyone more than I get in my car and fear an accident. Statistically we are all of us -- male and female -- much more likely to not get raped than get raped. And we were in medieval times, too.
Which begs the question - is this the same in sff - and other - books where it appears to be very prevalent. And, yes, GRRM, I am looking at you...

 

[ZombieWife]

It's not that I walk around with it, huddling up, shying away every time I see a man, but, it enters my mind quite frequently. So often, that it's just there. (As I said, omnipresent.) I think many women have just learned how to cope with these moments and it's kind of downplayed as no big thing--even in MY mind. Does that make sense?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Not really, sorry. If there was a huge risk of it happening - and happening randomly - then I'd say yes. If I found myself in a position of risk then yes, it would be there, but ordinarily, it is not something I would consider a risk or think about, even subsciously. Maybe I am naive.

I do accept, though, in a position of risk rape would be one of the first things to come into my mind, where for men it might b violence.

 

[Gumboot]

Stranger-danger is a classic example of media hype fabricating a threat where one doesn't exist. The overwhelming majority of all violence is perpetrated by people who know their victims, and the overwhelming majority happens in places the victim feels safe.

This is particularly true of rape and sexual crime. Do you know where you're most likely to be raped? In your own house. And do you know who's most likely to rape you? Your partner or someone else you know and trust.

 

[svalbard]

Zombiewife, I think it is incredibly sad you feel that way. On a night out here - and, given I come from Ulster this might surprise people, but we have a low (non sectarian related ) violent crime rate - I would be much more woried about violence than rape, and don't worry much about either. I have never walked around in fear of it, anyone more than I get in my car and fear an accident. Statistically we are all of us -- male and female -- much more likely to not get raped than get raped. And we were in medieval times, too.
Which begs the question - is this the same in sff - and other - books where it appears to be very prevalent. And, yes, GRRM, I am looking at you...

GRRM's story is focused around a world in the grip of a dreadful war. Terrible things happen in war. If he was too ignore the terrible things that occur during war times then he would be sugar coating his tale and for me, the reader, that would destroy the power of his writing and the story. We do not have to go back that far to see how awful soldiers could be during wartimes. At the fall of Berlin in 1945 it is believed that the vast majority of the female population was raped. The populace of Nanking suffered horrendous brutality when that city fell to the Japanese in the late 1930s.

I have always felt that Martin's story felt more like The Thirties Year War of the 17th century than the Wars of the Roses. A quick google of that time will show you the horrors of what happened. So in times of strife and the breakdown of law and order crimes such as rape are very much prevalent.

I am always very slow to get involved in debates such as these as I believe they tend to continue on forever and I am also a firm believer in if you do not like something then do not read or watch it. We have that choice.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

GRRM's story is focused around a world in the grip of a dreadful war. Terrible things happen in war. If he was too ignore the terrible things that occur during war times then he would be sugar coating his tale and for me, the reader, that would destroy the power of his writing and the story. We do not have to go back that far to see how awful soldiers could be during wartimes. At the fall of Berlin in 1945 it is believed that the vast majority of the female population was raped. The populace of Nanking suffered horrendous brutality when that city fell to the Japanese in the late 1930s.
I am always very slow to get involved in debates such as these as I believe they tend to continue on forever and I am also a firm believer in if you do not like something then do not read or watch it. We have that choice.

So, if GRRM's are based around a war, where are the male rapes? Jaime and Brienne are captured, and Jaime is an alpha male - why is she the one threatened with rape, and he the one who suffers a macho-threatening injury? If they really did want to make Jaime doubt himself/weaken him, then rape may be a more logical way to go. The effect on men from rape is often different than that on women, and one of the reasons it was - and is - perpetrated is to reduce their power and Jaime was a more obvious target for such reduction of power than Brienne.

I have, btw, no problem with GRRM's books, I've read all of ASOFAI, and, whilst they didn't set my world on fire, I enjoyed them enough to get to the end of the series. But to claim that:

"If he was too ignore the terrible things that occur during war times then he would be sugar coating his tale and for me, the reader, that would destroy the power of his writing and the story. We do not have to go back that far to see how awful soldiers could be during wartimes."

and then not see that the series has glossed over the prevalence of male on male rape and the reasons behind it, whilst regularly touching on female rape story lines (and which, particularly in the Tyrion storyline, moves the male characters on in their arc and not the female) - actually reduces this argument somewhat.

GRRM didn't embrace the times and show them for what they were - he embraced a one-sex element of it and barely touches the possibility - and it's more than a possibility, it is historical fact that these things happened, at the very least to male prisoners (which Jaime has been, and Ned, and Tyrion) -- of it happening to both sexes. The only place where it might have happened- with Rooster and Reek -- it's so vaguely implied it's almost a cowardice of itself. If we accept historical accuracy is one of the strengths of this series, then lets see this historical accuracy in all its glory on both sides, or not at all. And, frankly, the way it's approached in this series, I'd vote for not at all.

I've looked at both torture and rape for a wip, and they're both sides of a very similar coin, perpetrated for exactly the reasons Aber mentioned earlier - power and subjugation, not sex - and if they're used - as with Tyrion's wife -- as a motivation for the non-raped character to perpetrate an act of violence then I think it's open for discussion as to its validity as a literary tool.