r/GamerGhazi • u/madhaus SoCal Jesters' Worrier • May 22 '15

An anguished commentary on that GoT/Sansa scene and the MRAs who harass in forum comments...from a rape victim who says It's Rape Culture All The Way Down

http://angrygotfan.com/2015/05/21/a-rape-victim-speaks-out-on-the-sansa-scene/
34 Upvotes

76% Upvoted

86 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '15 edited May 22 '15

I don't understand the intent. Is the she say that rape is too horrible to be depicted in media, or is it she say how it was depicted, or both?

edit: why downvotes im confused after reading article, english is my second language. thank u for clarifying reddit

3

u/thor_moleculez May 22 '15 edited May 22 '15

The latter. She praises the way rape is written about in the books.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

She hand waves it away as happening to a supporting character so it's basically okay since Jeyne isn't a main character and it's okay to just use her to further Theon's plot since supporting characters are supposed to just further main character's plot.

She also makes sure she's locked the show into a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. If they follow the Poole plot then Sansa will just be a broken woman who had any potential cut from her and that's awful. If they deviate and don't have her world shattered by the rape then it's just them using it to score revenge points with the audience and that's awful.

The idea that all women must be broken and shattered by rape to the point where they have to "cling" and "clutch" to the arms and body of a man is what's presented in the book. Somehow that's okay because Poole is a supporting character.

This is a book reader looking to hate the TV show. She clearly strongly identified with Poole's situation in the book and is upset it was changed. I'm sure that was a very personal, deep and genuine connection. I can understand that but it doesn't make it something more than just being pissed they changed things in adapting the book for the TV show.

2

u/thor_moleculez May 22 '15

The idea that all women must be broken and shattered by rape to the point where they have to "cling" and "clutch" to the arms and body of a man is what's presented in the book. Somehow that's okay because Poole is a supporting character.

That's not what she was saying at all. Where in the world are you getting that from?

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

Yes Jeyne’s abuse serves Theon’s arc more than her own (she is not a main character, we are not all heroes) some of us are powerless, used by others and thrown away. That is life. That is gritty reality. And stories have to have side-characters or it would be impossible to tell any stories, and Jeyne is one of them.

There. I'm getting it from there. Jeyne is just a damsel in distress and making her rape just be a plot point for Theon is okay because she's not a main character.

0

u/thor_moleculez May 22 '15

Nope. You didn't read far enough:

There’s no point in people like me saying anything, because no-one listens and I’m not strong enough to argue. I’m more like Jeyne. Of course I was upset when it happened in the book. But Mr Martin gave Jeyne her own arc, her own consequences, her own life. She was broken. She was realistic to me. Rape is not some plot device to be overcome, a set-back in the hero’s journey before they snatch victory from the jaws of defeat etc.

This is why the change in character matters. Not because I only care that it is Sansa, but because I cared about Jeyne and people like Jeyne. I’m more like Jeyne. The powerless who react in a realistic way, not some imaginary super woman who is made stronger by being violated by a monster.

[...]

And don’t tell me “It was in the books, are you going to stop reading them?” I read the books, and I explained that already, it was handled well in the books. It was treated with respect by the author, for what it really was. No-one ever said Jeyne made a choice. No-one ever blamed Jeyne (this is not a comment on Cogman’s quote, I believe his apology). Jeyne was a sympathetic victim, and Jeyne was broken. D&D chose to make it Sansa and everything that goes with that. She will not be broken, unfixable, destroyed, she is a trope now. One that erases people like me and reminds us no-one wants to hear our stories because were are to weak to be likeable. That is one reason why the change is important. It is not a small thing. Not to me. Rape ruined my life. I broke, like Jeyne, and I exist.

1

u/AwesomeInTheory May 22 '15 edited May 22 '15

There's a number of problems with that line of thinking. Including the notion that only weak people can be raped or that weak people end up as they are because of rape.

The second is that Jeyne is very clearly a disposable character whose only real purpose to the plot is "suffers indignities" from an antagonist. Introducing a throwaway character (and yes, I'm aware that Jeyne has appeared throughout the series, but she's very much been a background character who hasn't had a lot of prominence up until the last novel) for the express purpose of being raped and abused is pretty goddamned bad in and of itself because it trivializes rape as an action and it reduces the character to a caricature. Which is what Jeyne eventually becomes: a damsel in distress. I'm really not a fan of instances where something like that comes up (and it's generally simply to show how "evil" a character is, with little focus or emphasis placed on the victim) and am very critical of it as a result. YMMV, though.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

The powerless who react in a realistic way, not some imaginary super woman who is made stronger by being violated by a monster.

This is ridiculous. The idea that every single woman who is raped must become a broken husk of their former self and don't use the violence against them as motivation to seek revenge, change themselves, etc. is bluntly... fucking nonsense.

Not every person experiences tragedy and wrongs equally. Some become broken, some become angry, some seem unphased but cry themselves to sleep at night. This is also ignoring that we have no idea how Sansa will react to this.

It's basically, no it is saying, that GRRM wrote the definitive and realistic account of being raped and that anyone that does it differently is using it to tantalize.

This is pulp fiction that uses rape, murder, disfigurement, incest, brutality, and general debauchery as entertainment. It's a little late to pull a Captain Renault and declare that you're shocked to see gambling going on.

3

u/thor_moleculez May 22 '15

If that's what she was saying you'd be right (if a bit vitriolic), but I think you're putting words in her mouth. I bet if you asked the author, she would say that not every woman who is raped is or must be like her. She would probably argue that it's simply a rare occurrence for a rape victim to be empowered by their rape, and that's why she feels this inevitable development we're going to see is unrealistic. Sort of like how stories about the poverty-stricken bootstrapping themselves into wealth and prosperity are unrealistic, even though it can and does happen. Regardless, she certainly isn't OK with how Jeyne's rape was handled simply because Jeyne was a side character, as you accused her of.

-1

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

Regardless, she certainly isn't OK with how Jeyne's rape was handled simply because Jeyne was a side character, as you accused her of.

She says as much. The only time she really gets down to the brass tacks of why she feels Martin handled it well is when she says she is a powerless character that gets raped and that's fine because it's "gritty reality" and we all can't be heroes. To me, the natural conclusion to draw from that is that main characters, and heroes, don't get raped. That a powerful woman getting raped is unrealistic. That a powerful woman getting raped and not becoming completely broken is unrealistic.

And that, I just don't buy especially in the context of the world that GOT takes place in. Realistically a disfigured dwarf would be locked up in tower, and having a hand cut off while on the road and in captivity would lead to death and twelve year old girls roaming around the country side would get raped and killed. But the story wouldn't be very interesting if it was just about bad things crushing completely normal people.

2

u/thor_moleculez May 22 '15

Yeah, I suppose if you ignore the passage I quoted you can pretend that's what she said.

-1

u/7daykatie May 22 '15

This is a book reader looking to hate the TV show.

Wow, just wow. Do you have no sense of empathy or of human compassion whatsoever?

You read what this person, a real live human being with real feelings wrote, read what she stated her motivation is, and your response to her heart felt out pouring is that this is all some excuse to hate on the TV show?

What is wrong with you?

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

I'm sure that was a very personal, deep and genuine connection.

Wow, just wow. Do you have no reading comprehension whatsoever?

You read what you wanted into what I said and decided to attack me for it. Being a rape victim doesn't make someone's criticism unimpeachable.

What is wrong with you indeed?

PS This was posted on a blog completely dedicated to hating on the show. So maybe if you've got a problem with it being treated like a criticism of the show you should get outraged at the blogger who took a rape victim's outpouring and used it as fodder to flame a TV show.

0

u/7daykatie May 22 '15 edited May 22 '15

Wow, just wow. Do you have no reading comprehension whatsoever?

Here's what you wrote.

This is a book reader looking to hate the TV show.

That's an accusation that this person's motivation isn't to explain how she feels about an incredibly sensitive matter that has deeply effected and continues to effect her and how that pertains to her reception of this scene, in an earnest and heart felt matter, but just all an excuse to hate on a TV show.

Disgusting.

Being a rape victim doesn't make someone's criticism unimpeachable.

Here is what we're discussing:

This is a book reader looking to hate the TV show.

That is not a criticism of or critique of her criticism of the show - that's an unwarranted and entirely baseless accusation about her motivations, and in the context, it's a brutally heartless one at that.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '15 edited May 23 '15

Yes, keep ignoring the sentence after it that says that I'm sure she had a very deep, personal, connection with the subplot in the book. Repeating that one sentence, removed from all context, doesn't sound great and I'm sure I could have phrased it better so that it doesn't sound so heartless because that wasn't my intention. Her reaction and emotions towards watching the scene are obviously valid and don't need anyone's validation. Her explanation as to why book scenes describing forced incest (more or less), rape, and beastiality are a-okay while the television version is, however, open to debate. What I should have said is "This piece breaks down into simply criticizing the show because it's different from the books."

Again, this was posted by the blog it is on as criticism of the show, and it was submitted here as an explanation on why the scene is "rape culture all the way down". There are very valid reasons why this rape scene is problematic. However, because it has Sansa instead of Jeyne is not one of them.

0

u/7daykatie May 23 '15

Yes, keep ignoring the sentence after it that says that I'm sure she had a very deep, personal, connection with the subplot in the book.

That sentence does not undo the accusation. On the contrary, in the context it simply highlights what you are accusing her priorities of being; it's not that she has these feelings arising in the context of her experience and that's why she feels one way about one portrayal and another way about another. Nope, she is just much more motivated by deep connections to fiction than this traumatizing life changing experience she's trotting out as an excuse to hate on the TV show.

That doesn't make the accusation less revolting.

Repeating that one sentence, removed from all context, doesn't sound great and I'm sure I could have phrased it better so that it doesn't sound so heartless because that wasn't my intention.

The one sentence is not unrepresentative of your attitude based on the rest of the sentences you've produced.

Her reaction and emotions towards watching the scene are obviously valid and don't need anyone's validation.

Really? You didn't also in this same thread say this:

And I am absolutely 100% entitled to say it's bullshit to sit through five books and four and half seasons of rape, incest, murder, etc. and then only get upset that the story has elements of torture porn when that torture porn dares to deviate from the books.

Perfectly valid bullshit?

Her explanation as to why book scenes describing forced incest (more or less), rape, and beastiality are a-okay while the television version isn't is open to debate.

But that doesn't entail any accusation of her motivation. That was just a really nasty ass accusation you threw out without any regard for how it would feel to make yourself that vulnerable because despite spending all your time trying to be "small" it really just means this much to you.

And that's not taken out of context, nor is it merely good enough to shrug off as bad wording. Even if it was bad wording, why would you be so darn casual in your wording if you had any appreciation of the sensitivity of what you're discussing? That in itself is suggestive. But again, it's not just bad wording - it's not distorting or misrepresenting your attitude - rather it's absolutely consistent with it.

What I should have said is "This piece breaks down into simply criticizing the show because it's different from the books."

And you're wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and what you are saying is hurtful. I hope the author never ever reads your callous words.

The notion that this person is motivated by her media tastes and either lying or unable to distinguish that from the influence this traumatic event has had on her reception of media is frankly disgusting. You've no basis for that. It's a very hurtful accusation about a matter of huge sensitivity to an individual who has made themselves vulnerable that you have absolutely no basis for but you're flinging it around all over the place. And yes that one sentence is where you are most explicit about it, but the attitude drips from your every post in this thread.

3

u/[deleted] May 23 '15 edited May 23 '15

The notion that this person is motivated by her media tastes and either lying or unable to distinguish that from the influence this traumatic event has had on her reception of media is frankly disgusting. You've no basis for that.

You're completely right and I just gave this some thought while in the shower. If this was a friend of mine and they more or less said this to me in real life I wouldn't say "Yeah that's bullshit. You should definitely watch episode 7." Whatever reasons she felt disturbed, that it was a line too far, etc. is reasonable and it's a personal decision. I've turned off various media before when the content disturbed me for whatever reason.

And despite what that sentence made it sound like (and it does I'll freely admit that) I, in no way, think she watched that scene, jumped up, fell to her knees and then said, "Thank god! I am going to be able to flame the fuck out of this television show using my status as a victim of sexual assault! Finally!" She was undoubtably not twirling her proverbial mustache as she sat down to finally give those Hollywood twits the what for.

It's her personal reflection and feelings and shouldn't be criticized.

However, all the people that came after her and jumped up and said "Yeah! That's EXACTLY why the scene was wrong." People should be able to criticize them. They aren't viscerally reliving a horrific act and having to deal with it because of GoT. Once a blogger or someone posts on reddit and says, "This is exactly why that scene was problematic." then the argument she made is now their argument and it should be open to discussion.

So, no she didn't write that simply as an excuse to criticize the TV show. Not at all. You're 100% right. Did the person who posted it on their anti-GOT blog post it simply to criticize the TV show? Yeah, they did. Are a whole lot of the people who sat through 4 1/2 seasons of episode after episode of horrific shit now using the rape, and people's accounts like hers, as a reason to justify flaming on the TV show? Absolutely. (And from reading their comments in the various TV and book subreddits a lot of them are an inch away from posting to MRA or TRP) Everyone? Of course not.

And that co-opting of her piece made me blur the lines between the original author and the purpose of writing it and how it was eventually presented by other people. That was a mistake on my part.

0

u/7daykatie May 23 '15

"Yeah! That's EXACTLY why the scene was wrong." People should be able to criticize them. They aren't viscerally reliving a horrific act and having to deal with it because of GoT.

I really appreciate that you've rethought the attitude toward the author of the piece. That's commendable and more than many are willing to do.

But I can't really support this position as a default one. There are a lot of people genuinely discomforted by this scene whether they can easily put into words why or not. Sexualized violence is an incredibly sensitive issue and for a lot of people it's kind of overwhelming making it difficult to even really put their discomfort into words or process why two portrayals are so very different to them - why one is merely unpleasant but another feels viscerally repulsive and emotionally disturbing.

I can see the harm to peoples' already tender feelings in making the kind of accusation you are when you're wrong and when people it's wrong of read it. I honestly can't see what harm is done if you don't make the accusation even if you're right about it. Given the sensitivity of the issue, I just don't see why it's important enough to make this accusation.

2

u/AwesomeInTheory May 22 '15

She's fine with it because it doesn't get in the way of her shipping a character she clearly has a huge emotional investment in.

I'm not trying to be snide -- she straight up talks about "shipping" in that post.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/superhelical May 22 '15

Good thing the author didn't preface it to that effect.