*Trigger Warning* Rape: A Crude Plot Device?

Lillith1991 said:

Can we mention how little female on male and male on male rape these writers are writing for something that isn't supposed to simply be a plot device? I find it more than annoying, it's infuriating to me. Especially when they claim it is for realisms sake, and put a man in a situation where he is likely to be raped but isnt because conviently there's a woman to take the fall.

Click to expand...

This. I may be wrong, and I haven't read the entire series yet, but I don't recall a male character being raped in ASoIAF or Abercrombie's books, for instance. Tortured and mutilated, yes, but not raped.

I commented in another thread that writers seem to be more willing to mutilate male characters and to rape female ones. I suspect that this has a lot more to do with the author's sense of what will make a character lose sympathy with the reader than about realism.

1. A raped male is emasculated beyond repair in many people's eyes. Emasculated men are unsympathetic to some readers.

2. A mutilated woman becomes ugly and unfeminine. Ugly, unfeminine women are unsympathetic, or at least completely uninteresting, to some readers.

As usual, people's choices about what to put in their "historically realistic" fantasy says a lot more about our current culture's sensibilities than it does about history.

Another reason why some writers are unwilling to show male rape may be because they confuse the urge to rape with a person's normal sexual desire. Men who are straight, as in, they never seek male partners under normal circumstances, will rape other men in warfare, prisons and so on, but many people assume the men doing the raping are, by preference, gay or bisexual. I think some writers who are sensitive to negative portrayals of gay men are loathe to show man on man rape, because they worry that they might be portraying gay men as predators, or portraying M/M sex as inherently dysfunctional and predatory. I think this might be more of an issue in a book that has an absence of positive or neutral portrayals of M/M relationships and sexual activity. Also, of course, there are ways to show the true motivations of the men performing these acts.

Roxxsmom said:

As usual, people's choices about what to put in their "historically realistic" fantasy says a lot more about our current culture's sensibilities than it does about history.

Click to expand...

I suspect there's a lot more truth to that than is immediately apparent.

Fiction doesn't always have the freedom to accurately portray events. I wish I could re-locate an article I read once that said, "You can't defend a plot simply because it really happened that way. Life is random. It doesn't always make sense. In fiction, your readers won't give you that leeway."

I probably mangled that a bit, if you recognize it. But there's truth to that. I think Roxxsmom showed it with good examples. People won't react to male-victim-rape as the writer probably wants them to. You'd be historically correct and accurate to put it in, but may well lose the reader in the process.

robjvargas said:

I
I probably mangled that a bit, if you recognize it. But there's truth to that. I think Roxxsmom showed it with good examples. People won't react to male-victim-rape as the writer probably wants them to. You'd be historically correct and accurate to put it in, but may well lose the reader in the process.

Click to expand...

You make a good point, Rob, though that wasn't quite the point I was trying to make (though I'm all for writing fantasy that isn't grounded in history as well, or that takes history and twists it in unexpected ways). In fact, I have run across occasional stories that include male rape. Bakker (for all that I vehemently disagree with his ideas about the innate nature of men--if a woman said some of the things he's said about male nature, she'd be labeled a man-hating radical "feminazi") has male rape in his books.

But it's probably a matter of thinking about who will and won't be receptive to what you put into your book and of thinking about how you portray it.

Writers can educate instead of just reflecting and reinforcing their reader's assumptions, but it takes a light touch. I know for a fact that I've read novels that have made me rethink my own preconceptions about things. I don't think fiction is ever "just" entertainment, for that reason.

The question is, what is your target readers' comfort zone, and how far can you push them away from it before they decide they don't want to read the book? Some things take baby steps, but consider that the tastes and sensibilities of people can evolve relatively quickly. The reason why some people want to restrict access to some books is because they know that we are influenced by the things we read.

Reading. It gives people ideas.

Rape as a plot device is overdone and played out imo.

My 2 cents. You may get change back.

robjvargas said:

People won't react to male-victim-rape as the writer probably wants them to.

Click to expand...

I see you point. At the same time, though...

I remember reading R. A. Salvatore's books when I was a kid. In drow society, men don't have the right to refuse sex. One of his characters, Zaknafien (father of the infamous Drizzt Do'Urden), has been raped multiple times. I can't remember if it's explicitly talked about in those words, but it's fairly clear he's in a relationship with a woman and it's not consensual.

And the hero, Drizzt, is threatened with rape. He's expected to have sex with a woman; when he refuses, he gets into shit for it. In another book, he's captured and it's pretty clear his captor intends to take advantage of him, though she doesn't succeed.

And as a reader who was, at the time, a very naive and unaware kid, I didn't at all feel confused by. I picked up on what was going on. The author acted as though it was awful, so I saw it as awful. The author didn't act like it emasculated Drizzt or Zaknafien, so I didn't see them as emasculated.

Point is, if you treat a female-on-male rape seriously, most readers are going to take it seriously. I believe that. I really do.

EDIT: Oh! Goddamn, I completely forgot. Another character, Wulfgar (who is the manliest male character of all) is held prisoner and raped repeatedly. He suffers PTSD to the point where he's no longer able to have sex. He's forced to break off his relationship with the woman he loves because he has flashbacks every time she touches him. It's a big character arc for him, and he spends an entire book just getting back on his feet. And even after that, it remains a major part of his character.

JMO, as always.

ViridianChick said:

Statistics show us that, currently, men in the United States military face sexual assault than women. Why? Because there are more men in the military. And yet in this hyper-violent setting that's touted as dark and realistic and cruel, in this setting with far more male characters than female, there's no male rape victims.

Click to expand...

This.

And also this article: http://www.newstatesman.com/cultural-capital/2013/03/rape-james-bond

Quote: "My go-to example for this used to be James Bond. “Is it realistic that James Bond has never been raped?” I would say. How many times has he found himself utterly at the mercy of men who want to hurt, degrade and humiliate him before killing him? "

ViridianChick said:

And as a reader who was, at the time, a very naive and unaware kid, I didn't at all feel confused by. I picked up on what was going on. The author acted as though it was awful, so I saw it as awful. The author didn't act like it emasculated Drizzt or Zaknafien, so I didn't see them as emasculated.

Point is, if you treat a female-on-male rape seriously, most readers are going to take it seriously. I believe that. I really do.

Click to expand...

I think that might be part of the "crazy topsy turvy gender roles" thing that gets played for shock value with the drow (which are also portrayed as being an unsympathetic and evil race and culture, except for the handful of characters who "escape" it, like Drizzt). Very different from how stories where things are "normal," (as in patriarchal) often play out. Rape of women by men is usually not portrayed as good (unless it's a Gor book), but it's often just sort of, "That's how things are. Sucks to be you, ladies."

I wonder if men getting raped by other men is actually more taboo or uncomfortable to many male readers than being raped by women.

It's amazing how often I've run into men who have a "Bring it on, babe!" attitude when the specter of being coerced or forced by a woman comes up. Not saying all guys are this cavalier about the prospect, or that this is how they'd react if it actually happened to them, but it doesn't seem to be something most men worry much about when they haven't experienced it*

But ask men how they'd feel if nearly every fantasy book they ran across had male characters with traumatic rape (by other men) back stories, and where men lived with the constant specter of male rape, and there were occasional scenes where male characters are raped, or nearly raped, by other men, and I'd bet most would say they'd get really tired of it after a while.

That's how women feel about the way rape of women has been handled in a lot of the epic fantasy out there.


* Except MRA guys, of course. But they mostly seem to bring rape of men by women up to derail any discussion people are having about female rape victims, rather than from genuine fear of their own victimization.

Treehouseman said:

Quote: "My go-to example for this used to be James Bond. “Is it realistic that James Bond has never been raped?” I would say. How many times has he found himself utterly at the mercy of men who want to hurt, degrade and humiliate him before killing him? "

Click to expand...

Some of the torture scenes in the novels were quite a lot more, erm, suggestive than in the movies. I remember one where he's bound naked to a chair with no bottom, and there's a wicker fan or something underneath getting closer and closer to his soft 'n danglies. But it does make one wonder why the sadistic thugs never just bypassed all the theatrics.

ViridianChick said:

Point is, if you treat a female-on-male rape seriously, most readers are going to take it seriously. I believe that. I really do.

Click to expand...

A reader can take the subject as seriously as the author and still not get to the same "place" the author intended.

That also doesn't mean that the reader *won't*. Just positing thoughts for consideration.

I haven't published anything, so I'd be silly to claim I know a thing or three about the readership.

Treehouseman said:

This.

And also this article: http://www.newstatesman.com/cultural-capital/2013/03/rape-james-bond

Quote: "My go-to example for this used to be James Bond. “Is it realistic that James Bond has never been raped?” I would say. How many times has he found himself utterly at the mercy of men who want to hurt, degrade and humiliate him before killing him? "

Click to expand...

Thank you for posting. I've never heard these points made before!

Skyfall is also the only Bond movie I actually enjoyed. Of course for many reasons; however, Javiar Bardem as Silva was priceless. And that scene where he suggestively strokes Bond's thigh, although a very light suggestion, scratched the surface of the unthinkable that could be done to Bond, which is crazy since Bond has been through all sorts of torture.

It makes me wonder if the perception here (not the reality) is that for male protagonists, rape is the ultimate act of violation, whereas with female protagonists rape is the only act of violation available to them.

Yeah. This is another problem I have with GoT. (The TV series, to be clear. I haven't read the books.)

Statistics show us that, currently, men in the United States military face sexual assault than women. Why? Because there are more men in the military. And yet in this hyper-violent setting that's touted as dark and realistic and cruel, in this setting with far more male characters than female, there's no male rape victims.

Click to expand...

There is male rape in the books.

As was said I think above, if the book is about rape/it's aftermath then I'd include it. If not...


In the books in my sig, one of the male characters has rape in his backstory. I only ever implied it* (the chances of me ever writing out a rape scene are probably zilch) but it surprised me that everyone thought that, if anyone, it was his female cohort who had been raped, when she wasn't.


*About the same amount of implication as for a different female character, and everyone got that.


It's like people expect women to be raped in certain circumstances, but for a guy, well, it's the extreme of the extreme. In one case, an author whose name I forget was stunned to be asked when the female MC of her series was going to be raped. Not if, when, like it was a given it would happen at some point.

I did consider having it happen to a male character in the series I'm working on now. Because it would have been realistic, tbh, considering how much male/male rape happens in prisons/wars. But...but I wouldn't have included it for a female character in the same position, so in the end I decided not to for him. Though you could probably read it that way. I left it open

ETA: I think that's my go to thing -- if I wouldn't add it for a guy in that situation, then why include it just because a character is female?

If a writer wants to use rape as a plot device let them. Not to say I have to approve or disapprove or buy their book or not buy their book. Just that it's up to them what they want to include or not include or how they want to write something, etc.

Ken said:

If a writer wants to use rape as a plot device let them. Not to say I have to approve or disapprove or buy their book or not buy their book. Just that it's up to them what they want to include or not include or how they want to write something, etc.

Click to expand...

I think this post and a couple others illustrates extremely well that different people mean different things when they mention words like plot device.

Plot device according to Lillith: Something added not because it was needed to enrich the story or actually has an effect on the story, but because the author wanted to add it for any number of reasons. Particularly when the writer trivializes it or makes it sexy, as if the victim is enjoying it.

Lillith1991 said:

I think this post and a couple others illustrates extremely well that different people mean different things when they mention words like plot device.

Plot device according to Lillith: Something added not because it was needed to enrich the story or actually has an effect on the story,

Click to expand...

Plot devices have an effect on the story. In fact, their entire purpose is to affect the plot, to move it somewhere. A MacGuffin is a plot device. Plot devices are not inherently bad.

Hence the key qualifier "crude" in the title.

It is the fact that a plot device is used for the express purpose of diddling with the plot (in a mechanical devicey sort of way) that usually makes it unfit for something as complex and affecting as rape.

Also it's super overused, IMO.

Lillith1991 said:

Plot device according to Lillith: Something added not because it was needed to enrich the story or actually has an effect on the story, but because the author wanted to add it for any number of reasons. Particularly when the writer trivializes it or makes it sexy, as if the victim is enjoying it.

Click to expand...

Exactly -- if it's going to significantly affect the plot/characters, sure (ETA though it'll need delicate handling). If it's just there to "add drama" or -- and this really makes me go ugh - to "motivate the male character who loves the victim"....I can think of better ways.

buzhidao said:

That's not what a plot device is. I mean, there's some fluidity in language, but you can't just make stuff up or it ruins people's abilities to communicate

Plot devices have an effect on the story. In fact, their entire purpose is to affect the story, to move the plot somewhere. A MacGuffin is a plot device. Plot devices are not inherently bad.

Hence the key qualifier "crude" in the title.

It is the fact that a plot device is used for the express purpose of diddling with the plot that sometimes makes it unfit for something as complex and affecting as rape.

Also it's super overused, IMO.

Click to expand...

I see plot devices for whatever reason the same way others view cliché, most likely because it is almost always framed the way people frame clichés. Poorly done. I can use a cliché in my writing, but if I do something new and interesting with it. If I subvert it in some way, people won't even notice it is there or that it is being used.

In the same viene, if I include rape either on or off stage and everything from then on is different because one or more of the ubiquitous company of do gooders was assaulted. Well, then it becomes part of the story. It changes things, possibly in quite drastice ways. The story would not be the same story if I took it out but something completely and entirely different. For many plot device is seen the same way, though for others it is different.

Plot device= used without care, and wouldn't change the story in any appreciable way.

Legitimate part of plot= pivoltal moment, that adds complexity and without which the story would in no logical way be able to continue the way it did.

Lillith1991 said:

Plot device according to Lillith: Something added not because it was needed to enrich the story or actually has an effect on the story, but because the author wanted to add it for any number of reasons. Particularly when the writer trivializes it or makes it sexy, as if the victim is enjoying it.

Click to expand...

... or thinly disguises the fact so readers can enjoy themselves.

Mr Flibble said:

In one case, an author whose name I forget was stunned to be asked when the female MC of her series was going to be raped. Not if, when, like it was a given it would happen at some point.

Click to expand...

You're probably thinking of Seanan McGuire: http://seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com/470626.html

Highly, highly recommended read.

This thread has been an interesting read for me, as someone whose WIP includes two rapes (possibly three, depending on how you personally define consent), and none of them are the focus of the entire thing.
I could easily remove them, and have the novel go in basically the same direction, with a few of the bells and whistles having been changed, but it's not somethingI would ever do.
The aftermath of the rapes isn't particularly shown, either, considering they take place in what's basically the third act, and there's simply no time for long reaching PTSD or the strain these things put on personal relationships.

I'm certainly not adding these things because I feel as though my MC needs to be raped, but at the same time, I'm not particularly willing to change something simply because it's not strictly necessary.

NRoach said:

This thread has been an interesting read for me, as someone whose WIP includes two rapes (possibly three, depending on how you personally define consent), and none of them are the focus of the entire thing.
I could easily remove them, and have the novel go in basically the same direction, with a few of the bells and whistles having been changed, but it's not somethingI would ever do.
The aftermath of the rapes isn't particularly shown, either, considering they take place in what's basically the third act, and there's simply no time for long reaching PTSD or the strain these things put on personal relationships.

I'm certainly not adding these things because I feel as though my MC needs to be raped, but at the same time, I'm not particularly willing to change something simply because it's not strictly necessary.

Click to expand...

Is your MC male or female?

I think including male rape in a story could be a bold creative decision, honestly. It's rare enough that it would be effective, AND it wouldn't be feeding into annoying (or worse) stereotypes.

But... it sounds harsh, because of course rape is many things WORSE than just this, but at the simplest level, female rape in fiction is just such a cliche. It's been done so many times it may as well be the boy-of-uncertain-parentage-discovers-a-magical-weapon-and-goes-on-a-journey trope.

Although of course there's no real-world mass of travelling orphans with magical weapons who may be hurt by having their experience depicted in a novel.

For me, it's generally difficult to see what the rape of a female character actually adds to a story, compared to what it detracts.

Captcha said:

Is your MC male or female?

I think including male rape in a story could be a bold creative decision, honestly. It's rare enough that it would be effective, AND it wouldn't be feeding into annoying (or worse) stereotypes.

But... it sounds harsh, because of course rape is many things WORSE than just this, but at the simplest level, female rape in fiction is just such a cliche. It's been done so many times it may as well be the boy-of-uncertain-parentage-discovers-a-magical-weapon-and-goes-on-a-journey trope.

Although of course there's no real-world mass of travelling orphans with magical weapons who may be hurt by having their experience depicted in a novel.

For me, it's generally difficult to see what the rape of a female character actually adds to a story, compared to what it detracts.

Click to expand...

Female.
Having given a bit more thought to it, I think it's a matter of tone, rather than plot. The entire thing is dark, and the third act particularly so; the rapist in question is an abusive "boyfriend", and outside of the rape, he's not too terrible a person. He takes the MC in when she's homeless, feeds her, and keeps her warm, all the while keeping up this not-particularly-believable façade of niceness.

The rape provides a stark contrast to that façade, and I feel as though without it, it would look more like a hamfisted attempt at redeeming the guy than an unambiguously abusive relationship.

I'd point out, as well, that they're not the "dark back alley and lots of screaming" kind of rape, more the "I know you've told me to stop, but we both know that you wouldn't actually dare stop me", which is probably the most common.

Lhowling said:

I believe that rape should be considered as a plot point. I believe that if a rape scene or if rape as a storyline fails to strike a reader in a thought-provoking way, then perhaps the writer was not successful in getting their message across. Of course, it is a provocative topic, so it's also not beyond reason that despite how well or poorly it plays in any story, the reader may just be turned off. Writers can't help that. Although, I don't think there's ever a time when a rape scene or rape as a plot point is accomplished the right way. Rape will always strike a nerve with people, regardless of how it's portrayed.
...
To me, rape is not a black and white issue. And I don't like it when it's framed as such in movies or literature, where it becomes so moralistic

Ugh.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with this (and several other statements on this thread). Yes, we all know rape is bad. But there are other kinds of rape besides "creepy man stalking woman in parking garage." There are women (and men) who are in long term relationships or marriages who deal with this on a regular basis and don't leave. So it's a very complex issue, and I'm okay with it being included in books if it's treated as such. I include it in a fair amount of my own books.

I've read some great books and seen some great movies where it is shown to have far-reaching effects (YA novel Speak, M/M in Sleepers & American History X, child rape in Bastard Out of Carolina to name a few) where I thought the writer did a good job of not sensationalizing it. I don't like when it is used as a convenient plot point or sexualized (insert laundry list of books/movies here), but I don't think it's something that should be ignored or off limits, either. It requires delicate treatment, and a writer who includes it should expect a certain amount of people to think it was handled badly, even when the author tries to be sensitive.

Sounds like that's what happened with this TV show.

Emermouse said:

I scoured YouTube searching for clips from Lewis Lovhaug's, aka Linkara, review of "Identity Crisis," looking in particular for the part where he does a good takedown of the rape as a plot device trope. I'm really kicking myself that I can't find it because it's really good. He points out that it's so often used not because the writers want to explore the trauma and issues associated with rape, but because it's seen as something that happens to women, so if you want to have something bad happen to a female character, you have them raped. "Identity Crisis" was particularly bad in that we only see how the rape affects the other heroes, not in how it affects the victim (in this case, Sue Dibny). It came across as the writers wanting to be all edgy and shocking without actually putting forth any effort.

Click to expand...

Got it: http://atopfourthwall.blogspot.com/2012/01/15-things-that-are-wrong-with-identity.html

Not YouTube, but his regular blog. I'll weigh in on this in a bit--just wanted to add that link if anyone was still looking for it.

Lena Hillbrand said:

I tend to agree with this (and several other statements on this thread). Yes, we all know rape is bad. But there are other kinds of rape besides "creepy man stalking woman in parking garage." There are women (and men) who are in long term relationships or marriages who deal with this on a regular basis and don't leave. So it's a very complex issue, and I'm okay with it being included in books if it's treated as such. I include it in a fair amount of my own books.

I've read some great books and seen some great movies where it is shown to have far-reaching effects (YA novel Speak, M/M in Sleepers & American History X, child rape in Bastard Out of Carolina to name a few) where I thought the writer did a good job of not sensationalizing it. I don't like when it is used as a convenient plot point or sexualized (insert laundry list of books/movies here), but I don't think it's something that should be ignored or off limits, either. It requires delicate treatment, and a writer who includes it should expect a certain amount of people to think it was handled badly, even when the author tries to be sensitive.

Sounds like that's what happened with this TV show.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure where anyone is getting that it should be ignored or off limits in anyway. So far all that has been talked about is improper use of it, not even remotely the same as outright banning it.

This was interesting because today I have been debating whether or not to include rape in a character's backstory. The reason the issue came up is because he makes several references to rapes in his autobiography (he's a real historical person) when he describes how he and 11 other young men are captured and enslaved by Barbary pirates. He never says anything about himself being - or not being - one of the victims, but something in the way he writes about an incident involving "two of us" just made me question if he meant it happened to him. I don't think a man writing in 1629 would be all that keen to shout out in print that he was raped by another man, so I don't think he'd openly admit it, but his writing certainly makes that interpretation not entirely unlikely. To me, reading it that way made him come together for me as a person, so I'm inclined to write him as if that happened. I'm not sure it will ever actually be mentioned, but I was still a bit apprehensive just the same because I know how many people really hate "rape as backstory" (and I may mention it, if it becomes relevant at some point).

So, do you think it is less problematic because it may be historically accurate (in the sense of actually having happened to this specific man)? Or is it still really cliché and potentially offensive?