sept_douleurs t1_iu3rmr2 wrote
For anything labeled dark romance, it’s pretty common; it’s basically a coin flip as to will it have SA in it or not. It’s also not uncommon for older historical romances to include scenes where the consent is dubious or non-existent—these books didn’t get a reputation as “bodice rippers” for nothing—but it’s not as common in more recent historical romances (unless they’re also dark romance). In other subgenres, like sweet romance and rom-coms, it’s very very rare to have SA even as an alluded to element in the story, much less described graphically on page.
enJ0eable OP t1_iu46ob8 wrote
I’ve tried to avoid dark romance so far for this reason, but thank you for the reminder. 🥰
With history novels this makes sense, I just get easily upset over the fact that some authors, while adding sa scenes, still manage to do so in a respectful way (ie not being too explicit or treating the subject with the seriousness it deserves), while other don’t. It’s clearly possible, so why do you feel the need to traumatize your readers? 🙃 (Sorry, ranting here lol)
I guess no impulse purchases whatever the case. 🥲
AlbertoMX t1_iu4o87q wrote
Because it sells. Like... A lot. Asian romantic light novels have plenty of manipulative control freaks with a lot of dubcon or noncon.
And dont make me talk about those age gaps...
enJ0eable OP t1_iu4u289 wrote
>And dont make me talk about those age gaps...
Riiight?? Currently refusing to watch House of Dragon for similar reasons. 🙃
But yes and that’s the most infuriating part! One book was so graphic it made me flinch and it has 5 stars on Amazon and is a NY times bestseller. To be reminded how celebrated it is in society is…. 🥶
(Edit: To the Downvoters of this comment I only say examine yourself. Why does someone calling out SA warrant a dislike? Do you feel attacked somehow? If not, what is it?)
Rahimus_ t1_iu6czht wrote
You’re not calling out sexual assault. Everything you’re mentioning is fictional. Nobody was sexually assaulted, because none of the characters exist.
If you don’t want to read stories where SA exists (as it does in the real world), that’s your prerogative, but don’t act like it’s some morally superior stance, it’s not.
Reading about sexual assault - no matter how explicit - isn’t immoral. It can be part of the story the author wants to convey. If you think the story must then itself be immoral, I’d urge you to reevaluate your position. A story containing an immoral person isn’t the same as the story being immoral (what would that even mean lol).
enJ0eable OP t1_iu86tsx wrote
Maybe calling out isn’t the right word here, because you’re right, there’s no one TO call out. We can talk about whether or not some people here feel called out, but that is another story.
You are, of course, also right about fictional characters or a fictional story itself not being moral. Morality is tied to actions, choices, decisions. It therefore doesn’t make sense to judge fictional characters at all, we can only analyze their behavior or the imagery underlying it.
While you are the one bringing up morality here, not me (I merely suggested that sa’s popularity in media these days - like many people in these comments confirm! - makes my spine freeze), it’s still a relevant discussion to have.
In another comment you mentioned the word “evil.” Who said anything about evil? Immorally doesn’t equate evil, or a whole lot of people would have to be evil in the real world.
We’ve come closer to why morality still is questionable when sa is being turned into a romantic trope or dramatic plot device in another comment you made:
>Accountability for what? The sexual assault that didn’t happen? The age gap that doesn’t exist? You haven’t explained what’s inherently wrong with writing a story that contains SA. I don’t see a problem. A story is something the author imagined, and wants to share with the world. If that story includes rape, then so be it.
Like I said, only actions can be moral. Writing, publishing, marketing, selling are all actions made by real people. I also mentioned in my edit of the post my not minding SA in media if it’s handled responsibly. So for example the assaulter could face actual consequences for their actions, whether that be them going to jail, getting killed (historical or fantasy) or simply left by their partner who was the victim. Instead it’s become a plot device that in the worst case is romanticized (the age gap with the younger one being a child is the common choice here) and in the best case thrown into the story casually, without preparation and often without the severity it deserves. All the while viewers/readers continue to watch and celebrate such content. The writers know this of course, which is how they’re the ones making money.
If you still “don’t see the problem”, the most important part you’re not quite right about is this:
>Everything you’re mentioning is fictional. Nobody was sexually assaulted, because none of the characters exist.
Why, do you think, does a whole group of people (that might be larger than you realize) have to look up trigger warnings about SA at all? Why are there whole sides dedicated to this?
I have a feeling bringing up statistics isn’t going to do anything, but we know them all by now. 1 in 6/7. The story doesn’t contain real SA of course, but real life does. So does it contain impressionable young people who consume media in vast quantities, binge watching shows sometimes in one day. It also contains assaulters, r..ists and in some cases people who have the definition of SA wrong. Especially the latter is dangerous, because I’m sure the coworker I’ve mentioned earlier (and many others like this) sees even less of a problem with a child being with a grown person. This trope being acknowledged within a romance and not addressed as a problem can thereby leave small reminders in certain people, that their behavior is ok. Not everyone has the mental capacity, emotional intelligence or even the willingness to critically examine a character’s choice. They just consume and enjoy.
While I was growing up, another trope was pretty popular in basically all genres of film and TV. The “Keep fighting even after she says no” trope. A lot of men especially had that idea down to a T. My attacker included. He also didn’t stop after my no. Or the tenth. Or the 20th.
I like many others don’t look for trigger warnings because we slightly enjoy it less. We don’t even look for them because we think about morality in any way. We look for them to protect our brains and bodies from trauma wounds being opened.
And while I can feel the “but this is your trauma not mine” coming, I’ll lastly say this: Morality at the end of the day can be analyzed to death. Whole philosophies have been developed around the thing. But I’ve never preached anything here. I’ve never said you’re immoral for watching or reading these stories. Morality and ethics for me is personal. Do I personally want to condone harmful rhetoric taking place and giving my money and thereby support for writers who realize that? No. Do I wish others would see that, too? Yes of course. How couldn’t I, after what happened to me. But I don’t control others. And I don’t control you. So at the end of the day it’s about the question:
What can I sleep with at night?
Rahimus_ t1_iu890dc wrote
>It therefore doesn’t make sense to judge fictional characters at all
You can most definitely judge fictional characters. The book tells you actions they took, and sometimes the motivation behind them. What I said is that it doesn't make sense to judge the morality of a book, because, it's a book, not a person/character.
>Who said anything about evil?
I mean, as you said, clearly I did. You're putting too much emphasis on this. It was simply a term I used in the comment — one often used in the discussion of fiction — as opposed to repeating immoral another time. I'm not gong to get in to a discussion of definitions here, but it's worth noting that "immoral" plays quite a key role in the definition of evil.
>So for example the assaulter could face actual consequences for their actions
Lmao. At this point, we would need to make a distinction between different types of fiction (e.g. realistic, historical, fantasy etc.). I'll address those 3, and leave you to ponder the rest. In real life, it's very common for people who commit SA to face no consequences. You would limit authors writing realistic fiction from portraying that part of our world? I don't see the justification for that. The same argument applies for historical fiction. In regards to fantasy, you need to take in to consideration the world that has been created. Maybe there are gelded men, after being found guilty of rape. At the same time, if the king rapes a handmaiden and nothing happens, that's simply the way of the world in this society.
None of these situations reflect poorly on the author — unless you think an author deserves to be cancelled merely for being able to design a story where a rape occurs, which I think is an indefensible positon.
> romanticized
>
> thrown into the story casually, without preparation and often without the severity it deserves
I'm unclear what the point you're trying to make here is. I've already discussed why SA may be romanticized in a text. The person comitting the SA would likely see a romanticized version of the reality from their perspective. In many cases (where it's more akin to statuatory rape than rape) the second character involved may also view the reality from such a perspective. That does not mean the author thinks rape is romantic...
What severity does SA deserve? In some fantasy worlds, it may be very common. In more realistic fiction, you mentioned the 1 out of 6/7 yourself, that sounds more like an everyday thing than something deserving a lot of severity.
>They just consume and enjoy
People are free to enjoy whatever literature or film they want. If they read about rape, and then decide to commit sexual assault, that's not something you can possibly blame the author for. People make their own decisions.
>Do I wish others would see that, too
I think this is the problem with your stance on this post, and in the comments. This is a subjective matter, yet you present your stance as if its the morally superior, objectively correct position.
[deleted] t1_iu6b29a wrote
[removed]
enJ0eable OP t1_iu6f1d9 wrote
Thanks for making my point for me.
I clearly said it’s the age gap I have the problem with (=inherent lack of consent), which is in fact not only “condoned” in western modern day societies, but to some degrees encouraged. Not least through arguments and deflection like yours. Just last week a 29m coworker told me about him hooking up with a 16 yo like that’s a normal thing to do.
So I don’t “forbid myself” from watching a show, I just don’t want to watch it. Maybe look up the word bigotry again, because wanting to avoid triggers and wanting to actually enjoy content in one’s personal time isn’t it. (For similar reasons I also don’t consume anything within the horror genre. Is that bigoted, too, when being jumpscared just isn’t my idea of fun?)
Then the simple minded insult. Ironic. Fiction is written by real people. Who can take accountability. Who make money off of said content. Now you can argue there’s a disconnect there, but I don’t see it that way. And many other people don’t either. Reminds me of folks who say “We need to separate the art from the artist.” No we don’t.
Lastly, the handmaid’s tale has many problems, but factually not that specific one you mentioned. Not going into detail here, as it would derail the discussion.
Rahimus_ t1_iu7znco wrote
>Fiction is written by real people. Who can take accountability.
Accountability for what? The sexual assault that didn’t happen? The age gap that doesn’t exist? You haven’t explained what’s inherently wrong with writing a story that contains SA. I don’t see a problem. A story is something the author imagined, and wants to share with the world. If that story includes rape, then so be it.
This isn’t about a disconnect between the art and the author, it’s about a disconnect between a fictional character doing something evil, and the author or the art being evil.
PiCoolerThanPie t1_iu80zrs wrote
I personally like stories w/ really messed up stuff like SA, but I do think there can be a moral line in regards to the portrayal of such scenes. Portraying SA etc as hot or desirable is not good.
Rahimus_ t1_iu84jk3 wrote
Can you clarify what you mean? I would say that if a story/chapter is written through the perspective of a character committing SA, it makes sense it would be described as hot/desirable. That’s just a consequence of the lens through which the story is told.
joyjesoh t1_iu4ulda wrote
My experience with Asian romance differs though.
I'm an Asian, so I'm inclined to reading Asian romance novels because of the difference in dating culture in Asia vs West.
Romance in Asia is more slow burn, so you don't see kisses or sex till both parties are very into the relationship, so more consensual. On the contrary, in the west you see characters kiss on the first date, sex in the first week. So there's a higher chance of SA, I feel.
Just my two cents
nyet-marionetka t1_iu7fbkg wrote
You can have fast burn romance and casual sex with complete respect of consent for both parties.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments