Just some thoughts, definitely not "answers", I don't think your questions have simple ones, if they did, they wouldn't be so uncomfortable to contemplate.
What does it mean that even angels will ride roughshod over consent with pleasure?My take
( ... )
Speaking as a feminist and as a survivor of sexual violence and all of that jazz: Why on earth should we expect men to respect our right of consent if we refuse to respect theirs?
That really, really bothers me about what I'm seeing as I watch reactions unfold. Maybe I'm too close to the issue and am overreacting, but it does bother me.
If it doesn't matter if Sam says no or Dean says no, then why should it matter if Ruby or Jo or Anna says no or not?
It may be of little comfort but I suspect that on the whole, these are issues that not a lot of the fandom have had to face or deal with in any real meaningful way.
Just maybe, an eye or two might be opened by the discussion.
Why on earth should we expect men to respect our right of consent if we refuse to respect theirs?
In a political sense you're right. But in a moral sense, they should because it's the right thing to do. Just as we should respect theirs because it's the right thing to do.
I'm just lost on how people focusing on sexual violence against women instead of what can be viewed as allegorical sexual violence against men, though that interpretation is very much up for debate, somehow proves the fandom is not respecting men's right to consent
( ... )
Honestly, I had trouble figuring out what the initial post was about until the OP clarified in comments. I think the topic's pretty interesting-- especially, actually, in light of the misogyny in SPN. Is the sexualized violence supposed to be more egregious, because we're so accustomed to seeing it used against women we're supposed to be inured?
I agree that the thought of SPN fandom or fandom as a whole as misandrist is...lol no.
It's an interesting question, for sure. I think, given what we know of the SPN writers (did you hear Sera Gamble's comments about how important it was to her to not write Sam as a rapist, and how Kripke and the other writers seemed to think she was weak because of it? It was very telling, and horribly depressing) it's most likely that it's presented as more egregious almost accidentally, in that men are routinely treated as human on the show in a way women are not. So we as viewers are presented with the male violation and pain while the female violation and pain tends to be glossed over (with the exception of Meg, but what happened to her was presented not on its own terms, but by how it affected Dean
( ... )
No, I didn't hear those comments! Honestly, I try to avoid a lot about SPN because the show depresses the crap out of me at times anyway.
It's an interesting question and I'm still not quite sure what I think of it myself-- there's definitely been sexual implications like the 'ridden hard' comment, but metaphor is just that.
As I recall, there was already a swell of anticipated anger at the implication before we saw it that Sam might be having or have had sex with Ruby, over the assumption that there would be an unwilling host participant.
By the time we actually saw the flashback, and the writers had covered that base, a certain portion of the fandom was already predisposed against the idea, and against Sam.
The bulk of the negative reaction was against the idea rather than a real reaction to the actual scene. This is a damn shame, because the scene was incredibly intense and powerful, and incredibly painful. It should have swung sympathy in Sam's direction, showing how much he went through after Dean's death, and foreshadowing how Ruby pushed and manipulated him, taking advantage of his emotional suffering.
I suppose I was one of the few whose reaction to the hints about Sam having sex with Ruby, was to grow increasingly concerned about Sam, as I knew that he would never have slept with a demon if he was of sound-mind.
Dean even calls it directly after that scene, telling Sam that so far all he's told him about is "a manipulative bitch that screwed you, played mind-games with you, and did everything she could to get you to go bad."
I agree, it's a shame if audience members missed out on the true implications of that event.
Just some thoughts, definitely not "answers", I don't think your questions have simple ones, if they did, they wouldn't be so uncomfortable to contemplate.
What does it mean that even angels will ride roughshod over consent with pleasure?My take ( ... )
Reply
That really, really bothers me about what I'm seeing as I watch reactions unfold. Maybe I'm too close to the issue and am overreacting, but it does bother me.
If it doesn't matter if Sam says no or Dean says no, then why should it matter if Ruby or Jo or Anna says no or not?
Reply
I agree completely - if no means no when a woman says it to a man, it should mean the same when a man says it to a woman. When a man says it to a man.
I'd be lying if I said that the imbalance in fan reactions surprised me, though.
Reply
Reply
Just maybe, an eye or two might be opened by the discussion.
Reply
In a political sense you're right. But in a moral sense, they should because it's the right thing to do. Just as we should respect theirs because it's the right thing to do.
(Here from metafandom.)
Reply
Reply
I agree that the thought of SPN fandom or fandom as a whole as misandrist is...lol no.
Reply
Reply
It's an interesting question and I'm still not quite sure what I think of it myself-- there's definitely been sexual implications like the 'ridden hard' comment, but metaphor is just that.
Reply
Thank you for pointing this out! I too was confused by the backlash against Sam, when clearly it was Sam that was the victim in the situation.
It is disheartening to realize that rape, or dub-con, is not recognized as such when it is female->male violence.
Reply
By the time we actually saw the flashback, and the writers had covered that base, a certain portion of the fandom was already predisposed against the idea, and against Sam.
The bulk of the negative reaction was against the idea rather than a real reaction to the actual scene. This is a damn shame, because the scene was incredibly intense and powerful, and incredibly painful. It should have swung sympathy in Sam's direction, showing how much he went through after Dean's death, and foreshadowing how Ruby pushed and manipulated him, taking advantage of his emotional suffering.
Reply
Dean even calls it directly after that scene, telling Sam that so far all he's told him about is "a manipulative bitch that screwed you, played mind-games with you, and did everything she could to get you to go bad."
I agree, it's a shame if audience members missed out on the true implications of that event.
Reply
Leave a comment