Yes, Cuba Gooding Jr did Assault Sarah Paulson

It’s been reported that Cuba Gooding Jr and Sarah Paulson were at the American Horror Story: Roanoke panel for the Paleyfest in Los Angeles, to discuss American Horror Story: Roanoke. This would have been an unremarkable event had it not been for Cuba deciding to slip behind Paulson and lift her dress, exposing her legs and buttocks when Paulson turned to introduce Kathy Bates. Paulson responded with a shriek as she tried to cover her exposed body.  Since news has spread of Cuba’s actions, twitter responded with rage questioning how he would feel if this happened to his daughters.

American Horror Story: Roanoke is not the first time these two have worked together and they have reportedly established a friendship. It’s in the guise of joking around that Cuba felt he had the right to expose Paulson as a joke to the audience.  That his actions were a form of assault most certainly didn’t occur to him.  It’s because of rape culture that violent actions (and make no mistake about it, forcibly exposing someone’s body is violent) are laughed off as unimportant. That Twitter felt the need to reference Cuba’s own daughters as a way to attack his actions evidences that even when we can recognise an assault for what it is, we reify the idea that woman as a category are not due bodily respect.  Women are only free from assault when they can be framed as mothers, daughters, sisters and wives.  What Cuba did to Paulson isn’t wrong because he doesn’t want his daughters to be similarly assaulted but because he violated Paulson’s right to privacy and her right to choose when her body is displayed.

I know a lot of people have defended this action with the argument that Sarah Paulson laughed it off. She didn’t react with outrage and anger - so it must be okay then?

Rape by Deception

Commonly when we think of rape, it’s usually about some stranger jumping out of the bushes or some evil man stalking us as we walk through a dark parking garage to get to our cars.  The victim is chosen at random and doesn’t know her rapist. It’s the basis for all the self defense classes women are encouraged to take. Overwhelming, we think of rape as something inflicted by the violent stranger. Additionally, rape is almost always constructed as a crime against women and if men are understood to be the victims of rape at all, it is only if the rapist is male. The truth of the matter is that the most common form of rape is not stranger related at all. In fact, rape can take on many forms and it’s these forms which step outside of popular imagination that many refuse to accept or even at times acknowledge constitute rape.

Recently, we have seen a lot of rape happening on the shows that we review. What they all have in common is an element of deception and that woman is the perpetrator. These two elements are enough for the violation to read as sex and quickly be swept aside. The victim is often portrayed to have no personal trauma related to the incident and if there is any antagonism between the rape victim and his rapist, it is usually due to entirely different issues; the rape is certainly never considered a reason for him to loathe her. In fact, a problem only seems to arise in this situations when a child is conceived as we have seen in Grimm and Once Upon A Time  There is little to no discussion about the violation itself and instead the focus quickly to turns to the child

Nick on Grimm is a Portland city police detective and if anyone should be aware of the law and how it relates to consent, it should be this character. Nick consents to sex with who he believes to be his girlfriend Juliet and instead it’s actually Adalind, who has masked her identity using magic.  Not only does Nick fail to acknowledge or even confirm that he is a rape victim, he is repeatedly shamed by his friends and Juliet. The entire sexual assault is framed as Nick having an unwitting affair - if anyone is portrayed as a victim of this rape it is Juliet - in fact, Nick being raped is probably the event that sets Juliet on her evil path. The rape of Nick is a crime against Juliet and part of her character’s development. The descriptors used help sanitise the incident, thus setting the stage for Nick to fall in love with and cohabit with his rapist.  Adalind quickly moves from the woman who violated his person to the mother of his child as though these two identities are somehow mutually exclusive. Adalind’s motherhood quickly becomes the path the redemption train traverses and all bad acts are cast away with the afterbirth.

Once Upon a Time, like Grimm, chose to include a rape by deception. This time, the wicked witch of the east Zelena pretends to be Guinevere, the love interest of Robin Hood. When the deception is revealed it is cast as a wrong against Regina (the evil Queen) because it for a time impeded her chance at true love and a happy ending with Robin Hood.  Zelena is imprisoned for her crimes but at no point is Robin’s violation even remotely considered to be at last partially an explicit reason for her punishment. All of Zelena’s bad acts are reviewed ad nauseum and not once is there a mention of the fact that along with the destruction she caused in Storybrooke that she has also become a rapist. Robin is angry but the reason for his anger is centered around the murder of Guinevere (though, admittedly, even this is depressingly underplayed) rather than the fact that he was deceived and raped repeatedly.

Robin Hood and Regina take custody of the baby because Zelena is evil (though, again, we have to stress her being a rapist is never raised as part of said evil). When they all end up in the underworld, Zelena’s redemption train begins. Regina starts by suggesting that Zelena can start making amends and choosing to do good instead of evil. It’s worth noting, again, that making amends in no way means accepting responsibility for raping Robin. The coup de grace comes when Regina and Zelena meet with Cora and learn that there was a time when they cared very deeply for each other. Zelena doesn’t need to perform any acts of contrition, she is simply forgiven by Regina who then informs Robin that he should hand over his daughter to Zelena because now, Zelena is a part of team good guy. Robin is reluctant but he does comply.

Let us stress this again, at no point was Zelena’s rape of Robin acknowledged and at no point was her addressing this part of her redemption

The very idea that someone can suddenly be labelled good and have their bad actions cast away as though no one was harmed is alarming. Watching as Robin was pressured into handing over his daughter to someone he has every reason to feel is dangerous is a problem.  Robin may not love Zelena but the woman he does love cares for her and that is enough to grant forgiveness. Love is a beautiful thing and for that matter so is forgiveness but only Robin has the right and or ability to actually forgive and accept his rapist. Forcing him into doing so renders him the invisible and inconvenient victim; we see Zelena and Regina come to terms with each other but Regina doesn’t take one moment to consider the feelings of the man she loves towards his rapist. It is not a matter of Robin trusting Regina when she insists Zelena is good now, it is a matter of addressing he has been wronged, he has been hurt and Regina’s trust is not really relevant in that.

Grimm: Nick, Adalind and the Rape No-one Talks About

This isn’t the first time we’ve spoken about issues on Grimm. In fact, recently, there were so many issues that we simply did a post calling it all out because it was almost impressive how many terrible elements they managed to cram into a season.

And yet, here we are again because Grimm has managed to sink to a particularly galling - and sadly predictable - depth. Nick and Adalind have slept together for the first time and are heading to coupledom.

That paragraph pretty much sums up the problem with this whole romance because “Nick and Adalind have slept together for the first time”, is not what the show says. Monroe and Nick himself have both openly spoken about Nick having slept with Adalind once (or maybe even twice) before.

Let us be adamant on this point: Nick has never slept with Adalind before. Nick has never has sex with Adalind before. Nick was raped by Adalind

I’m repeating this for emphasis because the show is determined to gloss over this and rewrite history:

Nick was raped by Adalind.

This was not having sex. It certainly wasn’t a romance. This was rape.

For it to have been sex and not rape, there would have to have been consent. That is the ultimate definition of what rae is - having sex with someone without their consent. Coercing them into sex by whatever means: force, manipulation, intimidation, taking advantage of their incapacity or deception. Yes, I know I am repeating myself a lot here, but  I am repeating myself because the writers of Grimm have completely lost this very basic and unquestionable definition of what rape is.

Grimm, Season Five, Episode Eleven: Key Move

"It is not down on any map;

true places never are."

After staring at the map the five keys produced, they all decide on a location to go and check out.  It's Rosealee who secured fake passports for Nick and Monroe to travel under certain that Black Claw will be looking for them.  Monroe is very excited because the Grimm's who buried this treasure did so in the fourth century and it could be absolutely anything - he even speculates that it's the holy grail.  This is a big leap of faith for Nick and Monroe because they know that the trip itself will be dangerous and have no idea what is buried there. It literally could be anything.

With plans set, it's time to say their goodbyes.  Nick tells Adalind about heading to Germany with Monroe and she is adamant that she doesn't want Nick to go because she feels that it's too dangerous.  I was really hoping that Adalind's fears were about her absolute economic dependency on Nick and the possibility of being a single mother.  When Grimm did delve into this earlier this season, I found it interesting, especially given that this is something all women must consider if they decide to give up work.  Unfortunately, Adalind's issue is because she has fallen in love with Nick.  Let me say that again, Adalind has fallen in love with Nick. Adalind decides to throw caution to the wind after declaring her love, claiming to no longer care about how complicated this will make things and kisses Nick.  Complicated? At this point, Grimm could have scored points by having Nick reject Adalind because she did after all rape him but instead, Grimm actually had these two have sex.  Nick willingly consented to sex with his rapist.

In the afterglow, Nick lay with Adalind in his arms thinking about her various bad acts but never once did he think about the rape.  Since the rape occurred in season four, Grimm has run screaming from the label of rape.  It's ridiculous given that Nick is a cop and would damn well know that what happened to him is rape by deception.  Perhaps this is about society's determination that all rape must be violent, with a stranger jumping out of the bushes.  Perhaps it's because society too often refuses to accept that a woman can indeed a rape a man.  The absolute denial about what happened between Nick and Adalind, is a very good example of how our rape culture works.  Grimm then doubles down by once again having Monroe refer to the rape as Nick sleeping with Adalind.  Nick says that when he slept with Adalind, he thought he was having sex with Juliette, and therefore even by their own definition, this was rape by deception.

A lot of work has been done to rehabilitate Adalind's character in order to make a relationship between her and Nick supposedly believable.  The very idea that a rapist can be redeemed in this way is beyond problematic.  As part of this redemption train, Adalind has been depowered and made absolutely dependent upon Nick.  This is no coming together of equals.

Fox's Lucifer and Sexually Predatory Behaviour

Lucifer Morningstar is the devil which means that we expect him to be evil. We expect him to cross every boundary that there is.  We expect him to be smarmy, dishonest and clearly untrustworthy.  Tom Ellis as the devil is absolutely incorrigible and embodies another in a long line of anti-heroes which the audience is encouraged to root for. Considering Lucifer’s ability to harm, we should be far more concerned about him than we actually are.  Sure, some of our laissez–faire attitude can be blamed on Lucifer’s rakish charm but a good deal of it is the fact that despite years of work by women, consent is still something we don’t take seriously.

Lucifer Morningstar on Fox's Lucifer is yet another in a long line of anti-heroes which the public has been offered. From Tony Soprano, to Walter White, to Dexter, to Francis Underwood, to Michael Corleone, audiences have rooted for these men despite their bad acts.  Though we have yet to see Lucifer do any real long lasting on screen violence like rape or murder akin to his fellow anti-hero counterparts, he is perhaps even more explicitly evil and or problematic given his identity.  When we see Lucifer using his magical powers to force people to confess their deepest desire, we are intrigued rather than repelled by the gross violation that this represents. These secrets he compels are private for a reason and yet Lucifer cavalierly forces people to openly confess, headless of the consequences his target may have to pay. There’s a reason we don’t share with the world everything that goes through our heads.  From the very beginning, and perfectly shown when he outs a gay security guard against his will and with no thought for the consequences, it’s clear Lucifer has no respect for anyone but himself. This is the foundation of his relationship with Chloe.

When Lucifer first meets Chloe Decker, he is amazed when he realises that his ability to appeal to directly to women’s unconscious desire for the so-called bad boy, or what Lucifer likes to call the “feral urge” doesn’t seem to work on her.  Lucifer even wonders if something is biologically wrong with Chloe, or if she hit her head as a child.  What he cannot accept is Chloe repeatedly explicitly saying no to his advances.  Chloe goes as far as tell Lucifer that she finds him repellant but for him, it only serves to fuel his ambition to have sex with Chloe.  

Chloe repeatedly sets boundaries and makes it clear that, at best (and reluctantly), she will consent to a  working relationship with Lucifer but none of this stops him from showing up in her home uninvited to make her breakfast.  Lucifer is more concerned about being thrown out of Chloe’s home than the fact that he violated her personal space.  Lucifer then escalates his behaviour and appears naked, like some kind of subway pervert when Chloe comes to meet him at his piano bar. Sure, Chloe might like the view but exposing your naked body to someone without their consent is not some form of harmless exhibitionism. It’s predatory and in this case, the exhibitionism isn’t about mutual consent but about Lucifer’s sexual gratification and desire to validate his sexual viability. There’s a reason why flashing is a crime.

Friday Discussion: Trigger Warnings

We have spoken before about how Atrocities are all too often casually invoked in fiction for lazy characterisation. We have also spoken about how marginalised issues are too often appropriated for lazy storytelling or even as a cheap marketing tool - but these points don’t just apply to the genocides and catastrophes that are in our history books, but also to the very personal atrocities that happen to people every day. Rape, abuse, hate crimes and so many horrendous acts leave people every bit as devastated as the horrors that are considered large enough to deserve historical record.

Let us not downplay what a trigger means. A person who is triggered is hurt - they are wounded, they are often forced to relive some of the worst moments of their lives. Being triggered is more than being uncomfortable - it can mean your deepest fear ambushing you, it can mean nights of overwhelming terror, it can make leaving the house a desperate struggle. No, it certainly doesn’t always manifest this way and certainly many people have learned ways to cope with their triggers - but on no account can we dismiss triggers as something minor, or “oversensitivity” (as it is so often dismissed as by people who object to them even being discussed)

Obviously, it does become difficult, if not impossible, to remove every trigger for every person in the media. Nor does it mean that any or all triggers must never ever appear in the media in any form. However, that doesn’t mean some of the most commonly experienced and egregious triggers cannot be warned for - that the victims of things like rape, torture, hate crimes etc cannot be given the chance to protect themselves.

With every depiction of these on TV or in books you are invoking atrocity. You are using atrocity, you are portraying atrocity and there is an even higher chance that you are presenting that atrocity to its victims. Which means we must always ask WHY we are doing this? Why is this here? Why is it being included?

To invoke these atrocities casually, gratuitously, clumsily and/or pointlessly not only seeds unnecessary minefields of triggering pain for victims to stumble upon but it completely disrespects their experience and rubs salt into these tender wounds. It’s bad enough that a show has decided to gratuitously depict what these victims have endured - but to do it as entertainment? To do it for shock value? To do it and show none of the consequences, the impact or the scars of it? To do it even for titillation?

Rape on Game of Thrones

Yet again the internetz is in a Game of Thrones uproar, and this time it’s about the rape of Sansa. Some question if what happened between Sansa and Ramsay actually constitutes rape because she married him of her volition before he violated her. Reasonable people can agree that these people are living in the past because it is absolutely possible to rape one’s lawfully wedded spouse. Others have suggested that this is only a thing because it was Sansa who was raped and she is a favourite character. To that I must ask when did Sansa become so favoured?  A simple search will reveal that Sansa’s character has been much derided for her genteel performance of ladyhood in the face of danger she faced in King’s Landing.  

Sansa’s rape may have been the most recent catalyst for a discussion about rape in  Game of Thrones but if we are honest, from the very first season, it was apparent that as far as rape goes, how it occurs, who becomes a victim, and whose character growth is meant to benefit, the instances of rape are highly problematic. To be clear, I am not in any way suggesting that there is ever a time when rape is appropriate or justifiable. The writers of Game of Thrones argue that rape is the historical result of war (a contention I don’t disagree with) however, this is not how rape has been employed in the series to date.

The first incident of rape to appear in Game of Thrones occurred in season one, episode one, accurately foreshadowing all of the abuse to come. On Daenerys Targaryen’s wedding night with Khal Drogo, as she wept, it was Drogo who said “no”. Daenerys wasn’t even afforded the opportunity to protest beyond her tears. If we apply the writer’s logic to this instance, it fails miserably. The marriage between Daenerys and Drogo was to cement an alliance and most certainly was not an act of war.  Daenerys was not a citizen of the enemy captured in battle and she was not a slave; the reasons historically where rape and war are associated. The writers were not content with simply having the ever so blond and white Daenerys violated and subjugated by her beast like husband (yes, that is how the show portrays the Dorthraki), they had Daenerys fall in love with her rapist.  For a moment, I blinked, wondering if I was watching Luke and Laura from General Hospital all over again.  Women DO NOT FALL IN LOVE WITH THEIR RAPIST! Moon of my life my ass, more like bane of my existence.

The rape of Daenerys was the last scene of the first episode and would go on to inform the thinking regarding sexual assault regardless of protestations which would occur later in response to fan outrage.

Are we saying that rape should never be depicted in media at all? No - there are certainly powerful moments in media when atrocities can and should be depicted. They need to be treated with the respect and wariness they deserve - we need to acknowledge that these are the traumatic experiences of real people that are being invoked and that should not be done gratuitously or for cheap shock value; there needs to be a reason. And it needs to be a good one.

What is the reason for this, the first rape? Especially since it was (debatably, of course) not depicted in the books? Obviously the excuse of war does not remotely apply - so why is it here? This rape is used to both characterise the animalistic tendencies of the Dorthraki (which, aside from anything else is a supremely racist trope given how the Dorthraki are depicted as POC) and, of course, present the pure innocence of Daenerys at this time - so white and fragile and delicate. Here we have the ongoing themes of Game of Thrones and rape - it is used to either make women look vulnerable, victimised and controlled and owned by their men or to make bad men look so very bad (when the rape even HAS a point, which often it doesn’t, serving more as wallpaper to the setting in the same way as the oft appearing naked sex-workers).

Grimm: Oh Hell No

If you have been following Fangs for the Fantasy for some time, you will know that when a season finale comes around we often write a Friday Discussion about particular issues that have stood out to us over the course of a season.

So we come to the fourth season of Grimm and a terrible dilemma - there’s just so much wrong here that touching on any one issue wouldn’t give the full depth of a season that left us yelling “oh hell no” at the screen every episode.

It is the collective fail of this season that makes all of it so much worse. So let us line up some of the issues of this broken season.

Wesenrein

Our first Oh Hell No has to be yelled at the top of our lungs for some of the most appropriative awfulness we’ve ever seen - and that includes  the season in which Grimm made Hitler into a Wesen.

This season, Mornoe and Rosalie are attacked by a group that disapproves of inter-wessen relationships (he’s a blutbad, she’s a fuchsbau). The whole storyline is directly ripped off from the racist bigoted violence against people in interracial relationships. We can’t say it’s “inspired by” or that it even “draws upon” this terrible bigotry and terrible time in history - this is a direct rip off.

The Wesenrein even put burning cross-like symbols in Monroe and Rosalie’s lawn. Burning crosses in their lawn, there was no other way they could convey hatred without stealing this terrible moment from history? And then they have a trial with lots of Wesenrein people in KKK-style robes - all they need is some bleach and it could be a historical photograph.

This is appropriation. This was a direct theft of a horrendous atrocity in history. This was claiming the experiences of a marginalised group and turning it into entertainment all while nearly completely removing actual POC from the plot line. I reiterate - Oh Hell No.

Random POC Appropriation

We need another Oh Hell No here - Grimm is not good with their POC actors, despite having two prominent characters of colour in the main cast, neither Hank nor Wu really get deeply absorbed in the plot. Like so many POC on so many shows, they’re often on screen - but as sidekicks, comic reliefs and shadows for the main characters. When we do  get plot lines that actually do involve POC on Grimm in a particularly meaty manner, it inevitably means Grimm is raiding cultures of colour for woo-woo. POC and POC issues or culture will never be raised for episode after episode - then suddenly Kali! Bring on the Hindu snake people. Chupacabra, dredge up latinos everywhere! Native Americans added a third such episode this season

These characters/cultures/people only appear when Grimm wants to fill its pockets with some non-European monsters and once the show has finished play with its new toys, they’re put back in the box to be neglected again.

Grimm, Season Four, Episode Sixteen: Heartbreaker

"How the silly frog does talk!

He can be no companion

to any human being."

Juliet bursts into Renard's room, drops the book on the bed and informs him that there is nothing in the book which will benefit either of them.  Juliet then demands to know where Elizabeth is, saying that it's Elizabeth who did this to her. Renard tries to reassure Juliet by telling her that Elizabeth had no idea that Juliet would become a Hexenbiest. Juliet refuses to be pacified and says that she wants her life back and threatens that Renard had better watch out if she doesn't get her life back.

A group cyclists ride a trail and Bella is not impressed when Rick tries to hit on her.  Bella decides to deal with it by riding off by herself.  She doesn't get far and accidentally rides into a ditch and falls off the bike.  Zack manages to catch up with Bella and helps her off the ground.  Zack then makes his pitch to Bella, telling her that she is really great, but once again Bella is not interested.  Zack tries to check on Bella's injuries and he is insistent about staying with her because she is injured.  Bella doubles over in pain and Zack places his hands on her shoulders.  Bella woges and Zack starts to struggle to breathe.  Zack ends up falling into a ditch.

Nick is sitting in a coffee shop and calls Juliet and again leaves a message. Nick is then joined by Hank, and so he explains what happened to Juliet.   Hank suggests that Juliet might be afraid of what Nick might do to her. Okay, someone needs to explain to me why this sudden fear of what Nick might do is somehow reasonable.  Nick's phone rings and of course it's about Zack.

Nick and Hank meet Wu at the park and they stand over Zack's dead body.  Zack's face is badly swollen. The cops decide to check out Zack's place while they wait to hear about the cause of death from the M.E.

Zack's apartment is rather spartan.  Hank asks if Monroe and Rosalie know about Juliet and Nick replies no.  Hank tells Nick that he has to tell them.  On the fridge, Nick finds a photo of Bella and Hank finds several drawings of her as well.

At home, Bella calls her mother crying saying, "it happened." 

Back at the station, Sam reports to Renard that Viktor has been sent back to Vienna.  Renard questions if his father became impatient with Viktor.  Renard then asks if Viktor and Adalind are alive, only to be told by Sam that he doesn't know.  Sam says that no one knows who is replacing Viktor and adds that if Renard wants him to return to the royal family, he needs some information on Kelly and the baby.  Renard hands over a file, saying that it will look like Sam is making progress, adding that there is enough truth in file to make it plausible.

Bella is on the couch crying about what happened with Zack, saying that she didn't mean for this to happen. Cindy, her mother, assures Bella that this is not her fault.  Bella is frantic that someone will find out but is instructed not to do anything because no one can prove anything.  When Cindy turns to face Bella there is a huge scar on her face.  Cindy asks Bella if she wants her life ruined the way hers was.

At the station, Wu is going through Zack's laptop and he finds several photos of Bella.  The photos clearly make it appear that Bella was not aware that she was the subject of Zack's photography. So yes, that makes Zack a creepy stalker dude. Wu does learn that both Zack and Bella are a part of a group called River City Riders and that a ride is scheduled for today.  Hank and Nick decide to head to the location to see if Bella shows

Hank and Nick arrive and inform the riders that Zack is dead.  They ask if they can speak to the person who saw Zack last and are informed that the person they want is Bella.  The riders add that while Bella is nice and likes to ride, she pretty much keeps to herself. While the riders don't know where Bella lives, they do know where Bella works.  Nick excuses himself when his phone rings. It's Wu calling to say that Zack was killed by a toxin which causes heart failure.  The toxin is extremely rare and that one ounce kills 10-20 humans.  Wu is quick to suggest that Zack's death must be Wesen related.  Nick gives Wu Bella's name and Wu agree to run a background check.

Adalind  questions Marcus about when Viktor is coming back and is told not to worry about Viktor.  Adalind then asks about her daughter and is told that the king is doing everything he can to find her.  Adalind is then ordered to change into something appropriate because Prince Kenneth will be joining her shortly. 

In the car, Hank wonders if Bella was involved in what happened to Zack, or if she was a witness.  Hank points out that there's no clear motive because the two didn't have a relationship.  They arrive at Bella's work and Hank questions if Bella is Wesen and Nick replies that they will know for sure if he can get her to woge. Nick and Hank enter the bike shop and ask for Bella.  Nick informs Bella that Zack is dead and that she was the last one to see him.  Bella admits that Zack caught up to her on the trail and that they talked a little. Bella gets upset as she tells them that Zack wanted a relationship and she didn't, adding that Zack didn't do anything.  Nick starts to press Bella for details and shows her a picture of a dead Zack. Bella however does not break, so Nick offers her his card, asking her to call if she thinks of anything.

True Blood: Dubious Consent, Abuse and Relationships

We have spoken before on how many books have presented abuse, sexual abuse and complete lack of consent as romantic - but the same themes have also been heavily present in True Blood as well. Sometimes shown blatantly in the show, some made deeply problematic by the show creators and some rendered problematic by fandom’s reaction. The show has many sexual scenes and relationships, it’s a recurring and often explicit theme, but many of those sex scenes and relationships (or the conversation around them) are highly dubious and are sorely in need of more vehement challenge.

This season’s antagonist was Warlow, played by Rob Kazinsky. Warlow is a centuries old vampire/fairy hybrid who had determined that Sookie will be his one true love and his companion in the centuries to come. Speaking about Warlow’s feelings, Kazinsky had the following to say.

"He's been waiting six thousand years for her," he says. “For that reason, it didn't matter whether she was as attractive as she ended up being or not. He didn't know she was going to be a babe. He knew that she was going to be a fairy and a princess and that's all that really mattered to him, because he killed his entire tribe and she is the last of his line."

Despite Kazinsky’s suggestion that Warlow has true feelings for Sookie, what is evident is that he loved the idea of her, not Sookie as a person. When Warlow approached Sookie with his plan to capture himself a fairy princess, he knew absolutely nothing about her. Sookie essentially was a prize for him to possess and this is proved by his violent reaction to her suggestion that they should date rather than immediately commit to each other for eternity. A man who loves a woman does not try to force her into a relationship against her will, nor does he slap, threaten and stalk her when she refuses to capitulate. Perhaps this was his attempt to soften the character of Warlow but it reads like apologism for violence against women. Urban Fantasy like many other genres has a long history of justifying abuse as love and this has everything to do with our misogynistic culture.

Jason is also the centre of several of these controversies. In season 4 of True Blood, Jason was kidnapped by the werepanthers of Hotshot. He was abused in many ways but, in particular, he was repeatedly raped by Crystal and many of the young women of the village being forced to have sex with him while he was tied down. This scene is both graphic and painful - there is no romanticising the rape or treating it as a happy fun time for Jason, there is even some ongoing suggestion that Jason has been traumatised by the event. This is the positive. On the negative side, Jason wonders if him being raped was a “punishment from god” for having too much sex.

This is made far worse by comments by writer Alan Ball and Director Jason Petrarca about how Jason was getting his “comeuppance” for his promiscuous ways and how Jason, who views part of his sense of self on his sexual prowess, is now having that used against him.

Hemlock Grove - So Many Problems

Hemlock Grove is the new webseries produced by Netflix; the second series Netflix has produced in this fashion. Despite low expectations, Netflix’s previous webseries, was surprisingly decent - greatly raising the bar for Hemlock Grove. We tuned in hoping for something really good.

We were disappointed. So, very very disappointed.

There is so much to complain about regarding this show that we envisioned a full series of posts on the myriad fails but, being a webseries, they would quickly become irrelevant unless the worst should happen and a second season actually be produced (gods preserve us). So we’re left with one post on the many reasons this show became only slightly more amusing than stabbing vinegar soaked toothpicks into our eyes.

We are a social justice site, and there are many social justice fails we can - and will - attack. But even before we get to them, Hemlock Grove was impressively awful even if it had perfect social justice credentials.

The acting was wooden, melodramatic and just plain awful. I rarely attack actors directly, but Bill Skarsgard has talented family, you’d think his father or brothers would give him some pointers.

The world building was clumsy as hell, with all kinds of myriad creatures introduced that are utterly irrelevant until the very last episode. Letha’s angel-pregnancy, the whole Upir family, the medical experiments, Shelly - all of it pretty irrelevant but the whole show is full of them. 

And the story is so badly written - it’s clogged with irrelevancies that make no sense and add nothing - why did we have the man who saw visions? What did he add to the story? Roman and Peter’s shared dreams - was there actually a point to this or did I zone out waiting for the actors to actually convey some emotion? And how come this entire damn town is quite willing to believe that Peter is a WEREWOLF but absolutely no-one bats an eye at Roman mind controlling random people for funsies? I know Peter’s never had a friend but within minutes of knowing Roman he’s inviting him to come witness his change? Even the defeat of the big bad - Peter and Roman spend all series plotting against the Vargwolf and then a random third party, randomly appears and handles it with minimal effort?!

American Horror Story and Gratuitous Rape

 
American Horror Story is a show that loves to push boundaries. Sometimes it does this with some terribly emotional, painful and dramatic scenes that are incredible to watch. Sometimes it does this by invoking and presenting a horrendously hard to watch issue, realistically and with no sugar-coating as it did in American Horror Story: Asylum, with the painful depictions of ex-gay “therapy” inflicted on Lana. And sometimes it does this by deciding to have Anne Frank run around in an act of line crossing that left us stunned.

In it’s urge to shock, American Horror Story loves to leap across lines it should hesitate to cross, and rarely have we seen this more evident than with the constant depiction of rape through these 2 seasons.

Rape was a consistent theme throughout American Horror Story: Asylum. In many cases, it was absolutely brutal and painful to watch.  In the media, it is not uncommon to see violence aimed at women but the degree to which American Horror Story: Asylum included rape in its storyline this year was absolutely gratuitous. One cannot even reasonably argue that the rape occurred to move the plot along - it was inserted for shock value, nothing more. Leigh didn’t need to try and rape Jude to have his revenge with her, any more than in America Horror Story: Murder House, Tate had to rape Patrick to murder him. The point of  American Horror Story: Asylum, was for the viewer to be horrified by the conditions of the inmates and this most certainly could have been done without the continual rape of women.  Rape became a facet of entertainment, a tool for setting the theme.

All of the rapists were clearly to be understood as evil and in particular Dr. Thredson played by Zachary Quinto. It is good that rape is understood as a terrible violation; however, American Horror Story: Asylum made it seem as though all rape occurs because of psychopaths. Even though the rape itself was intimate because all of the victims knew their attacker in someway, the attacks still occurred within a framework of the rapist being psychologically damaged in some way, as a way of explaining his actions. The true motivation for rape is power, not psychosis, as American Horror Story: Asylum would have us believe. It doesn’t take a mental illness to make a rapist, nor can we attempt to excuse or distance ourselves from the horrors of rape, by presenting the perpetrators as always as these evil, mentally damaged people, rather than, as is often the case, the normal man in the street, the neighbour, the friend - even the loved one. This is a trope which was continued on from  American Horror Story: Murder House, where the rapist of Vivien and Patrick was Tate, a mass murderer and someone who was again presented to be insane. This approach servers to pathologize the mentally ill and establish mental illness as a threat to the safety and society. 

Bedlam Season 2, Episode 3: Unfaithful

Dan is in his usual flirting form showing Rita, a new character, around part of the Bedlam building. She’s looking for a venue to get married in after her last choice blew up in a gas leak (go for the rubble, Rita, it beats ghosts). Despite the reason she’s there, Dan is still on full flirting form – much to the disapproval of a bridal-dressed ghost haunting around. The flirting escalates as he promises to fix everything for her wedding within a week – and they kiss (I agree, Dan beats a hen do any day). It geos no further as the lights go off – and bride ghost is furious.

After the credits we catch up with them dressing which means a) it went further than a kiss and b) we didn’t get to see Dan half nekked. Boo. Rita has understandable regrets and Dan promises discretion. Unfortunately the haunting begins and in Rita’s flat a little bridal-themed music box is playing.

Max and Dan have some banter then Max goes on to play with his ghost site and the information he received last episode (unknowingly from Dan to try and shut down the site) when Ellie barges into his room without knocking and grabs his closed lap top against his objections (hmmm, she has complained about him crossing boundaries when he looked in her rucksack – but she’s doing this?). She finds the ghost blog and puts it down as her life online (because if it’s about the ghosts it’s her life?) and orders him to shut it down. She belittles him as if he were a child and accuses him of treating it like a game – as if he wasn’t there trying to save Cass’s life last episode and if he hasn’t saved Ellie’s as well. Of course, according to Warren and Dan, this website is the main reason more tenants (and victims) aren’t flocking to the building.

Warren is suffering from sleep deprivation after his many spooky dreams, but Dan comes in with the good news – the site has been taken down (Max was obedient to Ellie’s orders) though Dan intends to keep looking for the culprit. Dan attributes Warren’s distraction  to missing Kate (though the mention of family seems to be hitting sore spots for Dan). When Dan leaves, Warren looks up Kate in his phone, but then gets woozy – and enters one of the spooky dreams with a  shadowy figure. When he comes out of it, seemingly seconds later, he’s in the deserted, still-under-construction part of the building (which has a body in the walls, still). His phone rings – from Kate, but he only hears noise and static.

In the lobby Max runs into Rita – and they know each other from the past. There’s a somewhat awkward reunion (and, perhaps  a suggestion that he may have had an unrequited crush on her). Her mobile rings – but when she answers she only hears static-fuzzed bridal music. Yes, the spooky is beginning. She returns to her room to find the bridal music box playing again – and the television showing BBC news has scrolling text at the bottom “Forsaking all others” over and over. The tension ratchets up in perfect bedlam style, until Ed, her fiancé leaps in, breaking it. He has a copy several wedding vows for them to look through – but Rita focuses on the “forsaking all others” line. They both then get to discuss wedding plans with Dan which isn’t awkward at all

Later in the bar, Ellie attacks Max some more and Max reveals that he was haunted as a child by his dead father. She’s briefly stunned by this revelation (that Max may have feelings?) but Max moves the conversation on quickly to assure her the blog is shut down and to offer her some sweets she got from Rita (who he reveals to have been his girlfriend when he was 17, hence the awkward). The sweets trigger Ellie’s Spook Vision – showing the music box and a bride being dragged away during her wedding day. She also finally tells Max about Eve – the spooky  little glowing girl with the marbles.

Back with Rita, the haunting continues – with a piece of paper whjere the ghost has scrawled “forsaking all others” dozens of times – and “whore” on the other side. She rushes to Dan to tell him someone’s been in her room – and asks if he’s told anyone. He says no… and they end up in bed together. After the action she reveals this isn’t the first time and that her fiancé has no idea. She discusses her motives for getting married which seems to be more based on familial obligation rather than what she actually wants.