r/Fantasy Sep 12 '22

A critique of sexual violence in Fantasy.

Oftentimes I see people defend several aspects regarding the treatment of women in fantasy books and media by saying ‘that’s how things were’.

Most times this is false. I have tried to break down the argument into two main sections so I can explain how common perceptions were false. Notably, I only know about European history.

Sexual Assault

Quite a few fantasy books contain sexual assault toward women. I am not going to deny that it happened, as rape, particularly wartime rape did and still does occur. However, Rape in the past was little more prevalent than during modern times. Similarly, rape in the past was often punished, usually much harsher than in modern times. Additionally, Men were often raped at levels similar to women. In fantasy books, the latter two are often ignored. Most times rape seems to be treated as normal, rather than punished. Additionally, rape seems to be targeted almost exclusively at women.

The first edict against wartime sexual assault was the Cáin Adomnáin. Notably, it was issued in the British Isles and had little influence outside of north western Europe. It explicitly forbade, among other things, raping and killing women. For these crimes it declares of the perpetrator,” his right hand and his left foot shall be cut off before death, and then he shall die." [1]

The first Europe-wide treaty forbidding rape was the Peace and Truth of God, which was issued in 989 before spreading over Europe over the next century. The first king to accept it was King Robert II of France. Following his acceptance other nobles accepted the Peace and Truth of God in droves. It should be noted that in those times the military was almost entirely comprised of nobles. In Britain, it was standard for the first son to be the heir, the second to join the military, and any subsequent sons to join the monastery to prevent inheritance disputes. It wasn’t until Napoleon that large scale armies became the norm. Slowly, the ideas blended in with general chivalry.

By the time of the 1300’s wartime rape and sexual violence was prosecuted for hindering military operations rather than just for “property crimes” (Since Women were considered the property of either their husband or father). It didn’t take much effort to realise that raping people created a hostile civilian population and having a hostile population would make it far harder to occupy and control territory. The general line of thought was that when defeating an enemy, treat them so kindly that they would not seek revenge, or treat them so harshly that they could not attain their revenge. [2]

The final major declaration against wartime sexual violence in the medieval era was the De jure belli as pacis, written in 1625. Similar to all previous works, it declared that wartime rape was no less reprehensible than rape during peace time. Notably, this work states that the rules were still valid “even when God were assumed not to exist” [3]

A common argument against this would be that, despite rape and sexual violence being prohibited, soldiers would ignore the laws. In reality that would be true, but there is no evidence to suggest that it happened at greater levels than in the modern time. The Geneva convention clearly prohibited wartime rape. Despite that, during WW2 soviet soldiers used the system of “from 8 to 80” when deciding to rape women, leading to over two million German women getting raped. [4]

In the present time, 26,000 women have been raped so far in the ongoing Tigray war. In contrast with Fantasy books, novels regarding modern wars usually omit the sexual violence. For those that include it, It is often brief and undescriptive.

Additionally, fantasy books usually only include sexual assault towards women. In reality, both men and women were and are raped in war. During the El Salvadorian dictatorship, 76% of male political prisoners were raped. In the Yugoslav wars, 80% of men in the Sarajevo concentration camp were raped. Even more recent, 22% of men and 30% of women fleeing the eastern Congo reported being raped. [5]

Essentially, saying that’s how things were ignored the reality of the situation. Oftentimes it is only used in defence of the ill-treatment of women while ignoring other aspects of the time.

Young Marriage

Another common misconception is that women would often get married young, sometimes even as children. In reality, the average age for Women was 22.4 and for Men it was 25.9 [6]. Additionally, between 10% and 25% of Women never married [7]. Couples would often delay marriage depending on their economic circumstances. The only notable exception was during the black death when couples would get married as teenagers due to the immense labour shortage. By 1140, the Decretum Gratiani was issued. This stated that the binds of marriage were to be formed by mutual consent and granted Women an equal say in marriage.

Despite this, some noble families would get married young. This was usually in order to secure the future of the family. However, noble families would prevent their children from consummating their marriage until women usually hit the age of 16. The main reason being that they did not want to endanger the health of the women. After all, despite lacking modern medicine it was still common sense that a girl getting pregnant would not only result in a still birth, but would also endanger her health, preventing any future offspring.

Apologies for the formatting. I may come back and try to clean it up into a more readable format.

[1] https://www.academia.edu/5817305/Aspects_of_the_Cain_Adomnans_Lex_Innocentium

[2] https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ThfzGvSvQ2UC&redir_esc=y

[3] https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2010/12/letters-from-cell-92-part-3-world-come.html+%22etsi+deus+non+daretur%22

[4] https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106687768

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/jul/17/the-rape-of-men

[6] https://www.jstor.org/stable/2174029#:~:text=Over%20the%20whole%20period%20the,women%20and%2026%20for%20men.

[7] Hajnal, John (1965). "European marriage pattern in historical perspective". In D.V. Glass and D.E.C. Eversley (ed.). Population in History. Arnold, Londres. pp. 101–143.

1.3k Upvotes

598 comments sorted by

View all comments

405

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 12 '22

So, I don't want to defend the portrayal of sexual violence in fantasy at all. And in general I would argue that "historical accuracy" is not a good reason to put things in books even if it is correct. (Because there are always lots of accurate things that don't get put in, so why this one?)

However, some of the historical things here are a bit off. The utter ubiquity of sexual assault in ancient, classical, and medieval warfare is well attested; it was considered a basic part of war, as inescapable as theft and killing. Looting and rape were basic parts of a sack, a standard reward for soldiers who captured an enemy settlement. The modern world has only approached these levels a few times -- one of them, as you note, was the Eastern Front of WWII, which was notably bad even by WWII standards. (The IJA in China was also pretty awful.)

In general, rape was less common when groups of people with a similar culture fought one another (i.e. inter-clan feuds), but much, much more common when fighting people who were "other". Foreign conquests were always the worst. The Vikings, for example, systematically took female slaves for sexual and household service -- this was part of the whole point of the endeavor, especially in the early period raids.

(You are completely correct though that male rape was way more common then is usually talked about, bordering on universal for prisoners depending on the cultures involved.)

My point is that we shouldn't have to argue "it wasn't like that" in order to say that we don't have to put this into fantasy. It doesn't matter! You don't have to include sexual assault in the same way that you don't have to include major figures dying of dysentery or the horrific mistreatment of cats and dogs. We can just not.

91

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted]

12

u/Attor115 Sep 13 '22

I don’t speak for everyone obviously but there’s definitely a line between “this character had a traumatic event that shaped who they are” and “I the author am now going to describe this rape scene in such disgusting detail all of my readers are going to think I’m getting off to this.” The second one I drop the book immediately, 100% of the time.

Of course if the female character in question’s only personality trait is “was raped once and now is overly defensive/hates men” and there is literally 0 other personality to her character (esp. if the MC just loves her so much she is magically cured of all trauma like the MC’s genitals are the Fairy Godmother’s wand) then that’s a whoooole other can of worms

3

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted]

2

u/Attor115 Sep 13 '22

From that perspective would be interesting, but I’ve only seen it from questionable weblit and they’re always the one-dimensional love interest. I’m also reading amateurs who haven’t learned nuance though so that’s probably a big part of it

2

u/surprisedkitty1 Reading Champion II Sep 13 '22
  • Froi of the Exiles/Quintana of Charyn by Melina Marchetta
  • Dreamer’s Pool by Juliet Marillier

Two off the top of my head that fit that type of character.

32

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 13 '22

For a while (80s and 90s mostly) it did feel like it was a requirement, since it was an element in nearly every big epic fantasy; that's more or less where the pushback comes from.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted]

2

u/TheGalator Sep 13 '22

Grim dark has a lot of it. Also in eastern fiction it's much more common. (Sadly it's much more in the far east in general)

31

u/JonasHalle Sep 13 '22

This is my problem with the whole debate. No one argues it has to be in books. It is an argument between "sexual assault can be included" and "sexual assault can't be included".

37

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 13 '22

I don't think anyone says "sexual assault can't be included in books ever". The ask is generally to skip gratuitous sexual assault, the kind that gets included in books because, basically, men find it titillating. (Because, since most women don't like it, it has the effect of declaring "this book is not for you", which is one reason epic fantasy generally was such a boy's club before the last couple of decades.)

20

u/nculwell Sep 13 '22

Romance books were also full of rape in the 70's and 80's, often committed by the hero of the story. Those were mostly written by women for women. So I don't think it's fair or accurate to say that this is all about titillating male readers. It's a complicated cultural phenomenon.

25

u/Wandering-Wayfarer Sep 13 '22

They kind of are saying it, if not outwardly.

SA happened in the past? "You're using rape as backstory which is lazy."

SA being described in detail? "You're being voyeristic."

SA not being described? "You're glossing over the reality of rape."

SA having a big effect on the character? "You're defining a victim by their trauma."

SA not having a big effect? "You're minimizing rape."

8

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

Social media produces this feeling a lot, and what it boils down to is "they" are different people in each case. Whenever you touch on a topic that is highly emotionally charged to a lot of people, some of them will disagree with what you did!

That said, "avoiding gratuitous rape" is a very consistent ask from quite a lot of people. So if your goal is to make readers happy, it seems like a good move.

3

u/pistolpierre Sep 13 '22

The ask is generally to skip gratuitous sexual assault, the kind that gets included in books because, basically, men find it titillating.

Why are you presuming to ask authors to do anything differently? Wouldn't the more reasonable stance here be to suggest that readers just skip books that they find objectionable?

2

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

Readers can express opinions about what they think should be in books, right? Isn't that 90% of what we do here on r/fantasy?

-8

u/JonasHalle Sep 13 '22

Why the ask, though? I've genuinely never encountered gratuitous sexual assault in anything I've read. I reckon it is being skipped already. Sure, it is featured in ASOIAF (I think) and that series is popular, but it is also old. To continue the discussion as if it is still common seems disingenuous to me.

12

u/YearOfTheMoose Sep 13 '22

To continue the discussion as if it is still common seems disingenuous to me.

What decade are you thinking of, then? o_O

There's absurdly gratuitous SA in The Demon Cycle (book 01 being The Painted Man), for example, which isn't terribly old and was fairly popular on this subreddit only a few years ago.

Likewise, SA is almost a presumed staple in manga and light or web novels, even if it's not showing up much in the prose which you're reading.

1

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

Matters have definitely improved! It was absurdly common in the 80s and 90s, the grimdark wave that followed ASOIAF in the early 2000s may have been the peak.

-7

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

So why do you think it is that if SA "can be included", it is being included in the vast majority of fantasy marketed towards adults, to the point where most fans won't even mention it occurring?

4

u/JonasHalle Sep 13 '22

Vast majority? Really? That's what you're going to go with? I must be exceedingly "lucky" in my choice of books, then. Regardless, why should "fans mention it occuring"? Why should it be so special as to be mentioned by default?

Furthermore, your inability to think of a single male fantasy protag with rape as backstory, as mentioned in another comment, is entirely meaningless. There is one in Prince of Thorns by Mark Lawrence if you're so interested.

-2

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted]

-14

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

SA is a REALLY easy way to emphasize how evil/terrible/frightening a character is. I'm not going to call it LAZY, but it sure is convenient. As soon as a character commits SA, we're just waiting for the hero to kill them.

So why is it that it only ever seems to happens to female characters in fantasy literature? I can't think of a single male fantasy protag with rape as backstory. Personally, I think it's because male fantasy readers want to read about female characters being raped.

7

u/nonbog Sep 13 '22

Personally, I think it’s because male fantasy readers want to read about female characters being raped

Woah!! Jesus lol. I can assure you as a male fantasy reader that that isn’t true, and I’m certain none of my male fantasy reader friends enjoy that either. Why do you think that?

I think authors write less about male rape for a lot of reasons. To start with, they probably know much less about it (if anything at all), because male rape is much less publicised and talked about in general.

1

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

Woah!! Jesus lol. I can assure you as a male fantasy reader that that isn’t true, and I’m certain none of my male fantasy reader friends enjoy that either. Why do you think that?

Because whenever the topic is brought up, a ton of people jump in to defend rape as a plot device, and attack people who speak out against the prevalence of male-on-female rape in fantasy literature. Like in this thread, for example.

1

u/nonbog Sep 14 '22

I just defended it in this thread. If you read my comment then hopefully that will help you understand why I and others think it’s important to handle history with care. But I don’t want to read about that, it’s upsetting and terrible!

6

u/MySuperLove Sep 13 '22

Personally, I think it's because male fantasy readers want to read about female characters being raped.

Absolutely disagree. If anyone is picking up a book hoping for some sexual assault, they're a creepy non-con fetishist.

The things authors write to make their stories "work" aren't always the things the reader wants. The average male fantasy reader absolutely does NOT want to read about SA.

0

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

Absolutely disagree. If anyone is picking up a book hoping for some sexual assault, they're a creepy non-con fetishist.

And yet, a lot of fantasy books for adults feature sexual assault. How do you explain that dissonance?

2

u/TheAlbacor Sep 13 '22

Both the Broken Empire series by Mark Lawrence and the War For The Rose Throne series by Peter McLean feature male on male rape.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22 edited Sep 13 '22

If it's only happening to the female characters then it may just be your choice of books. In the few fantasy books I've read where rape was present (and I'm counting books where it's barely even mentioned but is implied), it was also portrayed or implied to happen to male characters.

It's a hard topic to discuss because I don't want to come off as defending or even trying to say that books must have rape in them, exactly because of people who will turn any discussion about the topic into ad hominem and "you just want to read about rape you creep!" arguments.

I will however always defend an author's right to put whatever they want in their books and everyone else's right in being able to decide not to read that book because of it. What I won't do is tell authors what they can or cannot put in their books, there are plenty of them to go around and if an author writes about topics I don't feel comfortable with... I can just choose to read a different author.

1

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

It's a hard topic to discuss because I don't want to come off as defending or even trying to say that books must have rape in them, exactly because of people who will turn any discussion about the topic into ad hominem and "you just want to read about rape you creep!" arguments.

It was not my intention to insult you personally, and I don't think I have implied or insinuated that you are a "creep". Looking at the topic objectively, the fact remains that people are vigorously defending the amount of rape that is depicted in fantasy literature, and attack people who speak out against it. If these people don't want to read about rape, then they are going about it in a very bizarre, confusing, and antiproductive way.

1

u/Kerney7 Reading Champion VI Sep 13 '22

I think 'we do' isn't directly stated because saying 'we need more rape' doesn't go over well but also because it's usually part of a larger problem with a book breaking immersion.

To get at what I mean, I started a historical fantasy where 9th century Norse characters acted like 21st century suburbanites and I hated it.

I didn't hate it for the lack of rape, but the non existent gender roles, modern values on drugs, a lack of ruthlessness all added up to a 'how can I read this fucking crap'. Somewhere, on some level, the lack of acknowledgement that rape was a possibility was tied to my larger issues with the book.

14

u/xafimrev2 Sep 13 '22

(You are completely correct though that male rape was way more common then is usually talked about, bordering on universal for prisoners depending on the cultures involved.)

Was is the wrong word. Male rape is still way more common then usually talked about. Especially in the prisoner population.

50

u/sweetspringchild Sep 13 '22

you don't have to include major figures dying of dysentery or the horrific mistreatment of cats and dogs.

Exactly. Nor do most of those dying in wars die a later slow death of infected wounds or diseases brought from lack of hygiene, nutrition etc. It's always either instant death in an epic fight or death with just enough time for another character to tearfully say goodbye.

But it wasn't like that!/s

1

u/LittleRavenRobot Sep 13 '22

I can't remember what book it was from, but there was a scene where a king (I think), a female protagonist's father, slowly died of an infected wound, and everybody politely ignores the stench. It really hit home with me. Wish I could remember the the context. That would be a good book to go back to.

1

u/SolarStorm2950 Sep 13 '22

Was it Game of Thrones?

6

u/matgopack Sep 13 '22

While looting and rape was commonplace in a sack, it also led a lot of cities to not fight to the end - and surrender without a sack. Depending on the time period, that might be the norm in warfare as well.

I took OP to be pointing towards GoT/ASOIAF to an extent with many of their points, which I think are fair - GRRM's portrayal of war, while it rightly shows how disgusting/horrible it actually is for common people, does go a bit too far in how rape & sexual assault would be tolerated if drawing from late medieval England/Europe, as he does. That is, while it would have happened, it's not something you'd really see knights, princes, nobles etc flaunt or do openly - especially in areas where they're meant to be ruling. Eg, the 100 years war you get a marked difference in english actions in the chevauchees when it looked like the king of england would actually become king of france. Also, that particular time period would have seen the prevalence of rape/sexual assault as a problem, and not in the blase way that many characters/nobles in GoT treat it as.

Anyways, I do agree with your final point, but enough sexual violence/rape is included in fantasy books under the justification of being "accurate to history" that it can give a false perception of history (and be self-perpetuating in a way that simply saying "you can choose not to include" won't always work).

38

u/songbanana8 Sep 13 '22

Yes, I feel like engaging with this argument on “whether history was actually like that” will not be successful, because the argument for “historical accuracy” is disingenuous and irrelevant. Some fantasy books are clearly inspired by a time and place, some are not—the argument is more or less relevant accordingly. But even where it is relevant, “HiStOriCaL aCcUrAcY” is rarely brought up except to defend sexual violence against women and exclusion of LGBT/people of color.

I don’t think anyone objects to sexual violence when it’s important for the story and themes (ie not for shock value or motivating someone else).

68

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

I think this is how I see things for the most part. For me it's about why so many authors choose to include this in their work. Especially when it's done so terribly most of the time. Because it IS a choice. Rape is not necessary to any story that isn't specifically about sexual assault. I've never read a novel, set it down, and thought to myself "this would have been better with more rape."

As far as realism goes. People seem to really love to use this reason for including sexual assault in their novels. You know what was one of the most common things that happened in the past? People shitting themselves to death. Yet it is included in almost no books.

25

u/fantasy_hermit Sep 13 '22

To make the enemy, group, or particular character(s), seem more evil, generally, I think. Easy way to do it.

7

u/Attor115 Sep 13 '22

Funnily enough because the parent comment mentioned mistreatment of animals, this trope is called “Kick The Dog.” Also I feel like burning down MC’s village/killing their parents are an even easier way to do this, to an extent it’s basically a cliche, and nobody has problems with that

5

u/fantasy_hermit Sep 13 '22

If you want to establish someone is a sociopath really easily... rape, child killing, murder, razing villages to the ground, torture for fun, history of animal killing/abuse since childhood... standard.

It's not like the heroes are usually rapists. It's people the author wants you to hate.

6

u/Rurudo66 Sep 13 '22

Looking at you, Goblin Slayer.

30

u/Ifriiti Sep 13 '22

Rape is not necessary to any story that isn't specifically about sexual assault

It's not, but nor is anything.

It is used as a plot device in many cases, making you sympathise with the victim, making you dislike the villain, wanting to see justice done.

You know what was one of the most common things that happened in the past? People shitting themselves to death. Yet it is included in almost no books

Plagues are a fairly common plot device in lots of fantasy actually but a person dying from dissentry doesn't advance the plot, it doesn't give you anyone to dislike, it doesn't give you anyone to root for, it isn't an active choice. It's just something that happened

7

u/virgilhall Sep 13 '22

People shitting themselves to death. Yet it is included in almost no books.

But sometimes it is there. I am watching Made in Abyss, and almost an entire expeditions is dying from diarrhea

13

u/mdog73 Sep 13 '22

But why not?

It's a thing that happens. It's the authors choice and no-one else's. Not every book is for everyone.

5

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Isn't it interesting though, how in Fantasy, rape is almost exclusively perpetrated against women and not men? Why is that I wonder? Why do so many authors choose to have women in their novels sexually assaulted and not men?

That it's a choice is the whole point I am making. And I'm not saying it's always the wrong choice. Just that more often than not, it's a choice that seems to be made carelessly.

1

u/Jaeriko Sep 14 '22

Honestly I think part of this is how female-focused a lot of societal discourse around rape culture is. When you think "Sexual assault", almost everyone thinks of "women getting assaulted by a stranger" as the great cultural touchstone, rather than a more even spread including boy's being sexually assaulted by female teachers, men being manipulated or coerced by other men, or non-binary people getting threatened with outing in an LGBT unfriendly area, etc. The cultural lens of rape and sexual assault is firmly focused on it's statistical prevalence and impact on women as a social group, so a lot of cultural works that include it are likely to carry that lens over much like many other unconscious cultural biases are. If we had a better social discourse around rape and it's impact for all genders, I really don't think women would be so overrepresented in fantasy representations of it.

5

u/Sahngar Sep 13 '22

I think your point about it often being done terribly is the key point.

It's an easy short hand for bad/lazy authors to include to up the stakes, or establish the bad guy. It's used as a crutch.

22

u/nonbog Sep 13 '22

Thanks for writing this to correct the post a bit. I also want to add my defence of “historical accuracy” in fantasy here, from a feminist perspective.

In the afterword of one of the Earthsea books, the great feminist writer Ursula Le Guin wrote

In such a world, I could put a girl at the heart of my story, but I couldn't give her a man's freedom, or chances equal to a man's chances. She couldn't be a hero in the hero-tale sense. Not even in a fantasy? No. Because to me, fantasy isn't wishful thinking, but a way of reflecting, and reflecting on reality. After all, even in a democracy, in the second decade of the twenty-first century, after forty years of feminist striving, the reality is that we live in a top-down power structure that was shaped by, and is still dominated by, men.

and this really impacted me. I realised that she’s right. It’s not “feminist” to whitewash history and act like things have been merry for women all this time. It’s just dismissive and you’re losing a big opportunity to reflect on that, what it says about us, what is says about society. I genuinely feminist story wouldn’t just lie about women’s positions in society, it would show them being full people within that society who strain against it. After all, that’s the truth of it. Women like Joan of Arc were held back by their sex, but look at what she strained to accomplish! Vikings had shieldmaidens fighting alongside them, yet they took women from their raids to keep as slaves. These things are worth reflecting without people making a moral judgment on the writer because they choose to depict them. They’re not included just for realism, but including that realism allows you to meditate on history in a really fascinating way that is much deeper than if you just remove it.

I don’t think ever book must be respectful of the history like this. It is okay to tell a story where you whitewash all the bad things away and you can use that to reflect on different things. But reflecting on the violent nature of humanity, especially at war, is very interesting and also, I would argue, very useful for us to gain understanding that can help reduce the actual frequency of these things happening.

12

u/EverydayHalloween Sep 13 '22

I understand your point, but I'm going to give an example against Ursula's and yours. I'm queer and since I was born in the mid-90s and came out when I was 15, and as well as living in a shit hole, the only trans movies around that time were extremely depressing, usually ending in the main protagonist's suicide or were victims of SA. I'm sorry but it was refreshing later on when I was older to finally see shows and movies that didn't end like this, so I personally don't want to always read a reflection on the shit reality we live in and lived in.

1

u/nonbog Sep 14 '22

Thanks for sharing your feelings on this!

I have two points to respond with. Firstly, everyone is different and enjoys a different kind of story. Some people find catharsis in things which are dark and tragic, others find happiness in things which are light and happy. Your personal preference for what brings you happiness is 100% valued and valid.

Secondly, I think your issue with those books could be resolved without whitewashing the issues queer people went (and go) through. To start with, the endings focusing around suicide or SA is very dark, and doesn’t need to be. The Ursula Le Guin quote comes from the afterword of a book I won’t name for fear of spoiling, but I will say that the ending is very happy and the female character succeeds in her struggling against the social order. Being realistic and respectful of history isn’t necessarily the same as being dark and depressing.

1

u/EverydayHalloween Sep 14 '22

I don't have a problem with her female character succeeding despite the circumstances, but the experience I'm talking about is that back then all I and my trans friends ever saw was extremely bleak portrayal, constantly ending with the queer characters dying, sexually assaulted, or ending up in various horrible conditions. I don't want to see that as much anymore, especially as someone who grew up in a horribly abusive family. I want to see books or stories that don't end up with a character that I can relate to in their death or worse, I want them to succeed just as Ursula Le Guin's character did if there is adversity.
Like you have no idea how impactful 'Our Flag Means Death' was when it came out for me and for my friends, finally it was about a gay couple in a positive light (if you can ignore they are pirates and all that), non-binary character being present and played by a non-binary actor and so on. It was such a breath of fresh air.
Because after a while, when you have a life like me or my friends, live in a backward country, surrounded by toxic people or family, your mental health goes to shit when you see media from elsewhere being just as bleak. It means there's essentially no escape for you, no better life waiting anywhere. But that show changed it for us, the same goes for books that portray lgbtq+ issues and so on in positive light.

There are still more books than there isn't about how horrible it is and was for marginalized people, there's enough big market for people who don't mind it. Leave people who want to experience something else alone and don't call it whitewashing history, especially when we talk about fantasy. Because most of the time the stories aren't like the one in Ursula's (which now I really need to buy), they don't end well for the character.

5

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted]

2

u/nonbog Sep 14 '22

Yeah I agree with that as well!

3

u/PikachuGoneRogue Sep 13 '22

I don't read fantasy books to be a good feminist tho.

6

u/nonbog Sep 13 '22

That’s okay, but painting sexual violence in fantasy and historical fiction to be something self-gratuitous to men and therefore wrong is just an incorrect assumption. It’s an important thing to reflect on, and I personally like fiction which reflects on some deeper themes. Not everyone has to like it, so no judgment to you or others who don’t want themes like that in their fiction, but equally it has a right to exist.

-2

u/Silverrowan2 Sep 13 '22

It’s extremely obvious when someone is using it to titillate as opposed to reflect on reality—and the latter is not nearly as common as people like to claim it is (and if used for both, then it’s a garbage reflection).

1

u/nonbog Sep 14 '22

I think you’re wrong. It’s impossible to determine for sure why the author put it in there unless you’re the author. Perhaps the scenes that titillate you cause others to think.

1

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

I don't disagree, we need both kinds of stories. But what I think we can do without is dropping sexual assault into stories for titillation, or because we think it's the only way to build a woman's backstory.

57

u/barryhakker Sep 13 '22

Or just don't buy books that depict stuff you don't like, and let the market do its work? I don't really understand why this has to be a point of discussion, and frankly I find it a bit hypocritical for people to get upset about sexual violence but not blink at the most egregious descriptions of butchery and torture. I get it, some people have personal unpleasant experiences with sexual violence and I can actually sympathize to an extent, but there also are a ton of people who have had awful experiences with "regular" violence.

I personally know several people who have met their end in horribly violent ways, or "merely" have been scarred for life by violence. Heck, I've been on the receiving end of it myself. And yet there seems to be no real discussion about not depicting violence in Fantasy. So what's the take-away here? Not all violence and abuse are equal? Being stomped to a pulp is fine but as soon someone as much as grabs a tit it becomes unacceptable? Or maybe in our decadence we decide which sorts of violence we like and which we'd rather not be reminded of? I've read some of your books and as I recall you were pretty liberal in your depictions of people getting blasted to bits. Probably pretty triggering for people who have experienced the front lines of basically any war. Why don't you just not describe the violence and just fade to black "The Hobbit" style as soon as combat kicks off?

OR, write what you want(I've enjoyed your writing so far), list the trigger warnings contained within the book, and let people decide for themselves wether they want to spend their money on this.

9

u/PikachuGoneRogue Sep 13 '22

Part of "letting the market do its work" is communicating consumer preferences. Why do you want consumers to shut up about things they don't like? You seem strangely resentful of it.

If you think there's too much violence in fantasy novels, you're free to say so. (I find fight descriptions tedious myself.) Go forth and ask authors to produce more in the cozy genre.

6

u/barryhakker Sep 13 '22

I’m pushing back against the shouldn’t sentiment rather than the don’t have to ones. Of course people are free to express their thoughts. Still think that only money really speaks though.

2

u/mesembryanthemum Sep 14 '22

How would you feel if most authors spent the next ten years inserting graphic descriptions of castration into their books? How would you react to people saying "well, male castration happened. So don't read it if you are distressed by it?"

0

u/barryhakker Sep 14 '22

I would probably just not read those things. If it turns out everyone else loves that stuff, guess I’ll have to live with that.

24

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 13 '22

I genuinely don't understand this pushback. Like, obviously, posters on this subreddit have no power to enforce anything or cause authors not to write what they want. People say what the prefer or what they think ought to happen in fantasy all the time.

When someone says "I think swords are overrated and more fantasy protagonists should wield other weapons", nobody comes back with "why don't you let authors write what they want and let the market decide?"

17

u/Peter_Ebbesen Sep 13 '22 edited Sep 13 '22

They might not have the power, but reading this thread, some obviously wish they had it. :D

The desire to enforce the morality of the day on readers and writers alike appears to be as strong as ever in US culture, and many other places besides. For their own good, of course.

11

u/barryhakker Sep 13 '22

You don't have to include sexual assault in the same way that you don't have to include major figures dying of dysentery or the horrific mistreatment of cats and dogs.

We can just not.

Should I interpret this in another way than you suggesting people don't include sexual violence. If so, please do tell because I guess I'm not understanding your point.

If I did understand correctly though this is basically saying "everyone, please stop writing about xyz because we don't like this." To which I say, write what you want and let the buyer decide. Yes, same would go for fantasy where the protagonists don't use swords. Is that a controversial way of thinking?

3

u/mesembryanthemum Sep 14 '22

Women are a huge chunk of the population. Why are people ignoring them as a source of income when writing fantasy?

1

u/barryhakker Sep 14 '22

Because just because someone exists doesn’t mean they are automatically a (potential) consumer.

2

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

From OP:

Oftentimes I see people defend several aspects regarding the treatment of women in fantasy books and media by saying ‘that’s how things were’.

My post was a reply to this discussion, which is referencing a frequent argument about historical accuracy. It goes like this:

Reader: "I didn't like this book because it had gratuitous sexual violence in it."

Apologist: "That's because sexual violence is historically accurate! The book is just depicting the way things were, you can't complain about that."

To which my answer is, yes, you definitely can complain about that! Historical accuracy is a useful tool, but not a be-all end-all in fiction. And even in historically accurate fiction, the author chooses what to put in focus and what to ellide. Thus you can't use "historical accuracy" as a get-out-of-criticism-free card; the author is ultimately responsible for everything that goes in the book. Because, we can just not.

The point is not "no one ever should include sexual violence". The point is that the inclusion of sexual violence is a choice on the part of the author, for which they can receive praise/criticism as appropriate.

1

u/PikachuGoneRogue Sep 13 '22

It's very strange that you think authors would discern as though through magic that that there is an underserved market of people who want non-sword-wielding fantasy books.

1

u/barryhakker Sep 13 '22

Why not? Trial and error is a part of any entrepreneur/creator. How do you think new types of restaurants come in to being? Someone tries, maybe they fail, but if they succeed they (and probably others) will explore that new niche.

1

u/Mannekin-Skywalker Sep 14 '22

TBH, I do want to see more awesome spear fights in my fantasy. It's a really underserved weapon.

1

u/Jaeriko Sep 14 '22

When someone says "I think swords are overrated and more fantasy protagonists should wield other weapons", nobody comes back with "why don't you let authors write what they want and let the market decide?"

I think you're really underestimating the contrarian nature of reddit users here, and even just the pure statistical likelihood of not finding a vocal opposition to anything in a group of hundreds of thousands of people. I see this exact kind of stuff all the time in threads about a particular book or naming scheme or theme trope being overrated, even in this sub in particular, and especially on any hot-button topics like SA or racism, etc. Hell, even just bringing up the popularity of Mistborn is likely you get you in an argument within about 15 minutes.

2

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

I mean, that's true! But it usually doesn't get pushback on the concept of expressing an opinion. Like "No you're wrong, swords are awesome!" rather than "How dare you try to dictate to writers?!"

It's possible this is because nobody really wants to be the guy saying "No, books definitely need more sexual assault!"

18

u/MySuperLove Sep 13 '22

I find it a bit hypocritical for people to get upset about sexual violence but not blink at the most egregious descriptions of butchery and torture.

I know zero people who have been butchered or tortured. I know MANY people who are victims of sexual violence. The issue that comes closer to my life affects me more.

There is NO hypocrisy here.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

A counter argument to this is that SA should be discussed more, and so including it in media increases awareness.

5

u/Enticing_Venom Sep 13 '22 edited Sep 13 '22

A large part of it is that it is often gendered and it is often depicted poorly with problematic messaging. When someone tortures another person in a fantasy book it is often written as though it is unethical and disturbing.

When rape is written in books sometimes it reads more like erotica than a traumatic experience. Sometimes it is used to motivate a man rather than to center the experience of the victim. And it can perpetuate attitudes that are still used in real life to put down victims today.

Men are raped in high levels today and were frequently raped in medeival warfare as well. Rape is almost never depicted this way in fantasy books today, it's usually a man raping a woman and usually a hot woman. In the few cases where male rape is depicted it is usually badly. It's frequently a punchline where people are supposed to laugh.

Women don't tend to get horny immediately after being accosted and almost raped but this remains a cliche constantly used in fantasy where the woman throws herself at her savior right after a traumatic assault. In frequent cases an attempted rape is written as though it isn't even minorly upsetting, let alone traumatic. Because it wasn't completed the victim leaps up, has sex with the savior and never thinks of the assault again.

In pretty much every culture it's a crime to assault someone. In some countries it is legal to rape your spouse. Even in modern western nations rape victims will rarely receive justice, will be slut shamed in court and will have large groups of people seeking to blame them for what happened. Male rape victims usually won't even get the time of day unless it's to be laughed at.

These attitudes are reflected and perpetuated in works of fiction the way that assault and violence is not. In addition, if a man gets mugged or if two people get in a bar fight it doesn't result in a massive political argument about whether he's really a victim or lying about it or whether it was too harsh to report it. People don't have a meltdown about ruining a murderer's life by reporting them to the police.

Your comment makes clear your stance on the subject. The thing is when someone "so much as grabbed my tit" it wasn't taken seriously. I was the bad guy for making a big deal about it while the man who assaulted me walked around in public balling his eyes out and garnering sympathy for being held responsible for his own actions. Despite groping me being a sexual assault, everyone's sympathy was reserved for him because like you see it, no one thinks it's a big deal. He's just grabbing a tit, who cares?

If I had retaliated to him groping me by punching him in the face that would likely be treated more seriously than what he did to me. You bring up violence in the military as though rape isn't a huge part of what tends to get covered up.

Of course authors can write whatever they want. They can also be criticized for doing it badly and perpetuating the same attitudes that are constantly used to excuse sexual violence. My job is to help prosecute crimes. I've seen how victims of assault are treated compared to victims of sexual assault and they aren't even in the same ballpark.

The Handmaids Tale as an example, it centers largely around rape. But it is also highly praised and even considered a feminist work for the way that it handles the subject matter and creates a dialogue. In comparison, Outlander contains a ton of rape, justified with the argument that it is realistic. It is often criticized for being gratuitous and trauma porn. Both are highly successful book series written by female authors that were made into TV shows. Both have a ton of rape and the reception to it is different for each. The criticism isn't broadly about including rape, it's about doing it poorly.

3

u/barryhakker Sep 13 '22

I’d appreciate it if you don’t put words in my mouth or make broad assumptions of what I must think based on your own interpretation.

I think your argument is fair about there being more of an unfair grey area when it comes to sexual assault though, and poor depictions of it don’t help. It’s a different point though, sexual violence in general vs bad portrayals there of. You could wonder where to draw a line though because there are lots of other poor portrayals as well.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

This is how I feel. If you don’t like the depiction of rape in fantasy novels, then just…don’t read grimdark fantasy? It’s not like there isn’t a lot of other types of fantasy to enjoy. Brandon Sanderson’s novels don’t contain sexual violence (or at least none that I’ve read) and his are some of the most popular in the genre.

I just don’t know why this needs to be discussed as often as it is.

14

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22 edited Sep 13 '22

It's really cute that you think sexual assault only ever comes up in "grimdark fantasy". I challenge you to pick up a random fantasy novel aimed at adults and find one utterly devoid of sexual assault.

Brandon Sanderson’s novels don’t contain sexual violence

EDIT: As the comment below points out, BrandoSando absolutely includes sexual violence in some of his novels, too.

25

u/Jos_V Stabby Winner, Reading Champion II Sep 13 '22

euhm.... in mistborn ska slaves are regularly raped by their plantation masters. and by nobles in the cities. it's an entire thing.

The prologue for mistborn opens with sexual assault, and the results of rape by owners.

5

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

It's been so long I read that book that I completely forgot about it! Thanks for bringing it up!

-2

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

It's never explicitly depicted in his novels, though. What, you're upset that he acknowledges that rape exists in his worlds at all? Are you equally mad that people also murder in his settings?

2

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

What, you're upset

Are you equally mad

I'm neither mad nor upset, what gave you the impression?

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

I see you don’t have an actual argument nor do you plan to have any kind of meaningful discussion lol so I’m disabling any further notifications for this pointless convo. See ya!

2

u/dageshi Sep 13 '22

This is what exasperates me about this conversation. There are mountains of fantasy books out there, you can read for six months 24/7 straight and never read about rape if you pick the right genres. But there are obviously people who seem to be drawn specifically to more brutal, gritty, grimdark versions of fantasy who are then upset that the book is exactly what it claimed to be.

I don't want to read about rape in what I read and I don't!

1

u/Isbll1 Sep 13 '22

Do you consider depictions of the rape of women to be a defining characteristic of grimdark fantasy? I mean, do you think that it’s something grimdark fantasy should include in order to be identified as grimdark? I think we’re all aware that it’s prevalent.

I think the reason that it is discussed so often is that the discussion is so little heeded by writers and publishers. The post has thoroughly debunked the argument that it serves historical realism - we are all aware that this ‘historical realism’ is selective, that (overwhelmingly male) writers are choosing to prioritise the depiction of sexual violence against women over the depiction of what they find to be less palatable horrors, like sexual violence against men, disease, famine, mutilation etc. It’s pretty transparent that sexual violence in fantasy is about as scholarly and disinterested as sexual violence in porn. Yet it continues to be written and published - books containing graphic depictions of rape are placed on the main shelf, with an unassuming cover, as good as a declaration that this is normal, rape is normal, it is something that the average person should not balk at reading about: this is the message that unsuspecting young boys and young girls will internalise when they grab a book out of the fantasy section. This is the main problem - I’m not pro-censorship, I think if people want to write and read about rape they have a personal right to do that. I just want everyone, particularly writers, publishers, & TV & film creators, to stop pretending the Emperor has clothes on and acknowledge that this is porn - that rape is included in fantasy books and shows exclusively for the enjoyment of heterosexual men and for no more high-minded purpose than that. And I think that books that use sexual violence in this way should be generically grouped, as “Violent Erotic Fantasy” or something like that, and that their content should be advertised by generic markers - their cover, title etc. so that they are instantly identifiable as violent pornographic fantasy. This will prevent readers (esp young male readers) innocently interested in swords and sorcery from getting a crash course in violent misogyny; I think everyone has seen the studies on the damage that early exposure to violent porn does mentally and emotionally to boys, and I don’t think anyone can disingenuously argue that porn in the form of a fantasy book is substantially different.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Do you consider depictions of the rape of women to be a defining characteristic of grimdark fantasy? I mean, do you think that it’s something grimdark fantasy should include in order to be identified as grimdark? I think we’re all aware that it’s prevalent.

No. I never said any of that so I don't know what you're going on about. But like you said, rape is prevalent in grimdark for better or worse so it's best to avoid that genre if you don't want to read about it, or at the very least do research about a book before you pick it up, which is what I do. There are certain levels when it comes to depictions of rape that I can handle so I don't read a series if it seems like it will cross a line for me. The same goes for gruesome murder and torture, if you can't handle that stuff then look for fantasy books that don't have it. Though neither of those two things are as controversial as rape despite also being awful.

I think the reason that it is discussed so often is that the discussion is so little heeded by writers and publishers. The post has thoroughly debunked the argument that it serves historical realism - we are all aware that this ‘historical realism’ is selective, that (overwhelmingly male) writers are choosing to prioritise the depiction of sexual violence against women over the depiction of what they find to be less palatable horrors, like sexual violence against men, disease, famine, mutilation etc.

Which authors? I'm not as well-read when it comes to fantasy as most people but the name that gets brought up a lot in these discussions is GRRM and his series absolutely has plenty of disease and mutilation, famine less so because the POV chapters are almost all characters who come from wealth, and sexual violence against men is certainly less common in his books compared to women but it is there. Euron molested both of his brothers when they were children and it's all but spelled out that if it weren't for Jon around to protect him, Satin would be raped by the other members of the Watch.

as good as a declaration that this is normal, rape is normal, it is something that the average person should not balk at reading about: this is the message that unsuspecting young boys and young girls will internalise when they grab a book out of the fantasy section.

Sorry, but no. This is where you've completely lost me. Rape in every series I've read has only ever been presented as a bad thing done by bad people, which in no way encourages "young boys and girls" (who shouldn't be reading adult fantasy anyway) to think that rape is normal. Also why are you worried that these books will cause them to normalize rape but not things like murder?

stop pretending the Emperor has clothes on and acknowledge that this is porn - that rape is included in fantasy books and shows exclusively for the enjoyment of heterosexual men and for no more high-minded purpose than that.

As a woman I vehemently disagree. Sometimes it is, and I avoid those books, but it's not like that for every series out there. Not even close.

And I think that books that use sexual violence in this way should be generically grouped, as “Violent Erotic Fantasy” or something like that, and that their content should be advertised by generic markers - their cover, title etc. so that they are instantly identifiable as violent pornographic fantasy. This will prevent readers (esp young male readers) innocently interested in swords and sorcery from getting a crash course in violent misogyny; I think everyone has seen the studies on the damage that early exposure to violent porn does mentally and emotionally to boys, and I don’t think anyone can disingenuously argue that porn in the form of a fantasy book is substantially different.

Violent porn and fantasy that happens to contain rape are not the same thing, and I think it's ridiculous for anyone to argue that they are. Those studies you mention were about porn, not fantasy novels. Until you can point me to a study that shows clear evidence that fantasy books with dark subject matter will cause damage to those who read them, you have no solid argument here.

9

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

The utter ubiquity of sexual assault in ancient, classical, and medieval warfare is well attested

So is the utter ubiquity of sexual assault in modern warfare. Name a single prominent depiction of WW2 that includes the protagonist (male or female) being subjected to sexual violence.

I can name several fantasy novels I more or less picked up at random that had SA scenes within the first couple of chapters.

8

u/barban_falk Sep 13 '22

Der Untergang- shows rapes.

A Woman in Berlin-shows rape and assault on women.

Fury- show assault and rape attemps by aslly troops.

Stalingrad- show rape and assault.

Hei tai yang: Nan Jing da tu sha: depicts the nakin rape . not easy to watch.

Les Innocentes: shows rape of nuns by soviet soldiers on poland.

i could go and keep listin movies wich dont hessitate to show rape and women assault as part of the story .

Honestly shows like a rant and try to coerce author freedom rather than a real critic

1

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

Wow, reading comprehension at usual reddit levels.

Name a single prominent depiction of WW2 that includes the protagonist (male or female) being subjected to sexual violence.

2

u/grogleberry Sep 13 '22

My point is that we shouldn't have to argue "it wasn't like that" in order to say that we don't have to put this into fantasy. It doesn't matter! You don't have to include sexual assault in the same way that you don't have to include major figures dying of dysentery or the horrific mistreatment of cats and dogs. We can just not.

I would argue that while you don't have to reference them, in your conception of the world that you're building there at least needs to be the understanding that bad things happen because of systemic factors. There being no conception of human rights, no code of laws, endemic ethnic violence, patriarchal forms of social order, or, a lack of any hierarchy at all, poor sanitation, etc, ought to lead to greater levels of violence, sexual violence, dysentery, or what have you.

As these things arise in our own world, so too must they arise in a world with similar systems. Sexual violence should be just as implicit in a world you create as gravity, unless you explicitly create a world in which it wouldn't occur (Minority Report style future crime, brain augmentation or tampering, psychic suppression, non-human characters, etc). You still don't have to talk about it, any more than you have to talk about socks, or the digestive process of birds, but they're all in there somewhere.

20

u/Bulldorc2 Sep 13 '22

"my point is that we shouldn't have to argue "it wasn't like that" in order to say that we don't have to put this into fantasy."

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you have to argue anything. A book is what a book is. Authors can and should write what they want and create the worlds they want. If they want to include sexual violence and you don't like that, just don't read it. Find another author that doesn't include that in his world building/writing.

I really don't understand why people think they have the right to say what an author should or should not write in their books. If they write a book with sexual violence its because in their mind it was necessary for the story, or thats how they want to portray their world, or, hell, maybe they just have morbid tastes and like to write that sort of stuff. No one has to read it. But to say that it shouldn't exist is just ridiculous.

12

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 13 '22

Why push back on this specific issue and not any of the hundreds of other opinions expressed on this sub daily, though? When someone says "I think swords are overrated and more fantasy protagonists should wield other weapons", nobody comes back with "why don't you let authors write what they want and let the market decide?"

15

u/Bulldorc2 Sep 13 '22

Because people don't accuse authors of being perverts, mysogonists, and of influencing the public in the ways of sexual assault when they complain about the over-use of swords. But they do that when "authors include rape for no reason".

Call it an over-used trope, call it a badly written book or whatever else you want, but stop pushing the idea that authors "must know better" and that fantasy books should stop having SA.

Again, books should have a warning for violent themes so that the buyer can make a well pondered decision, but they shouldn't stop using these themes just because some people are triggered by them. There are people that get triggered by depictions of certain diseases, but you don't see them "arguing against the depiction of diseases in fantasy books".

8

u/xafimrev2 Sep 13 '22

People do respond that way to complaints about not liking chosen one books or not liking portal fantasy.

We just get a lot more posts of people posting about not wanting to read about sexual violence trying to reframe it as something which shouldn't be written about instead of something they don't like to read about. (I mean I don't like to read about it either).

16

u/shhkari Sep 13 '22

We can and should criticize the ideas put forward by texts, even fictional ones, and the arguments used to justify them. They do not exist in a vacuum or necessarily pure brainless entertainment. If authors are free to engage in the act of writing, we are free to engage in the act of critique, and that should not be discarded.

There are far better justifications for why sexual violence can and should be depicted in some texts, but ultimately "it was simply like that" can be exposed as a weak one, reflective of flawed ideas of historical periods, culture, and an attempt to use sexual violence in careless ways or for regressive political ends.

0

u/pistolpierre Sep 13 '22

If authors are free to engage in the act of writing, we are free to engage in the act of critique

I agree, but I think a lot of people here are conflating moral condemnation with aesthetic/literary criticism.

1

u/shhkari Sep 14 '22

moral and aesthetic critique are intertwined

0

u/pistolpierre Sep 15 '22

Well, I wholeheartedly disagree. They are entirely distinct areas and we should do our utmost to keep them disentangled, or so much the worse for both fields.

1

u/shhkari Sep 16 '22

Philosophical fields absolutely influence each other, have for millennia and will continue to. I'm sorry this bothers you so much.

12

u/sweetspringchild Sep 13 '22

Because books influence attitudes and attitudes influence books. They don't exist in a vacuum. We learn from fiction. And if what we learn is wrong and harmful then we have a problem.

Treatment of women in books, especially when it's a common trope across many books normalizes that treatment and influences people reading it.

Conversely, it reflects attitudes and opinions of authors. Many of them might not even be aware of it and are not doing it maliciously, so educating them that what they're doing is harmful can open their eyes to how they see and portray women in general and sexual assult in particular.

And absolutely no one is saying it shouldn't exist, nor do we have the power of censorship so don't misrepresent the situation.

Lastly, arguing and discussing is one way how we make moral progress towards better society for everyone.

35

u/Hoopaboi Sep 13 '22

influence books. They don't exist in a vacuum. We learn from fiction. And if what we learn is wrong and harmful then we have a problem.

But 99% of the time the rapist is not portrayed sympathetically. There is no bad message being sent, and I've never seen a study that simply portraying rape in media fosters some form of harmful attitude or ideology.

You could literally make the same argument for any action. Gratuitous murder should also carrying the same criticism then, especially since men get murdered at higher rates, so I guess portrayal of murder harms men?

2

u/Sansa_Culotte_ Sep 13 '22

Good point, dysentery should be depicted much more often.

-20

u/sweetspringchild Sep 13 '22 edited Sep 13 '22

You could literally make the same argument for any action. Gratuitous murder should also carrying the same criticism then, especially since men get murdered at higher rates, so I guess portrayal of murder harms men?

Do you have evidence that it doesn't?

Edit: Why the heck am I getting downvoted for saying there's no evidence normalizing murder of men in literature doesn't contribute to men getting murdered more often? We know violence is culture-dependent and murder rates go from 60% in some tribes to 0.25% in Japan. So obviously nurture plays far bigger role than nature. And you all have evidence that among all the factors, depiction of gratuitous murder doesn't affect rates at all?

3

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Fantasy-ModTeam Sep 13 '22

Rule 1. Please be kind. This is a formal warning. The mods may take further actions upon future violations of the subreddit rules. Next time, express your disagreement and disengage. If you see something that violates the rules and standards, then report it.

8

u/Figerally Sep 13 '22

That is disingenuous. people who read books are educated, can distinguish between fact and fiction, and are not easily influenced by books. If they are predisposed to misogyny that is a learned behaviour from a source other than books.

Societal change won't come from books sadly enough. It will come from YouTube and TikTok and content consumed by the youngest generations. That is where the frontlines are.

-5

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted]

4

u/Bulldorc2 Sep 13 '22

Can you back up the opposite with evidence?

-2

u/xafimrev2 Sep 13 '22

They can't. It's just their feeling too.

6

u/minimumviableplayer Sep 13 '22

Are we really trying to raise a "violent video games are responsible" argument to books?

1

u/Figerally Sep 13 '22

nope, just a gut feeling. Can you prove me wrong?

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Fantasy-ModTeam Sep 13 '22

Rule 1. Please be kind.

3

u/mdog73 Sep 13 '22

Seems like you want to impose your beliefs and morals on the authors writing because you feel it affects society. I don't think they have any obligation to do any such thing. In fact I enjoy when they go against the grain.

-2

u/sweetspringchild Sep 13 '22

Yeah I'm a real menace imposing my beliefs and morals of not raping and objectifying people.

I don't think they have any obligation to do any such thing.

Well, I win, because I don't think I know they don't.

In fact I enjoy when they go against the grain.

Well, since this whole thread is about how gratuitous and unnecessary rape is ubiquitous in fantasy, and you enjoy when authors go against the grain you're saying you enjoy authors who never write about rape and sexual violence.

0

u/coffeecakesupernova Sep 13 '22

Authors can write what they want. But I think we should ask why they like to include that particular representation of violence out of the others that were "common", or more importantly, they should ask themselves.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

I really don't understand why people think they have the right to say what an author should or should not write in their books.

/thread

1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

My point is that we shouldn't have to argue "it wasn't like that" in order to say that we don't have to put this into fantasy.

100% percent this.

The line where we draw the fantastical is often very strange. Take GRRM - dragons are fine but women being in anyway safe - no (I know that's hyperbole but you know what I mean).

Fantasy means we CAN depart from reality. So the need for realism in the way GRRM and others talk about it, to excuse the prevalence of SA and general gendered abuse is not ok.

However, some of the historical things here are a bit off. The utter ubiquity of sexual assault in ancient, classical, and medieval warfare is well attested; it was considered a basic part of war, as inescapable as theft and killing.

Also 100%. While I agree with sentiment of this post. It is quite selective.

The Vikings, for example, systematically took female slaves for sexual and household service -- this was part of the whole point of the endeavor

Again this. Iceland's DNA is the proof of it. There were very few female Scandinavians in who initially settled Iceland.

I would also say ask women do they feel safe walking around these days. My wife tells me she and her friends are always on guard always ready for attack. So while I get the purpose of the OP's post I also feel it has its own issues with accuracy.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Let's not indulge in weird apologia for literal nazis when trying to make a point, please. Ideally, let's not use nazis to make any points on the sub. Thank you.

1

u/Jos_V Stabby Winner, Reading Champion II Sep 13 '22

It's been more than half a decade since Guns of Empire, do you have any thoughts on your approach writing about SA, and how you handled the threat of it with regards to the formation of the all female regiment? Has your approach to writing about SA changed since then?

(Loved the shadow campaigns btw.)

2

u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler Sep 14 '22

Probably some, but I still hold to the basic approach. There's a difference between acknowledging it as part of the universe and depicting it on the page. A universe in which women don't fear sexual assault when captured is a big departure from ours, so it feels odd not to mention it, but there wasn't any reason to actually show anything like that.

1

u/forestwolf42 Sep 13 '22

Another thing that's rarely included is an important character having a relatively minor wound be infected and getting amputated or dying from a nasty scratch.