The Frisky: In yet another installment of Men Who Need To Take Remedial Women’s Studies, an executive from the U.K. broadcaster of the hit show thinks criticism of Game of Thrones’ sexual violence against women is “nonsense.” Way to alienate your audience, bro. After the Season 5 episode where Ramsay raped Sansa on their wedding night, many fans (including a U.S. senator) thought the show had finally gone too far. Gary Davey, managing director of content at the British TV network Sky, doesn’t agree.
7 comments:
Dismissing comments about sexual abuse on television by explaining that violence happens to all genders is a massive cop out, and one that turns a blind eye to the horrors women face every day. The men in the show rarely face sexual abuse, with one notable exception, and sexual violence is on a whole other plane when compared to typical violence (swords, magic, etc.). The article also brings up the idea of mansplaining, or a man telling others how women are supposed to feel, which seems to become more and more of an issue in mainstream media every week. I agree that a man can't tell women how they should react to being exposed to sexual violence, and it begs the question "Why would anybody give this man a microphone in the first place?". The article then chooses to delve into book vs. TV show nonsense, since the books haven't yet reached the scene in question from the TV show, and so to the author the assault isn't particularly "canon". I think this is a major digression from the initial point, and serves only to undermine the author's platform for justice by migrating it into a platform of fanboyism, which I don't have a particular amount of patience for.
So, here’s the thing. There are some legitimate reasons why one could justify the use of rape in a TV show. 1) They want to offer people who don’t fully understand the impact of rape an easy way to see its effects 2) They want to highlight the factors that cause people to become rapists and help their audience recognize rape culture 3) They want audience member who re sexual assault victims to have characters they can better understand/see hope in. I think sexual assault (sadly) is a large part of life and something many people, especially women, think about on a daily basis. As such, I think art and entertainment (like TV Shows) has the right to use sexual assault and rape. But where GoT crosses the line is the use of these actions as a shock factor, and then attempts to justify it with all of the wrong reasons. There was no reason healthy relationships (like that of Daenerys and Drogo) needed to be turned violent. And the severe disproportion of the sexual violence toward women in the show is ridiculous. Rape is not a marketing gimmick. Rape is not ‘edgy’ or ‘gritty’. Rape is a real thing that happens to real people. The GoT writer’s need to learn to respect the difference between a legitimate artistic choice to create a positive conversation on a difficult subject and doing something for the shock factor. And FYI, by the time you’ve hit twelve female characters who’ve been raped, it’s not really edgy or shocking anymore.
I COMPLETELY agree with what Jacob and Emma said in the previous comments. Rape is certainly not a marketing gimmick (and if it is being used as such, than whoever approved it probably sided with Gary in this situation) and it really does reinforce the idea that it's not a serious issue when used in popular, widely seen shows like this. I understand at a base level what Davey was trying to say-- he was trying to explain that violence occurs to both genders and that both parties get thrown around and beat up throughout the show. I am still however, disgusted at what he said because it is just so untrue once you add a layer of context to it. Like the author of this article mentioned, most of the violence that was done towards women were of a sexual nature and a non-sexual nature for men. That is also a fact that is applied in real life as well - "one in six women have experienced rape." It's not some fake statistic that is used to emotionally drive an episode of your favorite television show. The candid way in which Davey also spoke of the issue was downright disrespectful and brushed aside the thousands of victims : "The rape happens, it’s part of the story, it was in the books." He is surely a man who has never felt the fear of another human overcoming you physically and emotionally against your own will. And then no one believing you about it after.
I thought this author did a good job of outlining why dismissal of sexual violence on TV is problematic, especially when that violence is directed towards women. The author also did a good job of doing the background work that Sky TV network Managing Director Gary Davey clearly failed to do. While TV shows should be able to portray sexual violence if they choose, showing a disproportionate, or possibly unnecessary amount of sexual violence against women isn’t just a question of taste – for shows watched by thousands of people, these scenes can have a serious impact. Aside from being extremely uncomfortable for survivors of sexual violence, showing these scenes on popular shows can enforce rape culture. I personally have only seen an episode or two of Game of Thrones, partially because I don’t care much for violent television. It’s a bit of a bummer, because the show does seem interesting and the design and production work impressive – some of the sets for the show are quite the undertaking.
I do wonder what dedicated Game of Thrones fans think of the violence… do they mind it? Dislike it? Think it’s important to the story? Do they merely overlook, or look past it? If so, is that an indication of such violence being normalized in our culture? I think these are valid questions, but I’m not surprised that a network director would not want to delve into such topics.
This is a very multi-faceted issue. In what circumstances (if any) is it morally right to depict rape on television? I argue that if said depiction fits within the thematic, characterial, or narrative worlds of the story at hand, one is just in showing it. However, if one is merely throwing any type of assault in the story just to have assault, then the piece becomes compromised artistically. If it works for the story, it works (usually).
In the case of Ramsay Bolton's rape of Sansa Stark, this scene does two things: it reinforces the character of Ramsay while acting as a motivating force for the character shift we see in Sansa towards the end of Season 5 and into Season 6. Furthermore, this scene further emphasizes one of this show's main themes: captivity vs. freedom. The audience could have assumed that this rape took place after Ramsay and Sansa were married; the show did not have to put it on the screen. The decision to show this scene completely changed the dynamic of the episode and of Sansa's character path. It's one thing to think, "Ramsay probably raped Sansa." It's a completely different experience to watch it happen, as horrible as it is. I won't address possible reactions to this scene, since everyone responds to it differently. Moreover, that's not the point of this argument. I will note, nonetheless, that showing the actual rape leads to a greater emotional reaction from the audience.
I won’t go on with further analysis of Game of Thrones, because then I would be missing the larger issue at hand. The depiction of rape and other violent acts, when done in accordance with the story and when written with care and taste, can help shape a character, expose thematic ideas and advance the plot. It’s important to be cognizant of the potentially upsetting nature of violent acts, but it is equally important to know how to use them to help tell a story.
In terms of Game of Thrones the sexual portrayal on the show as a whole is problematic, and in my opinion, partially the network's fault. George R.R. Martin in his story has created a world that is brought down by the follies of men, who all inevitably die fighting wars. His most powerful characters by the last book and in the 6th season (spoilers) are essentially all women, with a woman leading the entirety of Westeros, and another one coming to take it away from her. We see women fight and out smart men constantly in the books, especially. However in the show, incongruous with this powerful women, there are constantly naked women portrayed in a sexual way. One step forward is many steps back. In a show where women are the power players how come HBO has usually unecessary nudity in almost every episode? And it's hardly ever male. It adds nothing to the story and I'm sure is only to bring HBO new subscribers and viewers. Even Emilia Clarke, the actress who plays Danaerys, allegedly asked to no longer be nude as often in the show. It discredits womens' power to be shown as objects and to have extraneous sexual abuse. Yes, Sansa's abuse from Ramsey is a driving factor of hatred from her, but couldn't they have just had them from him being an all-around terrible guy like he is, without including the horrific and distasteful rape scene from last season?
I watch this show for the story, which I am constantly awed by due to Martin's pure genius when it comes to planning and storytelling, but I stopped watching the show for 3 years until this year just due to its portrayal of women and violence. I think that HBO should finally listen to the outraged fans and cut the abuse and excess nudity of women in this final season and truly honor their incredible female leads and their powerful characters.
I should preface this comment by saying I'm a fan of the show, but I do agree that amount of sexual violence on Game of Thrones is questionable and potentially problematic. The frequency with which it occurs does lead me to believe it's at least for shock value, especially because the act itself is shown. I read a very interesting article about how sexual violence was handled in a more empowering way in Max: Fury Road - and I don't think I'm doing the author full justice quoting from memory (I will post back with the link when I find it again) but we knew the women were victims because it was alluded to (their victimhood was an essential part of the storytelling), but that in refusing to show the actual violence itself, the movie was able to use the violence without turning it into part of the spectacle.
Post a Comment