Scifi with aggressive sexuality

[JirinPanthosa]

I just started watching Lost Girl on Netflix. It's a solid B- show overall, a little similar to Buffy in the sort of stories it tells. But it's also one of those shows that's so oversexed you suspect the show is written by 14 year old boys.

It's got these weird contradictions too where Bo's touch works on heterosexual women but not homosexual men. I can't tell if that's subtle sexism or just adolescent wish fulfillment. She literally needs to have casual sex to live.

When shows do stuff like 'Decontamination' where mechanics are built directly into the premise to force the story to resolve around sexuality, is it calculated focus group pandering or are the male writers consciously or subconsciously writing their own sexual desires into the story?

 

[JD]

The creator/showrunner for the early seasons, and 4 of the series most prominent writers were women, so I don't think male sexual desire had a lot to do with it.
EDIT: The second showrunner, who took over for the later seasons was also a woman.

 

[Christopher]

The creator/showrunner for the early seasons, and 4 of the series most prominent writers were women, so I don't think male sexual desire had a lot to do with it.

Absolutely not. A huge portion of Lost Girl's fanbase was lesbian, which was why the core romance on the show was Bo-Lauren rather than Bo-Dyson. This show wasn't about male fantasies. Women like sex too -- they just like it to be empowering, not exploitative.

Here's an interview where creator Michelle Lovretta spells out her rules for sex-positive writing:

http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/201...chelle-lovretta-on-rules-for-sex-positive-tv/

So, I came up with a few internal rules and I moved to Canada that first year to co-showrun the show (with the fab Mr. Peter Mohan) partly just to help institute them:

1. sexual orientation is not discussed, and never an issue;

2. no slut shaming – Bo is allowed to have sex outside of relationships

3. Bo’s male and female partners are equally viable;

4. Bo is capable of monogamy, when desired;

5. both genders are to be (adoringly!) objectified — equal opportunity eye candy FTW…

Bo has lots of sex, with men, women, humans, Fae, threesomes… and she’s still our hero, still a good person worthy (and capable) of love, and that’s a rare portrayal of female sexuality. Also, a show built around a bisexual lead doesn’t have to BE about her bisexuality — orientation can just be an interesting element of a story, and not the story itself, and that’s the central spirit of our show. I consider that “I’m here, I’m queer, and it’s no big deal” approach to a main character still fairly rare and wonderful, at least in North America. It’s also rare to have a female lead who is so honestly sexual, without judgment…I think the single element I will remain proudest of is just that we’ve been able to create and put out into the world a sex positive universe where a person’s sexual orientation is unapologetically present and yet neither defines them as a character, nor the show as a whole.

Sexuality is not adolescent. It tends to get treated that way in the media, but it's an integral part of adults' lives, and it's worth exploring in an adult way. So just because something is about sexuality, that doesn't automatically make it exploitative or juvenile. That's what you get when it's handled wrong, which it is all too often. Lost Girl is one of those rare cases where it was handled without the usual sexism and stigmas.

 

[JD]

I have to admit, when I saw the thread title I was expecting this to be about the characters being raped in Game of Thrones or something like that.
I was never that bothered by all of the sex in LG. The show was about a succubus, so it's pretty much a given that there's going to be tons of sex involved. Most of the time I thought it was handeled pretty well and worked into the stories in a way that worked. Some shows, like GOT tend to get carried away with it, but I never really had that problem with Lost Girl.

 

[Velocity]

Too bad they didn't write a better character than Lauren, though.

 

[Kor]

Themes of human and alien sexuality have been part of SF for a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_sexuality_in_speculative_fiction

Kor

 

[Christopher]

I tried to do much the same thing as Lost Girl in my SF-superhero novel Only Superhuman -- to portray the female leads' sexuality in a very positive, uninhibited, empowering way, rather than something to be stigmatized, condemned, or used to exploit. Yet there were readers who saw it as sexist or exploitative. A lot of the time, I think that had more to do with their own hangups and anxieties about sex than with anything in the book itself, since I've had much more positive reactions from a number of female readers (not to mention the women involved in the editing, cover design, and marketing of the book). A lot of Americans -- and specifically a lot of sci-fi fans -- are uncomfortable with sexuality and don't know how to engage with a story that treats it as a positive, healthy thing. Not to mention that there are so many toxic and demeaning images of sexuality in the culture that a lot of people don't have the context for recognizing a more positive treatment. That's why it was so good to have something like Lost Girl.

 

[mos6507]

The second you put something out there people will interpret it in their own way. There's no way to control their reactions. I mean, look at how much attention was paid to the controversy over Alice Eve taking off her clothes in Into Darkness.

 

[Christopher]

The second you put something out there people will interpret it in their own way. There's no way to control their reactions. I mean, look at how much attention was paid to the controversy over Alice Eve taking off her clothes in Into Darkness.

That's not a good example, though, because that definitely was gratuitous titillation pandering to male gaze. That's not a healthy portrayal of sexuality being misread by people because of their own sexual hangups, it was simply juvenile. It had the same problem as Enterprise's treatment of T'Pol and Hoshi -- instead of allowing female characters to pursue their own sexuality by their own choice, the (male) writers just tacked on voyeuristic moments that left them objectified and exposed to male gaze in situations that they had no control over, and where titillation had no place to begin with.

See, this is exactly what we're talking about -- the difference between pandering to sophomoric, voyeuristic titillation and telling stories that employ healthy, adult sexual interaction. Those are two entirely different things, because of the fundamental difference in the power dynamic between a woman who chooses to present herself sexually for her own reasons (like Bo in most Lost Girl episodes) and a woman who is unwittingly exposed to male gaze in a situation that shouldn't be sexual to begin with (like Carol in her underwear, or Hoshi when her top was "accidentally" pulled off during a tense escape). Here's a nice discussion of the difference between the two.

 

[JD]

That scene with Hoshi losing her shirt still bugs me. It was just so completely stupid and unnecessary.

 

[Commander Richard]

I don't even remember it.

 

[JD]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Ugh, the guy the clip posted it on Youtube thought it was "sexy and cute".
I don't have a problem with them doing sexy scenes, but this was just stupid. If they really wanted to get Hoshi topless, you'd think they could have come up with a better way to do it.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I don't have a problem with them doing sexy scenes, but this was just stupid. If they really wanted to get Hoshi topless, you'd think they could have come up with a better way to do it.

Yeah, that's what the decontamination chamber was for!

 

[RJDiogenes]

The religious roots run deep. There's no problem with sexuality or beauty or nudity in the arts, but people have been programmed to react negatively to it-- even people who self-identify as "liberal" or "progressive" (as if we have such things these days). I get a kick out of people who want to label sexual material as adult and then claim that sexuality is juvenile. Make up your mind.

 

[stardream]

I don't care about sex scenes one way or another as long as they serve the story etc. I do know there was one thing I was getting tired of in pilot episodes and movies. Within the first few minutes of an episode (or movie) introducing the main straight male character they show a bedroom scene. I remember seeing it in Mad Men, in Halt and Catch Fire...on and on. I've seen a few where they have done it with women but none spring to mind at the moment but it has happened. I got so tired of it, not because they were bedroom scenes, but because I was seeing what was basically the same scene over and over. I'd be just as tired of it if the first scene opened of them gunning someone down.I nearly gave up on Person of Interest for doing the same thing until I found out it was a flashback.

Surely there is are some more innovative ways to introduce a character.

I know, I'm veering off topic.

 

[Vandervecken]

Themes of human and alien sexuality have been part of SF for a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_sexuality_in_speculative_fiction

Kor

Farmer's Image of the Beast, still undisputed champion not just of sexuality, but depravity. Once you're read that, the rest becomes "meh, is that all you've got?"

See, this is exactly what we're talking about -- the difference between pandering to sophomoric, voyeuristic titillation and telling stories that employ healthy, adult sexual interaction..

Ie, dull. If fiction is duller than truth, what's the point?

But there is also sex, not as sophomoric titillation, but as exploration of practically Lovecraftian desires.

Who says science fiction's portrayal of sex needs to be healthy? It's at the fringes that it becomes interesting. Why would I want to see my neighbors having normal sex of any kind? I want the fun stuff. I will agree that gratuitous sex scenes are annoying as fuck, because they take time away from a real plot you might be interested in. But they're annoying because they pander, not to base instincts--I might enjoy that--but to boring instincts. They could be made more interesting...but tv hardly ever goes there. Movies as well. Really they are all kind of lame in the sex department.


I've never quibbled, if it was ribald,
I would devour, where others merely nibbled!

 

[Draculasaurus]

Too bad they didn't write a better character than Lauren, though.

Oh, she's such a drag.
Lost Girl was a light, fun guilty pleasure show. Then someone said, "You know what this succubus adventure show could really use, is a needy monogamous girlfriend that's always jealous and insecure and she'll be in every episode and she'll be just a bland featureless slab who calls during the adventure to ask what time Bo will be home and if she really, really loves her."

 

[BigJake]

Ie, dull. If fiction is duller than truth, what's the point?

But there is also sex, not as sophomoric titillation, but as exploration of practically Lovecraftian desires.

Some of the best work with this darker side of sex can happen without the need for much or any onscreen sex at all. Legend practically dripped with dark sexual themes without needing to have anyone literally getting it on, for instance. Dark Angel (I wonder how many people remember Jessica Alba's first star turn?) had an episode that involved the main character going into "heat" because of the feline DNA in her genome, and that actually explored the psychological implications of that in an interesting way. Buffy the Vampire Slayer used fantasy themes to explore sex and compulsion all through its run, and Dollhouse got mileage out of a deliberately dark and squicky core premise (despite actual sex being mostly inferred).

Who says science fiction's portrayal of sex needs to be healthy? It's at the fringes that it becomes interesting. Why would I want to see my neighbors having normal sex of any kind? I want the fun stuff. I will agree that gratuitous sex scenes are annoying as fuck, because they take time away from a real plot you might be interested in. But they're annoying because they pander, not to base instincts--I might enjoy that--but to boring instincts.

Fair point.

They could be made more interesting...but tv hardly ever goes there. Movies as well. Really they are all kind of lame in the sex department.

I give movies a bit more credit, but that's not to say there aren't plenty of movies that phone it in.

 

[Christopher]

Nobody said the portrayal of sex needs to be healthy, but portrayals of healthy, unstigmatized sexuality are so rare in mass media that it's good to have them for a change. I reject the assumption that it has to be a zero-sum choice between the two. That's exactly the problem -- that there's too much fiction out there that handles sex poorly or degradingly -- and particularly, way too much that is objectifying and alienating for women -- so it's good to have something like Lost Girl that, for a change, is welcoming and supportive to women, lesbians, bisexuals, polyamorous people, and other groups that have historically been denied a safe space in mainstream fiction. It's fine to have fiction that explores the darker side as long as it's not the only thing out there. It's even fine to have fiction that panders to 14-year-old boys... again, as long as it's not the only thing out there. The goal is to be inclusive for everyone.

 

[matthunter]

As with most of her roles, Jaime Murray's character in Defiance is very open with her sexuality and it's obviously there to attract a male audience, but the character uses it for manipulation as a means to power.

Killjoys also has some fairly hot-and-heavy scenes, with the female colony doctor very obviously using one of the male protagonists to "scratch an itch". Same lead is also later hooked up with the main female protagonist, but again the long-term ramifications of that are left unexplored (in terms of their relationship) compared to how it affects the guy's younger brother, who considers the girl a surrogate "big sister" (he's been working with her a lot longer) and thus finds the whole idea squicky.