@stardream That's what was so shocking about that post. I'm not trying to start something up, I'm genuinely trying to understand (and trying to relate the thread back to the theme of media) : how is what you wrote not victim blaming?
Scifi with aggressive sexuality
- Thread starter JirinPanthosa
- Start date
Oh my god I take a break from the board to do my job for like, three hours...
Anyway,
Seriously.
@stardream , aside from the obvious problem here of this being a horrible statement to make to any victim, "Couldn't she just knock him out?" has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
I understand that you hate the idea of a helpless woman, which is cool. And I disagree that this is irrelevant to the discussion -- it's definitely part of these issues, and even relates perfectly back to how women are portrayed in the media, especially in science fiction and fantasy.
I think I've made it very clear that I am a feminist and that I don't think women are helpless. I believe in female empowerment, I think physically strong and capable female characters like Buffy (or more realistic versions of female fighters, like Prentiss or J.J. on Criminal Minds ) are a very positive thing, and it's clear that there are plenty of individual women out there who have the physical prowess and/or training to take out a man, and plenty of individual men out there who aren't physically threatening.
However, let's be realistic here. I am a 5'3" 120lb woman. What do you think my odds would be of succeeding in knocking out an average sized man (in America 5'9.5" 195lb)? I took a couple free self-defense courses, sure, but I have don't have the time, the money, or the physical ability to devote my life to the type of training it would take to make me a physical match for an average man.
Also, you do know that, unless you do enough harm to seriously brain damage/kill someone, a person will only be knocked out for a few seconds IRL, right?
All your points are valid. Though in the way the story is presented, the ferryman doesn't pose a direct physical threat to the woman. Which still does not make his request morally right. It would be rape if the sex happens. There is agreement here. But what if she refuses and he does nothing?
We could even pull a Kobayashi Maru and change the parameters of the story, switch the sexes or change the characters both to male or both to female. The sailor would always come out as either a rapist or just immoral if the fiancée character just walks away.
If he changes his mind and does nothing (or if she leaves the boat as a response to his threat), it's still attempted rape.
No...I didn't mean to delete my post...will fix!
I can't remember exactly what I wrote. It was mainly along the lines of: I clearly wasn't talking about the River story anymore.
I have a few minutes so i'm jumping back in here. I don't think suggesting a woman knock out her attacker is victim blaming. It's a suggestion which is unrealistic (as is the rest of the story) and still a valid point - she could have tried to physically overpower the dude. IF she was fit, or had the training etc. But if we're assuming the average, woman have something like 80%? or so of the strength of equivalently sized men. Someone who's occupation involves a lot of physical exertion like rowing a boat, or rigging lines on a sailboat etc would have more muscle than someone whose occupation is more domestic. So unless she's trained in anything more complex than basic hand-to-hand self defense, she'd be at a tremendous physical disadvantage if she attempts to physically subdue the boatman in order to take his boat across without his permission.
Oh now you post this. Oops
I don't know. From the scenario I'd almost agree. But the only move the sailor makes is an outlandish immoral request. It would be hard to see this as a threat. With the refusal of the fiancée to accept his terms she also refuses to give her consent, which cannot be given freely in the proposed situation anyway, and the interaction ends. Could or should this be categorized as attempted rape?
In the story, what is the threat? If she refuses his demands and walks away she in no better or worse condition than before, but he remains forever morally deficient.
The captain made the threat: Have sex with me or you don't get to see your lover. Whichever choice the woman makes (or even if the captain rescinds the demand), the threat was still made.
And I should think that being kept away from her lover IS most definitely a worse condition than before.
In real life this would be an inacceptable shifting of the burden of guilt towards the victim.
Not at all. All i'm saying is that if she's not better trained than the other guy, she doesn't stand a chance of overpowering him. And if she is better trained, and can fight off her attacker, more power to her.
Nothing about should or should not etc.
I gather what the women here are saying is ANY MALE who is "just requesting" sex in an unusual (non-mutually romantic) situation is a half-step from demanding it; which clearly becomes attempted rape.
again, how does what I said translate into victim blaming, victim guilting or any such?
Holy shit no that is not what any woman here is saying. Jesus Christ.
The captain made the threat: Have sex with me or you don't get to see your lover. Whichever choice the woman makes (or even if the captain rescinds the demand), the threat was still made.
And I should think that being kept away from her lover IS most definitely a worse condition than before.
But she is already away from he fiancé. Her situation did not get worse when she walked away. It stayed the same.
Unless the sailor put her in the situation that is keeping her away from her lover, it is no threat, but a terrible 'condition' he connects to his willingness to 'help' her. "Do this or else nothing happens" isn't a threat, but the act of an ass.
That is literally what "shifting the burden of guilt means"!
Then I'm at a loss as to how an unreasonable request as the price of doing business - absolutely loathsome behavior - becomes a threat?
EXACTLY.
Similar threads
