Rape Scene - how graphic is too graphic

So, this got me to thinking. Rape is clearly a hot button issue, so much that I know people that failed psych evals for saying murder was the more serious crime. So it tends to be avoided pretty much in all forms of fiction.

In regular fiction (not erotica or pornographic art/not so much art) rape is often down at a glance, with various methods to keep graphic details at a minimum. Murder though, not so much. Every gory detail is shown.

In erotica or pornography the rule for rape seems to be that by the end the female (I can only speak to hetero) always "comes around" and enjoys it. I'm not talking to the act of orgasm, but some form of agreeing or asking or begging etc.

Very few works depict the reality of it, or better said, a perceived reality of it. Some would say, that's fantasy, and yes, that is true, but I don't know many people that fantasize about something so personal that eventually leads to invalidating the very fantasy. I know too many people that have such dark thoughts, and it should not be a surprise as it is the most popular sexual fantasy.

So the issue is guilt, in my opinion. Guilt that many have had such fantasies on either side or both from any number of reasons. Nobody claims that rape is not about power or that it is not traumatic to a person, but so is having a knee cap shot. Both have life long consequences that never quite heal. The difference? People don't masturbate to shooting people's kneecaps. Well the vast majority of normal and even the vast majority of messed up but law abiding people.

I have some scenes that are sexual in nature, and one were consent is non-consensual, as in a prostitute that really doesn't want to but does it out of fear for her pimp. If I didn't believe it was relevant to the plot and a major turning point for the character I would not have included it. She ends up killing the john, so I couldn't quite fade to black to a later time.

Before anyone assumes (which I can understand) I have seen the effects of rape in strangers as well as loved ones and still get blinded by rage when I think of it, but at the same time fantasy is still just fantasy, even if it is in grueling detail. We have agency over our lives and turn ons, and as such I believe that we can distinguish between real and not.

AB

 

But fantasy in porn is still "consensual". I put that in speech marks, because who knows when people get drawn into situations they would rather not be in.

I think the fantasy of rape bears no relationship to the reality. As you said "the rule for rape seems to be that by the end the female (I can only speak to hetero) always "comes around" and enjoys it."

I have no idea if this is the most popular sexual fantasy, but I like to think it is just that- a fantasy. Something that exists in the world of fantasy.

If someone derives pleasure from the reality, then I personally find that odd. But then I have seen the glee with which red-top tabloids report on rape, or at least have in the past.

You raise an interesting point, and I do not know the truth of it in all honesty.

 

Well I am talking about consensual acts. It shouldn't be that hard to verify that rape is the number one fantasy among women. The same goes for erotic fiction (not necessarily erotica, all kinds) regarding the begging for more, yadda yadda. It may be a legal aspect for posting it on sites hosted in different countries. That I am not sure, but what I have learned is that every woman I dated has had at least once in their lifetime a rape fantasy, and not merely one where they imagine themselves crying pushing the assailant off but failing etc.

Just think of BDSM and how violent and painful that can get, yet it is very much consensual.

Another aspect that is medically proven in most women is arousal in both gender rape victims. As a male I found it hard to believe and maybe on some level I still do, but then again tests were conducted so they couldn't all be that wrong? It seems to be a defense mechanism to prevent damage occurring during the act from before humans could speak, or something to that effect.

Either way, there are many aspects that make this a tough subject to discuss about, much less write about in a way that has artistic merit. Writing has to be art, otherwise it would be reporting or writing an Ikea manual.

 

Rabbit hole.

In this situation "every woman I dated has had at least once in their lifetime a rape fantasy": it is always consensual and within the confines of a trusting relationship; hence fantasy.

 

I'm hoping you didn't misunderstand my contribution to this thread. Of course rape is not a normal sex scene. It's a horrifically violent act.

However, writers seem a lot less worried about depicting other kinds of violence, don't they? Blow their heads off, fine. Bits, brains, blood, gore everywhere, fine. Slash them to bits with a sword, fine. Eaten by a tiger or a zombie, fine. Rape ...ooh, that's another country.... If it's sexual violence being depicted, writers tend to worry ...and rightly so. In the hands of somebody who isn't skilled at depicting rape, it can become gratuitous and even 'arousing' in the minds of readers who respond to this sort of thing.

My understanding of this thread is that the OP was wondering how to depict rape so the right things happen in the mind of the reader.

My digression into the topic of depicting 'normal' sex had nothing to do with the rape issue. It had to do with ADreamer's statement about avoiding writing 'normal sex' in novels. "Chapter N closes with the potential and Chapter O opens with the aftermath." The OP actually brought up the topic of writing normal sex as well, in this thread, and I was simply responding to it.

 

I understand your point. It is similar to this: in the US/UK it is acceptable to watch horrific acts of violence, but the sight of a cock is unacceptable ever. Obviously I am not trying to equate the sight of a cock to rape.

But then, I also understand it. Sexual violence to my mind is fundamentally worse than violence. It has a degree of premeditation or gratuitous pleasure to it that makes it singularly unpleasant.

Often a work of fiction will find an explanation or convincing motive for violence- revenge, self-defence, defence of others. Whereas sexual violence really is all about the self, it is all about self-gratification. There is no greater purpose for it.

 

Western culture allows and encourages depictions of violence and shrinks back at even brief nudity. As if the nude figure somehow exudes sexuality and that sexuality is more offensive than shooting someone in the head. The problem has gotten so bad that there is little emotional response to such violence - then it just becomes outlandish and exists even more abstractly. Sexual violence is still violence - it is still shocking and can be played with in many ways.

I have many issues with Masterspelt's original post, but the second post has made me realize exactly how graphic is too graphic for me. I understand something now that I did not comprehend before...

I will only state that rape fantasy in women is controlled and removed from reality - it is a problem that English has no suitable word for the constructions of such self-indulgent and consequence-free passions. Such fantasies are little more then testing boundaries or achieving gratification in a society that shuns female desire. It is more or less a woman seducing a desirable man into ravishing her. His logic often being "I cannot control myself, I must have you!" so that a forbidden act can explored while the woman retains complete control of his actions. The male is nothing more than a construction to imprint various passions on. While he might be beastly, it often represents an ideal masculinity that is nothing more than an entirely controlled puppet of pleasure, serving the woman's own desires.

 

According to the CDC, 1 in 5 women will get raped at some point in their life. I've seen statistics as high as 1 in 3. According to RAINN, an American is sexually assaulted every 107 seconds. Only 2% of rapists will have any kind of prison time.

Rape as a fantasy is a thing, and it's totally fine. Actual rape, when a person is held down against their will and violated in ways that leave permanent emotional and mental (and sometimes physical) scars, is not. Some people get off on the idea of being dominated, of having controlled stripped away, even of being seen and used as a sexual plaything. No-one gets off on the idea of having the interior of their vagina torn open from forceful entry without any form of lubrication, of being forced to endure that pain and humiliation and vulnerability while their body is used to satisfy someone that, often times, they know, trust or even love. No-one wants to endure that, have to worry about what sexually transmitted infections they may have gotten, or if they're going to have to carry their rapist's child.

If you want the difference between fantasy and reality, read rape erotica and then read actual accounts of rape. You'll see the difference plain as day. They are not comparable.

I'll never tell someone not to write something. I'm not telling anyone not to write rape scenes. What I'm saying is that, if you do, do it right. Treat the topic with the respect it deserves. Having violence and knee-caps being shot out is fine, chances are that no-one who reads your book will ever have experienced an arm being chopped off or being shot. But sexual violence is another matter entirely. For many people - too many by far - it is not a gorey fantasy, it is a horrific reality that they have gone through and that they will never forget.

 

Ok, I must have misinterpreted your post then.
I understand your point about other forms of violence being ok, but rape no. And I think Chinspinner put words to how I feel about it:

and also:

 

While I agree a step-by-step wouldn't work because I'm fairly sure it's going to bog down the flow, I do think that just because it's from the rapist's POV, doesn't mean it glorifies rape; it all comes down to how it's written. Sure, if the reader has shaky morals and considers rape glorious or sexy, it can happen, but to most people it'd probably be sickening. I'm referring back to Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye. Maybe it's just me but there was nothing glorious about the rape, even though it was from the rapist's POV. The entire book is not the easiest of reads, but I think it's a brave attempt and makes you think about not just child abuse but also other social problems.. A book like that is important, and I'd much rather read that than some sugarcoated version which skates around the reality to preserve its reader's paece of mind or a splatter that only aims to exploit.

I'm not sure I follow you. Are you saying getting shot is more ok to write frivolously about because among the readers there aren't that many people who've been shot? So it won't affect people so strongly? A graphic description of crushed knee-caps won't be as shocking to the reader because it's less likely it would ever happen to them or has never happened to them? So, graphic murder = okay-ish. Graphic rape = no-no? I can sort of understand that. The sexual aspect makes rape a (stronger) taboo. It fills us with different kind of revulsion than reading about some elf beheading bad guys on a battlefield. Its prevalence... I don't know, I mean, domestic violence is also prevalent, but I don't see threads like this popping up about that.

What's the "right" way to do it, anyway? Off the top of my head, I can think of several books with rape scenes, all quite differently executed, altough one common feature in all of them is that they damage the victim deeply. I think in my mind that would be the "right" way. But what the victim feels, how it happens (it's not always someone pinning you down, ramming it inside 'cause friction isn't pleasant to the dick either and the vic certainly isn't always a woman; e.g. male prison rape statistics aren't going to restore anyone's faith into humanity either), how their bodies and minds react to it, how they cope with the trauma... it varies.

I think if one is set on writing about rape, it's worthwhile to really think through what happens and what its consequences are. It's also possible that once you put your mind to it, you actually don't really want to write about it. This is why I've written only one rape; I knew I wanted to confront the subject at some point, and even decided to write it from the rapists' POV (they don't get further than using a finger before they're dead, though) because there were some scores I wanted to settle through fiction -- if that makes sense. But apart from that, I don't think I will ever revisit that place, not from a female vic's POV anyway. The aftermath is the hardest thing to write, tbh, although it seems to many readers the hardest part is reading the rape scene.

When you delve into the motives of rape, you'll find other reasons than self-gratification, although it's certainly a strong one. In one of my favorite novels (it's Icelandic, Ég heiti Ísbjörg, ég er ljón), it was a tool for revenge. Sometimes it's used to establish dominance or to prove yourself to the victim, yourself, or to others. I think in entertainment it's very often portrayed as something the rapist does for sexual pleasure, but that's not the entire picture. Although, I guess we could say even e.g. revenge is about self-gratification. And we could also say, there's no need for any great purpose, and when it comes to physical violence, the mere notion of 'great purpose' feels... naive?

 

When I said self-gratification, I did not necessarily mean sexual- power over another is a form of self-gratification.

But yes- revenge is a form of self-gratification, I think that we all see some nobility in it though as a motive, on some level. The husband/father seeking revenge for his murdered family is a common trope, and it is always presented in a way that makes his misdeeds palatable.

 

Is bowing out. Some very good points made, but as I mentioned with my previous relationships, there is only so much I subject myself to now. Fantasy and reaityl tend to blur because of memories of real effects. So ultimately this is why some things dont need to be graphic to be poignant.

AB

 

Depends on your angle. I for one use it as a means of getting at a character emotionally with out going into explicit detail of how it happened. But if it is your aim to push the envelope, you better do your research of how the action takes place. It can be for a few different reasons, and affects the victim in different ways. So go out into the world wide web and seek the info.

As long as it is not glorified, it can be highly emotive to your audience. Having said that be as explicit as you are comfortable with to get your point across.

 

@Masterspeler - I really question why anyone could hold a position that rape is worse than murder. If a psychologist dares to assert such an opinion as objective fact or hold it against anyone, my mental gloves come off. Murder. Murder is far worse than rape - and our society has been utterly polluted by those who have deadened our collective minds. People who know nothing reveling and grasping at mental straws for cheap thrills and horror. It is a red miasma - clouding the minds and cheapening life in ways not rivaled since Arkwright himself.

Another contribution from Inks to this discussion:

Spoiler: Trigger warning.

If a writer happens to hit a sore spot, invoking past memories of the reader, they supplant the action and relive it in another body. Being unable to be immersed in the situation is a shield or barrier that very few authors can really pierce - if you find the right frequency or gap, the heart itself can be stabbed by even imprecisely wielded words. Therefore you do not even need to show the act to get certain responses.

You do not even have to write well: "As he entered, the sound of his zipper being undone silenced the TV and the closing of the door. Visiting time has come again."

You do not need to show. You only need to imply.

 

I actually have rape in my stories as well and I thought the best way to show it is to not show it but heavily allude to what happened.

 

You got me. I dont know why people believe that but they do. I could venture into a guess, but its politics so I dont go there.

 

Which was the point i was trying to get across before i got trolled

 

The point is that because off Miguel's mental unstability and trauma from being abused in a Cuban jail and comming to Miami on the Mariel boatlift made him cling on to Elizabeth and when she rebuffed him it sent him over the edge. Having said that, he is prone to mood swing and acts off wild impulsivity due to his mental illness

 

Be glad that you didn't stumble unsuspecting over it . Worst was an up to this point throughly enjoyable series, which got off into acutely uneasy territory on a tangent (and about half of a book too *urgh*). The only! positive thing about it is, now I can smell a sadistic writer at a hundred pages.. *sigh*. Not an education I wanted to have.

 

Sounds like that was agonizing

 

Sounds like Terry Goodkind. Am I right?