How can I write this seduction scenario, character development wise?

A bank heist being planned on the assumption that a bolt of lightning will strike the vault and open at just the right moment it is also not impossible. But it's not plausible.

 

Well perhaps I need to understand here. Why can't a person hate a particular type of people so much that would incite violence. With all the wackos out there, what is that I am missing?

The issue not being big enough, I am not seeing the distinction, especially since most murderers kill for shallow reasons. Why does the reader have to share her justification instead of just accepting her as shallow and fascist?

 

My point is not that a person can't irrationally hate others. My point is that if a person starts out sane, then the experience of not getting what she wants is not going to drive her insane. The insanity has to come from somewhere else.

Where's your cite for that idea? Who says that most murderers kill for shallow reasons? That is, who says that most murderers become murderers--because that's what we're talking about--for shallow reasons?

Why does her "justification" have to sound like a justification and excuse for rapists?

If you want to write a novel about the idea that people can become murderers for any reason, any reason at all, why isn't that reason something else?

Examples of something else:

He's a murderer because when he was a child, his father didn't get him an autographed baseball.
She's a murderer because her icemaker broke and she had to use ice trays.
He's a murderer because he was rejected when he auditioned for American Idol.
She's a murderer because the city installed speedbumps on her street and she is deprived of the joy of speeding out of her driveway.
He's a murderer because the last time he went to McDonald's, they gave him a cheeseburger instead of a hamburger.

Why not something like that? When you have someone become a murderer and rapist "because" they didn't get sex on demand, that sounds very, very much like an excuse for murderers and rapists.

 

Okay thanks. What place does the insanity have to come from, if not an extreme fascist attitude?

Oh, I did meant to imply to the reader that the excuse was justified. Not at all. When the MC is raped and wants justice, he strikes back, and the reader is suppose to be on his side, in wanting the villain to be stopped. I did not mean to imply that the villain's beliefs were justified, I am going for the opposite.

 

If you say that a person is insane "because" they didn't get fries with their burger, and if you say that "involuntary fry deprivation" is a theme of your book, that strongly suggests that at some level, society has an obligation to make sure that people get their fries, and that people who go nuts and assault others for their fries are, to some extent, not in control of their actions. And not being in control of your actions is often seen as a justification.

 

Sorry I wrote it wrong. I meant I did NOT mean to imply that the villain's actions were justified. Is their a way I should approach it, where the reader will not see it as a justification? Even though it's a justification to the villain herself, it's not meant to be one to the reader. Is their a way I should make that more clear perhaps?

 

As long as you say that she became insane "because" she was deprived of something that she wanted, I see a huge problem. Your "because" makes no more sense than insanity "because" of french fry deprivation.

Do you feel that a person can become insane because they are deprived of french fries?

 

Is the insanity the issue or the justification of it?

Is the issue whether or not she CAN go insane from it, or is it the justification of it that is the problem?

 

How would you feel about a book that had a theme of involuntary french fry deprivation, with a character that went insane because of (rather than a character that was already insane and was triggered by) said deprivation? Perfectly reasonable?

 

There are many fictional stories where villains kill or commit violence out of jealousy, so I am use to jealousy being a motivation.

 

We're not talking about jealousy. Where did you get jealousy?

 

Well the woman is jealous in the sense that she wants what men are not willing to give her. So she is jealous in that sense, of others.

 

So the guy who wants fries is jealous of the people who have fries, and that drives him insane?

 

Well we are talking about the female villain here, right? She is driven to murder and raping her victims, out of wanting what she can't have.

 

So why not have her murder fry-eating fast food patrons? If a person is driven to murder by wanting what she can't have, that would make perfect sense.

 

Well the story would be changed around a lot. The MC's theme as to how he driven to getting justice from his rape, would be very different, since his character is not a fast food patron, but is a cop who was on the case, and his police resources, play a role in the story as well. What is the reason for the change to not being accepted by the opposite gender, to fast food deprivation?

 

The reason is that I'm trying to demonstrate how little sense it makes for an otherwise sane person to be driven insane by either not getting fries on demand, OR not getting sex on demand. It's wildly, wildly implausible. If they're insane for some other reason, then any frustration, including those two, might theoretically be a trigger. But the idea that she is insane "because" of either fry deprivation or sex deprivation makes no sense at all.

 

Well she takes being rejected as a personal attack on her, over the years. She feels that men think that something is wrong with her, and she feels she has to retaliate cause she is being judged or persecuted. It's not the deprivation of sex that angers her, it's the judgement on her.

One example of a possible comparison, I could use is I recall seeing a movie where some black men went into an ice cream shot back in the 40s I think, but the shop refused to serve black people, and it was whites only.

Now they came back with guns and took the ice cream they wanted by force, out of retaliation. It wasn't the deprivation of ice cream that bothered them, it was them being judged by other people. That is what my villain is retaliating for. Her frustration comes from years and years of being judged this same way.

 

No. No. No. One woman who doesn't get male attention, versus an entire population of people who were enslaved and deprived of the most basic of rights, are NOT the same thing.

 

The point is, is that it's a person retaliating against being judged for who she is.

 

No. It's not. "Judged" is the very, very least of what happened to blacks in the forties.

Why are you so determined to avoid having a more plausible underlying cause for this character's insanity?

 

It depends on what other causes would be and what changes they would make the story. What other causes would cause it?

And why does my villain have to have more people like her, who have suffered, in order to realiate? Why can't she just avenge her own judgement, done on to her only?

 

How many times--a dozen? Two dozen?--have I suggested severe childhood abuse or trauma?

Have you read Hannibal, the sequel to Silence of the Lambs? Do you remember Hannibal Lecter as a boy, and his baby sister that he loved so much, and what happened to her, what he SAW happen to her?

That. That kind of thing.

 

Sure, I can have the men do something more extreme to her, then just reject her only.

 

It doesn't have to be the men. It seems more plausible for something to have happened in her childhood or early life. What are the odds that she'd run into MULTIPLE completely insane men?