Trope Critique- Stalking For Love

So I recently came upon this video from an interesting youtube channel called Pop Culture Detective.
The video is a critique of a romantic trope where the (usually male) protagonist obsessively pursues their love interest despite a lack of- or even rejection of- interest on their part. Pop Culture Detective provides several examples from popular media of where characters engage in behaviour that would otherwise be creepy, damaging and even criminal, but are framed as endearing because the story hints that it will work out and that the protagonist is only doing it out of sheer love. And while male protagonists engaged in this behaviour are usually portrayed as not being in any serious fault, female characters doing the same are more likely to. The argument is that the focus is shifted toward male satisfaction and entitlement, so it is their interest that matters.
I know personally, I have found this sort of thing a bit weird before but this video definitely calls to attention just how bad and widespread it is.
What are your thoughts on this?
Where is the line between dedication and obsession? Do you disagree with any of the examples in the video? Other notable examples?

 

I haven't watched the whole video yet but it's an interesting question!
To add to it, does the old cliché of some women 'playing hard to get' actually exist or is that a myth? Is it an old fashioned idea that women enjoyed being 'courted'?

I don't know the answers but my initial view is that making sweeping generalisations isn't the correct way to look at these instances, with each being a unique, and therefore different, set of scenarios.

 

Excellent video and very informative.

For me, this trope must stop. If I knew a man was stalking me just because in his mind he was in love with me; I will feel very unconfortable, crepped out, not desire to be out of the streets and for sure will call the police. This is not romantic, and this trope must die. For me, if someone loves another person, he or she will feel comfortable and open to each other. And if one says no, the other respects and moves on.

When the stalking could work for me is, if it was a horror movie. Now that could fit on the psychological horror genre. The victim that end up with a stalker tries to escape her/his nightmare. But at the end the stalker must put in jail and the victim gets help, psychologically.

 

I'm sure there's some truth to it. Some people may enjoy more of a build up, may feel more comfortable if there is persistent interest or may feel uncomfortable expressing interest themselves without it. But I'd definitely say it's more of an old fashioned idea and myth- especially in the idea that men are the courters and women are the courted. I'd say it has to do with male entitlement- that if a man spends more effort he should get rewarded- and also forced gender roles in that women traditionally aren't supposed to be as forward or sexually interested as men, so the man has to put on a whole show before she is allowed to do anything.

Sure, not every character being persistent about their love interest is stalking, and the degree to which it's problematic when it is varies too. But the point is, it's easy to find examples of stalking for love, and some of them are quite problematic.

 

Well, courting and stalking are very different.

"The garden show? How lovely! I'm afraid I can't; my parents are coming in this weekend. You'd love my dad..."

The above woman might like being courted by the person in question.

"No, thanks."
"No."
"Joe, let's just focus on the HOA budget, OK?"
"Joe, do I need to ask the chairman to have you assigned to another committee?"
"Joe, if you don't get off my sidewalk in thirty seconds, I will be calling the police."

The above woman does not want to be courted by the person in question, and Joe is already into stalking.

 

Agree 100%. The whole notion of love at first sight and this romance from a distance is something I have always felt wrong about a lot of romance plots, where characters fall in love very easily and genuinely being close and spending personal time with someone is not important- like how often a male and female lead in an action or adventure movie seemingly inevitably end up together for no apparent reason. I think that larger trend of easy romance hits at the same basic reasons for why these stalking for love plots are accepted.

Yep. You could also have real stalking in a drama I think.

 

What I found most shocking and revealing was how many examples in the video had the love interest behave exactly like the latter case, but yet it's apparently okay that the MC keeps showing up at their workplace and leaving phone calls and doing elaborate public stunts because, of course, they were meant to be together so we know it'll all work out just fine!

 

There is of course a difference. I had typed up a reply but with this not being in the debate thread I'd likely get into trouble for playing devils advocate!

 

Yup. In real life he'd be arrested without doubt.

 

Oh, love, at first sight, is so stupid, no it is. This means one thing, the character is crazy as hell. Why would you fall in love on the first day? You barely know the person. It seems these videos are made to appeal to young women, but even that it feels so wrong in so many levels. And then the worst part is that instead of making the character having a hobby they are passionate about, no their love interest is the only thing they will focus on. Yes, I have no doubt when you love someone that you would like to spend time with him/her and think about the person you have affection, but not to the point to become an obsession. And this is not wealthy! When will love be portraited with respect and maturity?

No seriously. I think the psychological horror should explore this stuff. It's something that many victims could be related to, and not to mention that could show what the video you posted mentioned as well: anxiety, stress, depression.

This video is fascinating with good points:

She talks about bad aspects of romance, but she mentioned stff he discussed here.

 

EXACTLY

Yes yes yes. And then even when they are actually spending time together as a couple, it's often just sort of staring into each eyes and professing their love, or kissing, or sex...like that's all people do in a relationship.

Yes, it's actually quite poor.

I assume you meant healthy .

It's not horror, but Jessica Jones comes to mind as something that explores this sort of thing seriously.

I have seen that one before. Good video.

 

Ooh, that's so unrealistic. I wonder if who writes this stuff had any experience, or if not if have done some research before writing anything. Or if they used their common sense? We all know couples argue and that's alright because it means they are discussing important issues which need to be addressed. Of course for the relationship to be healthy, the couple must again respect each other and forgive each other.

Yes XD. I should have corrected that, my bad.

 

Not just arguing, but just doing something with their lives together- be friendly, having fun, being someone the other person wants to be around. Instead, the way the characters express their bond is too often is purely through their affection for, and dedication to, each other, and not through sharing any actual comradery and common interests. That should be a focus of any romance plot, but it feels like it's often an afterthought. If they're going to be spending their lives together, they should be seen just enjoying the experience of doing exactly that. There are lots of fuckable people you could dedicate yourself to- why do you actually want to be with this person?

 

That's a big yes to everything you said.

 

Wow. You guys are all so accurate I could not agree more. That is the one and only reason I don't like the romance genre because who doesn't love a good romance? I do believe in love at first sight but it's not REAL love or intense as they always show. I feel like it's just something about that person be it looks, chemistry, or personality that you are attracted to when you first meet them. However, it takes time to truly fall in love.

I'm not writing a romance but much later in the story i'm working on, the romance starts to blossom between two characters and I am writing it in the way romance SHOULD be in my opinion, because I get so tired of reading insta love/stalking books/jumping in the bed after the first meeting.

My characters grew up together so they already had a pretty close relationship. But what I really try to show is the reason they love eachother (which I beleive is the same reason most people love eachother in real life). And it's because they understand and accept eachother despite their flaws and differences. It's because of the moments they share ( just like DK mentioned) Where they are having fun, making eachother laugh, being there for eachother in hard times, enjoying eachothers company.
I read many books and I RARELY find a book like that and it frustrates me deeply.

But also every has their own opinion because I let my sister read only the romance scenes I wrote just to see what she though because she exlusively reads romance like crazy. And she said to her it wasn't romantic at all it was heart warming. And I'm thinking isn't romance suppose to be heartwarming?

 

If you define stalking as obsession with a 'love interest', one way in which you could turn the trope on its head is by protag1 being unhealthily aware of protag2—not stalking but to turn the cold shoulder, avoiding protag1 whenever possible. This would be an obsessive behaviour that doesn't threaten the 'love interest' and maybe (with the right plot development), germ a happy end.

Note, this behaviour of protag1 is still unhealthy. Protag1 does not love. Protag1 obsesses.

 

1. Love at first sight is an insult to the supposed depth of love and is inconsistent even amongst stereotypical bullshit romance cliches. Either this is a very strong PHYSICAL attraction, or you somehow think you can read minds.
2. Persistence in romance has to be justified within the boundaries of some degree of consent and within the boundaries of the law.
3. I wish there would be less idealisation of the idea of destined love. Weighing your options is okay. Being told no is okay. Moving on from a dead loved one is okay. Even if it's hard. There are so many gottdamn people in the world, how fucking picky are you? It's been pointed out that soulmates is statistically absurd and would crush human reproduction and happiness if it was necessary for relationships.
This is why one of main ideas I've included a character who has to move on from a long running on-and-of relationship because it was actually somewhat unhealthy.
And my WIP has a character who is in a pre-existing stable relationship where they just get along. And he doesn't have someone later but he knows he could and considers options. And he dies before the age of 50, so, he has an excuse. Also in a historical setting relationships are a bit more polarised to all-or-nothing so you can't have a casual move-on.

 

Seems it is a popular trope in Rom Novels. Suppose it takes all kinds. Or the classic: Every approach has it's strengths and weaknesses.
Now as far as walking the thin line between romantic and flat out creepy, well IDK. Suppose it may serve you well to read some Novels
that are focused around the 'chase' method to love.

Good luck.

 

I'm also just going to point one a big not-romance novel that has this in, to a somewhat insane degree. The Great Gatsby. Guy meets Girl, splits up, goes to war, goes to college, and then spends multiple years performing illegal activities to get enough money that he can buy the house across from hers, and then throws parties every night in an attempt to attract her. While the novel doesn't exactly comment on it, and general presents Gatsby as some heroic, there's a certain underlying tone that he's not an aspirational figure.

 

I'm wondering if the dividing line between acceptable and not acceptable has to do with simply getting noticed.

I reckon if a character sees somebody they are attracted to, it's okay for that interested party to attempt to get noticed, and/or make their attraction known. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. But over-extravagant behaviour can be incredibly off-putting, so it's best to keep it low key until the person other does notice. Then have things go from there.

However, there is a difference between 'notice' and 'pressure.' If the object of the attention makes it clear that they DO notice but are a) not interested, or b) actually want the other person to go away, then the situation becomes uncomfortable—and even scary—if the interested party doesn't immediately quit.

I suppose good stories can be made about all the levels this situation can reach. A person can get noticed and be accepted as a love interest. A person can try to get noticed but fail to be seen (can be a bit of a comedy.) A person can get noticed and initially rejected (but later the love interest changes his or her mind, and the relationship evolves.) Or it can be unwanted stalking and scary behaviour.

I believe the key to the issue, in terms of how a reader will look at the situation, is how the object of the attention feels. If that character feels flattered or intrigued or attracted, then it's okay. If that character feels uncomfortable, annoyed, repelled or frightened, then it's not.

 

And only if the person doing the gestures knows they feel that way.

 

Certainly, which is why it's problematic that a lot of these stories include the love interest not wanting it, as far as the pursuer is aware. As the video points out with one particular example, the story often relies on giving the audience reassuring knowledge or hints that the pursuer does not, and so while for the audience it seems appropriate because we know they'll get together, it's absolutely stalker behaviour in reality. Many of these scenarios are only saved because they work. If they didn't, and the love interest didn't confess how they loved-them-all-along, the audience might realise how wrong it is. Imagine if the girl in The Notebook just called the cops after the freakishly disturbed ferris wheel ploy. Who would be willing to overlook it then?

 

That's where the writer has total control.

The writer can portray the feelings and thoughts of both characters. That way, the READER knows how the actions are being received, as well as why they've been initiated. This will mean the reader can make up his or her mind about the activity itself. Are both characters moving in the same direction, or not?

My own novel contains a relationship like this. One character pressures another into a relationship, thinking the other person is just as keen but only a bit more cautious. When the other character finally puts a stop to it, the first character's disbelieving shock sends him straight off the rails. However, the reader has understood all along what the dynamic between the two characters truly is.

Of course in real life people do misread gestures, and this can happen both ways. A person can assume another person is making a move on them, when that's not the case at all. On the other hand, a person can assume their own moves are welcome, when they're not.

This is storymaking, not real life, I'm discussing here. We writers can learn to depict our characters' relationships, so the reader comes to the conclusion we want them to.

That conclusion can even be ambiguous, to some extent. People's feelings about each other are often quite complicated, especially when they've known each other for a long time. Stranger 'stalking' and family or friend 'pressure' aren't really the same thing. A stranger is a person whom the object of the interest doesn't know or may not even be aware of—and consequently has no feelings for at all. A friend or family member, on the other hand, is somebody whom the object of the interest DOES know, and maybe has deep feelings for. They just may not be the kinds of feelings the interested person is hoping for. That's when it gets complicated.