Well it's very subtle. And im sure most of my readers are thinking that it's not possible, but it is to me. Law and Order: SVU without a doubt has some shady plot lines. You know, the ones where they conviently ( and for the perpetuation of 'true' equality) have a huge trial where a female rapist is apprehended, and Elliot (of course) has to learn a lesson about not always assuming men are the perpatraitors? Ya, thoes are a mess.Still love the show, but i mean really. Oh! And remember the episode where diane neal played an uptown, very successful, female, rapist? She and her friends apparently killed their other friend because she was going to report that they raped a male stripper at her bachelorette party? Again, please tell me the point of that. All that does it hightlight exceptions and completely draw attention away for the facts, problem, statistics. Basically it is non-productive. But here's a way they make up for some of thoes flaws...
In the 9th season the episode "impulsive" deals very candidly with a young male student claiming to be raped by his female teacher: melissa joan hart! Now i ask you what are the politics of that? Sabrina the teenage witch plays a waspy english teacher? I never saw that coming. Anyway, so the male student reports her as his rapist. Elliot and Oliva go to his school, ask the teacher out of her classroom and arrest her for rape. However, as she is being arrested the teacher then reports that it was the other way around: the student raped her.
The next scene each of the accusers is in a separate interrogation room. The camera switches back and forth between the two with the use of a class POV( point of view) shot. One minute the camera allows us to see/experience the situation as the teacher, and then you're suddenly yanked from that world to see/experience what it would be like as the student. It's a classic film/tv technique that is supposed to make you feel multiplied! It's supposed to make you question yourself and what you believe. It litterally turns you (the viewer) into two people at once.
So when the two are in different rooms telling their version of the story. And they do agree on some things: they had sex in the students house, they had sex in the bedroom, that was in his house to tutor him for a major exam(psat's, sat's....), and that they only had sex once. Of course the only disagreement is who for who into having sex. And this is where i started to get nervous, but then the characters had an exchange that actually provoked thought and expressed genuine exploration into the subject of rape. The student described how his teacher was kissing and storking him "i couldn't help it" he said " i was excited." When the teacher explained the story however she repeated words like/phrases like "forced", " made to..".
Now i do not intend to say that men cannot be raped, thats just not true because anyone whith a penatrable spot on their body can be raped. And to extend that even further, anyone who is/was/can be/has been/ forced into sexual situations by coersion, manipulation, desperation, shame, cultural expectation or plain violence. What i found interesting about this moment in the story was that the writers (unknown to them or not) really probed this idea of how 'rape' happens. When the male student said he 'couldn't help it, he was excited' what i heard was ' i really didn't wanna have sex with her bro, but she started touching me, kissing, pretty much throwing herself on me so what could i do? i fucked her, but i totally didn't mean to". Get me? It just kinda decodes as something a stereotypical frat brother would say (disclaimed: i do not mean all frat boys, i said sterptypical - but please note that sterotypes come from somewhere so it's not all that easy to ignore). I understand that she was his teacher, but thats just it - thats the real offense. The real offsense of it is age and authority. If the teacher did 'rape' him heres what will NOT follow him in years to come as he attempts to rebuild his life after a female predator 'raped' him: fear of pregnancy, fear of vagina taring/having vaginal tearing, catching something that results in repoductive issues, having your rapist legally stop you from aborting his biological seed, having your sex life attributed to the fact that you were raped, being told what you wear was why you were raped/or why you will get raped, people telling you that any of your behavior will get you raped, having a member of the species that raped you say things like "we're not all bad" or "well now you know so if you can't get raped again", being raped on a subway, bus, train, plane, automobile, in the street, at a fair, in an alley, on the sidewalk, in a car, at the movies, at a wedding, in a church, at a party, at your bestfriends house, at the beach, in your dorm room, in your hall bathroom, in the shower, in a class room, or in your own home. Thats just keeping it real. In these examples, even the other episodes i talked about, the men who were raped were in positions of 'helplessness'. A male prostitute and a student? Would anyone call it rape if there were a business man and a pro tennis player? doubtful!
The message basically reads: men who submit to feminine lifestyles ( postitution ) or men who are ,sadly, seduced by women with too much power (meaning any power at all) are allowed to call it rape. But women, who have been/are raped all the time, by friends, family memebers, upstading citizens, doctors, dentists, teachers, coaches, hall directors, employers, or even on occasion, strangers, are just sluts who wore slutty clothes, and have sex, drink, drug, and dont go to church! they got what they deserved. hmm, thats right, keep telling you'reself that.
This was great!
ReplyDeleteI appreciated the exhaustive (and still incomplete) list of places where women aren't safe (everywhere, no matter its purpose or sacred designation). The comma after comma really rhetorically rubbed in what you were saying-- men do not share this existence which presupposes the inevitablility of rape for women.
I think you deftly maneuver the exceptions, by taking care of this in parantheses with taking care of the notion of stereotypes, and then reaching you conclusion that those men who are victims of rape fall into a few categories: they are either in feminized positions of vulnerability, or they play into the very discourse that they are animals who have no control of their bodies and are taken advantage of for this fact (*insert hair pulling crazy rage here*).
I like that you also went over how crazy SVU is in its postmodern way of trying to claim that those victimized in our society can also victimize, and I obviously like defending the merits of SVU especially as watched by such a critical observer as yourself.
I loved you showing off your knowledge of cinematic devices with the disorienting affect of the pov shots as both characters explained their point of view. You should do more of this because most people know plenty about literary devices (metaphors, frame narratives, etc) but I don't think the common reader, nor the common intellectual, knows the language for the devices of film that construct its meaning. Plus, I love learning from you :^)