Rape in Superhero comics.

[Rob on the Job]

I think rape is fine in some superhero comics, even, if done in a manner significant to the plot or the theme of the book. The rape in WATCHMEN and in MIRACLEMAN are both important to the events in those books and the themes and feel of the books. ...

I was thinking about "Miracleman" the other day.

There actually were two rape scenes in that series: One when Miracleman's creator, Dr. Emil Garganza, raped a Mexican gang leader's wife in front of the leader, before killing him.

Later, Johnny Bates was about to be buggered by schoolmates until he said the magic word to turn into Kid Miracleman, in the process of blowing off his assailant's genitalia.

Both of these scenes were scripted by a Mr. Alan Moore of Northhampton, England, who quite coincidentally also penned the aforementioned rape in "Watchmen" as well as alluding to sexual assaults in other series, such as "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen."

Hmmm. Sounds like a research paper: "The Significance of Rape in the Post-Modern Comics of Alan Moore."

[stealthwise]

I know what symoblism is, I minored in English lit.

If I could be permitted just the tiniest bit of snark here... am I the only one who found this sentence funny for two reasons?

[Shawn Hopkins]

If I could be permitted just the tiniest bit of snark here... am I the only one who found this sentence funny for two reasons?

I think it's funny myself.

I admitted I minored in it, and it had a literature emphasis. I did not get around to classes on the grammar and spelling part, and it has always been a problem for me. I spent my time reading and listening to lectures about things like deconstructionism, metaphysical conceits and, yes, symbolism. Despite my obvious and admitted shortcomings as a person the errors in my previous post make clear, I work as a journalist at a newspaper and write for a living almost every day. I muddle through.

There, I've confessed that I suck and that I sucked this time in a way that could be construed as ironic. What did that add to the debate?

You guys are just too smart for me with your dictionary.com definitions and your proper spelling. I'm sure I've made some mistakes in this post, so have at it.

[BloodRedSandman]

Provided that there is a it's part of the plot, then I really don't have a problem with it. Off the top of my head have read 2 comics where a character was actually raped.



1. Identity Crisis -- Sue Dilbny getting raped by Dr. Light.
Identity Crisis was rather suggestive. However you really did not see any thing. After that, you could tell from the position from where both characters and the fact that Sue's pance where seen ripped afterwards that she was raped.

2. The Watchmen -- The Comedian raping Silk Specture
This was was more suggestive and much more violent. Firstly where was Silk Specture taking a few kicks and punches. And the actual rape scene was much more suggestive as there a one shot with the comedian taking his belt off followed by him with his pance down. Like you can see part of his ass. And you can see that he's between the legs of Silk Specture. However you can not see any actual intercourse. And appart from a butt shot (which was not that clear in the first place), that is about it.

Provided that it has some thing to do with the plot and that it's not graphic, I don't have problem with it. Like you can not see any intercourse, but it's enough to get the idea accross of what is going on.

Any thing more graphic that what i posted there, then I would advise that there is warning on the cover that book is for mature readers. Specially if you are seeing female breasts. However again, you can not see actual intercourse.

Any thing beyond that, and I view the contents as purely pornographic.

[John Nowak]

I think that as far as depicting rape in superhero comics is concerned, it's pretty much like any other violent crime; is it right for the intended audience; is it right for the tone of the book; is it handled well?

Plot wise, it's different from most crimes just because there's never a justifiable reason to do it; killing or maiming can be done for a good reason (say, self-defense), but rape can't.

[swinebread]

I think it's funny myself.

I admitted I minored in it, and it had a literature emphasis. I did not get around to classes on the grammar and spelling part, and it has always been a problem for me. I spent my time reading and listening to lectures about things like deconstructionism, metaphysical conceits and, yes, symbolism. Despite my obvious and admitted shortcomings as a person the errors in my previous post make clear, I work as a journalist at a newspaper and write for a living almost every day. I muddle through.

There, I've confessed that I suck and that I sucked this time in a way that could be construed as ironic. What did that add to the debate?

You guys are just too smart for me with your dictionary.com definitions and your proper spelling. I'm sure I've made some mistakes in this post, so have at it.

You are still making a living as a writer, I'm not.

Oh, and I've had enough rape in comics for awhile now. Let's hold off OK.

[shyguy]

To take the obvious example: Doctor Light's rape of Sue Dibny. It's not that it shouldn't have been done because rape shouldn't appear in a superhero comic; it should not have been done because it didn't fit the aesthetic of a Justice League adventure.

Bingo. It's one thing to feature a rape scene in a comic that is supposed to be deeply disturbing on every level, like Miracleman. It's quite another thing to have such a scene in a comic that stars the Superfriends.

I think there's definitely something to the symbolism angle, as well. The example that comes to mind isn't a superhero comic, but a television show.

In season 6 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Spike tries to rape Buffy. Both this season and this particular scene are widely disliked by fans of the show (though fans are not unanimous and those who dislike these things may not even be the majority), and the scene in question actually compares pretty well to the scene in Identity Crisis in terms of creepiness.

I've heard many a Buffy fan say, "Why did they just have Spike try to turn Buffy into a vampire?" And they're right - the writers of the show had a built-in rape symbol, and opting for the "real thing" took me right out of the show and destroyed any impact the scene might have had. I wasn't thinking about how evil Spike was; I was thinking about what the writers of the show were thinking.

It was the same deal with Identity Crisis. It didn't make Dr. Light look dangerous; it made Brad Metzler look like a lazy writer. And of course I didn't have that problem with the rape sequences in Watchmen or MiracleMan, because that kind of thing fits in those kinds of books.

I guess that's a long-winded way of saying "It depends on the kind of superhero book."

[Lorendiac]

Let me put it this way. I have never, nor do I expect to, nor can I imagine any circumstances under which I would, thought to myself about a comic book, "That was okay... but it could have used a rape or two in there."

Come to think of it, I don't remember ever making that specific complaint either!

I've been known to protest that a comic book story badly needed more humor, or more logic, or more "mystery" regarding whom the perpetrator really was, or more "responsibility" in the sense of letting a key character have to live with the long-lasting consequences of his own mistakes (instead of someone waving a magic wand and making the problem just go away in a classic deus ex machina bit at the very end!), or more of this, that, or the other thing . . . but I can't recall the last time I ever said, "More rape! That's what this story desperately needed to really make it sing to me!"

[Lorendiac]

I've heard many a Buffy fan say, "Why did they just have Spike try to turn Buffy into a vampire?" And they're right - the writers of the show had a built-in rape symbol, and opting for the "real thing" took me right out of the show and destroyed any impact the scene might have had. I wasn't thinking about how evil Spike was; I was thinking about what the writers of the show were thinking.

I'm a bit confused -- I think there may be a typo here. Did you mean to have those unhappy fans asking, "Why didn't they just have Spike try to turn Buffy into a vampire?"

[shyguy]

I'm a bit confused -- I think there may be a typo here. Did you mean to have those unhappy fans asking, "Why didn't they just have Spike try to turn Buffy into a vampire?"

Right you are! Whoops!

[Gothos]

Bingo. It's one thing to feature a rape scene in a comic that is supposed to be deeply disturbing on every level, like Miracleman. It's quite another thing to have such a scene in a comic that stars the Superfriends.

I think there's definitely something to the symbolism angle, as well. The example that comes to mind isn't a superhero comic, but a television show.

In season 6 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Spike tries to rape Buffy. Both this season and this particular scene are widely disliked by fans of the show (though fans are not unanimous and those who dislike these things may not even be the majority), and the scene in question actually compares pretty well to the scene in Identity Crisis in terms of creepiness.

I've heard many a Buffy fan say, "Why did they just have Spike try to turn Buffy into a vampire?" And they're right - the writers of the show had a built-in rape symbol, and opting for the "real thing" took me right out of the show and destroyed any impact the scene might have had. I wasn't thinking about how evil Spike was; I was thinking about what the writers of the show were thinking.

It was the same deal with Identity Crisis. It didn't make Dr. Light look dangerous; it made Brad Metzler look like a lazy writer. And of course I didn't have that problem with the rape sequences in Watchmen or MiracleMan, because that kind of thing fits in those kinds of books.

I guess that's a long-winded way of saying "It depends on the kind of superhero book."

We'll have no disagreement about Brad Meltzer being a lazy writer-- I quit JUSTICE LEAGUE when he had Batman consider making the female Doctor Light a member *specifically because* the name had become fearsome, thanks to what the criminal had done! But I disagree re: Buffy.

BUFFY, however much it used humor to offset a lot of the horrific goings-on, was a horror show before it was a humor or superhero show. In that sense it's closer to MIRACLEMAN than to JLA, in that it was from the first season meant to show people, both ordinary and demon-possessed, doing Very Bad Things.

Even so, Spike's attempted rape of Buffy, even if many fans disliked it, is not the same kind of Bad Thing as Light's rape of Sue, even though the act is essentially the same.

Consider the context of BUFFY: at the time the near-rape occurs, Spike and Buffy had been clandestine lovers (and were, as far as I recall, still clandestine at the time of the episode). I don't remember exactly why Buffy rejects Spike-- I seem to remember she had some other problems at the time-- but unlike Light, Spike is not trying to overpower his victim purely to display his power. From the way James Marsters plays it, he's hopelessly in love with the Slayer, but because she rejects him, he seems to think, "If only we can be together again, she'll love me again!" Oddly enough, though in dozens of instances Spike does horrible things just for the hell of it, to flaunt his "rude boy" status, here he's doing it (or trying) because he thinks a little force will unite him with the woman he loves. He seems bewildered when she fights him off, as if his dream of unison is so potent he doesn't understand why it might be objectionable to her. And it's certainly a good thing for him that she does fight him off: there's little question in my mind that had he accomplished his end, Buffy would have staked him for sure. In this case, his wrongdoing leads him to attempt redemption later in the series.

As for trying to turn her vampire to make him love her, well, that's not really appropriate to the occasion. It would require a lot more premeditation for him to have decided he was going to make the attempt, and in this case, he's, uh, not exactly thinking with his brain.

I further suggest that the psychological nuances of the Buffy scene are so sophisticated compared to the Meltzer scenario that it's like comparing Nabokov to MY LITTLE PONY. I think Meltzer was essentially trying to one-up Alan Moore's usage of the Joker in the famous "maiming Batgirl" sequence, but whereas the Joker's penchant for cruelty is well-established, Doctor Light is essentially the sort of gimmicky-villain who was never meant to evoke any deeper symbolic associations. He really belongs in stories that are light and gimmicky, and doesn't fit into any sort of darker milieu. As an experiment, it's not even as interesting as my earlier example of Ross Andru's "grim and gritty" FLASH.

[Gothos]

Double post.

[bannermanonemillion]

I don't know what I can add to the debate but I can remember (it's seared in my mind) when I first read the infamous Dr. Light scene in IC. I felt a little sickened and numb (and I'm the guy who eats spaghetti while watching a gruesome "CSI" autopsy) and found it difficult to move forward and enjoy the rest of the book.

I could argue like some of the other posters have that such a scene doesn't belong in a book featuring the likes of Superman et al, as it would attract younger readers.

I could also argue that rape can play a role in an intense, dramatic scene, but I guess it comes down to what shyguy said:

"It depends on the kind of superhero book."

[dancj]

I
There actually were two rape scenes in that series: One when Miracleman's creator, Dr. Emil Garganza, raped a Mexican gang leader's wife in front of the leader, before killing him.

Later, Johnny Bates was about to be buggered by schoolmates until he said the magic word to turn into Kid Miracleman, in the process of blowing off his assailant's genitalia.

Gargunza also raped Miraclewoman when she was unconscious.

[ChrisMRich]

There are two sides to this question, in my view.

From the first side, almost all 'hero saves heroine from a fate worse than death' scenarios in fiction are symbolic of either rape or sexual corruption. So in one sense, it's impossible to remove rape from the superhero comic book story because the symbolism of rape (or of the corruption of sexual innocence) is fundamental to heroic fiction of any kind. I've been reading 'Ivanhoe' recently, and it occurred to me how /fundamental/ the notion of the villains lusting after the heroines really is to heroic fiction. In that example, the crux of the conflict is the hero and his companions seeking to save the virtue of the heroines (for those of you who haven't read Ivanhoe or seen the movie, there are two 'damsels in distress', one the hero's love interest and the other tragically in love with the hero) from voluptuary villains who wish to possess them in clearly sexual ways. True, not every heroic story is this explicit or stark. But the theme is always present. It's the hero's pure-hearted motivation to protect the heroine and cherish her versus the villain's possessive need to own her.

The other side of the coin is that in comic book fiction there are many cases where, regardless of the symbolism, the assumption of rape says more about readers than it does about the story or its creators. More than one writer has had fans and/or critics take off-panel imagery further than the writer has intended. This includes the infamous refrigerator scene in 'Green Lantern' as well as many famous comic book 'rapes'. Fans or critics jump to conclusions about what happens off-panel because of their own reactions to the events depicted in the actual panels. Firestorms of controversy then swell into being based on the implications of what happened that we didn't see. Writers have even argued with fans and critics about what 'really' happened, such as writers insisting characters fans devoutly believe were raped were not ever raped or comic book historians actively declaring in their intended-as-definitive works that a famous sidekick was raped before he was murdered when the creators of the story in question have never suggested it and many fans never even considered the possibility.

As an interesting counterpoint, some of the most direct depictions of the intent-to-commit-rape by bad guys in comic books totally escape comment or controvery. In 'Kraven's Last Hunt', a group of young men menace Mary Jane and she is saved by Kraven, pretending to be Spider-Man. Their motivation is fairly clear to a mature reader, though handled deftly enough to not be inappropriately obvious to the less mature reader. This is in an 'All Ages' comic book and most people don't even think about this scene, instead the controversy of KLH was the 'glorification of suicide' because Kraven killed himself. But one can't deny that a gang rape very nearly happened.

So I'll sum up: when one eliminates the blatantly exploitative (the bulk of alleged 'mature readers' comics from the 80s and 90s), the question of rape says more about readers than creators or stories more often than not. The theme is always present to some degree in any heroic fiction, while how those themes are interpereted by readers in specific instances varies a great deal.

I will say that bad stories shouldn't be published, regardless of their content.

Comics should be good.