Consent Issues in BtVS Season 8

[shipperx]

I've been fighting against making this post.  There's a little voice in my head going "No, no, no!" because I honestly don't want the wank.   And I like the characters (not the ship -- though I did once, prior to the AtS episode Sanctuary where I concluded they not only didn't know each other as individuals or what made each other tick but they weren't particularly interested in finding out-- but I like Buffy and I like Angel as individual characters.)  And, if the hardcore truth be known, I love Angel more than I love Buffy  (I'm not defending that fact, just saying what's true).  I don't want to run about yelling "Rape! Rape! Rape!" because, for one thing, they're cartoon characters right now.  And besides, yelling like that just feels overblown (especially what with their being cartoon characters.  No actual cartoons were harmed in the making of this mistake comic). It's murky.  I'm not screaming 'rape'!

That said, dude, there are issues with the Boink in Spaaaaace.  

While I'm not going to go around yelling the 'r' word, I am shaking my head going "writers, writers, writers what in the hell were you thinking?"  A great deal of this based on Allie's self-contradictory explanation.   Let's look at Allie saying 'it's them' but then turning around and immediately comparing the 'glow' to a drug,  adding that the glowhypnol is 'clouding their judgement' ...  but there supposedly aren't consent issues... o.O?  Did he not just say that it was a drug clouding their judgement?    Let's examine this for a moment.

First,  no, it's not like Buffy choosing to drink a beer too many and having sex with the guy she was hot for. Buffy didn't know about much less consent to being glowhypnoled.   She didn't know that glowhypnol existed much less willingly ingest it.   Right there is a consent issue.  She didn't knowingly take the drug that 'clouded' her judgement.  She was 'drugged' and 'clouded'  without her consent.  The Universe slipped her a mickey.

Second, a question.  Would Buffy -- in her right mind -- consent to sex knowing that it would result in the destruction of the universe and the deaths of hundreds thousands  billions of people?   If the answer is no, then that's another consent issue.  (And, okay,  it's true that it's not like it hasn't happened before.  In season 2 she slept with Angel and he tried to destroy the world.  But she didn't know that then.   She does now.  As far as Buffy knows, the soul curse still works with sex.  And... did she even ask? Why didn't she ask?  Was she very high?   Because, if the whole soul curse (with its subsequent people deaths, potential for mayhem, and world destruction)  thing didn't matter to her in the face of love, then what in the hell has kept Buffy and Angel apart all these years?   Why weren't they shagging like bunnies already if the circumstances and the consequences don't matter?)   Would Buffy, in her normal self, be okay with her having sex despite the deaths of her Slayers and while bringing about the end of the world? If the answer is no (and her past behavior suggests that it is no), then we have a consent issue.   ( If the answer is yes, then we have an even bigger 'hero' issue.  And at this juncture let me say that I have a really, really difficult time believing that Angel in his right mind would consider this okay either.)

We're left with a choice that either Buffy and Angel are whacked on glow-juice or narcissists that place themselves above the rest of the world, that Buffy is a-okay with sex with the guy who just brought about the persecution and murders of hundreds of girls, and that Angel doesn't really give a crap that he's bringing an end to the world where his child lives! ( In which case, to paraphrase Mad Men's Allison as she threw a paperweight at Don Draper's head, 'You are not a good  person people.' )   

If, on the other hand,  we choose to believe that Buffy and Angel are not pathological narcissists (which is what I choose to believe), then we have to think that something is very, very wrong here.  Something is clouding their judgement so severely that their moral compass is neutralized.  That then makes it this whole space frakking Twilight mess a consent issue.

I'm not arguing that some part of this isn't their own urges.  I assume that it is.  But, as it's depicted in this comic series, it's a world-eclipsing narcissistic urge.  It's selfish and destructrve, something that they would not have chosen to indulge in their right minds... because I like Angel and Buffy too damn much to think that in their right minds they would overlook the deaths of hundreds of girls already killed in the name of Twilight and the potential deaths of the entire world (and the family and friends that live within that world) just to get their o-faces on and live in toga happyland alone.  

Sure, fine, soulmates.   Whatever.  They love each other a whole freaking hell of a lot, yadda, yadda.  Fine.   I'm taking that as a given in this post.  But would they, in their right minds, really choose the deaths of hundreds of women for the chance of sex?!  If the answer is no, then something was subverting their free will and that, people, is dubious consent.  

And the writers created this situation. 

They created a choice where either we say that Buffy and Angel are so narcissistic that they don't give a shit about anyone but themselves or they were roofied by the "Universe" or the Master or whoever the hell is behind this plot.   Neither choice is a good one.  Both do an extreme disservice to these characters, and whether or not the writers intended it (and I can be convinced either way), it's ugly.

I haven't felt the need to change my view of the characters from the shows because I cannot escape the feeling that these are the cartoon versions of them.  I can continue to like the characters as long as I remember that.  If I took the comics more seriously, I'd be very upset over what has been done to these characters cores, because I don't buy that Angel doesn't give a crap about his son or that he really would knowingly bring about the apocalypse so that he can eat grapes and dance in a toga in happyland.  (And yes, I know his suicidal mission of bringing down the Circle in AtS 5, but it was not out of his desire for personal happiness.  Angel likes his promise of rewards and shanshu, but he also is a brooding machine and he's not going to say 'screw the world, let's get my happy on RIGHT NOW!"  Sorry, that's not Angel. That's not the guy who threw away his daywalking ring so that he would remember the people in the dark.  (Cordy, can you please arrive and slap some sense into Angel?  Please? ) 

Either Angel is devoid of a great deal of character that I've credited him with having or there's some seriously hinky clouding going on in his head right now.  (And, no, I don't buy the talking dog telling Angel it 'had to be this way' covers it.  Not if Angel has a pair of functioning brain cells. Because buying a line from a talking dog (or even Whistler) is naive, stupid, and requires his dismissing free will while forgetting a whole slew of previously subverted prophecies that he's already lived through.  Oh, and it's dumb.   Did I mention that?     Besides, didn't we already have Shiny Happy People Jasmine?  Is Angel really this gullible and credulous? After all this time?  Can he not learn from past mistakes?  Angel isn't a complete moron, you know.  

And while I'm at it "they'll all die anyway" handwave is insanely bogus.  Sure, everyone dies someday, that doesn't make it okay to arrange their persecution and murder.  Or to use a more mild analogy, if you see someone drowning, it doesn't absolve you of their death to say "oh they're going to drown anyway" if you never bothered trying to toss them a life preserver).  And Buffy?  Sheesh.  Say what you will about the girl, but she has no qualms with saying "because it's wrong."   She has her blind spots, but she's always had a certain moral code... one that hasn't generally condoned unrepentant murder of one's own free will in the present tense.  On top of that, she's always been a dedicated soldier/Slayer, not someone sanguine to party on her subordinate's graves (with what may well be the dead folk's powers).  That's not her either.

So, at the end of the day we're left with the choice of Angel and Buffy being too stupid to ask pertinent questions despite the deaths of a lot of girls and random bystanders OR Angel and Buffy are too narcissistic to give a crap about the persecution and murder of hundreds of girls and the subsequent deaths of everyone else they ever knew or loved  as long as they get a chance for the happy OR Angel and Buffy are so 'clouded' by glowhypnol that they aren't making  rational decisions any longer, which by extension means they were glowhypnoled out the whazoo and are well into dub-con territory.   

Any way that I look at it, this is not good.  In fact, it's really bad. 

I don't know why the writers chose this.  It's really sad that Buffy and Angel being rhohypnoled and screwed by the universe is the least damaging option.  Dubious consent as best case scenario?  Sheesh.    But it's either they've been roofied or they are pathological narcissists (or stupid).  There's no good choice left.   So choose.  They're terrible or what was done to them was.

And maybe Allie should have thought when saying that the glow was like a 'drug' and was  'clouding their thinking'  as that pretty much lands it in dub-con territory whether he, Joss, and Dark Horse intended it, thought about it, or not.  Either the 'clouding' is enough to make them forsake all of their ethics (re: It's bad that people die so we can be happyyyy) making it some pretty damn strong 'clouding' that in turns makes all of this highly dubious consent, or they're still capable of consent, but don't give a crap about people who have already been killed,  thus making them...pretty awful people. 

I don't think that the writers really intended this dub-con/narcissist murk to be the case, but 'surprise!' that's the corner they painted themselves into (it really  reminds of  brouhaha One Life to Live's Emmy-winning writer caught himself in a couple of years ago with the  'she had a traumatic head injury and stockholm syndrome  storyline" where said writer was broadsided when fans started screaming 'That's not consent!  That's rape!'  That writer hadn't intended that to be the case, and tried his darndest to explain how it wasn't,  but I'm not remotely charitable about that storyline.)  I still have enough love for Angel and Buffy (even their cartoon versions) that I don't like to be too judgemental of what's just been done to them in the writing of this (judgemental of the writing?  Oh hell yes.  Of the characters themselves?  I wish they could turn back time with "undo! undo!").  I don't want to reach conclusions that I'm reluctant to reach.   I don't want to touch that.   I want to cover my eyes and go 'lalalalala.'  I'm not going to brand it 'r' word.   Plus, they're cartoons, so it feels quite, quite silly.   But I will say that I think the writing was incredibly... clouded  and left the characters trapped in something quite ugly.   It's unfortunate all around.

Comments

[shapinglight]

Yep. There is just no good option here.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

I agree with this post.

Cordy, can you please arrive and slap some sense into Angel? Please? Because this is not Angel.

If this happened, I would die of happiness. I basically want Spike and Cordy to save these two from whatever is going on. Because Queen C and William the Bloody just do not have time for this nonsense.

I believe that Joss and Allie did not realize there would be consent issues here, but honestly, that makes me even more upset--that they didn't think about this. Like, I'm still mad at Whedon that he didn't even think about Dollhouse being analogous with human trafficking. When this was pointed out to him, he went, "Oh. I never thought of that." Sorry, buddy, but if you want to be a feminist ally? You actually have to start thinking about these things. You can't assume that every idea you have will be awesomely feminist just because you call yourself one. (I am desperately trying not to turn this into a rant about how Joss isn't feminist. Desperately. Trying.)

I'd be willing to cut everyone involved in this a lot more slack if they said, "Yeah, I can see why people have problems with this; I'm sorry I didn't think of that." BUT THEY DON'T. Instead, Allie keeps making these comments that completely contradict other comments. They're influenced! But they're still them! They aren't influenced at all! But they are! MAKE UP YOUR MIND.

Also, I'm going to link to my list for the four millionth time, because I am getting sick and tired of dubious consent or punishment for sex as a plot point in the Buffyverse. FAIL.

Seriously, Mr. Whedon. If you aren't willing to deal with the ramifications of this sort of thing, just stop using it as a plot point. Also: think about things.

That is all.

[menomegirl.livejournal.com]

I don't think that the writers really intended this to be the case, but 'surprise!' that's the corner they painted themselves into .... But I will say that I think the writing was incredibly... clouded and left the characters trapped in something quite ugly. It's unfortunate all around.

Agreed. I don't know how they're going to write themselves out of it or if there's even a way that they can.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

WORD.

I completely agree with what you wrote. They have created a massive consent issue here, but they didn't want to so the story is not going to address it.

I think the glowhypnol was done to get over the characters. That was scene was needed for whatever story or metaphor S8 is aiming and since there was no way to get the characters to comply to the needs of the story, the magic wave of roofy was inserted.
It's pretty obvious from the way that plot device is treated, never exactly making sure how strong the influence is, so that every reader can attribute what he finds unrealistic to it.

It's very handy short cut, but together with ignoring the consequences (and I'm not talking of a guilt trip for destroying the world) of the characters being taken over by the universe it makes for so shoddy storytelling that like you I can't really see the comics as part of those character's defining story.

[the-nites-gurl.livejournal.com]

Your posts make me SOOO okay with the fact that I've never started reading S8 :) so, thanks heeee :)

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

BUT THEY DON'T. Instead, Allie keeps making these comments that completely contradict other comments. They're influenced! But they're still them! They aren't influenced at all! But they are! MAKE UP YOUR MIND.

Their subtext being, "no we only inserted this against accusations of OOCness not to make it rape", not realising that the fact that it's unintentional makes the consent every bit as shady.

[http://users.livejournal.com/woman_of_/]

Very well reasoned and argued. It is either Non-Con, by means of a cosmic drug, or distruction of the characters. The only way you can see this in a positive light is with black shipper glasses.

I will say nothing about Allie's comments, I long since lost any respect or creditablity for anything that man says. What really disappoints me is I really thought JW was a better storyteller than this, and was not as shoddy or shallow minded.

Two *Very* Different Takes on Issue #34 . . .

[pingback-bot.livejournal.com]

User eilowyn referenced to your post from Two *Very* Different Takes on Issue #34 . . . (http://eilowyn.livejournal.com/48885.html) saying: [...] tead of Angel. Um . . . no. This question actually led to my meta on how Bangels ship the couple while Spuffies ship the individuals. Because I put such stock in keeping Buffy and Spike in character over getting Buffy and Spike together no matter what, issue #34 with Spike and Buffy would have been deplorable to me.

Then there are consent issues.

just posted an eloquent meta [...]

[ubi4soft.livejournal.com]

What you said.

I'd like to add something in Angel's defense: apparently he was brought from a destructed world (possible including Connor dead again). He may have took the "drug" willingly out of desperation. (Of course, to believe this, I want it confirmed, I want to actually see the word Connor printed in S8)

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Yep. Those are the issues on the table. I have the urge to say, "I made these points earlier, but fine, no one listens to me!" Though I think people did listen. :D

I was saying to Lirazel yesterday how I've begun to think Whedon's issues with consent in all his works are because he's very aware of the power he has over his characters and because he tends to think of them as real (he talks about setting them free inside his head and listening to their conversations) that what he as the storyteller forces them to do can maybe feel like an abuse of power. When the storyteller orders a character to do something, or rather creates outside forces to make a character do something, and lets not forget that the Universe stands for WHEDON himself, then I think perhaps we are witnessing something Whedon is admitting:

He as the creator is violating the consent of the characters.

This is why he loves free will. This is why I think he prefers Spike and Buffy, imo. Because instead of him creating the destined connection of Buffy and Angel and forcing them to dance their dance with souls and curses and angsty can-never-be love, Spike and Buffy choose for themselves for much of Season 7. When he sets Spike free inside his head, Spike realizes he's always been in love with Buffy and he spends the next three years evolving himself. That's why Whedon thinks Spike is more evolved--because when Whedon let go of the reins and just let Spike run, look what happened.

When you see destiny and greater forces and evil puppeteering--that's all code for the writers themselves. So what is Whedon saying about himself that he's created this destined, destructive love for Buffy and Angel?

In some bizarre way, I think he feels what he does to his characters is wrong. Isn't that what Dollhouse stood for? Dollhouse was a metaphor for Hollywood and Whedon is the character creator--he is the chair with his pen, he is working for Rossum. At his worst, at the times when he cruelly wipes away a person--I imagine there's this niggling in the back of his head. I imagine Whedon as Adelle--well-intentioned, but still caught in the greater evil enterprise (Hollywood) and constantly tempted and pressured to violate other people's (characters, actors) wills.

I think Season 8's consent issues are meant to appear bad and awful. And it offers a quite brilliant commentary on Whedon himself. And just as Buffy is being pushed to confront all her issues, through this story Whedon is confronting his own issues of power and abuse. Buffy has power and abuse. Whedon says he is Buffy. Whedon has issues of power and abuse. Allie recently said that fame compromises heroes. Whedon keeps getting more and more famous. Buffy just became a god in Season, a god who can create worlds. Whedon's fans have been calling him a god for a long time, he's a god who can create worlds. The parallels are lining up and no, they're not supposed to reflect well on Whedon or himself.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

You know I adore this idea in theory, but I think I'd need to see more textual evidence supporting it in order to really believe that's what's going on. Because if we reach the end and the average reader hasn't arrived at this conclusion on their own? Either that's not what Whedon was doing in the first place or he failed in communicating it.

But again--I'm reserving judgment till the end. Then we'll see! And I hope you're right!

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Well, the meta-references to himself are ones I don't believe Whedon intends.

He's not writing a story so everyone can hear about his issues and understand his inner psyche.

But the evidence is already there. 1) Destined, forced relationships are destructive. 2) Free will is the bomb diggitty. 3) Fame compromises heroes. Buffy is famous and compromised. The Decoy dies a true hero in The Chain (you should read issue 5, seriously. You don't need to read anything else to read this--it made me cry. It's amazing.) 4) Many, many readers saw the discussion of the Universe pulling strings and said "Ding ding! Code for the writer!" so it is something that readers have come to a conclusion about on their own.

It makes sense to me. Fame and destiny are being shown as bad/destructive vs. the good of anonymity (purity of mission) and free will.

Look at it in terms of Whedon's own experiences with Dr. Horrible: purity of vision and free will to create. This is a tension Whedon is constantly talking about. It's his own story of personal struggle: his going it alone in the internet industry versus trading up for power with the big studios. Gah, even Angel in AtS Season 5 stands for it. Isn't Smiletime's great commentary on how studios bleed you dry and suck out your soul and make you a puppet hyperbole for the frustration Whedon (and his staff) feel as writers?

Plus, the beginning of Season 8 happened around the time of the Writer's Strike. He started writing it in 2006 originally, then scrapped the idea and went epic. I think considering he had been feeling this tension up to the point before the Writer's Strike got into full swing, this was a huge issue on his mind then. His own personal battle. And the stories we write are about our own personal journeys.

[flake-sake.livejournal.com]

How can you reconcile the idea that the consent issues are so shady deliberately with the things SA said, who will after all write the fall out of this?

He said that before some mail writers had wondered about it, he wasn't even aware of any consent issue and now he seems to think that glowhypnol solves the problem's very nicely. It explains the OOCness but as long as they keep going on on how Angel and Buffy really want each other they still seem to think that do not have to deal with any consent issues. He has been pretty much crystal clear on that.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Allie equivocates in interviews all the time. He doesn't want readers to dismiss what Buffy and Angel are doing themselves--he has even said as much. He said we fans shouldn't let Buffy and Angel off the hook completely--it's them, but not them. However we choose to reconcile this paradox is each individual reader's choice.

If we went by what the writers said, then Meltzer has sold the story as Buffy/Angel True Love that's Sooo Beautiful. That talk is cheap, personally. I'm digging into the text and often times, the text reveals things about the creators that they aren't consciously aware of.

I know this because it's happened to me. It happens to everyone. We reveal our selves, our Achilles heels, our deep dark psyches in what we choose to write.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

I think you're right, but enough people are reading all this as him playing it straight that I just don't know.

[infinitewhale.livejournal.com]

Not sure if I buy into the idea of destroying characters for that reason. Even if that's what Joss is trying to do, it doesn't fit the characters he's trying to tell the story with, especially with characters he said he wanted people to look up to.

I kind of with Penny_lane. If Joss wants the consent issues to be seen as awful, he needs to say it instead of letting Allie defend it.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Which people though? The ones who I've seen reading it straight have certain bias in wanting it to be played straight. And they can't come up with a theory that explains the entire season's many themes and forward momentum beyond "Buffy and Angel love each other sooo much!" :p

Others who I've seen read it straight are those so fed up with the story that reading it straight feeds into their ability to mock it.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

If Joss wants the consent issues to be seen as awful, he needs to say it instead of letting Allie defend it.

He's never going to do that until the story is finished. NEVER. He probably doesn't like how much Allie comments on the story, in fact.



Further more, isn't it enough that he's telling a story that shows how horrifying compromised consent is? That it can lead to the destruction of the world?

Why does he have to step up on his pedestal and say, "Consent is bad"? Do we need a character in the story to be the mouthpiece as the PC afterschool special of the story?

I thought having those types of moments in a story were BAD because of how anvilicious they were. I thought stories that told us how to think were bad stories done by bad storytellers.

[penny-lane-42.livejournal.com]

Well, I automatically dismiss the former, so I guess it's the latter? But the ones I'm thinking of are the ones who aren't so much mocking as they are just really angry about what they think this says about the characters.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I was there. I don't think ANYONE was as angry as me. I was FURIOUS for four months. I went back and read old entries by me and my emotions were all over my opinions.

Maybe it's not fair, but I look back on myself as not being entirely objective with how much invective I put into all my critique. I still agree with the ideas behind the critique, just not in the extremity to which I expressed it. So when I see people reacting with disgust, anger and mockery right now--well, I tend to think that strength of emotion and visceral reaction isn't leading to a very balanced lay of the land. I know it wasn't the case with me.

I dunno, a number of the people who are really angry about what's happening have even said to me "my brain tells me your right" but then explain how emotional they are about what's going on. Several people have said that to me. I think emotions are clouding people's judgment--which... is very meta considering we're all angry about glowhypnol'd emotions clouding Buffy and Angel's judgment.

Consent Issues in Season 8

[pingback-bot.livejournal.com]

User sueworld2003 referenced to your post from Consent Issues in Season 8 (http://sueworld2003.livejournal.com/959545.html) saying: [...] e [...]

[infinitewhale.livejournal.com]

As you've said many times, though, he is Allie's boss. All he has to do is tell Allie to repeat his line about trusting the tale or to wait and see how it plays out.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I don't think he gets the consent issues even now. Which makes me ::head desk::

[fenderlove.livejournal.com]

Because of the statements they've made and what was written in the comic itself, there can be no "happy" medium... There can't even be a satisfactory medium though I think that that's what Scott Allie thinks his done with saying "Buffy and Angel wanted to have sex... but they were drugged... but they still consented... No, not to the drugged part but to the sex part... What do you mean that makes no sense?"

Of course, none of the writers or editors seem to put much stock in Buffy's intelligence. Apparently, she only makes rash decisions, never considers the consequences, and never listens to her brain, only her heart. At least that's what the people at the IDW forum are trying to convince me of- that when doing the Slayer spell in Chosen, the possibility that women could die because of her actions NEVER crossed her mind. They want to wash all the consequences away with the "Well, they'd just die anyway" bucket.

[moscow-watcher.livejournal.com]

This is why I think he prefers Spike and Buffy, imo.

I think Joss has very complex relationship with his characters. Spike defied his creator and did what he wasn't supposed to do. He displayed kind of free will, even being a fictional character.

I'm almost sure that you were experiencing it as a ficwriter (I was) - when characters defy you and refuse to do what you want them to do. They become unnatural and unreal. The plot crumbles. You go back and rewrite their dialogue (and sometimes actions) and it becomes okay.

I think Joss was and still is fascinated by a character's free will, a character's power over the plot.