Violence Good - Sex Bad - Religion Good.... or is it the other way around?

[awmperry]

I think I'm about to upset a lot of people on the Fictionalley Park forums. It's a discussion of whether or not the next Harry Potter book will contain any sex scenes, and a lot of people are, in effect, saying "Oh no, she can't write that, it would be terribly inappropriate". Oh, and one of the mods calls the perfectly acceptable medical term "vagina" obscene. Ho hum, film at ten.

Anyway, my contribution to the debate:

They're in their teens, and their late teens at that; while I'm no more keen to read explicit scenes in HP than anyone else, it certainly is a subject that needs to be covered one way or another.

As for the propriety of it, I'm somewhat divided; personally, I get rather uncomfortable with overly specific sex scenes, but with a bit of thought, I really can't see any justifiable reason why. Why has sex become such a taboo, when violence is fine? That, I think, is where the "I don't want my kids reading about sex" argument falls down - parents don't mind their sprogs reading about child abuse, graphic amputations, murder, mucus-laden troll-slaying, mental rape, at least two characters seeing their mothers killed right in front of them, kidnapping (by the alleged good guys, no less), racially motivated murder, vicious beatings, enforced self-mutilation, and all sorts of other stuff that really is reprehensible - but the very same parents get in a terrible flutter as soon as there's any mention of sex, or even utterly neutral but hyper-sexualised body parts.

I recall reading about a woman who was thrown out of a Toys R Us for breast-feeding her baby - on the grounds that "That's totally inappropriate - there are children here!" You know what, silly shop manager? There's a kid stuck on the end of that thing too, and I don't see that sprog complaining. (Actually, on the Penn & Teller show that I can't name here, an opponent of breast-feeding actually equates breast-feeding to paedophilic rape. No, she wasn't joking.)

Quite frankly, if I were a parent - and I hope to be one day, not that the prospects look terribly good at the moment - I'd rather my kids were brought up with a healthy, knowledgable attitude towards sex, rather than seeing it as something shameful and taboo. It's no wonder that violent crime keeps rising - kids are effectively taught that sex is unacceptable, while violence is commonplace. And so all sorts of people rail against the evils of cinema and computer games, when it is in fact their own misguided prudery that's causing the problem.

Sex isn't unhealthy, it's not ugly, and it's not inappropriate for a teenage audience to read about - at least no more than someone cutting off their own hand in a fit of sycophantic, brainwashed cultism. Nor, for that matter, is sex any worse - far better, in fact - than the constantly thumped idea that the future is unchangeable, and that a lunatic's delerium in any way forces anyone down a set and unchanging path.

I'd rather my prospective kids believe in free will and being decent to people, than any religiously-based concept of "violence good, sex bad".

If Rowling writes a sex scene in Deathly Hallows, that's likely to be a couple of pages I'll rather hypocritically skip over - but it won't be inappropriate for her audience.

So, what say you? Am I right, or am I talking bollocks?

Comments

[green-knight.livejournal.com]

I dislike graphic sex scenes in books for two main reasons. One is that the vast majority of them (I can only recall one that wasn't out of hundreds that were) are mode violations. For most pages we're supposed to either identify with the main characters or treat them like a close friend - and then they go and have sex with someone else. If they're good friends, you wouldn't watch, if they're someone you've got the gots for, you doubly don't want to watch them having sex with someone else (at least I don't)... The other mode violation is that you're supposed to go from 'fevering along with character' to 'being turned on' to 'following the character again - which makes me want to skip the bit in the middle.

Also, most sex scenes are boring. Body parts, described graphically, aren't overly erotic - the experience translates much better if things are hinted at and the emotional impact *on the character* is described - anyone with a bit of fantasy can work out what goes on under the covers, it's what goes on inside the character's head that counts!

I'd love to see Harry emotionally involved; but at the same time, while he's being chased by the Dark Lord ^H hunting the Dark Lord he won't have time for a lot of nookie; it should not be at the forefront of his mind.

[awmperry.livejournal.com]

Quite right - but then, I doubt a graphic scene is on the cards at all. (That said, it would amuse me if she wrote a really steamy, revoltingly graphic scene involving Harry, Ginny, and the squid. Just to annoy people.)

Some mention of it, however, wouldn't be inappropriate - and would enhance the fiction that they're supposed to be real people. Particularly following the chestburster in the last book, I can't see how a reference, however tangential, can be avoided.

[silly-swordsman.livejournal.com]

IIRC, she's already made a comment in one of the more recent books that saves her from having to deal with Harry putting on his invisibility cloak and sneaking into the girl's dorm - boys aren't allowed there, magically.

That meaning was obvious to me, having been a teenage boy myself, many years ago, but would not have been taken as a comment on a sexual interest by younger and/or more innocent readers.

I think you're right, and I think there'll be sex refecences, but I also think she'll keep it rather low-key, in a way that's an obvious sexual reference if you know it, but not if you don't, IYSWIM.

No cherry-popping, in other words. Which is fair enough, as the ages of the dynamic trio are not remarkably high for youngsters still being virgins.