If you follow True Blood then you know all about Bill Compton turning Jessica Hamby into a vampire. Bill is ordered to do it by The Magister, who rules that Bill’s killing another vampire needs to be remedied by his making a new one. In the world of True Blood, The Magister is a powerful official and his rulings carry with them a lot of weight. Thus, Bill Compton, vampire, is introduced to Jessica Hamby, human, and is called upon to take away her humanity and make her a vampire.
While many vampire fans might not see this as such a bad thing, Jessica is adamant about wanting to stay human. Her being captured and dragged to what amounted to a vampire court meant that her remaining human was highly unlikely, as she was bound to be the most alive person in the area. And, true to expectations, she’s turned to undeath by Bill as part of his punishment.
I’ve been reading True Blood and Philosophy: We Wanna Think Bad Things with You, a fun look at philosophy and pop culture. One of the essays in the book talks about the morality of vampires turning humans and what is required to make such happenings “moral”. The essay argues that only a human who gives informed tacit consent to being turned beforehand can be turned in a way that meets a moral criteria. It’s a fun thought provoking essay, just one of many in an equally fun and thought provoking book.
The issue of consent got me thinking.......
Isn’t Bill Compton, everyone’s favorite “Vampire Bill”.....a rapist?
Bill forcibly penetrates Jessica under the circumstances described above, clearly against here will. Isn’t non-consensual forcible penetration sexual assault in the eyes of the law? If my reading is correct.....Bill, everyone’s favorite Vampire Bill, is a rapist.
One argument against Bill as a rapist is that his penetration isn’t sexual in nature. The problem with this argument is it equates rape with sex and sexuality. Since rape is a sex crime, it might seem at first glance an appropriate argument. However, much science has been done that shows rape not to be so much a crime of passion and/or sex, but, more commonly, a criminal act based in anger and a desire to control. In Bill’s case, turning Jessica against her will is an act of legal necessity, he’s simply required to do it. The implications are if he doesn’t accept this punishment a worse fate might await him or his beloved Sookie Stackhouse, the human woman who’s won over what remains of his heart. So anger and control aren’t motivators for Bill, but fear is and, perhaps, through fear, control after all. Maybe by fearing alternatives, Bill accepts this one punishment in an effort on his part to control what other things may or may not happen to him and the human he loves. By turning the innocent, unwilling Jessica, Bill hopes to manage and control the threat against his beloved human, Sookie.
Since rapes don’t even have to involve sexual organs, the fact that this penetration involves fangs and not, say, a penis, means that it’s still a penetration and a forcible one at that, so, the fact that Bill doesn’t force himself on Jessica in a way we’re used to doesn’t not make his attack rape.
But what about the issue of Bill being under duress? Isn’t that a mitigating factor? After all, if he doesn’t turn Jessica...... Well, what would’ve happened? We don’t know. Can’t know. Why? Because Bill did turn Jessica. It wasn’t like Bill had a gun to his head (or, a stake to his heart) when he chose to follow The Magister’s ruling. Also, while Bill felt like he had no choice, international law has been pretty hard core on those who’ve “just followed orders”. Take members of the SS in Nazi Germany, during World War II. Saying that one had orders to follow was no excuse for committing genocide and other clear crimes against humanity. After the war, members of the SS still went to prison, convicted of wrongdoing even after offering the “just following orders” defense. If they could choose not to follow an order, that was sufficient to make their choosing to follow an order evidence of their guilt. Bill could have said no. He could have stood his ground to The Magister and said that he was not going to be party to taking Jessica’s human life from her against her will. The very fact that Bill could’ve said no but didn’t is evidence of his guilt. He chose to assault Jessica Hamby.
What does all this say about us? About our views on things? Bill Compton is a very popular character and yet, it seems, Bill Compton is clearly a rapist. Does this mean that people like rapists? That rape isn’t so bad? What are to take from this?
For one, I’d argue that we humans are natural born apologists. We like to make excuses and apologies for those we love, for those we like, for those we agree with. We naturally twist facts and interpretations to fit our view of things and in so doing, we take the bad and we make it good. Bill, a rapist? Hey....he didn’t have a choice! Or...he’s a vampire, that’s what vampires do! Bill can’t be a rapist because, well, because he’s a nice man!
None of these arguments in defense of rapists is new. The rapist couldn’t help themselves because, well, that’s what they do argument is a variation of blaming the victim. Hey....men are horn dogs! Did you see that miniskirt that woman was wearing? Her boobs were practically hanging out in the open! Of course he had sex with her! That’s what men do! They can’t control themselves! She was asking for it! And, really, how could he control himself?!
He didn’t have a choice but to rape her at that frat party. All his fraternity brothers were egging him on. Everybody else did it, so, he had to too! It’s not his fault! He can’t be a rapist because, well, he’s a nice man! Just like Ted Bundy was a nice man! Hell, even Adolf Hitler liked dogs and babies!!! And....wait a minute! Bill Compton is a vampire!!! He’s not even a man!!!!
We don’t like to acknowledge that rapists can be good people. It’s disturbing. We’d rather look the other way, at something else entirely. That rapists can be like us is frightening and something that makes us all uncomfortable. Rapists are sick sexual predators. We make them register their whereabouts and wear a digital cyber R on their chests to identify themselves as outside the norm of society. And yet they can be liked...nay, even loved by others. They can be somebody’s hero, as is the case with Bill Compton, Vampire Bill......or, as I’ve laid out in my argument above, Bill Compton, rapist.
While many vampire fans might not see this as such a bad thing, Jessica is adamant about wanting to stay human. Her being captured and dragged to what amounted to a vampire court meant that her remaining human was highly unlikely, as she was bound to be the most alive person in the area. And, true to expectations, she’s turned to undeath by Bill as part of his punishment.
I’ve been reading True Blood and Philosophy: We Wanna Think Bad Things with You, a fun look at philosophy and pop culture. One of the essays in the book talks about the morality of vampires turning humans and what is required to make such happenings “moral”. The essay argues that only a human who gives informed tacit consent to being turned beforehand can be turned in a way that meets a moral criteria. It’s a fun thought provoking essay, just one of many in an equally fun and thought provoking book.
The issue of consent got me thinking.......
Isn’t Bill Compton, everyone’s favorite “Vampire Bill”.....a rapist?
Bill forcibly penetrates Jessica under the circumstances described above, clearly against here will. Isn’t non-consensual forcible penetration sexual assault in the eyes of the law? If my reading is correct.....Bill, everyone’s favorite Vampire Bill, is a rapist.
One argument against Bill as a rapist is that his penetration isn’t sexual in nature. The problem with this argument is it equates rape with sex and sexuality. Since rape is a sex crime, it might seem at first glance an appropriate argument. However, much science has been done that shows rape not to be so much a crime of passion and/or sex, but, more commonly, a criminal act based in anger and a desire to control. In Bill’s case, turning Jessica against her will is an act of legal necessity, he’s simply required to do it. The implications are if he doesn’t accept this punishment a worse fate might await him or his beloved Sookie Stackhouse, the human woman who’s won over what remains of his heart. So anger and control aren’t motivators for Bill, but fear is and, perhaps, through fear, control after all. Maybe by fearing alternatives, Bill accepts this one punishment in an effort on his part to control what other things may or may not happen to him and the human he loves. By turning the innocent, unwilling Jessica, Bill hopes to manage and control the threat against his beloved human, Sookie.
Since rapes don’t even have to involve sexual organs, the fact that this penetration involves fangs and not, say, a penis, means that it’s still a penetration and a forcible one at that, so, the fact that Bill doesn’t force himself on Jessica in a way we’re used to doesn’t not make his attack rape.
But what about the issue of Bill being under duress? Isn’t that a mitigating factor? After all, if he doesn’t turn Jessica...... Well, what would’ve happened? We don’t know. Can’t know. Why? Because Bill did turn Jessica. It wasn’t like Bill had a gun to his head (or, a stake to his heart) when he chose to follow The Magister’s ruling. Also, while Bill felt like he had no choice, international law has been pretty hard core on those who’ve “just followed orders”. Take members of the SS in Nazi Germany, during World War II. Saying that one had orders to follow was no excuse for committing genocide and other clear crimes against humanity. After the war, members of the SS still went to prison, convicted of wrongdoing even after offering the “just following orders” defense. If they could choose not to follow an order, that was sufficient to make their choosing to follow an order evidence of their guilt. Bill could have said no. He could have stood his ground to The Magister and said that he was not going to be party to taking Jessica’s human life from her against her will. The very fact that Bill could’ve said no but didn’t is evidence of his guilt. He chose to assault Jessica Hamby.
What does all this say about us? About our views on things? Bill Compton is a very popular character and yet, it seems, Bill Compton is clearly a rapist. Does this mean that people like rapists? That rape isn’t so bad? What are to take from this?
For one, I’d argue that we humans are natural born apologists. We like to make excuses and apologies for those we love, for those we like, for those we agree with. We naturally twist facts and interpretations to fit our view of things and in so doing, we take the bad and we make it good. Bill, a rapist? Hey....he didn’t have a choice! Or...he’s a vampire, that’s what vampires do! Bill can’t be a rapist because, well, because he’s a nice man!
None of these arguments in defense of rapists is new. The rapist couldn’t help themselves because, well, that’s what they do argument is a variation of blaming the victim. Hey....men are horn dogs! Did you see that miniskirt that woman was wearing? Her boobs were practically hanging out in the open! Of course he had sex with her! That’s what men do! They can’t control themselves! She was asking for it! And, really, how could he control himself?!
He didn’t have a choice but to rape her at that frat party. All his fraternity brothers were egging him on. Everybody else did it, so, he had to too! It’s not his fault! He can’t be a rapist because, well, he’s a nice man! Just like Ted Bundy was a nice man! Hell, even Adolf Hitler liked dogs and babies!!! And....wait a minute! Bill Compton is a vampire!!! He’s not even a man!!!!
We don’t like to acknowledge that rapists can be good people. It’s disturbing. We’d rather look the other way, at something else entirely. That rapists can be like us is frightening and something that makes us all uncomfortable. Rapists are sick sexual predators. We make them register their whereabouts and wear a digital cyber R on their chests to identify themselves as outside the norm of society. And yet they can be liked...nay, even loved by others. They can be somebody’s hero, as is the case with Bill Compton, Vampire Bill......or, as I’ve laid out in my argument above, Bill Compton, rapist.
No comments:
Post a Comment