Long time lurker brought out by total misinterpretation of "Girl With The Dragon Tattoo"

[Snake Alchemist]

Do people seriously think the books/movies glorify rape? That is the exact opposite theme of the books. For goodness sake, I used to joke that the alternate title of the books were "Every Man in Sweden is a Misogynist".

[dmallind]

1. Small bit of trivia - Initial working book title was....

....."Men who Hate Women"

That's all I know about the damn things though.

[lapislzi]

4. Worth reading.

Both for the character of Lisbeth and for the extremely interesting perspective on the right wing in Scandinavia. When I first heard about the massacres last summer in Norway, I immediately thought of the books. This was in fact the author's area of expertise.

[yodermon]

2. I think it's because the rape/s are described in such graphic detail

and this is a triggering mechanism for some, esp. victims of sexual abuse.

However, the flip side of this coin is that Lisbeth's character is so fantastically empowering in her response to the assault, and I think this is what propelled the books' popularity (it's certainly not due to "quality writing", although I enjoyed reading them).

and welcome to DU! (love your handle). I mostly lurk too

[Kablooie]

6. The "quality writing" was on the guy's chest.

[rhett o rick]

3. I have read the books and seen the Swedish movies and agree w you. nm

[JustAnotherGen]

5. No

I don't think the book did. I think it gives a vast misrepresentation of the EFFECTS of rape/sexual assualt on a young woman/girl/teenager/4 year old. Okay - the last one was hyperbole but at least I admit it was hyperbole.

She 'becomes' a kick ass woman. This means that her 'rape was necessary'. . . right? Or does it not? Only women who are victims can be 'kick ass' not be a bitch? Right or wrong?

Because several women I know (including my niece at the age o13 - by gun point in a church) were raped - and they went on to develop eating disorders, cutting, committing suicide, alcholism, drug addiction and in one case - prostitution.

The female protagonist is what a male rapist wants to believe. That it wasn't a big deal. It made her stronger.

It doesn't. It makes women weak. And they hurt themselves - NOT - others.

So this guy has this 'fantasy' world - and today I've read on DU a woman was raped by two cops. I wonder if those cops thought they were just 'toughening the bitch up'?

[PeaceNikki]

7. Thank you for offering that perspective.

I'm so sorry that happened to people you know and care for.

[JustAnotherGen]

12. Thanks - and you know what is sad?

We've had very vocal female members of DU who have said: "LOOK! This happened to me. It BROKE me. I can't be put back together again. And it doesn't make me less of woman for not going out and becoming a vigilante."

We have a DU family here. We have friends here. I don't dismiss my family and friends in real life that are in pain - I've no intention of doing it here.

Yep - it makes me a pain in the ass! But I'm consistent in letting my assery run its course!

I think a BEAUTIFUL companion book for those who just love love love this book?

Alice Seabold - Lucky. If one isn't familiar with it? How about "The Lovely Bones". About the book "Lucky"
http://pabook.libraries.psu.edu/palitmap/bios/Sebold__Alice.html

During her first semester at Syracuse, Sebold was raped in a tunnel leading to an amphitheater. She tried to fight off the rapist, who continually fought and beat her. Still a virgin, she was savagely raped, forced to kiss the man who then urinated on her and eventually left her to crawl away. A policeman later told her she was lucky as a few months earlier, another girl had been murdered and dismembered in the same tunnel. Sebold says that now she was enduring something her parents would never understand. She would one day write that, “I had changed. The world I lived in was not the world that my parents or Steve Carbonaro still occupied. In my world, I saw violence everywhere. It was not a song or a dream or a plot point.”

More from the link:

A few months after the rape, she recognized her rapist while walking down a street near campus. She brought her rapist to court and secured his conviction. Her attacker is out of prison now, but Sebold says she has not kept track of where he is.

A decade after the rape, Sebold still found life difficult and her parents were of no avail, thinking it was all too much to handle. Eventually she ended up joining a troubled crowd in Manhattan, New York, and began experimenting with heroin. In New York, she became an adjunct professor at Hunter College. She said her students there had kept her alive by getting lost in their lives. She fit in with them as she had with no one else since her rape since many in her class were minority students who had gone through similar hardships.


The title of the book 'Lucky' came from what the police man told her while reporting her rape - that she was lucky to be alive.

For a work of fiction - if Lucky - reading about a REAL rape victim's experience gives someone the vapors - they could always read one of these two works of fiction:

Bastard Out of Carolina

or We Were the Mulvaneys or Rape: A Love Story . . . both by Joyce Carol Oates

[PeaceNikki]

14. Thank you for the link and snips.

I think it's important to discuss how and why people feel the way they do about this VERY emotional topic. I also think it's disingenuous to claim that one's opinion on it is a 'total misrepresentation'. Clearly you did a good job of illustrating that it's not. It's just looking at it differently.

Thanks again for really shedding some light on how others might see this.

[TexasProgresive]

8. She already was a kick ass woman at the age of 12

When she defended her mother who had been beaten senseless by her psycho father (she set him on fire). Her retaliation of the rape was Lisbeth just being true to herself. Your take is totally different from mine.

[JustAnotherGen]

15. Read the Book

Lucky by Alice Seabold. You'll view Alice Seabold as a million times stronger than Lisabeth. I promise you - you will. You will feel everything an actual, real life rape victim that was SO BRAVE that she stood up in a court of law and got a conviction on the the man that urinated on her after battering and pummeling her body. She's not less 'than' for not setting him on fire when she saw him on the street.

She's a kick ass woman. But she's 1 in five - or 1 in four (depends on the study) of American women. Though - so few actually report it. So possibly much higher? Doesn't make those women less than 'true to themselves' to not set someone on fire you know?

[riderinthestorm]

16. Agreed. Her character had already endured extreme brutality that would have broken most

In the books Lisbeth Salander has already endured extreme brutalization by "the system" in an attempt to break her (which it didn't).

I believe Larsson includes the rape scene to demonstrate several things:

1. That girls/women within social services are powerless and typically are abused, exploited and frequently raped.
2. To demonstrate that Lisbeth is kick ass and CAN and HAS endured terrible shit - and that she continues to survive.
3. To further demonstrate why she is the way she is - that this terrible stuff has warped her. And it explains a lot about why she is the way she is....
4. It also serves to amplify the revenge theme that animates Lisbeth

[Johnny2X2X]

18. I agree

Lisbeth was already who she was before the rape and she responded the way you knew she would. Doesn't mean everyone is the same, just this one character in a work of fiction.

Glorify rape? Are people serious? It's was portrayed as a hideous deed by a troll of a person who got brutalized himself in return.

Sorry, rape is a terrible awful reality, and this is a story of a woman so strong that even something so awful didn't stop her. She just kept kicking ass. Doesn't mean everyone is Lisbeth or would or could respond like her, but this is just part of who she is. People are really grasping at this just for the sake of making some noise IMO. She's a tough you woman who endured brutality and like a multitude of male heroins in literature she exacted violent revenge.

If this was a male character there would be no discussion. Was anyone complaining about Marcellus Wallace being raped in Pulp Fiction? No, he was just as scarred as Lisbeth and like her too he was going to get his revenge.

[JustAnotherGen]

23. What about Tom in Prince of Tides?

He's a classic case of a man just 'stuffing it down'. Read the Conroy book - because the movie portrays Tom and his sister first as 'tweens' and second - not as twins. In the book - they are 18 and he kills his rapist. The family's pet tiger kills the men raping his mother and sister (been years since I've read the book - but still chills me to this day).

Anyhoo - Tom becomes closed off and his sister keeps trying to commit suicide.

P.S. I've never seen Pulp Fiction. . . Maybe the first 25 minutes or so? Not a fan of Tarantino at all. But maybe American History X is a solid example of another movie scene where a man is raped.

[polly7]

9. Of course rape leaves life-long, devastating effects more often than not,

but to never hear of women, even fictional, who have been able to develop strength and empowerment afterwards, would be a shame.

[Whisp]

10. Lisbeth was kick ass before the rape

so I can't agree with 'toughening her up' thing at all.

but seeing a scene like that if one was a victim would be awful, that I sure can agree on.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

35. No she doesn't have to have been raped to be a badass

However- it is a theme among movies, comic/ books, etc; that something bad happens to a person and that is what makes them able to drive beyond what they previously would have considered the limit. Would she have been so likely to put everything on the line <I> while <\i> being the badass she already is. Traumatic experience can cause people to break from social norms because- frankly- they don't give a fuck if it means helping someone or finding some kind of retribution

[Proud Public Servant]

11. First book just skirts being exploitation. But the second...

is a different matter. The Girl who Played with Fire is chock-full of prurient (if not pornographic) material that frankly made me uncomfortable, not because I'm a prude (far from it) but because Larsson, a middle-aged man, seemed to be dwelling a wee bit too much on lesbian S&M, sex toys, and torture than would seem strictly necessary in narrative terms.

Apparently, at least according to Wikipedia, he wrote these books for his own amusement. Ahem.

By the final novel in the trilogy -- in which we get just a little two much information about the author's own obsessions (the crusading journalist/authorial stand-in hooking up with a Amazonian government agent who enjoys casual sex) -- Blumkvist/Larsson was starting to seem like something straight out of an R. Crumb comic -- except not in a good way.

Like I said, I think the first book just skirts being exploitation (maybe thanks to a good editor). But it's hard not to conclude that Larsson was a deeply twisted guy who was working out some seriously icky sh*t via these books.

[eridani]

17. One of the CHARACTERS (officer Hans Faste) is obsessed with

--lesbian S&M and sex toys. The author painted this character in a very unfavorable light. Besides which, Lisbeth and Mimmi aren't doing S&M--they do light bondage (B & D is a different sexual subculture) on an occasional basis. Mimmi is a minority within a minority, not being interested in "cozy evenings at home" with a permanent life partner. (What does a lesbian bring on the second date? A U-Haul.)

[Proud Public Servant]

25. And who created that character?

Larsson just goes into way too much loving detail about his character's obsession; as another poster said, it's the classic exploitation-fiction dodge: appeal to prurient interest by dwelling on kinky details via a character, then excuse yourself by demonizing the character.

Imagine, in real life, you met a fifty-something man who said to you "let me tell you about this guy I know," then regailed you, at great length, with the lesbian B&D fantasies "this guy" is obsessed with, then concluded it all by saying "isn't that guy disgusting?" -- wouldn't you find him just a bit creepy?

[Snake Alchemist]

27. He just sounds creepy.

http://www.stieglarsson.com/biography-work

[eridani]

41. The detail is what tends to make the reader despise the character n/t

[seabeyond]

24. this is the feel i get from it all... nt

[cthulu2016]

13. The "exploitation film" concept...

Exploitation films tittilated in the guise of moralism. They would have a "good" message.

"Without seeing our nubile teenage daughters stripped nude and ravaged by marijuana-crazed savages how can you understand the drug crisis facing our nation?"

A lot of exploitation films were about the dangers of VD, and of course they had to show people contracting VD. All very educational.

I am not opposed to exploitation films. I like some exploitation films.

But they are what they are: Tittilation wrapped up in an ostensibly positive message.

Why does CNBC air business specials about the business of pornography all the time? It gets ratings. Why does MSNBC air round-th-clock exposes of child prostitution? It gets ratings.

There is a reason that "positive" works about rape and serial killers are more popular than positive works about pay-day loan scams.

People find the material tittilating in addition to whatever other value it may have.

[Snake Alchemist]

19. People who hate these books/movies must REALLY hate Stephen King.

Another misogynist I suppose .

[Snake Alchemist]

20. Stieg Larsson's bio

Also posted in it's own thread

http://www.stieglarsson.com/biography-work

[DirkGently]

21. I liked the series & didn't see it as minimizing, nevermind glorifying, sexual abuse.

Last edited Wed Dec 28, 2011, 06:33 PM - Edit history (3)

I disagree with the posts in this thread that seem to characterize the book(s) as being so narrow and pat as to be saying, "Exploitation makes women stronger." The series *was* a bit pat, in certain ways, but the overarching theme was more about how certain groups -- and women in particular -- can be marginalized and excluded, and how misogyny and racism still inform inform a culture generally viewed as being as enlightened and progressive as Sweden's.

The book suggests that not only women, but children, the poor, gays / bi-sexual people, non-Christians, and those adjudged at some point to be incompetent, are at the mercy of what at it's heart is still a morally rigid, patriarchal society. I thought the portrayal of Lisbeth, however clumsy and lurid in places, rang true about the ways in which a supposedly just society leaves a lot of people vulnerable to abuse.

The clumsy bit was how Lisbeth managed to be a member of all these marginalized categories at once. A child. A woman. Bisexual. Not wealthy. Not religious. A ward of the state. A little much, perhaps, but I think Larsson was painting in broad strokes to create an overall sense that his seemingly homogenous, button-downed, progressive country can also be intolerant and vicious to those who do not "fit in," and that Sweden's supposedly brightly lit, modern culture has deep, dark roots in racial and gender prejudice.

It did not seem to me that the sexual abuse was being minimized or rationalized, or that Lisbeth's character was supposed to be some kind of "up side" to rape or abuse. The Lisbeth character had long ago decided that social rules were rigged, and she had no choice but to operate outside of them, whatever the situation. Again, Larsson painted in fairly broad strokes and was going for a cultural, rather than a character-based theme.

Rather than representing some ideal reaction to injustice, or an ideal woman, the Lisbeth character was sort of an extreme case of how those excluded and demeaned by a society can become so alienated that they no longer feel they owe it any consideration at all. The fact that she fought back effectively drove the immediate emotional appeal of the stories, but it wasn't the heart of what Larsson was getting at in my opinion.

[seabeyond]

22. yes. i think it is a misogynist book and used feminism as a pretense to sell.

the editors told the writer to throw in more sex, hence the 3, 4 sex scenes that are totally irrelevant in the movie to some middle age luke warm man. i think the rape went beyond a gruesome rape to titillation and sexualization. i think the whole undercurrent of the books is a book for male fantasy absolutely anti female. and i think the promoting of this book with such excitement at seeing the violence toward women in all kinds of manner for 2 hours and 45 minutes is beyond....

well

i think you get the point

yes, i think it is a great scam, along with passion of christ for the fundamentalist

[Snake Alchemist]

26. It's obvious from his bio that he is a RW'er in disguise.

http://www.stieglarsson.com/biography-work

[seabeyond]

28. i am not one that believes this is rw male attitude, but male attitude

that hardly addresses the issues. some very good points that contradict your opinion have been brought up about the book. and this is your response? i guess you are not really asking for opinion but more of the bullshit hype for this trash of a movie.

[Snake Alchemist]

29. It seems the opinions say Lisbeth should have been portrayed as pathetic and broken after her abuse.

I do not agree. You must hate authors like Stephen King and the like.

I never realized Nils Bjurman was viewed as the hero to some.

[seabeyond]

31. no. that is not what is being said. you are ignoring what the valid points are that creeps people

out on both the author and the excitement at seeing such brutality against women for the whole of a film. but keep creating an argument that allows you to shun any criticism.

i read everything. some i easily recognize misogynist mentality. and some i see an author try to stay away, but an inherent sexism in the writing. and i see a lot that is able to write it true without the undercurrent of dehumanizing and objectifying.

so i am very well versed in my ability with the feel of an author and his/her intent. and that matters to me more than the actual story line.

[JustAnotherGen]

36. This is like trying

To explain to Ayn Rand fans why Gault was a worthless sociopath.

[seabeyond]

37. there you go. that is another apt example. nt

[JustAnotherGen]

38. But seabeyond

You DO know that Jodie Foster's character in The Accused had it so much better than those guys in Deliverance don't you? . I mean what's a little gang rape on a pinball machine?

[Snake Alchemist]

44. If you are getting excitement from that scene then there is something wrong.

It is meant to shock and horrify you. Some may read Moby Dick and say that the there is glorification of the whaling industry in it's subtext. They'd be horrendously mistaken, but they may say it.

[truebrit71]

30. ..and I think that you have projected your own issues onto/into the books and the movies..

..I have now seen both versions of the film, and in NEITHER is Lisbeth's rape "titillating" or "sexualized". In BOTH movies that scene is depicted as the violent assault of a young woman by an older man in a position of authority over her...

"The whole undercurrent of the books is....absolutely anti-female"....having read them I have no idea how anyone can possibly come to that conclusion...if anything they are anti-MEN....

[seabeyond]

32. i think you are clueless what my issues are so i think you are blowing smoke out of your...

i understand you LOVE this movie. i get it.

i am allowed my perspective on it also.

[truebrit71]

33. I think your perspective is wildly off base...

...hence your ability to draw conclusions about the book, the films and the author that are totally illogical..

[seabeyond]

34. there are women i respect and really like that are into this book. do you get that?

do you understand? i really like these women. i really respect these women. and yes, i am disappointed because in my view they are being suckered into the normalizing rape culture we have going with us today. and i feel this movie is a HUGE step in that direction. i also understand that they do not see it like i do.

are you listening? do you hear?

a person can have a different perspective of this movie without a need to vilify a person, or attack them personally, especially when the person doing the attacking does not know shit about the person.

i am by far NOT the ONLY person that sees this movie in this light. everyone else having the same issues as i, just because we dont agree with you?

what does that say about you.

i will repeat

i GET that you LOVE this movie.

i get it.

you have been in every thread to hype it.

i dont agree. it is no more than the hyped excitement of passion of the christ. violent porn in beating christ for an hour. the very opposite is the result intended.

[truebrit71]

42. How in the world does this movie even begin to "normalize rape"?

Have you even seen it????

The act is portrayed as a violent and disgusting act of force by a pig of a man over a young women almost powerless to stop it....

are you listening? do you hear?

I never, NOT ONCE villified or attacked you personally, specifically because i know shit about you...

What I do know is that you are almost totally unique in viewing this book and this movie as "normalizing rape culture"...everyone else I have spoken to that have read the book or seen the movie feel totally the opposite...

[seabeyond]

43. then you are purposely ignoring the criticism.

in the thread the other day there were quite a few articles discussing this. there were a handful that watched the movie and thought it pure porn, one man walking out in 20 minutes of the movie. in this thread alone there are a couple two, three discussing it. because they do not use my wording "normalizing porn" does not mean the same issues are not being discussed.

the rape scene went beyond the normal rape scene in movies to the point of sexualizing. whether you agree or not, there are those that feel that way. reality. no movie has over a two minute rape scene, not to mention the before and after drawing the horror of rape to this point. why? society had a line of unacceptable. this went beyond. this brought porn rape to mainstream. again, whether you agree or not.

i know that i put up two article that discussed all this to YOU specifically. and you didnt read them. so to act like you are actually interested in differing opinion is disingenuous.

and yes, stating that it is personal issues for me is taking it to personal. without knowing shit about me. pretty in your face obvious.

2 hours and 45 minutes of women being abused. 2 hours and 45 minutes of violence against women. to address issue of violence against women, is 2 hours and 45 minutes of violence against women. there are actually people addressing the violence against women in the media. this movie is all that.

[Snake Alchemist]

45. You think the whole movie is about that?

I take it that you have never seen "Irreversible" either.

[truebrit71]

46. Wow, you have a really twisted way of looking at the world...

...I actually feel bad for you...

So two minutes is the point at which a rape scene becomes porn? Good to know...

Oh and again, you did not answer how the rape scene was "sexualized"....?

"2 hours and 45 minutes of women being abused. 2 hours and 45 minutes of violence against women".....did you miss the rape and torture of Lisbeth's attacker? Did you miss the killer as he tortured, both physically and mentally, the Blomkvist character?

[LoZoccolo]

40. Do you think you speculate a lot about what goes on in mens' minds?

How much of this post would be left if you took out all the untestable assertions?

Please don't start your response with something like "you know" or "how can you not see".