May 20, 2009
The Brazen Android
Steam-powered robot revolution as told by Walt Whitman's best friend? Click! They even have an audio version of it available.
May 16, 2009
Rape, Consent, and Dollhouse
I read blogs, and although I haven't specifically looked for Dollhouse-related blogs, the blogs I read tend to be heavily populated with Joss fans, so my regular blog-reading has brought some issues to my attention. Alas is a blog that I used to read regularly and then read less and less until I just kind of stopped. But I came across their Dollhouse recaps/analyses through a series of links, and they brought up something I'd like to discuss, which is the issue of sex with Actives. (The two posts/comment threads which sparked my interest are the reviews of Episode 6, "Man on the Street," and Episode 9, "A Spy in the House of Love.")
I think everyone would agree that what Sierra's handler did was rape. Resting Dolls are icredibly vulnerable; they tend obey orders without question and are programmed to trust their handlers. A handler raping a doll is akin to an adult raping a child. It's an abuse of power over someone who you are supposed to protect.
What about Actives? Can Actives truly consent to sex? The blogger and commenters on Alas believe that all sex with Dolls, be they Actives or resting, is rape. At least some of the people who become Dolls sign a contract for five years. We don't know the specifics of the contract, of course, but I'm assuming it covers the possible activities they might engage in as Actives. By signing that contract are they consenting to any future sexual activity that occurs when they are imprinted?
What about the people who didn't sign contracts or who are pressured into signing? Sierra was forced into the Dollhouse.* In one of the flashback scenes between Caroline and DeWitt, Caroline said that she didn't feel like she had a choice.
Is it even possible to consent to become a Doll? Echo doesn't think so. In the finale she says that people can't sign themselves into slavery. It's implied that November is paid when she's released, though, so to me the Dollhouse seems to me like a type of indentured servitude: become a Doll for five years, giving the Dollhouse complete control over your body, and get paid at the end of it. (Assuming you enter willingly, that is.) But can signing a contract really justify the erasure of someone's personality and the use of their body as a tool for fulfilling the needs of others?
All these questions of consent lead to this: Do you think that there is a difference between having sex with a willing Active and raping a resting Doll? Is DeWitt's relationship with Victor/Roger any different than the handler's rape of Sierra?* It's mentioned in one episode (Episode 2, I think?) that clients aren't allowed to rape an Active; the imprinted personality must consent. Does that make a difference? Couldn't the imprint just be designed to consent to sex? Is sex with an Active a violation of the original personality's body? Is there a remnant of the original personality left in the Doll that is raped when the Active has sex?
This brings up even more questions not directly related to rape. Do the resting Dolls have personality's that are separate from their original personality? (For example, Victor cares about Sierra.) Or are the Dolls muted versions of the original people? What about the imprinted personalities? Do they count as "people"? How much autonomy do the imprints have? They are programmed with certain traits, skills, and responses, but they have thoughts and feelings. When the Dollhouse erases an imprint, are they killing a person?
So, fellow people who watch Dollhouse, what are your thoughts on these subjects? They've been bothering me, and I thought I'd ask for other people's input. The show brings up a lot of interesting questions, and to say that the characters are nuanced is an understatement. I want the Dollhouse brought down, but I like some of the people that work there a lot, even though they're kind of creepy and messed-up. Stupid Joss and his stupid shows that make you think!
*Sierra's backstory has always bothered me. DeWitt really believes in the Dollhouse and thinks that it helps people. I could see her justifying someone signing the contract under pressure as still technically having a choice. I don't think that even she could find a way to morally justify someone being forced into into the Dollhouse, though. Maybe one of her superiors in the Dollhouse lied to her. I hope we find out more in the second season(omg it wasn't cancelled!).
*I think it takes a certain level of cruelty to rape someone who clearly cannot/did not consent, as Sierra certainly couldn't and didn't. If the imprinted personality seems to consent, it might be easy to forget that the personality was created partly for the purpose of sex. It might be easy to ignore the issues of consent and not think of yourself as a rapist, especially if you've convinced yourself that the Dollhouse's purpose is morally justifiable. That doesn't mean that the act isn't rape. I like DeWitt, for all that she is twisted and deluded, and don't want to think of her as a rapist, but I'm not sure that she isn't one.
I think everyone would agree that what Sierra's handler did was rape. Resting Dolls are icredibly vulnerable; they tend obey orders without question and are programmed to trust their handlers. A handler raping a doll is akin to an adult raping a child. It's an abuse of power over someone who you are supposed to protect.
What about Actives? Can Actives truly consent to sex? The blogger and commenters on Alas believe that all sex with Dolls, be they Actives or resting, is rape. At least some of the people who become Dolls sign a contract for five years. We don't know the specifics of the contract, of course, but I'm assuming it covers the possible activities they might engage in as Actives. By signing that contract are they consenting to any future sexual activity that occurs when they are imprinted?
What about the people who didn't sign contracts or who are pressured into signing? Sierra was forced into the Dollhouse.* In one of the flashback scenes between Caroline and DeWitt, Caroline said that she didn't feel like she had a choice.
Is it even possible to consent to become a Doll? Echo doesn't think so. In the finale she says that people can't sign themselves into slavery. It's implied that November is paid when she's released, though, so to me the Dollhouse seems to me like a type of indentured servitude: become a Doll for five years, giving the Dollhouse complete control over your body, and get paid at the end of it. (Assuming you enter willingly, that is.) But can signing a contract really justify the erasure of someone's personality and the use of their body as a tool for fulfilling the needs of others?
All these questions of consent lead to this: Do you think that there is a difference between having sex with a willing Active and raping a resting Doll? Is DeWitt's relationship with Victor/Roger any different than the handler's rape of Sierra?* It's mentioned in one episode (Episode 2, I think?) that clients aren't allowed to rape an Active; the imprinted personality must consent. Does that make a difference? Couldn't the imprint just be designed to consent to sex? Is sex with an Active a violation of the original personality's body? Is there a remnant of the original personality left in the Doll that is raped when the Active has sex?
This brings up even more questions not directly related to rape. Do the resting Dolls have personality's that are separate from their original personality? (For example, Victor cares about Sierra.) Or are the Dolls muted versions of the original people? What about the imprinted personalities? Do they count as "people"? How much autonomy do the imprints have? They are programmed with certain traits, skills, and responses, but they have thoughts and feelings. When the Dollhouse erases an imprint, are they killing a person?
So, fellow people who watch Dollhouse, what are your thoughts on these subjects? They've been bothering me, and I thought I'd ask for other people's input. The show brings up a lot of interesting questions, and to say that the characters are nuanced is an understatement. I want the Dollhouse brought down, but I like some of the people that work there a lot, even though they're kind of creepy and messed-up. Stupid Joss and his stupid shows that make you think!
*Sierra's backstory has always bothered me. DeWitt really believes in the Dollhouse and thinks that it helps people. I could see her justifying someone signing the contract under pressure as still technically having a choice. I don't think that even she could find a way to morally justify someone being forced into into the Dollhouse, though. Maybe one of her superiors in the Dollhouse lied to her. I hope we find out more in the second season(omg it wasn't cancelled!).
*I think it takes a certain level of cruelty to rape someone who clearly cannot/did not consent, as Sierra certainly couldn't and didn't. If the imprinted personality seems to consent, it might be easy to forget that the personality was created partly for the purpose of sex. It might be easy to ignore the issues of consent and not think of yourself as a rapist, especially if you've convinced yourself that the Dollhouse's purpose is morally justifiable. That doesn't mean that the act isn't rape. I like DeWitt, for all that she is twisted and deluded, and don't want to think of her as a rapist, but I'm not sure that she isn't one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)