What happened at the end of Flesh and Stone was sexual assault: Q&A
“Flesh and Stone” is the fifth episode of the most recent (2010) episode of Doctor Who, a wildly popular BBC family television program. I am a huge fan of the show. In the last part of “Flesh and Stone” a scene, less than three minutes long, depicts a sexual assault committed by one main character on another. I believe the only spoilers in this post are for that particular scene in F&S, but no promises for the comment thread.
Scene description:
After the events of the episode, the Doctor and Amy have returned in the TARDIS to Amy’s bedroom. They sit on the bed together. Amy says that the aforementioned events have made her think about what and who she wants, indicating the Doctor, but he is oblivious to her meaning. Amy leans in for a kiss. The Doctor first leans away, then leaps away, standing up. He says “But you’re getting married in the morning!” Amy follows him and backs him up against the TARDIS. She says “The morning’s a long time away.” She slides his suspenders off his shoulders; he pulls them back up.
Throughout that exchange and the next, Amy’s hands are constantly on him: touching his neck, chest, and shoulders or trying to undo his tie. The Doctor is constantly fending her off. He very seriously says “I am 907 years old. Do you understand that?” Amy, unlike him, is smiling. He slips away in the other direction. Amy says “It’s been a while?” He is flustered and at first says yes, then “No, no! I don’t get older. I just change. You get older, you don’t change, and this can’t ever work.” Amy again slides down his suspenders and the Doctor again pulls them up, leaping away yet again. Amy follows him again, saying that she’s not looking for something so long-term. Her tone is still unserious. She puts her hands on his shoulders and kisses him again, for longer this time.
The Doctor shoves Amy off him saying “But you’re human! you’re Amy! You’re getting married in the morning!” Amy goes in for another kiss, but the Doctor says “–in the morning…” And he says that last line like he’s just realized something, which is enough for Amy to pause. As the Doctor begins thinking out loud, Amy positions herself invitingly on the bed. The Doctor says “I need to get you sorted out right now!” and Amy takes this as sexual innuendo, saying “That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you.” The Doctor takes her hand and pulls her to the TARDIS; she maneuvers it so that they’re embracing and says “Doctor…” in a way that makes it clear she’s still in a sexual mood. He extricates himself; she finally goes into the TARDIS, and with a glance at the clock in Amy’s room, the Doctor follows.
Do you really think that was sexual assault?
Yes, I really do. The Doctor’s nonconsent was obvious and constant, and Amy did not pay attention to it at all. Sexually touching someone–in this case, attempting to remove their clothes or kissing them–after they have indicated their nonconsent, is sexual assault.
But it didn’t look like sexual assault to me. Sexual assault is violent and serious.
I hear this a lot in rape apology. Often sexual assault that does not take place in a police/military/corporate context involves no weapons nor punching nor direct physical dominance. Many sexual assault victims think of their experience as “the time that person had sex with me/touched me/kissed me and I didn’t want them to,” because they feel as though sexual assault is a concept that should be reserved for something serious.
The truth is, that’s all there is to sexual assault: you indicated you didn’t want to have sexual contact, but somebody made sexual contact with you anyway. (Sexual assault can also happen if someone makes sexual contact with you without giving you a chance to consent.) While sexual assault with a weapon or accompanied by a physical beating can often be more traumatizing to a victim (for example, higher rates of PTSD), any sexual assault is violent.
What about the power difference between Amy and the Doctor? He’s a man and she’s a woman. And he’s a Sufficiently Advanced semi-immortal alien genius and she’s an young, ordinary human.
Power differentials are about averages and systemic differences, and neither of those things negate the reality of exceptions. Men do rape far more than women do, and women are raped far more than men are. This means that most discussions of sexual assault should focus on women as systemically targeted. It does not mean a woman who sexually assaults a man has not sexually assaulted him, and neither does it make that sexual assault less serious.
When it comes to sexual assault other than stranger-danger assault, the physical or mental vigor of the victim is not really a good predictor of whether the victim can/does successfully fend off an attack. The Doctor probably could hurt Amy if he wanted to, but he considers her a friend, and in any case is a pacifist, so all his defensive moves were designed to get her hands off of him and nothing else.
Often, someone citing the power difference when the victim is considered to have more power, is making the implication that the serious violence had not started yet or that the victim was not in any real danger. Sexual assault is serious violence. Sexual assault is a real danger.
How can you blame Amy for this? She’s under a lot of stress! Her wedding’s tomorrow! And she didn’t have any good role models as a kid, so I think it’s understandable that she acts sexually inappropriately.
Amy is an adult, and she is perfectly capable of comprehending the Doctor’s no, but she chose to ignore it.
Every sexual assault has context. Plenty of rapists and sexual-assaulters are under a lot of stress, or have depression, or were taught bad lessons about healthy sexuality when they were kids. This idea that people only really committed sexual assault if they specifically wanted to hurt someone, or if the thought “I’m gonna rape this person” was at the forefront of their mind, or if they otherwise seem like a scumbag to you is another aspect of rape culture. It keeps victims from realizing they’ve been assaulted and helps perpetrators rationalize their actions. If you are going to confront sexual assault, you need to come to terms with the reality that perpetrators are humans just like you.
Remember that everyone who sexually assaults was brought up in a rape culture. This is either an excuse for all sexual assaults or it is an excuse for none.
But the Doctor wasn’t saying “I don’t ever want to have sex with you ever and I hate you.” He didn’t even really say “no!” He only didn’t want to have sex because he objected to the power difference and Amy’s upcoming marriage.
Your opinion on how good are the Doctor’s reasons for not wanting sex is as irrelevant to the issue of consent as Amy’s was. A “no” does not necessarily mean “Never with you.” It may mean “Not with you right here right now this way.” It is still, however, a no. In the Doctor’s case, he was saying “no” to Amy’s immediate actions, which she did not cease.
If Amy thought the Doctor had bad or irrelevant reasons for not wanting sex and wanted to address them, she could have dealt with his concerns before attempting to take off his clothes or kiss him again. She could have stopped touching him and explained that she just wanted one night, not a lifetime relationship.
She didn’t, though. She continually grabbed at him and tried to undress him while he was making his protests and without waiting for his consent. In fact, she showed a total disregard, throughout the scene, for his nonconsent, despite the fact that he was physically and verbally showing her he was flustered, upset, and unwilling. Although the word “no” didn’t pass his lips, he was still saying no every time he physically removed himself, shoved her hands away, redressed himself, and verbally gave reasons he did not want to have sex.
His “no” is unmistakable except by people who have an interest in not hearing it. This is common in instances of sexual assault. Most sexual-assaulters would claim they could tell their victim really wanted it, no matter how explicit the no was.
The community members who revictimize the survivor are also very good at questioning the “no” no matter how explicit it was. Challenge this aspect of rape culture. Do not put the burden of proof on the victim and do not search for ways the no could have been misinterpreted.
You’re mean! I think you’re telling me I’m a bad person because I still like Amy.
You’re not (necessarily) a bad person, and you don’t necessarily have to hate Amy for this. Again, sexual-assaulters are human too, and sexual assault is just one of Amy’s many behaviors, others of which are admirable. Plenty of people who commit sexual assault have done loads of good things, although sexual assault is not one of them.
Consider that this is a reaction typical of people, even people who consider themselves anti-violence or advocates for victims, who discover a specific rape in their community. Consider further that negative reactions against those who insist on discussing and condemning the assault are a part of rape culture. For many victims of sexual assault, the secondary victimization by the community is the most devastating part of the assault.
To be clear, the Doctor is a fictional character and cannot be revictimized by your actions, and I am not the victim of Amy’s sexual assault. However, survivors of sexual assault are reading and taking part in the discussions about this scene. Those of you who use this discussion to talk about how upset you are that people are attacking you for liking Amy, are doing so in front of sexual assault survivors. If they are lucky, they will recognize that this says something about you and will remember to be careful about discussing their own sexual assault around you. If they are unlucky, they will internalize the message that survivors and victims are the least important people in the discussion.
Again, this doesn’t mean that you have to hate Amy (the Doctor doesn’t, after all), but it does mean that if you reacted to the fact of Amy’s sexual assault with a defense of your right to still like Amy, you have played your part in rape culture as the community that commits the second victimization.
I feel so guilty. I feel like such a bad person. I didn’t react negatively to that scene at all and I thought it was kinda funny. After reading this post, I am so, so sorry and I just want to die of shame.
Events that happen in television shows are sometimes difficult to recognize for what they are, because television is limited to sight and sound, or because you are not the one personally having the experiences, or because they are not labelled for your convenience, or because the show is portraying the event in a way that skews reality.
Please do not go into the shame corner here. If you have spoken with anyone about this scene and minimized its seriousness, consider returning to the conversation with them and reexamining what happened.
Remember that coming into the discussion abasing yourself focuses it on you, which is probably not productive.
I think we were supposed to react badly to Amy’s actions, so I don’t know why we’re even having this discussion. Why are you knocking the show?
In my opinion, it’s not clear whether Amy’s sexual assault was a sign of something gone wrong with time that ties into the season arc. It might be, but then again it might not be. It’s also not clear more generally whether we were supposed to see her actions as acceptable or unacceptable. We might learn more by the end of the season. For this reason I’m not knocking the show or commending it. In general, I love Doctor Who. It is one of my all-time favorite shows.
Plenty of self-identified feminists, anti-sexists, and people who otherwise assert that they are aware of the reality of rape and rape culture spent most of the discussion denying that a sexual assault happened in this scene, reacting defensively because they like Amy, or acting as though they were personally attacked. I am really disturbed by this. I see it as similar to the way things play out when abuse is discovered in feminist/progressive/radical communities. In other words, I wouldn’t have to push so much on this if I weren’t meeting with so much resistance.
I still think you are hateful and mean and attacking me for not being as enraged about this as you are.
Examine what you have invested in rape culture.
SugarLeigh said,
May 18, 2010 at 10:39 am
Brilliant. Succinct and compassionate. I think this is the finest post you have ever written, and I hope you feel positively TRIUMPHANT about it.
I don’t even give one whit about Dr Who and I still found a lot of value in this post. I’d especially personally like to thank you for making mention of that Shame Corner and how insidious it is. I don’t see it talked about much but it’s very valid for folks who have the issue (which you already know I have in spades) of initially thinking of every single realization of mistake or way of thinking not consistent with beliefs or progressive error etc. as A Huge Insurmountable Terrible Problem With ME That Is Wrong And Bad. I can’t wait to learn to skip that step, it’s pretty useless except to drag me down. Sometimes something as simple as a point-out like this can be enough to reframe it and turn it around though, happily. Awesome for you to address it.
InfamousQBert said,
May 18, 2010 at 2:14 pm
this is really fucking powerful. i second everything sugarleigh said up there. be DAMN proud of yourself here.
Delalyra said,
May 18, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Very thorough and useful. Thanks for this.
RMJ said,
May 18, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Thank you for writing this; this is a calm, detailed, thorough argument against one individual instance of rape culture. I’m not a fan of Dr. Who (never even seen an episode) but I’m thoroughly impressed. Bookmarking this and will be returning.
Princess Backpack said,
May 18, 2010 at 10:12 pm
If anyone’s curious, I’ve uploaded a copy of the relevant part of the scene to yahoo video: http://video.yahoo.com/watch/7511415/19902038
John said,
May 25, 2010 at 6:08 am
I watched the clip (I don’t have TV myself) and it was horrible. I was stalked for a while by an ex-girlfriend who, as well as pestering me by phone and email and turning up at my office or house when she’d been asked not to, would force repeated unwanted touch on me regardless of what I said or did. I got to the stage of worrying that I might have to change my name, leave my job and move house, to get away from her.
And I started to worry that she might progress to using a weapon; I asked a pyschiatrist I know socially whether the woman might be a psychopath, and got the odd reassurance “Doesn’t sound like it — they have better social skills!”
I’ve now realized that she might have been doing some of it in the hope that I would defend myself physically, to give her something worse to accuse me of and thus interfere with my attempts to get the police and courts to deal with her.
Tom said,
May 28, 2010 at 7:25 am
I had exactly the same thing happen although it wasn’t an ex. The most common response was “aaah come on, who’d stalk you?” by males. It seems being a man means you cannot be physically or mentally invaded by a woman in our culture.
Quercki said,
May 20, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Bookmarked with stars.
I’m still sorting out my reactions to these sorts of things. This helps some.
Cinnamon Girl said,
May 22, 2010 at 8:36 am
Great post, Quixotess.
I really don’t have much else to say. Except to SugerLeigh:
“I can’t wait to learn to skip that step, it’s pretty useless except to drag me down. ”
I’ve generally managed to skip that step, and you made me think about how.
I think I’ve always run under the assumption that I’ve inherited a whole heap of bigotry, misinformation and blind spots from my parents/cultures. So when I spot one in myself, I don’t see it as a personal failing; I turn it into an ‘aha’ moment.
In this case, if I hadn’t seen it as sexual assault, instead of berating myself I would have thought ‘aha, see how easy that slipped past me? So THAT’S the insidious way rape culture works. I wonder where I can spot other examples of this?’ or something like that.
This doesn’t mean knee-jerkingly saying ‘my culture made me do it’. It just means using your own experiences to gain an understanding of something bigger than yourself, by examining the internal process that led to your action. I find it especially easy with things like sexism and racism – I know I don’t like them, so if they’re coming out of my mouth I know there’s something I’ve internalised that I haven’t yet examined properly. I can’t see any reason to blame myself for what I was taught, but I do think it’s my responsibility to critically examine it once I spot it.
Makes me excited to find my own faults (and fix them, and gain an understanding of the world at the same time) rather than being ashamed of them.
Hope that made sense.
quixotess said,
May 23, 2010 at 2:02 pm
I think it’s utterly fantastic that you’re able to have that view of discovering you were wrong. It speaks of great emotional resources.
bumerry said,
June 8, 2010 at 2:25 pm
Amazing essay, Quixotess. Thank you for pointing out that sexual assault is sexual assault no matter who is doing it and to what degree it harms the victim. Also, from my social work perspective, Victim is an esteemed social status. Part of rape culture – and other oppressions – is denying that victims of sexual assault have actually been *victimIzed* at all. Everything from “alleged rape” to “had sex with a 13 year old” to “they were both drinking” to “s/he was into it, s/he wouldn’t be wet/erect if not” to “don’t be a victim, be a SURVIVOR!” does this. Indeed, examining how rape culture creeps into sexual assault prevention efforts, criminal and civil legal action meant to remedy all assault , advocacy and post-assault services is a vital part of our work.
“What’s taught is what’s known” as the inimitable k.d. lang wrote.
Sugarleigh, I deal with this all the time as a social worker/MSW student. I guess I fall back on the neutral stance I presented to my job coaching clients back in the 80′s.
Everyone makes mistakes every day, including me. Making mistakes means that you are human. Recognizing them means you are learning something. Correcting them means you have grown.
Shame is unwarranted wrt honest mistakes, because shame is an emotion only usefully embraced and used to grow when one has deliberately chosen to do wrong. Shame may *arise* out of habit though, when you’ve been taught that you can always be in control and never make mistakes. That teaching is a lie, nobody is ever entirely in control and flawless.
I strongly believe that nearly anyone can learn to dismiss this automatic feeling of shame. We learn to dismiss all kinds of unwarranted perceptions, like the perception that we are driving our new SUV within the speed limit when a glance at the dashboard proves us mistaken. Oh, I guess that example would more be just ME at the moment.
If I felt deeply ashamed every time my foot grew heavy, well, there would be a lot of car accidents because I would be missing the point of having a speedometer. I might even stop positive actions I usually take – maybe I’d avoid looking at the dash or setting my cruise control to within the speed limit out of embarrassment that my passenger might thus find out I was speeding.
Learning to control, not my emotions which are involuntary perceptions like my sense of balance or vision, but my reactions to those emotions is probably the best thing that has ever happened to me. It has radically improved my PTSD and daily functioning and made me a better person to be with or around.
Apologizing for an honest mistake, when done sincerely and with humility, is a fast fading social grace I’d like to revive. Then it’s over, and you can turn the conversation back to the issue at hand.
RockSci said,
May 23, 2010 at 1:43 pm
This post is awesome. It freaked me out that I didn’t see this as sexual assault in the first place, and once I realised what was going on it freaked me out that it was being dismissed as such in some surprising places. Most criticism I’ve seen of that scene is based around OMG Amy has sexual desires and isn’t mooning over the doctor as her One True Love and she’s such a slut, rather than the fact that IT’S ASSAULT. I would be super pleased to see a female character who knows what she wants sexually and isn’t afraid to express that, but having her ignoring a no and playing it for laughs wasn’t the way to do it.
I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to discuss her motivations, given that they are both fictional characters in a science fiction universe where actual mind control is possible (is it something timey wimey to do with The Crack?), but whatever her reasons were (and despite the fact she clearly wouldn’t think of it as assault) it doesn’t change the fact that it IS assault, and it is important to acknowledge that because frankly, most people who saw that scene won’t even have considered it.
Also, seconding Cinnamon Girl, that was pretty much my thought process when it was pointed out to me. The opportunity to slowly chip away at that internalised sexism is a positive in the long run…
Anyway, that was wordy and probably incoherent, but thanks for this!
quixotess said,
May 23, 2010 at 2:27 pm
I agree that it’s not wrong to discuss her motivations. There are lots of lenses we can look at this scene through and get interesting results. But I also agree that it’s important to acknowledge that it was assault in discussing Amy’s actions in the scene–I feel not mentioning it falls under “silence is complicity.” The conversation has been surprisingly frustrating most places I’ve had it!
I think the fact that we saw, as you say, a female character who knows what she wants and isn’t afraid to express that, but it was done as assault–I think that’s all the more frustrating.
I’ll also note that nonwhite female characters already have a long history of being portrayed as overtly sexual/sexually enthusiastic. That’s not to say it was usually a positive portrayal, but some people calling for a woman character who isn’t sexually timid or passive could learn about nonwhite women in male-dominated art to learn that those characters are already out there. In other words, sexually assertive female characters are not The Answer to negative pop culture portrayals of women’s sexuality.
colorlessblue said,
May 23, 2010 at 3:13 pm
I think the fact that most people can’t see how this was sexual assault comes from it playing into a lot of tropes in pop culture. It’s kind of hard to sum it up, but “persistence is seduction”, “playing hard to get” (as rationalization for ignoring rejection), “playing it for laughs”, “Rape Is Ok When It Is Female On Male”, “surprise sex you didn’t know you wanted” are all concepts that were somehow involved in the scene. Amy’s assault on the Doctor was classic Pepé Le Pew behaviour, and that’s supposed to be funny.
I also think that most people saying it wasn’t assault because the Doctor wasn’t scared are missing the point, the fact that it’s pretty common for victims not to identify what is happening as assault while it is happening. Maybe this is clearer to me because it took me 5 years to see one of the assaults that happened to me as something other than a misunderstanding, and if you switch the genders on that scene, you might even keep most of the dialog and you’d still have my assault.
I really hated the episode. I started hating it when I saw the continuity flaws on how the angels work. The angels were the monster that scared me the most, before these two episodes. Now they’re not scary at all.
Then they wrote Amy as completely stupid, when she’s been brilliant in past episodes, and the Doctor was mean in a lot of scenes too (he’s been rude and arrogant before, but the closest to mean that I’ve seen was when 9 met his first Dalek).
I won’t lie: I’m one of the fangirls who’s really attracted to the Doctor. I like 10 most of all, and I first had problems with 11 because of how much he looks like an ex-boyfriend, but as I get over that, I get more attracted to 11 too. I can really see myself thinking about having sex with the Doctor if I were in Amy’s shoes, but there’s sex, and there’s assault.
I wouldn’t have a problem with the scene if Amy were telling him she was interested, even if they still wanted to play it for laughs and had her starting with hints and metaphors and him being oblivious, as long as there were no groping, kissing and undressing, and she stopped insisting even verbally after he finally got the idea and said the first no.
Now the last problem I have with the scene is that, if you rewrite it all to make it not sexual assault, but keep the dialog mostly as it was *before it got physical*, there’s still no point where she says she’s attracted to him and just wants sex. There’s a lot of “I’m nervous about getting married” and “I almost died” and other rationalizations of the same kind. I get it that the writers didn’t intend to write an assault scene (they just failed to understand that lack of consent means assault, duh). I think what they meant was to show Amy as 20-something girl with sexual feelings who’s ok with taking the initiative and going after a guy she’s attracted to. What I think is that they failed in so many levels they even failed there, making her someone who needs special reasons want sex instead of just being horny.
John said,
May 27, 2010 at 6:22 am
Brittany Edney has produced a role-reversed homage to the seduction scene in “The Graduate”, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YshxzkqXA6I and for me this really showed the same asymmetry. (Her homage to the original version, with the same cast as the reversed version, is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlMgF85r05Y).
Duncan said,
May 28, 2010 at 3:26 pm
If you factor in gender-based differences in sexual norms* given that male sexual advances tend to be direct acts (physical contact etc) and female advances are more often visual or verbal indicators of availability you could view Mrs Robinson’s actions in the famous tights scene as being more direct than if the gender roles were reversed (a man taking off his socks is not a classic image of seduction; whereas if he were to attempt give Bridgette a backrub….**)
* I’m not endorsing those differences. I’m just saying they exist.
** Angela Merkel knows what to do; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUTwaSPcGno ***
*** Bush is well known for using signs physical and verbal domination over other world leaders (read accounts such as Andrew Rawnsley’s of his interactions with Blair). By using stereotypically seductive behaviours towards Merkel he is using her femininity as a way of asserting his political dominance (it isn’t actually an attempt at seduction); she’s not having any of it and quite rightly so!
Gnatalby said,
May 24, 2010 at 6:03 am
This post is fantastic, I especially love your addressing the shame cave, so much of the “You’re overreacting” response I think comes out of the shame cave.
I think people get more invested in the idea of what they are rather than what they do. Being feminist and anti-rape and anti-racism at all the other progressive values doesn’t mean you always act perfectly right out the gate, it means that when you make a mistake you admit it, apologize (if you’ve hurt someone), and commit to not making the mistake again.
How do progressive people think, simultaneously, “Wow there sure are a lot of unpleasant messages pervading every aspect of our society” and “Because I am a good person I am completely unaffected by these messages.”
They’re insidious messages. Everybody fucks up. It’s what you do after that shapes my judgment of who you are.
Vixen said,
May 24, 2010 at 9:24 am
Thank. You.
I am a enthusiastic Dr. Who fan, and I saw the problems with that scene. After reading Kate Harding’s disingenuous apologia for it, your take is a welcome dose of clear thinking.
It was absolutely sexual assault. It made me really really uncomfortable to watch. Not because Amy was the pursuer, but because the Doctor was being absolutely clear about his “No” (as contrasted with, say, the Reinette scene, where a woman was also the sexual aggressor.)
Also (assuming her freely-entered-into engagement with Rory came with the standard monogamy clause, although to be fair that wasn’t specified) her behavior was moral crap from that standpoint, too.
Are people really so blinded by the glitter of unabashed female desire that they can’t see why her actions are beyond problematic in this context???
Lost in La Linkspam (25th May, 2010) | Geek Feminism Blog said,
May 24, 2010 at 5:45 pm
[...] (Spoilers be here…) Quixotess on unacknowledged sexual assault in Doctor Who: What happened at the end of Flesh and Stone was sexual assault: Q&A. [...]
Zanzando said,
May 25, 2010 at 6:07 am
Thank you for writing this, and doing so in a measured way (so that it would be easier to read for people likely to be triggered by the scene and other elements of the larger problem).
While watching it, I remember feeling deeply uncomfortable, because this has a very personal connection to me.
As far as I’m concerned, the Doctor is canonically ace (asexual), as am I. And this kind of thing has happened too often to me (usually in social situations, a la “Come on, it’s just a kiss!”), and I *still* have a hard time identifying it as assault as it is happening.
I feel really conflicted about Amy ever since having to watch that. :/
quixotess said,
May 25, 2010 at 8:24 am
I don’t think the Doctor in New Who can be accurately said to be canonically asexual, given his reaction to being kissed by Reinette, and the various comments about his sexual relationship with Queen Elizabeth 1, and his kiss with Rose which I believe was not entirely functional, and his kiss with Jack which I believe was not without sexual meaning.
I think it’s shocking that people would try to force you to kiss them or to put up with being kissed by them. But I guess that’s part of it, that people manage to make it seem “natural” when it just simply isn’t, and that’s why it’s SO upsetting to me to see people deny what’s happening here, because it does carry over to real life.
I’m seeing comments about this post elsewhere that even over what I wrote insist that I shouldn’t have used the words “sexual assault,” even though they do apply, because it’s too emotional or manipulative. (Someone even said “theological” which is just bizarre.) It’s very privileged of them to be able to pronounce this scene something not worth getting worked up about, or to say “I don’t think it was violent or terrible, so we shouldn’t call it sexual assault.” People WERE TRIGGERED or upset by Amy’s actions.
I, too, am not feeling positively toward Amy, although I didn’t feel the love toward her to start (and I know a lot of people really liked her even if they hated her actions in this scene.) It’s not greatly affecting my enjoyment of the show, but I do just feel wary toward her and more enthusiastic about the Doctor.
Michael said,
May 25, 2010 at 9:40 am
Very interesting article.
I honestly hadn’t looked at it from this viewpoint before, I’d thought it was maybe a bit inappropriate, probably at the boundary of what was acceptable for a family show in the 6-7pm time slot, but thinking about it, had the genders been reversed this scene would have widely and rightly been criticised as an open-and-shut case of sexual assault in a prime-time family show. I think Cinnamon Girl has it right, it’s the “Aha, I hadn’t thought of it that way” moment, the one where you begin to wonder what else has slipped in under your radar and what you can do to stop it from slipping again. I think you’ve done a great job in explaining concisely and comprehensively why this scene should be viewed as sexual assault when it’s a woman being the aggressor to a non-consentual man.
I do still love the character of Amy Pond. She has so many positive attributes: smart, resourceful, witty, courageous, selfless, insightful, quite asides from being physically gorgeous. And as you have said, unlike so many other characters, not only in Doctor Who but throughout television and movies, she is a fully rounded human being, with flaws, imperfections, fears and doubts, who nevertheless is able to work through these doubts and fears. Her childhood obsession with the Doctor is perfectly understandable – the man who appears out of nowhere, answering her prayers to fix the “scary crack in the wall”, finding out that it’s a monster and rushing off to chase the monster; the fact that this has developed into a psychosis that has required “four psychiatrists” is both wonderfully comedic to the casual viewer and instantly gives layers of complexity to the character. The fact that prior to this scene she had been in a traumatizing life-or-death situation is clear. But all of this only explains why she acted as she did; it does not excuse her actions in any way.
However, so far I like the way the show has handled aftermath of this. The Doctor’s actions in bringing her back to Rory have done two things. Firstly, from a show perspective, it has given the TARDIS the sort of dynamic that has worked wonderfully in the show’s past, i.e. the Doctor, and a male and female companion (Barbara & Ian, Ben & Polly, Jamie & Zoe, Jamie & Victoria, Tegan & Turlough, Turlough & Peri, even Jack and Rose).
But secondly, from a story perspective, I don’t think the Doctor is letting Amy away with what she’s done. At the same time, though, he isn’t punishing her for her behaviour, well, not punishment as most people would recognise it. Rather, he’s doing what he’s always done best with his companions, teaching her, allowing her to find out for herself that her behaviour was wrong, and giving her the chance to change. I think the scene in “Amy’s Choice” where Rory gets killed is wonderful for Amy’s realisation of what she wants, and puts a whole new light on the role of the Doctor’s subconscious. If left to his own devices, the Doctor would likely have taken an absolute age to get round to putting Amy in the position where she had to choose what was important to her; the Dream Lord’s actions forced Amy to face her innermost wants and needs while simultaneously getting her to re-evaluate her relationship with the Doctor. I don’t think that’s the end of it for Amy, though. “Amy’s Choice” only dealt with the abstraction of dreams. I think Moffatt is showing us Action-Reaction-Consequence, so I think there will be a serious real-world consequence to Amy’s behaviour.
Maybe the Doctor’s ideas will work, maybe they won’t, maybe Amy’s behaviour all be explained away as a reaction to “wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff”. Either way, the on-screen dynamic and the characterizations are among the most interesting we’ve had in Doctor Who for a very long time.
quixotess said,
May 25, 2010 at 9:53 am
That isn’t really what I said (and I’m a bit creeped out by your enthusiasm for Amy in this comment.) I wasn’t talking about Amy in contrast to other television characters. I was talking about Amy as like all other people who have committed sexual assault.
StarWatcher said,
May 25, 2010 at 10:29 am
My Dr. Who-watching is very hit-or-miss, and this episode was my introduction to this doctor and to Amy. During the scene, I was growling at the TV – “Stop that! He said No!” Apparently, I was reacting to, and troubled by, the recognition of sexual assault… even though I wasn’t aware enough of what was actually happening to name it in my mind. Just one more example of how the rape culture screws with our reactions / perceptions.
So, thank you. I really appreciate the careful, deliberate unpacking and explanation of this scene, and the rebuttal of some of the possible/probable arguments that it shouldn’t be classified as sexual assault. Perhaps next time – sad to know that there will undoubtedly be a ‘next time’ – I’ll more easily recognize the ‘assault’ part of the activity.
quixotess said,
May 25, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Re “possible/probable” arguments, and since some people believe I’m being patronizing: I should clarify that I did not make up or posit any of the “questions” I used in my post. They are all things that people said to me (or as part of a conversation I was in), including “You’re being mean and telling me a bad person because I don’t hate Amy.”
StarWatcher said,
May 25, 2010 at 6:41 pm
I don’t doubt it. I was thinking along the lines of trying to remember those rebuttals if I encounter the same kinds of arguments.
Margaret Lion said,
May 25, 2010 at 11:14 am
Whoa. Very cool writing. I know I was very bothered that Amy kept kissing the Doctor when he did not want it. I kept thinking “Amy, be an adult, leave him alone.”
My guess is the producers thought it was cute and funny. Alas, ’tis not. I
Epimetheus said,
May 25, 2010 at 10:15 pm
Grumble grumble. The Doctor is not a pacifist. He’s guilty of multiple genocides.
Liz said,
May 25, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Thank you! This is so clear and well said. I really appreciate it and hope people learn from it.
david with a small d said,
May 27, 2010 at 10:33 am
VERY good post. I spotted it as sexual assault whilst watching the episode. The whole thing left me a little uncomortable and wondering why Stephen Moffat had made such an obvious writing error, but I genuinely didn’t think anyone else would pick up on it, what with it being stereotypically gender reversed and all.
However, I didn’t get particularly angry at it, I’ll admit. I just kinda thought “Meh – THAT’d cause a few complaints were it the other way round! Oh well, where’d I put my tea…”
Nishy said,
May 28, 2010 at 11:01 am
This was a great article, though I did find it slightly patronising.
I don’t even watch Dr Who, though as a sci-fi fan I really should and I’ll probably jump on the bandwagon soon enough – the ONLY bit of the new series I have seen just happens to be this scene, caught as I was chilling with college friends who were watching it.
The only reason I found the article patronising is because to me it was OBVIOUS that this was sexual assault, how could it not be?? Its a shame there seem to be intelligent people who didn’t/don’t realise that at first, but its fantastic that there are also just as many who are able to address the issue effectively, like yourself
sj said,
May 28, 2010 at 1:06 pm
Very well written.
I must admit I did giggle but I was shocked at the same time and was mainly falling in the “ok something is wrong here, what’s HAPPENING to her to make her act that way.” but I see your point how there’s no guarantee of that and it’s not a great image to present. Hopefully moffatt will deal with it and make it clear that it WASN’T natural behaviour and therefore wasn’t to be laughed off.
but regardless of how people feel about it morally, as a law student studying for her criminal law exam on tuesday I can tell you that legally speaking at least, it is sexual assault.
Of course given how tough juries are on rape victims in general and the massive gender bias in the courts the doctor would never get win at trial
Michael said,
May 28, 2010 at 2:53 pm
I know the logic
i know the reasons
i know the science
i know the rationalism
BUT I still dont see this situation with amy as being a rape scenario. I admit the fact that if there was a gender reversal yes I may be shocked. A man doing that to a girl would be shocking. But in this case its a girl doing it to a man and this does not generate the same shocked emotions and I repeat
I know the logic
i know the reasons
i know the science
i know the rationalism
but I am a human being and I am not pure logic. Culture is not purely sexist. There are reasons for why we react differently to different genders doing different things.
[Transphobia redacted by Quixotess]
quixotess said,
May 28, 2010 at 3:06 pm
I was kinda on the fence about whether or not to approve this; I settled for a modified version.
First, please know that I and others who agree with me are not arguing this from a place of wholly cold-headed rationality; we had a visceral reaction to the scene, as many people in this comment thread have noted. For this reason, it is curious that you should talk about how “we” react to different genders doing different things, when plenty of people on this very thread have said they reacted negatively, or were upset by the scene, or can see that it is sexual assault.
Please consider that the reason you find it easier to see sexual assault when it is committed by a man upon a woman is not anything like biology or natural gender roles. Consider that it might have to do with systemic power that men have over women, that makes it more likely for them to be able to assault and get away with it.
Michael said,
May 29, 2010 at 6:56 am
yes i did say we and i stick by what I said. When I say we I mean that the general public who watched this scene did not see a problem. I can only assume that the people in this blog represent a minority. Though that in itself is not a problem.
[Most of this comment redacted by Quixotess]
Human beings are complicated. There could be thousands of reasons why I did not see amy’s actions as sexual assault. But can I ask you what exactly are you trying to do with this blog.
Bernice said,
May 28, 2010 at 11:54 pm
Love this post. Everything about it. I kept thinking ‘She’s been possessed by aliens that are making her do bad things!’ or ‘Maybe it’s a remnant of the Weeping Angel inside that’s making her be like this?’
And yet…
I suspect this is one of those cases where the writers think that sexual assault is funny. Much like the Lucius Lovin character in Stargate: Atlantis who raped at least 10 minor characters in the show, and yet this is shown as humorous (and no, I’m not talking sexual assault, he drugs and rapes them, outright).
Or perhaps it’s wish fulfilment. In SGA, they wish they could drug beautiful women and make them obey all sexual demands. In Dr Who I guess they wish that beautiful young women would sexually molest them on occasion. Either way, it was disturbing to watch.
Bobble said,
June 17, 2010 at 4:27 pm
This, so much. I watched this with my family, and we pretty much watched this scene in silence. My mum and I exchanged really uncomfortable glances, but we didn’t say anything.
My brother (who gets very defensive about such things) said something like “we were meant to see it as something very wrong with Amy”, and I really hope that’s true. I really hope that it will be brought up again when the overarching events of the series are explained, that it will be a sign of something wrong taking over Amy and will be discussed as something wrong. But I don’t hold out much hope at this stage.
Sadly, I worry that it’s Moffat trying to say “Look, I’m not gay!”, and putting in ‘hilarious’ sexy womens, and getting it very wrong.
Nick said,
May 29, 2010 at 4:54 am
Hi,
I understand the logic behind this, but to me it seems more like the Doctor was trying to come up with reasons to avoid it because he KNEW that Amy was getting married the day after. He didn’t want to ruin that for her. There’s far too much sexual tension in the rest of the series, IMO, for it to be a rape scenario.
However, I understand your opinion and this, really, is just my interpretation of it. I’m probably wrong :3
quixotess said,
June 2, 2010 at 5:46 am
I think given all the verbal and physical ways in which the Doctor indicated his nonconsent, it would be a mistake to interpret that scene as him really wanting it but just coming up with flimsy excuses not to. Remember that “you’re getting married” wasn’t the only thing he said; he also talked about their species and age differences, which is something he clearly takes very seriously. In any case it doesn’t really matter why he said no. People whose relationship involves sexual tension are not in a state of default consent. The Doctor said no, and Amy ignored it. That’s all that’s necessary for sexual assault.
Kristen said,
May 29, 2010 at 7:48 am
I don’t know if it’s been mentioned elsewhere, but the element of setting for this scene is, in my view, crucial to interpretation. The TARDIS has materialized neatly in the young lady’s bedroom–not her kitchen, not a public place, but the room in which she grew up, and the site where the Doctor first gained Amelia’s trust. The audience is invited to grow complicit in her actions because he chose to enter her bedroom, her most private of spaces. If this were a studio apartment or dormitory the stakes would be lower, as these bedrooms also serve as salons, but her home is large and has at least three established, mood-bearing interior playing spaces where the time machine could have landed discreetly. Had Amy retrieved the gown from upstairs and shown it to the Doctor in the kitchen, the assault would have appeared far less appropriate–and indeed had she chosen to display herself to him on the kitchen table instead of her bed it would have appeared downright vulgar.
The Doctor’s comfort in entering this space may be justified as parental–after all, the last time he was in there, he was chasing monsters away from a scared little girl. But she has grown up, and if the writers intended to suggest that he feels comfortable in her space because of his guardianship of her then they undermined the entire premise of the story–the Doctor is not naive, and had this scene been afforded contextual thought, the character would have been wary to enter the room on account of the messages that action could send. Whatever the reason why the story creators included this scene, they placed it in her bedroom to subtly prepare the audience for intimacy, thus lowering the likelihood of viewer outcry.
Joan said,
December 4, 2010 at 7:41 am
Kristen, you make some excellent points here; however, the TARDIS materialized in the back yard. Amy tricked the Doctor, dragging him by the arm and insisting that “there’s something you must see!” She premeditated the thing.
the more I think about the whole “jump his bones” deal that was portrayed, the more creepy it becomes. Ew. Love the Doctor, am now very disgusted with the writers.
Joan said,
December 4, 2010 at 8:35 am
Correction: You are right the TARDIS is in Amy’s room. But, didn’t Amy insisted on it? Well, anyway, enough time on this, I guess.
napalmnacey said,
May 29, 2010 at 8:52 am
I saw it for what it was but pretended it was something else in my head cause I had been triggered. I’m just pretending it didn’t happen because Doctor Who was my escape after I was raped. It was one of the things I watched to get away from reality. The Blue Police Phone Box took me away. I just didn’t want to see the Doctor get hurt in that way.
I guess that makes me a coward, but I don’t want to stop watching this show, it means too much to me. I will always say what I think though – that was a very badly concieved scene and it was sexual assault.
But secretly, in my head, when I watch, that scene never happened. She just tried to kiss him and that’s it. That’s how I cope with it.
quixotess said,
May 29, 2010 at 12:16 pm
Nothing wrong with that from where I’m sitting.
I want to emphasize that, just as I don’t think anyone has to hate Amy for this, I also don’t think anyone has to stop watching the show to be a “good feminist” or w/e. Refusing to watch shows that have some sort of problematic content is one way of doing one’s social justice thing, but it’s not the only valid way. (And your comment is a good example of one reason why.)
quixotess said,
May 29, 2010 at 12:54 pm
Michael (replies only nest three deep)
I felt it would be unfair to delete your entire response, but I could not in good conscience let most of your comment through. It indicated to me that you are at the wrong blog. I am seriously not going to rise to the bait of things like “What are you afraid of?”
I apologize for simplifying the reasons for your response to the scene. You’re right that it could be any of thousands. The reason I suggested what I did was because you said you would certainly react differently if the genders were reversed, and you attributed this to some sort of natural programming. I am skeptical that this can be attributed to natural gender roles.
Recent bookmarks « Edward’s Rambling Blag said,
June 1, 2010 at 9:13 am
[...] What happened at the end of Flesh and Stone was sexual assault: Q&A « Reconcile [...]
Crystal Meth said,
June 2, 2010 at 5:47 am
Interesting article. I’m a feminist, and I have been heard to argue passionately against sexist attitudes towards men, but this scene did “slip under my radar;” I barely noticed that the Doctor was being assaulted, and I didn’t worry about his feelings. The only defence I can come up with is that I was only half-watching the show while busy doing something else, but still. When I started reading this article, my response was “Oh, ok, what she did was wrong, but it’s not that serious, is it?”
So it was very interesting to read the section headed “What about the power differences,” and especially the comments from John and Tom. So, thanks for raising my conciousness about this.
I think the trauma experienced by the victim depends not so much on hir gender, but on the nature of the relaitonship and the characters of those involved. I’m sure there are people who would shrug off an experience like this, perhaps find it annoying but nothing worse. However, I shouldn’t assume that the victim will shrug it off just because he’s male.
Tom said,
June 2, 2010 at 6:19 am
Thanks for the comment. I would say I am also a feminist, I know the gender difference can lead to confusion though, for example how many men do you see be pestered by drunken women in bars saying “Alright Darling?!” “Oi OI!”, and “he’s blatantly a goer” etc?
For women sometimes these male-to-female pressured situations are taken as ‘that’s just what happens’ but to me viewing that sort of situation is grossly embarrassing. When it happens the other way around there wouldn’t be such a problem, men would have their backs slapped right? Unfair?
Sometimes the need to be heard, no matter what the environment, is ignored, and I think that simply is wrong.
My case was an extreme, I’m not afraid of standing my ground against a hen-do for example, but when it’s one-on-one, female’s stalking males, does happen and it had VERY serious consequences, it would to anyone.
Sorry for rambling, lunch-time pint
bumerry said,
June 8, 2010 at 3:12 pm
I’m with you Tom. One of the cultural myths that most harms everyone is the notion that women and men feel and act in radically different ways because of wiring/”selfish genes”/the flying spaghettii monster decreed it/whatever.
Especially with respect to violence. I was horribly abused by a clearly psychopathic grandmother and even my therapits try to minimize and excuse her behavior or question my veracity. When she was likewise abusing my mom and her own parents tried to adopt the child, the judge refused to believe testimony from witnesses (including a doctor) and flat out stated that white women don’t do those things.
Women hit, torture, rape, kill. Not as frequently as men, and they more often choose people without even an appearance of legal redress as victims. Children, under our law in the US are essentially property. The Supreme Court has ruled that an adult’s “fundamental right to parent” trumps their child’s “best interests” = “human rights like security of person and medical care.”
Women seldom attack or kill strangers or even “acquaintences” in its legal framing for sexual assault as “anyone you’ve ever been around however briefly.” Indeed, if the unusual-for-all-genders stranger violence (excluding robberies) is taken out of the equation, I doubt there’s much gender difference in violent crime. There may be unequal prosecution and conviction, but I’d bet the actual incidence is roughly the same.
However, because I was violated by a woman, I recognized that my perceptions here may be skewed.
Annissa said,
June 29, 2010 at 12:12 am
You rock so much. I had the exact same reaction to that scene, it made me extremely uncomfortable.
I also saw your comments on the Kate Harding/Shapely Prose blog, and have to say I agree with you entirely. I’m definitely impressed with your classiness/poise/awesomeness and am going to have to keep reading your blog
KiriAmaya said,
June 29, 2010 at 12:06 pm
Thank you so much for this.
Joan said,
December 3, 2010 at 3:49 pm
This was a very insightful essay, thank you. When I saw the scene it was funny to me, until the second time Amy disregarded her friend’s pleas. He was literally pleading with her, he refrained from using roughness or scorn himself, showing that he values her and himself and their friendship far more than she did. What struck me was the scorn and contempt the Doctor’s friend Amy showed towards his anxiety and aversion. No, I don’t like Amy any more she isn’t “cute” or “liberated” she is a course, disrespectful and selfish type. I did really love the humor of the Doctor “sorting her out,” as best he could, like the noble soul this Doctor character has always been. I don’t get what Amy’s boyfriend ever saw in her anyway, beyond the clear physical attraction. I mean, she treated him with contempt too, when he was such a gentle, nice person. Too often, I fear, when male writers try to write strong female characters, we are served up some very cartoonish swill. Strong women know, as do strong men, that to love is to suffer, to place someone’s welfare at least on a part with one’s own; and of course to respect people.
I really appreciated reading this essay of yours, it gave me the right words to express what was upsetting me. Yes, it was more than obnoxious. Had she been able to do so, physically, this character would have “seduced” her friend coercively. Which means: sexual assault.
They better not wreck Doctor Who. I can still watch, because his character was kind and chaste with this “daughterly” companion whom he had known since her childhood.
quixotess said,
December 3, 2010 at 8:54 pm
*nod* I too was struck by Amy’s contempt for his “no.”
Greg said,
December 4, 2010 at 11:48 pm
A quick look at wikipedias article on sexual assault indicates the scene matches the UK’s definitionof sexual assault. the article doesn’t attempt to give the American definition of the term, only saying it varies widely by state.
My undrstanding of the term ‘assault’ is that it requires fear or apprehension on the part of the victim. Contrastedto ‘battery’ which involves a physical attack. (i am not a lawyer. this os not legal advice. yada. yada.)
i watched the first season of the new Dr. Who off of a DVD set.I haven’t seen the rest of the series. I am not an expert on what the Doctor is and is not physically capable of. and i did not see this scene until reading this thread. all that said, Amy’s behavior seemed absurd, the Doctor clearly says no, and she continues the pursuit.
but i didn’t feel the Doctor was in anyway threatened by her actions. I get the Doctor isn’t a diety, but I get the idea that he had the ability to make it stop at any point he wanted. He just didn’t want to escalate it to fire and brimstone level response.
I knew a woman who was about to get married who was trying to get me into bed with her and I said no because I knew her and because I was fairly sure she would come to regret cheating on her fiance. I never felt afraid or apprehensive, though. there was no ‘assault’. I outweighed her, was quite a bit taller than her, and was fairly certain that there was no way we were goong to do anything unless i allowed it. But she was also a friend, and I think part of her behavior simply came out of nerousness about getting married, so I didn’t take her intentions as trying to be mean, and I didn’t want to escalate the situation.
we talked through it and didnt do anything and remained friends and she got married.
So, i personally wouldn’t have watched the scene and thought she was assaulting him. I wouldn’t have even been a thought in my mind except that I never saw it except just before reading this thread saying it was assault.
I have a hard time believing he wwould have allowed anything to happen that he didn’t want to happen. and i have a hard time believing that she would have escalated it any further than it already went.
I don’t know how the law works around sexual assault. but if the law requires that the victim press charges for it to go to trial, then I think I can safely say the Doctor would not want his friend to go to trial, jail, or any of that.
StarWatcher said,
December 5, 2010 at 7:36 am
Crap; I have trouble navigating WordPress. I made a reply in the wrong place. Check out #34, StarWatcher.
StarWatcher said,
December 5, 2010 at 7:33 am
My understanding of the term ‘assault’ is that it requires fear or apprehension on the part of the victim.
No. “Assault” is the actions of the instigator, not the reactions of the other person. If someone has been drugged unconscious, there is no fear, but that is an assault.
Whether or not the person on the receptive end of the actions would be able to fight off the action if desired, it is still assault.
Check the part of the post under, “But it wasn’t violent.” That directly address your entire argument.
If your friend respected your “no”, you’re right; it wasn’t assault. But that’s the point — Amy did NOT respect the doctor’s “no”. She kept pushing and forcing the issue, despite the Doctor being visibly flustered — IE, apprehensive — and despite his pushing her away. Assault.
I have a hard time believing he would have allowed anything to happen that he didn’t want to happen. And i have a hard time believing that she would have escalated it any further than it already went.
First: bullshit. It doesn’t matter what he “would have allowed”. Her INTENT was to force something he didn’t want. That’s assault. Second: what you “believe” doesn’t matter, and you admit you didn’t see the episode. Amy was very determined on having sex, and the Doctor didn’t want it. That’s assault.
Of course the law requires that the victim press charges for it to go to trial. That doesn’t change the fact that it was assault. Many women who were raped never press charges, whether or not they were injured/battered/drugged during the rape. That does not change the fact that they were raped.
In short, your entire comment is an example of why so many rapists are not convicted, even if brought to trial: the common mindset is, “he didn’t mean it”, “it wasn’t that bad”, “she could have fought him off”, “it was a mistake”, “she changed her mind”. That mindset allows rapists to rape with impunity; they know that society will automatically make excuses for them even if brought to trial, and they know that less than 1% of rapists are ever convicted.
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/rape-culture-101/
Welcome to the rape-culture.
quixotess said,
December 5, 2010 at 7:56 am
Thank you, StarWatcher. In this comment thread so far I hadn’t allowed comments that, as you said, made arguments already addressed in the post, but Greg’s went through automatically because I had already approved a different comment of his on another post. I was hemming and hawing about leaving it up, but since you responded so well, I will.
Greg, you are at the wrong blog.
quixotess said,
December 5, 2010 at 10:49 am
Clue for the clueless: Once I have informed a person that ze is at the wrong blog, ze will no longer be permitted to comment.
Bonus clue: We are not in a court of law. The legal definition of anything is wholly irrelevant to this discussion .
StarWatcher said,
December 5, 2010 at 12:19 pm
You’re welcome. I know some bloggers allow such comments, since they serve as such clear examples of the mind-set we’re fighting; I thought that might be the case here. Such combinations can be useful for later readers to see that a blogger wasn’t just blowing hot air. Hopefully your post, plus a sample of the kind of thinking that inspired the post, should be educational. It’s just discouraging that we still need to be educating about this subject.