'The Killing' is Kinda Killing Me

SPOILERS for True Detective, Twin Peaks, and The Killing


I haven't finished it yet, but  there are two things in The Killing  that led to me  thinking it is just... Reeeeeally problematic. Okay, so if there's one trope I'm really tired of, it's the "whore gets killed" one in film and on TV (and yeah, I'm sure in books). One version is the Disposable Sex Worker trope, wherein the drama in the piece of pop culture in question centers on the quest to search for the murderer of at least one prostitute. A recent example that garnered much critical acclaim is True Detective. Now, don't get me wrong- I thought it was a fantastic piece of television, and it did a fabulous job of raising some poignant questions. It was well-acted, well-directed, and well-filmed. But the entire plot rested on the objectification of women's bodies, and not a single damn woman in the series had an existence that didn't depend on a man's. Because even the prostitutes at the brothel the detectives visit at one point, their whole schtick and reason to exist in the series is to service men and to be interviewed by the male detectives (or saved, too- another tired trope) (of course, SPOILER, dude ends up sleeping with her later... ugh). Anyway, my point is, I enjoyed the miniseries, but there was no humanity given to any of the victims, not even the main one whose murder the detectives were trying to solve. She's described basically as a whore and a junkie, useless and trashy.

Another and related trope, one I wish had an entry on TV Tropes but doesn't, is what I'm going to call the "Good Girl Has Secret Sex Life (That Kills Her)" trope. I started to really put my finger on this one when watching through Twin Peaks with my roommie in the fall. As Agent Cooper looks into the murder of Laura Palmer, we discover she wasn't the sweet, angelic highschooler all the adults in town thought she was- rather, she was a promiscuous drug addict that knew all sorts of shady dudes that could have potentially been the one(s) to rape and murder her. There's even this really disturbing subplot that she was having sex with her psychologist and left him sexy recordings of her voice. And so as Cooper discovers more and more about her, she's changed from a vivacious homecoming queen to a secret fille fatale that goes after adults instead of "silly highschool boys."

So this brings me to The Killing. In this one, the victim is another highschooler, like Laura Palmer, that supposedly everybody liked and was a good girl and all that kinda jazz. Her name is Rosie. But we quickly learn there's a dude she's been having sex with for at least a year; when a video made the night she was killed is found of that guy and one of his friends raping her (or at least it sure looks like rape), and the two highschool boys are shown it, they both smirk and laugh and dismiss it, one of them flat-out saying, "You ain't got shit." And later in that same episode, the police show Rosie's parents some huge high heels and costume jewelry that they don't recognize as being Rosie's, but those detectives are pretty sure it is. And finally, at the end of the episode, it's heavily implied that Rosie was sleeping with one of her teachers. The thing with the teacher is dragged on and on through the season, and is never fully resolved (I mean, we find out he had been trying to save a Muslim girl at his mosque from an arranged marriage, but it's still never completely proven Rosie and the teacher didn't have inappropriate relations). And toward the end of the season, we find out that she was sneaking around with a fake license to do things like go to casinos. And in the end, it turns out she was basically pulling a Laura Palmer and was taking part in an "introduction service" (read: prostitution/call-girl service) and it was through this that she met her killer.

I should point out, the marketing was strikingly similar between Twin Peaks and The Killing, too. The question of, "Who killed Laura Palmer?" was one of the taglines for the show; "Who killed Rosie Larsen?" is one for The Killing: 

Yet much of both of these shows emphasizes the sex life of the girl whose murder is being solved, not her killer. Seems a little disingenuine, and the tagline should really read, "Who did [character name] sleep with?" or, "How trashy was [character name]?"

SIDENOTE: There's also some backstory with the main character, Detective Linden, involving a former case that drove her a little over the edge. Said case involved a "dead hooker" (direct quote) that had been "slashed in her apartment" and dead for two weeks- with her six-year-old son trapped in there with her. It's not directly related, but still of note because it's framed as a defining thing for Linden, and it involved a "dead hooker." Literally the only description this victim gets, aside from the word victim, is the aforementioned "dead hooker" line. Her only purpose for being  brought up is as a plot device for angst and mental instability on Linden's part.

And it's important to note that while some time in the first couple episodes of S2, when the sorta-boyfriend gets interrogated again, he claims he and Rosie never slept together because  she'd cry  whenever he tried, we were certainly led to believe for nigh a whole season she had been having regular sex with him, or at least used to- and that this fact somehow contributed to her death. So, you know, teenaged girls can't have sex without being raped and murdered. 

And why does this bother me so? Well, for a few reasons.

I feel like both versions, the out-right prostitute, or the "whoring good girl," so to speak, put the victims on trial. Their backstory and history comes under scrutiny, their humanity is diminished, and they become less of a homicide (and usually rape) victim, and more of a Bad Woman/Girl that got what she deserved or, not-quite-literally dug her own grave. The investigation becomes an attack on the character as a person, under the ruse of tracking down the killer.

And I know prostitutes do get killed, etc. But that's not the point. These overused tropes are easy ways to build up edgy suspense. When the viewers are thinking, "What shady business was that girl into that got her killed?" rather than, "What sick asshole would do that?", we're emphasizing the wrong thing. Because no woman "deserves" or "asks for" being raped, let alone raped and murdered. It's just like how in real life, when a rape victim comes forward, she gets asked how revealing her clothing was, did she guard her drink, why was she out that late in the first place, etc. From a cultural standpoint, it's problematic, because it reinforces notions that a woman is somehow at fault or responsible for whatever violence a man inflicts on her*.

And also, the idea that if a teenager has consensual sex with a boy  her own age, she's a whore that deserves to die... it's just... I mean God. I get that perhaps underaged sex is problematic, but to send the message that it's going to get the girl killed (and, note, the boy doesn't even go to jail for anything, despite being caught drinking more than once). That just says sex is scary and leads to lack of information which leads to more teen pregnancies and just... (And no, I'm not saying that teen pregnancies are going to rise now that The Killing has aired, I'm just saying, teens are gonna bone, it doesn't have to always be about jealousy and murder.)

And when it comes to writing in general... it's lazy. Can you not come up with anything more original?

Really, when it comes to Rosie's backstory, the writers are just throwing tropes against the wall like they were spaghetti: Shady past, alleged teen seductress, the "who's the daddy" game (there's drahmah about that in S2, too), the best friend that's jealous because she's Hollywood homely and Rosie is the one all the boys paid attention to (turns out it was her in the video that looked like a rape)... I'm sure there are more, I just can't think of them. Except with respect to the Native Americans in S2.

Which brings me to the second big problem  I'm having with the show. 

In the S2 opener, Rosie's bloody backpack turns up on her parents' front porch. This is like two weeks after she was found, and after the D.A. filed charges on a member of the Seattle city counsel that was running for Mayor (it comes out that the current mayor faked some pictures to frame him). So this is shit-tastic scary- if the killer is out of commission (the city councilman got shot in the S1 finale), why would her backpack show up out of nowhere?

Enter the local natives: So the casino that Rosie was going to in order to presumably meet men through that service was at an Indian casino on tribal lands, property of the fictional Kulamish tribe. And in Season 2, the detectives dig deeper into the casino, and they come across Chief Jackson, a hardass gal that runs the casino and the tribe. In our introduction to her, she goes on about Sacred Mother Earth and some other vague hippie stuff people always assume  is associated with indigenous culture. In the first couple episodes of the season, the writers bait the audience into thinking maybe Chief Jackson is in on the murder: She uses thuggish scare tactics with her minions, going so far as to having Linden's partner ASSAULTED by a group of tribal men, she keeps a special room that our detectives are certain has evidence off-limits, she tries to cover up the fact that one of her tribe's members was the person that found Rosie's backpack, and she and her thugs all make claims of trespassing on the part of the Seattle police (she even says it to the councilman running for mayor)- and, importantly, us that as justification for said beating of Linden's partner (when it's really because of the cover-up aspects). And most of the Native adults speak in that kind of forced high, slow, overly-careful, Shatner-esque way that the dudes in this video fake when the white people enter their store (and Chief Jackson does it too, but only sometimes- she has the "accent" during her little storytelling session, but it's gone when she has her meeting with the politicians):

And why does this bother me so? While we do find out that (WHEW!) Rosie was just a maid and waitress at the casino, not a prostitute, it's at the expense of indigenous culture. And this fictional tribe is portrayed as basically a mafia, with a ruthless, bloodthirsty mob boss (Jackson- what an ironic name) as their leader. It's so hard to find representations of Native Americans in pop culture, and when they occur, they usually suck. I know I'm young, but I'm already bloody tired of Noble Savages and Tonto Talk, and now this? What, now tribes are actually just the Sopranos, but with casinos (read: tribal-run brothels) instead of strip clubs?

It's problematic because stereotypes are all the vast majority of white people know. And when that's all they know, they think they're legit. That's why there are still people that think Washington D.C.'s team name shouldn't be changed, that Tonto is "accurate" and (shudder) "culturally sensitive," that wearing a Pocahottie costume is a "tribute," why a lot of people genuinely assume every Native American just gets a "free check" every year for no reason, other than their being  Native American. 

So what is The Killing doing by turning its chief Jackson into a mafioso-type? Adding new, negative stereotypes to the mix of all of the preexisting ones- that tribal casinos are actually sex trafficking rackets that are run as rough and tumble as the Bada Bing, and that any white person that sets foot on tribal lands without the intent to spend money (or, you know, buy a whore) will get put in the hospital. What the fuck, writers?

And I know I'm drawing at straws, here, but while they spend at least the first half of S2 setting Chief Jackson up as yet another potential killer, or at least facilitator of the murder, she doesn't have her own entry on the Wiki page for the show's characters. Which says to me they really don't give a damn about her or the other indigenous people,  really, but rather are just using the Kulamish tribe to set up future plot stuff,  like  the potential for the falsely-accused councilman to eventually become corrupt or something, or to demonstrate how corrupt the current mayor already is- as in, for the development of the white dudes.  Which, like with all of the tropes surrounding Rosie and  her  backstory, is just lazy writing. AN ENTIRE GROUP OF PEOPLE ARE A PLOT DEVICE. Could they not think of something better for the tribe to do? How about Chief Jackson giving a damn about the dead girl? Or at least show us more as to why she's such a hardass. 

I'm like halfway through Season 2. I'll finish it, make no mistake- if only because I want to know who the frak actually did it. I mean, I'll give the writers this, they're definitely doing all they can to toss red herrings and confuse the audience. But I wish they could do it in ways that weren't reductive of women and indigenous people (and that weren't just overdone in general). Maybe the next curveball will be better- I'm hoping so, at least. But it just kinda  kills me- it's obvious the writers are good. And there are lots of great things about the show- I think my favorite plotline involves how Rosie's dad is affected (her mom, though, ugh...). He breaks my heart. So do her brothers, and her aunt. Rosie's family is the best thing about this show. And I also really like the councilman and his story- his backstory is pretty good (although it DOES rely heavily on the death of his wife, ugh), his relationships with both of his campaign advisers are very different but both very emotional and touching, and his scenes are some of my favorite. So yeah, I'll keep going, and I'm rooting for some characters. And these writers, too- that they break out of some of these overdone plot elements and come up with some new stuff. And I'm hoping we figure out more about the fictional Kulamish people (although again, if Chief Jackson doesn't have her own character entry, I'm guessing  she's only going to show up one or two more times at this point).

Here's hoping, at least.

*Yes, I know violence happens  to men, but these tropes only really occur in pop culture with women being killed by men, and the stereotypes perpetuated IRL are the same. 

Girly Nerdery 2: Cosplay, Cons, and the Intersection of Rape and Geek Cultures

I absolutely,  in my heart of hearts, believe that the way creepers at conventions think it's okay  for them to do their creeper thing at said conventions is a direct result of a combination of both rape culture and the hyper-sexist environment of geek culture. It doesn't matter whether a woman is  fat,  thin, blonde, brunette, white, of color- women are treated like crap at cons and in geek culture.  

TRIGGER WARNING: I'm going to be discussing real sexual harassment I've experienced at an anime convention, as well as bringing up other real-life accounts I've heard of online. 

There are lots  of posts online about how women at cons get harrassed. I think there's a strong misconception that only women in skimpy outfits face it, or only heavy women. I saw this on FB and I think it gets at some of this:

Contra to what a lot of people  on the comments there and  on the place I saw it on FB think, this image isn't about fat-shaming per se. It's about how women of any shape and size are treated like crap at conventions- heavy women, like the woman brave enough to draw this, are made fun of for being "too fat" for their costumes (much like this gal was here). BUT. The strip also shows how women with that "ideal" body type are called sluts and oggled at by the same people, and their "legitimacy" is constantly tested. 

In May, I hosted a bachelor/bachelorette party at an anime convention. Sort of. It was held at the  con, during the con, and myriad  of the  guests did con things throughout the weekend. I didn't- another friend and I got a room together at another hotel, so whenever I was at the convention hotel, I was running back and forth doing things prepping  for the party. So I was never in costume. I did, however, try to be somewhat in cognito by bringing a nerdy shirt for the day  I knew I'd be around  the con more. When waiting for an elevator whilst wearing this  shirt, a very tall, bulky dude that looked like David Bowie in Labrynth, except with  green skin, said to me, "Can I have your autograph?" I chuckled and said  it'd be pretty useless. He stepped closer and said, "Well how about you come up to my room?"

"Ah, no, I'm not that kind of person," I said, backing away toward the larger, open space of the lobby. I stopped parallel with a group of three guys that weren't in costume, but rather really outlandish  hats. They apparently had been watching and listening to the whole thing, because they were sniggering and looking at me. 

"You sure?" Bowie said, taking a step in my direction. 

I shook my head, but my body froze. Bowie glared at me for a moment, then said, "Psh, cunt," as he started to turn  around. The  hat guys started laughing as I bolted.

I found a staircase and took that upstairs.

Then about an hour later, as I was getting ice for the party, a dude in a Mad Hatter (ala Johnny Depp) costume said as I was passing him, "Hey, baby, where you goin' in such a hurry?" tipping his hat up a little as he overexaggeratedly looked me  up and down.

In my shock, I blurted, "Party!" as I started to walk much, much faster, which meant I had to go past him. 

From behind me, I heard him say, "The party's right here!" 

So to clarify, I was propositioned inappropriately not once, but twice, while 1) having absolutely no "provocative" clothing on, and 2) while still being the same shape I've been for ages, i.e. overweight. Yeah, big boobs, but in a shirt like that, plus with the sweater-wrap thing I had on over it, I prolly looked more like a black-and-grey blob than anything else.

Yeah, anecdotal evidence isn't always generalizable, but given the plethora of pieces about harassment at conventions and shady stuff that gets reported then ignored by the people that should care, it's hard to deny there's a problem. And it's obvious there needs to be better security and measures for people to report violations of their privacy or person.

But the misconception that it only happens to hot chicks in skimpy outfits is I think one of the biggest problems. This article from Kotaku has a good cluster of variant incidents, but some "highlights," if you will:

• A security guard getting up in the grill of a journalist.
• A game developer kissed a PR gal's head in a bar, and another kissed her neck.
• Another PR gal was accused of not doing her presumed job of taking a picture with a dude that thought she was a "booth babe."
• Another journalist had a man take a zoom-in shot of her breasts.
• One dude confessed to another that his usual strategem of making women to feel down on themselves in order to bed them wasn't working.

One thing all the women in this piece have in common is they either presumably or explicitly weren't even in costume. And you'll notice (if you read the piece) the rather entitled reactions of some of the men- that they have every right to pick up on these women and get in their space, and it's the women violating some social norm by not fucking them or not being pleased with their behavior. 

You know what that is? Rape culture.

I've had countless instances where I was harassed on the street or in a mall or something. I've been followed into stores, I've been cornered in buildings. I've had men call me a "cunt" and a "bitch" for telling them something as innocuous as, "No thank you," (in a very timid voice, I may add). And all this while being overweight, not a "hottie" at all. 

And I've had people that find out ask  me if I was wearing a short skirt or low-cut top. I've had people ask if I fought back when I was raped (and some even say I "must not have been trying hard enough" when I say that yes, in fact, I did). As if I somehow was at fault, or at least partially to blame. I can't win- just by being a woman, I'm both a cunt for resisting, but to blame for not resisting enough. My only purpose is to please men, and anything that goes "wrong" with them is my own doing. 

This  is what conventions are like, only at conventions, it's concentrated and hyperactive. I think maybe  it has to do with the pseudo-anonymity of being there- it's not in the "real world," so inherent assholery and douchebaggery are magnified and less restrained. I think this is intertwined with the sexism in geek culture that gets so adamantly defended by men, too, of course. I've discussed some of this already; and my next "Girl Nerdery" post will most definitely tackle this from the pro-feminist perspective ala Anita Sarkeesian and the backlash anyone expressing dissatisfaction gets.

But men at conventions are, after all, men from the real world, so the contradictory/paradoxical assumptions about women irl translate to cons pretty smoothly. And I think the tight spaces and brief timeframe make the behavior in itself more extreme. If the idea of geek-culture is a boys' network, conventions are the closest to the tangible manifestation of that- so it follows for women at conventions to be mistreated and viewed as subordinate at best, as entirely lacking autonomy or individuality or even humanity at worst. 

There's this entirely false assumption by men at cons that women there are only present to provide entertainment and sexual gratification for them, the men. If women aren't buying into cheesy pickup lines, the reaction is, "Psh, women." If they don't want their picture taken, they're a "bitch." There's no second thought to asking them entirely inappropriate questions like their bra cup size, their sexual fantasies, if they'd go to the man's hotel room- it's deemed "harmless" by these men. 

Women in costumes are called names, judged negatively for being dressed as such, but they're also called similar things for not taking lewd remarks as complimentary. If they voice a complaint, they "shouldn't have been dressed like that, anyway."* And like  with the "fake geek girl" bullshit, they're assumed to now know anything about what they're there for.
Wearing a costume does not equate free gropes or open legs, let alone does the mere state of being female at a convention. Gay or transgendered doesn't mean a person's internal thought process is, "Please, please, make a comment about your semen winding up on my face!" Having ovaries doesn't entitle anyone else to the right to copping a feel. 

And yeah, I think a few reasons people should find this (more) disturbing (than they do) is the overall lack of response from convention personnel, the visceral reactions against anyone speaking out (the comments section on that Kotaku piece, for example, turned into a blob about how the dude that took the camera from the guy that took the boob-picture was the asshole last time I looked, for example- even men  trying to do something about it are attacked), and the way women are basically expected to expect that kind of treatment. Men aren't held accountable, women  are lashed out against, and we're supposed to remain silent. This last is the most disempowering: We're expected to literally take  it lying down in some instances, and it's a big shocker if we don't.

That's rape culture.

And I think one thing that's rather sad about it is the environments within conventions are entirely constructed and created by people, and those people do nothing, or not enough, to create a space free from harassment or violation; and people choose to go to these things without stopping to consider that maybe, just maybe their impulse is inappropriate and invasive. And  why should these guys tone it down? They don't face repercussions! 

Women at conventions aren't there for men to oggle. They're there because they're fans, too. And their legitimacy is questioned- it's a disgusting  double-standard that is entirely constructed at each convention. Wil Wheaton,  bless is nerdy heart, has this great quote from The New Statesman on his Tumblr:

"A man can wear a bow tie and a fez and he's in costume. A woman can spend hundreds of pounds or weeks of her time on an exact replica of an outfit a minor character wore onscreen for five minutes, whilst reciting  the Prime Directive in Klingon, and she's an attention-seeking slut."

I'd go further  and say that, should she decide the comments she's getting are inappropriate and  have the gall to say as such,  she'd be called even worse things. 

Now I've been to two conventions besides the one I talked about above. I was with a large enough array of people each time, and with enough men, that I don't think much, if anything, negative really happened to me- it would have stuck  with me. So make no mistake, I'm not saying every woman that goes to a convention is going to get slut-shamed, made fun of, propositioned, and attacked. But what I am saying is that it happens a lot, and when it does, it's a reflection of the values of society writ-large and geek culture specifically.

And that is rape culture. 



*Nevermind that the most popular female characters are also usually pretty gorram skimpily-clad, but that's a topic big enough for its own post.