but what i was uncomfortable with (and where i feel the show wants to have it both ways) was where i felt like some of the women were being punished by Paul and by the story for having sexual agency and autonomy. when we first see Sara in the bar in the first episode, i thought she was refreshing and brilliant. she was not going to go home with her "nice guy" friend. she was not looking for a relationship. but then she seemingly first gets humiliated (the whole thing with the underwear and the vibrator) and then punished for that agency by being murdered.
Oh, I completely understand why you read it in this manner. For me, however, for the show to be pushing that particular agenda, her murderer would have to be her 'nice guy' friend, so that someone could then turn around and say, 'see - she was promiscuous, and she faced the consequences!' It's hard to see where the show stands in this matter, because we don't know that much about the lives of the other victims, so I don't know whether sexual agency and autonomy are a unifying factor.
For me, the deciding factor is the fact that the murders take place in locked houses. (In the most recent one, it even takes place when the woman's boyfriend or male friend is present.) The women did not invite Paul inside, interact with him in any meaningful way or even notice his presence in their lives. So any element of punishment for agency is, to me, entirely in Paul's head. So how I read it is the show making a strong statement along the lines of 'you can do whatever you want in your own lives, you can be as "innocent" and "blameless" as possible, and yet this horrible person has still found a way to violate and hurt you in the most terrible way possible. Therefore, victim-blaming is wrong, and therefore we should stop talking about what victims did to deserve it.'
But I can well see how you view the show as presenting mixed messages in this regard.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: Mixed Messages in "The Fall"?
Date: 2013-06-09 02:18 pm (UTC)Oh, I completely understand why you read it in this manner. For me, however, for the show to be pushing that particular agenda, her murderer would have to be her 'nice guy' friend, so that someone could then turn around and say, 'see - she was promiscuous, and she faced the consequences!' It's hard to see where the show stands in this matter, because we don't know that much about the lives of the other victims, so I don't know whether sexual agency and autonomy are a unifying factor.
For me, the deciding factor is the fact that the murders take place in locked houses. (In the most recent one, it even takes place when the woman's boyfriend or male friend is present.) The women did not invite Paul inside, interact with him in any meaningful way or even notice his presence in their lives. So any element of punishment for agency is, to me, entirely in Paul's head. So how I read it is the show making a strong statement along the lines of 'you can do whatever you want in your own lives, you can be as "innocent" and "blameless" as possible, and yet this horrible person has still found a way to violate and hurt you in the most terrible way possible. Therefore, victim-blaming is wrong, and therefore we should stop talking about what victims did to deserve it.'
But I can well see how you view the show as presenting mixed messages in this regard.