io9 Asks If “Game of Thrones” Gratuitous Sex Is Worse Than Gratuitous Violence?

Tweet about this on Twitter3Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on StumbleUpon0

One critic has coined the phrase sexposition for certain scenes on HBO’s hit series Game of Thrones.

And yes, the series does feature a lot of sex and gratuitous nudity.

But is that better or worse than using gratuitous violence?

io9′s Charlie Jane Anders examines this.  Here’s an excerpt from the article:

It’s a truism that Americans are more upset by explicit sex than explicit violence. It’s also true, though, that in American pop culture, explicit sex is largely about women’s bodies, while explicit violence is about men’s bodies. (This is slowly changing, as Michael Fassbender’s frequently uncovered body and The Hunger Games attest.) Also, in most American pop culture, sex is something done to women, while violence is something men do to each other. (And to women.)

But in the case of Game of Thrones, the complaints seem to be that the sex is both outlandish and extraneous to the story. But so, frequently, is the violence. And the balance has shifted somewhat this year, in favor of totally non-essential brutality. The season opener and last night’s episode had plenty of random violence, but little or no sex. (The opening scene of the second season: Two knights battling, until one of them ends up a wet smear on the paving stones. Then another knight is almost forced to drink himself to death.)

You really should read the entire argument HERE.

Comments

  1. Both are pretty prevalent in the books, so….

  2. John Terry says:

    Yup, I would even go so far as to say the TV show is tame in comparisons.

  3. Valentine says:

    Agreed!

  4. Valentine says:

    I mean, I agree with John Terry that the show is tame.

  5. There is a lot in the books and as long as they do not go over board OK by me.

Click on a tab to select how you'd like to leave your comment

Speak Your Mind

*