It’s another week, which means another look at sex and gender issues in HBO’s True Blood. If you’re new to our series of articles, take a moment to check out some of our previous ones, including a discussion of Tara’s transformation into a cagefighting lesbian, Sookie’s dual nature and a closer look at the show’s witches.
HBO television series have a reputation for not shying away from either violence or sex, and with copious amounts of both blood and flesh on display each and every week, True Blood is no exception. Couple that with the fact that the show’s creator, Alan Ball, is openly gay and True Blood’s persistent, yet vague, metaphors for all manner of civil rights (discussed here), and it seems reasonable to look at True Blood as a pretty liberal-minded show. So why does it display such a strong streak of sexual conservatism?
Examples can be found throughout the show’s previous three seasons, but this past Sunday night’s episode, “Me and the Devil,” put the finest point on the issue that we have yet seen. After escaping from Hotshot, where he was forced to have sex with countless women against his will, Jason Stackhouse spoke with his good friend Hoyt Fortenberry about the ordeal, wondering if it was perhaps punishment from God for having had too much sex.
Jason’s idea of God is seemingly like the father who catches his son smoking and forces him to finish the pack in one sitting, with his repeated rapes in Hotshot a kind of aversion therapy. He and Hoyt went on to elaborate on all of the scrapes into which Jason’s ravenous libido has led him, including becoming addicted to the drug V and being suspected of murder. With that one conversation, Jason’s entire arc throughout the series has been recast as a morality tale, where the lesson is that wanton lust will bring you nothing but trouble.
True Blood clearly has a liberated approach to sex, with most vampires exhibiting a type of pansexuality that encompasses humans as well as other “monsters,” for lack of a better term. This past Sunday’s episode even features an impassioned apologia of incest, which is in and of itself somewhat fascinating. Why then, would True Blood’s creators choose to send such mixed messages about free-flowing sexuality?
There’s nothing wrong with a piece of art having a point of view – in fact, it tends to elevate the work to a higher level. However, when a movie, television show or book sets out with such a clear message or idea about a particular topic, it ceases to be art and becomes something else entirely: Propaganda.
It’s easy to take potshots at True Blood, especially after last season, but the inherent sexual conservatism of Jason’s developing storyline is actually an example of the show at its best. While much of the rest of the show revolves around the transformative nature of love and/or lust and the difference between the two (Sookie and Eric’s burgeoning relationship for example), Jason’s recent revelation is the perfect counterpoint to that theme. By highlighting the troubles that the oversexed Jason has brought upon himself directly through his insatiable carnal appetite, True Blood illustrates that there is such a thing as too much of a good thing, and that a high level of responsibility comes built into any sexual act.
Of course, that’s not to say that either view is completely accurate, which is why both of them are so very necessary to fully explore the power of sexuality, which at its root, is largely what True Blood is all about.
Make sure to leave your thoughts in the comments below and catch True Blood on Sunday nights at 9pm on HBO. Then check back with us here on Monday to discuss the show.
HBO television series have a reputation for not shying away from either violence or sex, and with copious amounts of both blood and flesh on display each and every week, True Blood is no exception. Couple that with the fact that the show’s creator, Alan Ball, is openly gay and True Blood’s persistent, yet vague, metaphors for all manner of civil rights (discussed here), and it seems reasonable to look at True Blood as a pretty liberal-minded show. So why does it display such a strong streak of sexual conservatism?
Examples can be found throughout the show’s previous three seasons, but this past Sunday night’s episode, “Me and the Devil,” put the finest point on the issue that we have yet seen. After escaping from Hotshot, where he was forced to have sex with countless women against his will, Jason Stackhouse spoke with his good friend Hoyt Fortenberry about the ordeal, wondering if it was perhaps punishment from God for having had too much sex.
Jason’s idea of God is seemingly like the father who catches his son smoking and forces him to finish the pack in one sitting, with his repeated rapes in Hotshot a kind of aversion therapy. He and Hoyt went on to elaborate on all of the scrapes into which Jason’s ravenous libido has led him, including becoming addicted to the drug V and being suspected of murder. With that one conversation, Jason’s entire arc throughout the series has been recast as a morality tale, where the lesson is that wanton lust will bring you nothing but trouble.
True Blood clearly has a liberated approach to sex, with most vampires exhibiting a type of pansexuality that encompasses humans as well as other “monsters,” for lack of a better term. This past Sunday’s episode even features an impassioned apologia of incest, which is in and of itself somewhat fascinating. Why then, would True Blood’s creators choose to send such mixed messages about free-flowing sexuality?
There’s nothing wrong with a piece of art having a point of view – in fact, it tends to elevate the work to a higher level. However, when a movie, television show or book sets out with such a clear message or idea about a particular topic, it ceases to be art and becomes something else entirely: Propaganda.
It’s easy to take potshots at True Blood, especially after last season, but the inherent sexual conservatism of Jason’s developing storyline is actually an example of the show at its best. While much of the rest of the show revolves around the transformative nature of love and/or lust and the difference between the two (Sookie and Eric’s burgeoning relationship for example), Jason’s recent revelation is the perfect counterpoint to that theme. By highlighting the troubles that the oversexed Jason has brought upon himself directly through his insatiable carnal appetite, True Blood illustrates that there is such a thing as too much of a good thing, and that a high level of responsibility comes built into any sexual act.
Of course, that’s not to say that either view is completely accurate, which is why both of them are so very necessary to fully explore the power of sexuality, which at its root, is largely what True Blood is all about.
Make sure to leave your thoughts in the comments below and catch True Blood on Sunday nights at 9pm on HBO. Then check back with us here on Monday to discuss the show.
perhaps
but look at the narrator of this tale of morality. The character is rather given to blind oversimplification, and his conversation with Hoyt did not touch on his cult days, which I feel is really the message here: that sexual conservatism merely for the sake of acquiescence to social controls, be it to avoid a label like slut or simply to fit in, is an inadequate and thoroughly doomed enterprise.
If Jason's thoughts and actions are to be understood as a definition of the show's moral message than his murder of a black man, which was covered up by law enforcement (I mean, if you can really take Andy seriously as the Law), and which led to his position on the force is considerably more disturbing than the lessons of his lustful escapades.
I don't know as I would call it sexual conservatism to see Jason sort of looking at his sexual past as actions with consequences, and I think that is exactly what we are seeing when he is weighing his sexual past and what happened to him during his gang rape ordeal. Jason's character was doing this as far back as season two and was doing it in season three after he shot Eggs and Andy Bellefleur was telling him conscience off, dick on when he said he wanted to be the new Jason, the new Jason with some level limits. I think what the writers are trying to show is a certain level of maturity and wisdom in the otherwise air headed man slut.
@Aslinn - You're right that there's nothing particularly sexually conservative about recognizing that sex has consequences, but where I think Jason's attitudes veer off from responsible into conservative is when he starts thinking in terms of God punishing him for his sexual escapades. Interestingly, a fair argument could be made that this is the OPPOSITE of taking responsibility, as it just writes off bad things that have happened to him as some kind of divine retribution, not just a simple causal result. Once you bring God into the equation, the argument definitely changes.
@Christopher - I never said that Jason was RIGHT in his attitudes, just that they were in fact there, so you're absolutely correct that Jason's arc has also demonstrated the futility and hypocrisy of full-blown God-centric sexual conservatism. But doesn't that just add to my larger point of True Blood's thematic complexity when it comes to this matter? Not exactly clear what Jason killing Eggs has to do with this though, especially since it's questionable whether that should even be called a "murder," as Jason acted in good faith when he saw an angry guy shaking a knife at a scared law enforcement official.