Reading about grisly sex murders and mutilation is a safe way to explore the threats we sense in the world around us
A couple of weeks ago, I was about three-quarters of the way through Becky Masterman’s gory crime thriller Rage Against the Dying – a book about a series of grisly sex murders along the old Route 66 – when I was struck by a sudden, awful thought: “I hope I’m never raped and murdered.” Masterman’s novel, populated as it is by sadistic, psychotic rapists and necrophiliacs, had got under my skin to the extent that for a moment it felt impossible to envisage my own life uninterrupted by extreme male-on-female violence.
My reaction was certainly symptomatic of the kind of paranoid, hyper-aware symptoms associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (I was violently attacked in 2010) and some of the content could definitely be said to be “triggering”. Certainly more so than The Great Gatsby, a book from which necrophilia is notably absent but which American students are saying should come with a content, or trigger, warning. And yet I kept reading, just as I did on holiday last month when unexpectedly confronted by a brutal rape scene during a Stephen King short story.
According to several crime writers this week, women love reading about other women being murdered, which perhaps accounts for the genre selling about 21 million books a year in the UK. I would count myself among those consumers, though I’m not sure “love” is quite the right word when it comes to how the process of reading a book featuring extreme violence against women makes me feel. I don’t enjoy it necessarily, but I do find it compelling.
The writer Val McDermid rightly says that “women are better at scaring us“, partly because “since childhood we have learned to imagine this”. This definitely plays a part; from the time we are little girls, we are taught to imagine ourselves embodying a variety of roles, not least – with our first utterance of the words “don’t talk to any strange men” – that of potential victim. Crime fiction allows us to explore those looming horrors, and what they might entail.
When it comes to reading about the rape, murder and mutilation of fictional women, I do think there might be an element of curiosity, a feeling of “let’s see what we’re dealing with here”. Germaine Greer said that “women have very little idea of how much men hate them”, a generalisation that any female beneficiary of the love, affection and support of the men in their lives would obviously refute. But we are brought up to know that there are men out there who hate us, and who would like to hurt us, and we are taught to fear them.
Many women I know spend their nocturnal lives in a state of heightened preparedness: they carry rape alarms, and makeshift mace or lemon sprays for the blinding of male predators; they have emergency strategies in place (wet yourself, grab their balls, ask after their mother). Ever since I was a child, I have walked as far as possible away from the curb, hugging the walls of houses, in case someone in a passing vehicle tries to snatch me. I think crime fiction plays into that fear, and also the desire to know what we are up against, or could be up against. It renders concrete what can feel like a vague threat.
Friends can spend hours online, reading about serial killers. I myself became fascinated by the Black Dahlia case in the 1940s, after reading a reference to it in a crime novel. The female author Jessie Keane says that consuming crime fiction allows women to examine violence “in a safe way”. In other words, we are attempting to address our fears. This is probably the case for me, someone who has never been able to stomach onscreen violence (I was that child at the Halloween sleepover, threatening to tell the others’ mums if they didn’t turn off The Texas Chainsaw Massacre).
There is something addictive about fear, about pushing your tolerance for darkness to the limits. But I have to admit, I do prefer it when the female victims, having finally had enough of all the torture and the rape and the violence, turn vigilante and embark on some hatred-fuelled murdering. In the last two books I have read women turn the tables on their attackers. As a woman reader who got away, in real life, there’s probably something in that.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2014
Ted Cruz mocked for tantrum about Gorsuch siding with Native American rights: ‘Way to channel Andrew Jackson’
In a surprise move on Thursday, Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch sided with Native American rights, ruling that Oklahoma must honor a treaty granting tribal sovereignty over much of the eastern portion of the state.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) took to Twitter to vent his outrage over the decision.
Neil Gorsuch & the four liberal Justices just gave away half of Oklahoma, literally.
Manhattan is next. https://t.co/Ic9gqqznJp
Trump is cracking as his distraction superpowers falter amid the coronavirus pandemic
Donald Trump is dumb — so dumb he literally suggested on live television that scientists should explore injecting household cleaners into people's lungs to cure the coronavirus. But due to what appears to be a serious and undiagnosed personality disorder — his niece Mary Trump, who is a clinical psychologist, suggests it's likely narcissism or sociopathy — Trump managed to stumble backwards into a strategy that works well with the 24-hour cable news ecosystem of national politics. Actually, "strategy" may be too strong a word, but it's inarguable that Trump's short attention span, impulsive nature and all-consuming corruption have meant a constant deluge of scandals and outrages, with each one knocking the last one out of the headlines.
The Supreme Court just wimped out on Trump’s tax returns — and handed him a political victory
A cowardly Supreme Court punted today on the criminal investigation into whether Donald Trump and his Trump Organization are major league criminal tax cheats.
The high court held that while Trump cannot shield his tax and business records from New York State prosecutors, the president is entitled to pursue procedural challenges. That could means months, even years, of delay in the criminal investigation by Manhattan prosecutors into whether Trump is a garden-variety tax criminal.
In its weaselly Trump decision the Supreme Court stood yet again for the idea that you can get as much justice as you can afford, as I’ll explain below.