Speak Up Saturday: Sex Scenes

[yourlibrarian]

A lot has changed in the last 20 years for U.S. television in terms of explicit sexual portrayals and explicit discussion of sexual acts. I came across an article which argued for what makes one well done (Warning: Spoilers for Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 6):

"Yes, sex scenes in television today may have the ability to show as much nudity as they want, but two hot actors getting undressed does not a good sex scene make...reminder that great writing will always outclass shock value."

I think many might argue that character and slow build storytelling matters more than nudity, but what other elements make for a good sex scene, and which shows do you think have done it well?

What's more, what differences are there in non-U.S. productions that are better or worse when it comes to portraying sexual intimacy?

Comments

[feurioo]

Re: Brigerton and sex without violence. Personally, I noped really fast out of Bridgerton S1 when Daphne forced Simon to finish inside her. That wasn't romantic at all to me, and I never understood why they completely ignored what she had done to him, even if he'd been the one lying to her.

[shadowkat]

Well, it's not supposed to be romantic. It's kind of meant to be subversive - with the woman taking control of the situation. He lied to her - and married her with the intent of never having kids, but didn't tell her that at all. (If he had - she'd never have married him. It would have been a bad match for her.) Instead he made her believe she wasn't getting pregnant because it was her fault and he fully intended to have kids. (In short he was manipulating her to get what he wanted.) Keep in mind the time period? This is Regency - where if you don't have children, the woman is left with nothing. She inherits through the kids. So if anything were to happen to him - his cousin or a distant relative would inherit or someone three or four times removed, leaving her penniless. When she found out - she continued to have sex, but she kept him from pulling out. It didn't hurt him - it's not rape. If anything it is less painful for him to come inside than outside.
And less messy. And she's carrying the child - to protect her financial interests.

Basically he was being an ass.

It's important not to project modern sensibilities onto it - because in today's world, in most cultures, that wouldn't have been a problem. (Although it is unfortunately in others - we live in a patriarchial society, where women are still treated like property in many places in the world.)

Bridgerton isn't really a romance show a la Hallmark, it's social commentary kind of similar to Jane Austen. Shonda Rhimes and her show-runners are commenting on gender politics and inequalities along with racial and class inequalities through a satirical romantic series. I've not read the books, so I can't say whether they did it too or not.

[feurioo]

Agree to disagree. As a show banking on its own steaminess, I don't think that they handled it well, even if Simon was a big bastard himself.

We seem to approach the show from different angles: I watched it as a fun, romantic Regency romp because that's how it was advertised in several of the promos. While I would have loved to discover some of Austen's sensibilities in it, I thought the writing was, all around, rather forgettable in comparison.