Kalbear, on 20 December 2011 - 03:45 AM, said:
A few things here: the trope is that she's getting institutionalized rape for being a lesbian. That's what it matches, not necessarily what happens in the text. As it turns out in the text her being a lesbian is what causes her to be raped; the implication by you (that lesbianism is necessary as a motivator because you can't push on her family and you can't torture her) is that if she weren't a lesbian, she couldn't be coerced into being raped.[/left][/font][/color]
Kalbear, you're not even making any sense any more. She could absolutely have been coerced into having sex without being a lesbian; being a lesbian is absolutely NOT what "causes her to be raped". Making her a lesbian simply makes more dramatic sense, in giving us more sympathy for her and making her plight even more miserable.
Terez's character may not be defined by her being a lesbian
This is correct. Despite your previous claims to the contrary, her character is NOT defined by her lesbianism.
but her biggest moment of drama in the book (and really, she gets only one at all) is entirely related to her being a lesbian.
No, it isn't. It is mostly related to her refusal to have sex with Jezal -- regardless of her sexual orientation.
it's that she's also having that used against her as a means to blackmail is a problem.
But -- for about the thousandth time -- she is NOT having her lesbianism "used against her". She is having her LOVER used against her, REGARDLESS of whether that lover is male or female.
No, we see all the sexiness before it.
There isn't much sexiness to it, actually. They swap spit with squelching noises. Jezal grunts. Terez quotes Glokta. Where's the sexiness??
and a very clear arousal of Jezal
Oh please, because he gets a tingle and grunts??
and it's written from his PoV.
In case you didn't notice, Jezal is one of only 4 POV characters (uhhh....is it 5? I'm nearly asleep right now, I forget!) throughout the trilogy. Terez is not one of those 4 characters. Logically, therefore, the scene shows Jezal's train of thought but not Terez's. Duh.
We don't get to get to the actual humping, but it doesn't change the fact that the situation is heavily and overtly sensualized.
It is mostly "sensualized" in unappetizing ways -- spit noises, grunting, Glokta-quoting. The only real "sensualism" is only there to show Jezal being oblivious.
By glorify I mean that he spends a lot of detail on it
But he doesn't actually "spend a lot of detail on it" at all. Literally, **at all** -- since the rape itself isn't actually anywhere present in the text, period.
In this specific case the argument was that Abercrombie could have completely removed the scene with Jezal and still had the desired effect of making Glokta a horrible person.
Sure, but we wouldn't have seen Jezal being clueless; we wouldn't have seen Terez capitulating; we wouldn't have seen how the encounter between Jezal and Terez could look so different from their two perspectives. A lot would have been missed.
I think that given that Terez's relationship is a secret (when having secret lovers is not at all anything special in the world),
Gawd, you keep saying this as though it's something true and relevant.
Queens can't safely take male lovers before they produce heirs. Obviously, that would hopelessly confuse issues of inheritance, and seriously piss off the king (not to mention Bayaz). So Terez could never safely flaunt her lover, regardless of whether she's lesbian or not, until after heirs have been produced with trustworthy bloodlines.
I also think that there is certainly no clear-cut statement in the series that says homosexuality is acceptable
OH my FREAKING.......sigh, you're driving me to expletives again.
Do you really expect authors to go around saying "oh btw, homosexuality is perfectly acceptable in this society"???? I mean, REALLY??? Please oh please oh please, TRY to get serious.
And now it's after 3:30 here, and I'm going to bed!