Comments on: Homophobia in the Sookie Stackstackhouse Books and True Blood’s Response

By: Erica

Erica — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 03:17:15 +0000

At the time I wrote this, I hadn’t read Dead and Gone. But yes, Mel’s story is one of the best examples of the worst homophobia in the books. Harris seems to be especially bad when writing gay men.

By: Scott

Scott — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 18:01:29 +0000

The worst book for homophobia in the series is a late one, “Dead and Gone”. In that novel [SPOILER ALERT!], Jason’s friend Mel Hart has been exiled from the Hotshot were-panther community (that’s Calvin’s village) for being gay/refusing to breed. That’s repulsive enough, but he has had a crush on Jason Stackhouse and, when Jason’s wife flings homophobic insults at him, Mel lashes out at her, leaving her wounded (later to be killed by others). Mel is torn apart by the Hotshot were-panthers, the same inbred bigots who created the situation by exiling him in the first place. Whatever Charlaine Harris thinks of herself (non-racist, non-homophobic, etc.), it’s not reflected in her writings.

By: Passerby

Passerby — Sat, 18 Dec 2010 04:52:59 +0000

Um, can you tell me why exactly *you* are conflating “pedophile” with “gay”? You read “pedophile” and overlaid “gay” because it definitely isn’t in the text.

Godric is a completely different character from Godfrey – they even have different names. The text clearly states that Godfrey has sex with and kills children – it never says that he is gay, or that he has a preference for male children at all – that is all from your head. You’ve overlaid gay onto a character who is a pedophile, through your own reading of the scenes, because it certainly doesn’t say that in the text.

Farrell is the gay character, not Godfrey. The reason that AB replaced the Godfrey character with Godric is because it’s easier to sympathise with someone who hasn’t done wrong – and thus have Eric weeping over the death of a worthy character, rather than have Sookie weeping over the death of an unworthy character.

As for your assertion that all of the gay characters are killed off in this book, that would be Lafayette, the only gay character killed – not the “all” – as Farrell is saved by Sookie.

I also think if you re-read Dead Until Dark again, you’ll find that it is in fact a heterosexual sex act – Janella is giving oral sex to Malcolm. Not only that, but if you read your books again, you will find that Tara and Eggs are in fact, white people. Race is dealt with in a different manner in the books – in that rather than step into the rather fraught black/white racial tensions, Harris instead uses vampires/white humans to represent that.

By: Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:58:27 +0000

The virginity issue at least gets two mitigating factors: bad as it is, it does persist as a trope in a large part of the romance genre, under which these books might be categorized, so it gets a “conistent with its peers” excuse; and Sookie’s virginity didn’t feel pushed as a morality issue as much as a pragmatic one (no one wants to date a gal who can actually read their minds). So that didn’t bug me nearly as much as it might have.

I was really glad to hear the TV show substituted “Hep D” for “Vampire AIDS”, but I don’t think that would help with the “See? See? Gays are out to infect your kids with STDs!” issue. Not having watched the show, I don’t know whether that aspect of that scene was improved.

By: Erica

Erica — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:33:45 +0000

@Nicole — There were definitely undertones in the first book, but it didn’t feel like the sludge hammer of the second book. I think the entire premise of vampires getting equal rights, a la gay rights (especially when it’s not established in the universe that gay people have even achieved civil rights), is problematic given the evil nature of vampires.

I was okay with Sookie being uncomfortable with the vampire orgy, give the consent issue, & while problematic as Harris’ first sex act choice, things didn’t really get bad until the vampire AIDS issue. (I see a lot of Sookie POV issues early on concerning sex as Harris’ idealized virginity state for Sookie, which is its own issue.) I do wonder if vampire AIDS shows up in the other books.

Yes, thank goodness for Lafayette.

By: Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 05:15:31 +0000

I was actually googling the topic of “homophobia and sookie stackhouse” because I wanted some confirmation that I wasn’t utterly hallucinating the homophobic overtones in Dead Until Dark. It’s interesting to hear the overtones continue through the series, but–wasn’t it already right there in the first book?

So Sookie goes looking for Bill at his house, and he has a bunch of vampire friends over who are enjoying a bit of an orgy with their human toys. Sookie is immediately repulsed because one of the (male) vampires is receiving oral from his (male) human toy. That’s not my problem. Being an unwilling audience to someone else’s sex acts is no fun, I get that. But the fact that the very first onstage example of homosexuality is bound up with disregard of bystander consent is a bit unsettling. But then my impression that Harris uses “gay” to signify “bad news” is cemented when the gay vamp then deliberately attempts to infect Bill with Vampire AIDS.

It would be bad enough if the most overtly gay character was also an antagonist. It’s much, much worse if that gay antagonist goes about attempting to harm the protagonists by living down to one of the cherished slanders perpetrated by homophobic pundits everywhere and trying to give Bill “the gay disease”.

Thank goodness for Lafayette, even if I barely remember that he actually was portrayed as gay in the novel (I knew he was in the show). I’m very sorry to hear Harris kills him off.

By: Erica

Erica — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:22:42 +0000

@Mona — Yeah, I’m planning on reading the next book mostly because I already own it. But I don’t know how much further I’m going to read in the series. (That and I have a bookcase full of things I’d perhaps rather read.) I expect fluffy and I expect the writing to be shallow. It’s about 98% comprehensible, which hits higher than certain other popular vampire books I’ve read excerpts from. But this was rather like a smack across the head.

@Carole — Interesting. Not quite sure I’ll get that far, but you never know what I’ll read next. You’ve definitely peaked my curiosity to see if the 2nd book lowered your expectations so much the other homophobia wasn’t so bad.

By: Carole

Carole — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 05:11:01 +0000

There are some later books in the series dealing with a couple of lesbian characters that are also homophobic in a weird way. I can’t say more without spoiling it for you, but for some reason it never felt as homophobic to me as the second book did. Perhaps this is because the second book really lowered my expectations. I’ll be curious to see what you think when you get there.

By: Mona

Mona — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:12:21 +0000

Oh, thanks for this. Will not read the books, then (am enjoying the tv shows though, despite its flaws).

By: Erica

Erica — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:52:27 +0000

You were definitely the friend I was referencing who warned me that the second book was the weakest. I imagine I’ll be picking up the third book soon, now that I’ve gotten this review done & that I bought it before reading the second one.

I definitely agree that Harris would consider herself very gay-positive. I do think that a lot of current homophobia is causal and unknowing and unfortunately it tends to crop up places that have issues with “traditional values.” Or whatever they’re calling it these days. Of course, the causal is the place where we get the most bingo cards and derailing & the hardest to deal with hurt feelings, while feeling the need or obligation to educate and all the problems with that.