Skip to content

Stephen Moyer Thinks You Want To Be Raped By Your Vampire Boyfriend

It’s true! In a lovely quote from Nylon (which I learned about via Kelsey Wallace at Bitch Blogs, and HEY STAY TUNED FOR AN EXCITING ANNOUNCEMENT on that front, by the way; see also Renee’s excellent post) Stephen Moyer, who plays a vampire on some show I do not watch called True Blood, uncovers the key to every woman’s deepest erotic desires – forced sex from imaginary monsters:

“The thing about vampirism is that it taps into a female point of view – you have an old-fashioned gentleman with manners who is a fucking killer… it’s an interesting duality, because in our present society it would be an odd thing for a woman to say, ‘I want my man to be physical with me.’ How, as a modern man, can you fucking work that?  It’s one thing to be polite and gentle… But when do you know it’s OK to crawl out of the mud and rape her [as Bill does in one scene]?… It’s difficult stuff for a bloke, but a vampire gets away with it…. I think that’s the attraction of the show – it’s looking back at a romantic time when men were men, but they were still charming.”

For the record, Stephen, it is probably not ever “OK” to crawl out of the mud and “rape” your special lady friend. Surprisingly, the act of rape, BY DEFINITION, is never “OK” with the raped person! Oh, and also the scene to which our pal Steve refers looks pretty darn consensual, what with Anna Paquin grabbing his face and sucking the hell out of it once she realizes he is, in fact, her vampire boyfriend. So, let’s not focus on how gross Steve is! For once! I mean, he seems pretty gross, but maybe that is not news. What is news, apparently, is that women are capable of something I will refer to as “fantasy.”

Basically, we hear all the time about how the imaginary characters on which women get off actually reveal their true need to be socially dominated and in all other ways treated badly by the dudefolk. Girls like Edward from Twilight, which means they want to be stalked by pasty whiners. Girls like Bill from True Blood, which means they want to be grabbed by the ankle and ravished by a guy who just recently crawled (naked!) out of his own grave. Girls like Don Draper from Mad Men, which means they want to be cheated on, cheated with, lied to, denied careers and/or sexually assaulted in the midst of a routine business dinner. What we don’t hear so much about is that people are getting off on those things within the context of their own imaginations. Within their imaginations, where they are by definition in control.

I mean: there are a lot of unrealistic elements in the fantasy of Don, or Edward, or Bill, or whatever. Edward sparkles, and can fly. Bill, we are meant to believe, has been alive since the Civil War. (We are also apparently meant to believe that he has a “Southern” “accent,” LOLZ. Sookehhh!) Don Draper looks like Jon Hamm, which is just flat-out implausible. People don’t look like that! It’s all CGI, I tell you! Smoke and mirrors! Two out of these three dudes are vampires – and yes, there is a long history of the sexy vampire boyfriend motif in pop culture, from Dracula to Buffy, and no, I don’t entirely get that or find it attractive, but I will note that two consistent characteristics of the “vampire boyfriend” are that he is (a) very powerful and dangerous and scary and (b) totally not real. Seriously. No matter how many Goth clubs you go to, no matter how many pale weird-looking dudes you poke on Facebook, no matter how many times you wander around a graveyard in a flimsy shift caressing your neck provocatively, you will never get an actual vampire to date you. Which, I would argue, is a large part of the appeal. These things are divorced from reality, and that is the point.

People, including women, often like to fantasize about stuff that they don’t or won’t or couldn’t do in real life. That can include undead serial killer boyfriends, or, for some women, rough or forced or “dangerous” sex with other human beings. It makes sense that some women like to play with these ideas, in a context wherein they are in power, and can turn off the TV or close the book or in all other ways utilize their power of veto and walk away from a scene at the very moment that it starts to make them uncomfortable. It’s fine, and it’s normal, and it’s how human sexual desire works. Humans like to transgress. Sometimes we like to give up our power, or pretend to. What we don’t like is to have that power taken from us in a permanent, non-consensual, real, harmful way.

So, no: no matter what their fantasies, women do not all actually want to be raped or abused, women are not all “innately” attracted to dangerous or abusive men, and we definitely do NOT all long for a time when traditional masculinity reigned and men would open doors for you and pay for all your dates and also sexually assault you whenever they felt like it. Rape is, by definition, not wanted; I can’t think of a single woman who would go out with a man if she consciously believed he would hurt or kill her; and the whole “when men were men and sexism was rampant and women were totally cool with that and enjoyed it” scenario is just about as patently unreal as any given book in the Twilight series.

The difference is that the idea of women secretly craving abuse and sexual mistreatment is mostly a male fantasy. And a popular one, at that. And this fantasy, unlike the vampire boyfriend fantasy, is actually not fine – because all too often, men actually buy into it, and refuse to acknowledge the stated boundaries of others or pretend that those boundaries don’t actually exist. They think they know what we “really” want; they think that we’re just not saying it, for whatever reason, because women are liars or confused or “corrupted” or “betrayed” by feminism. The problem with Stephen Moyer’s statement is that he seems to be getting his fantasy and “women’s” fantasies confused. And his fantasy is a lot scarier than vampires.

29 Comments

  1. ChelseaWantsOut wrote:

    This is excellent. I have to go quote it to everyone in the universe now.

    I wish I had something intelligent to add, but I’ve been animating all day and my brain is full of arcs and squash and stretch and key poses.

    Although, incidentally, it is also full of sexy vampires, because I’ve been listening to Buffy while animating.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 5:10 pm | Permalink
  2. Ashley wrote:

    As I recall, Dracula was pretty much all about the fear of infiltration by foreigners as well as female sexuality.

    The most violent thing that happens to a woman in that book happens at the hands of her husband (previously seen trying not to get raped by three evil vampire ladies and one big gay vampire), who has to drive a stake through her chest in order to vanquish her vampire ass so that she’ll stop leaving the graveyard to drink baby blood. It’s one of the ugliest lady-hating, symbolic rape scenes in nineteenth century lit.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 6:31 pm | Permalink
  3. NIKA wrote:

    What an incredibly stupid thing to say. Wow. I mean, just when DO you know it’s ok to rape her?

    I think the other thing really telling in the quote is equating a man being “physical” with a woman to RAPE. Really? What if she just wanted a hug? I mean, we might as well include both sides of THAT spectrum.

    As a tangent, having never seen any actual clips from True Blood until right now, and having just read the first book out of beach-inspired curiosity, I find it interesting that a scene which originated with the main character being nearly attacked by her insensate vampire boyfriend has been turned into…gratuitous sex for tv? Why can’t the main character be faced with violence and use her sexuality to save her life? I mean, the book was nothing to write home about but it at the very least did that.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
  4. Gr3y wrote:

    I’m not sure I see where you and him are disagreeing. You’re talking about women’s fantasies, and he’s talking about a show that’s based on a series of books that based on the author’s fantasy jack off material.

    I can see how the line “How, as a modern man, can you fucking work that?” can be read in a few different ways.

    My girlfriend (who is an avid reader of yours), seems to think that he’s trying to see a way to incorporate grave based sexual assaults into his daily routine.

    I see it as a question of how he’s supposed to play a character who is very different from himself. It can’t be easy to play a dark, penetrative, predatory, monster and remain likeable.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 7:09 pm | Permalink
  5. kel d wrote:

    Oh, you had me up to “his fantasy is scarier”

    Even if he *does* fantasise about rape, it is still fantasy and if a lady can know the difference between her rape fantasy and reality then so can Stephen Moyer even if he can’t put on a southern Civil War era accent.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 10:05 pm | Permalink
  6. Heyoka wrote:

    I have to admit, I keep reading the title as “Stephanie Meyer Thinks [...]“.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 10:16 pm | Permalink
  7. orlando wrote:

    Since Stephen finds this such “difficult stuff for a bloke”, how nice that we can help make things easy for him.

    Hey Stephen! Listen up! NEVER. All fixed now? Good.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 11:05 pm | Permalink
  8. Vee wrote:

    Yes, yes, yes to all of this. Because we can *turn it off*. I really don’t know why consent keeps being such a complicated concept. If there is none, don’t have sex. There, easy enough, right?

    Or so you would think. I mean, a prosecutor in my country (Sweden) recently went on record in an interview as saying both that rapes within a relationship are not real rapes, and sex without the woman’s consent within a relationship is “not cool” but doesn’t deserve two years of jail. FANTASTIC.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 12:52 am | Permalink
  9. Fuchsia wrote:

    Well, Stephen is an actor who is (inarticulately and unsuccessfully) trying to hit on an explanation as to the appeal of the character he’s playing. However you are totally right about the way people seem to take such random ramblings seriously, interpreting them as The Real Truth About What Women Want and what really concerns me is the fact that such suggestions are often offered the backing of (pseudo)science. The amazing Greg Downey over at Neuroantropology (http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/06/29/chicks-dig-aholes-evolutionary-psych-on-sex-1/) wrote a piece a long while ago about the “finding” by a group of evolutionary psychologists that women prefer narcissistic, Machiavellian psychopaths – with James Bond serving as the prime example of such female innate inclinations. Oh, but he’s fictionary! And most of his fans are actually guys, not girls! And taking a brief stock of the actual world around you will quickly prove the opposite! Talk about confusing fantasy with reality….

    Btw, I also think this narrative serves equally well as fodder for the Nice Guy epidemic as it does as a justification for bad behaviour. “I’m not a ruthless MI6 spy with sci-fi gadgets that help me catch dangerous criminals nor have I recently returned from the dead. *That*’s why she won’t go out with me.”

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 2:41 am | Permalink
  10. FlameWriting wrote:

    Men apparently all fantasize about being dominated by women so by Stephen Moyer’s reasoning we should totally be living in a matriarchy by now.

    There’s another interesting aspect to the whole ‘rape fantasy’ thing, and how it’s TOTALLY NOT a desire to be raped in real life by ANYONE. It’s that it’s borne out of centuries of women being culturally conditioned that it’s shameful to know what you want, to say what you want, to even *want* anything at all or be in any way forward about sex. What many women are actually fantasizing about could simply be receiving pleasure without having to ask for it. Like, it’s ok to enjoy it because you had no choice in the matter, because the second you are given choice you should want to do only what makes the man happy and not just enjoy anything for yourself.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:50 am | Permalink
  11. Sarah wrote:

    GR3Y and KEL D:

    I’m completely with Sady on this. Just reflect on the quote from Stephen Moyer:

    “..it’s an interesting duality, because in our present society it would be an odd thing for a woman to say, ‘I want my man to be physical with me.’ How, as a modern man, can you fucking work that? It’s one thing to be polite and gentle… But when do you know it’s OK to crawl out of the mud and rape her [as Bill does in one scene]?… It’s difficult stuff for a bloke, but a vampire gets away with it.”

    That makes me think 3 things:

    1. How does being ‘physical’ equate to rape? I completely agree with Nika on that – it’s a worrying leap. And it also suggests, I think, that any woman who wants a man to be physical (in whatever way) is somehow inviting rape. Which is obviously not true.

    2. It really is NEVER ok to rape someone (quite right, Orlando!) – and I think any show, even a fantasy show, that tries to imply that in some circumstances it might be, or that women want to be raped and rapists are therefore just responding to their deepest desires, is wrong, and it should be called out.

    3. Isn’t the whole point that vampires are evil? So maybe a vampire raping someone is because they’re evil, because rape is evil? Or is Moyer trying to say that men secretly fantasise about being vampires because then it’s ‘ok’ to rape someone, which is what all men secretly want to do? If so, I think if I were a man I’d be insulted.

    I have to say, I’ve only ever seen part of one episode of True Blood, whilst visting the States this summer, but two things really struck me: lots and lots and lots of gratuitous (and cringy) sex; and lots and lots and lots of misogynistic dialogue / plots and female stereotyping. What gets me, is, this is a celebrated TV show from HBO, but I also think that actually I think it’s pretty offensive. And I don’t think the vampire theme should ever be used as an excuse for gratuitous sex / violence / rape – I think there are much cleverer ways of exploring the vampire theme (as, sorry to be nerdy, I think Joss Whedon did with ‘Buffy’ where he used vampires as a parallel for human evil, not an escape into some sort of fantasy whered violent behaviour is ok because its vampires doing it).

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 3:53 am | Permalink
  12. eva wrote:

    The title of your piece is what is offensive. It really pisses me off when writers of commentary willfully misunderstand someone’s meaning so they can go off on a rant and get attention. He quite obviously was using the word as a shortcut, sort of poetic licence, to differentiate beteen sex that comes from sudden, urgent desire and romantic lovemaking.
    I’m sure he’d gladly take the word back. If he intended the comment for publication, his main fault is not dumbing down how he speaks to an American audience.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 7:31 am | Permalink
  13. Sady wrote:

    Dear Vampire Boyfriend Fans:

    Calm yourselves.

    Insisting that someone doesn’t mean what he very clearly said isn’t doing you any favors. He is not “using poetic license.” He is not talking about his “character.” He uses the phrase “female point of view,” referring to women, says that what they want is “an old fashioned gentleman with manners who is a fucking killer,” sets up a dichotomy between modern/non-forceful men and old-timey/forceful men (while also somehow saying that old-timey/forceful men were, somehow, more polite), suggests that modern women can’t ask men to be “physical” with them (which, in the context of words like “killer” and “rape,” can very clearly mean “to do harm to”) and that modern men have somehow lost that essential thing (could it be… UNDISPUTED PRIVILEGE?) that allows them to do non-consensual sexual harm to women, which women want. Then he says that the show is good because it gives women that!

    What he is saying is really, clearly, recognizably traceable to a widespread variety of anti-feminist backlash, which says that NOT being abusive, controlling, or otherwise “alpha” (to quote the PUAs) in relation to women makes women sexually unhappy, because women don’t like “nice guys.” This line of thought also presumes that women lie about not liking “nice guys,” or don’t realize that they don’t like them, and that men know women better than women know themselves. This line of thought is not based in reality – therefore, it is a “fantasy.” This line of thought legitimizes and leads to abuse. Therefore, it is not an acceptable “fantasy.” This is because practitioners do not always confine it to their personal masturbation daydreams: this is a “fantasy” that masquerades as psychology and social theory, and proponents of it encourage men to go and act it out on the bodies and in the lives of real live women, with or without their consent.

    I’m really sorry I had to do an in-depth textual analysis of the post you just read. But some of you seem pretty fucking intent on NOT reading it, or not understanding the words on the screen.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 7:48 am | Permalink
  14. Tawny wrote:

    Basically, I love this blog because there are things I have not thought out that I go about thinking I have, then I come here and Sady Explains It All For Me! I am like OH, DUH almost every time I read an explanation for something here (example: lady rape fantasies, which I also have).

    So, thank you.

    Also: whether or not dude meant his character or himself or Modern Man, it is a pretty heinous thing to put on paper. Most people are not deconstruction scientists capable of critical thought, and when they read this quote they are definitely not taking away the things that the vampire boyfriend apologists are taking away.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 8:12 am | Permalink
  15. Kelly wrote:

    This. This is why you are amazing. Because there are things that sit wrong with me and I can’t explain why and there are things that feel ok to me but I can’t articulate exactly why, but you. You can explain it all so plainly that it seems obvious. Brilliant.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 8:50 am | Permalink
  16. snobographer wrote:

    You know what’s funny about that whole “chicks dig abusive assholes and are turned off by nice guys” line of thinking? What’s funny is that, in every account of an abusive relationship I’ve ever heard, the guy started out nice and gradually got more abusive as the woman became more emotionally invested in the realationship. So obviously the lure isn’t the abusive assholery, right? If it is, how come I’m always hearing how the abusive guy who nearly killed his girlfriend was all sweet and sensitive at the beginning of the relationship?
    Guys must have some idea how full of shit they are. How can they not? It’s so transparent.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:39 am | Permalink
  17. Scott wrote:

    This line of thought is not based in reality – therefore, it is a “fantasy.” This line of thought legitimizes and leads to abuse. Therefore, it is not an acceptable “fantasy.” This is because practitioners do not always confine it to their personal masturbation daydreams: this is a “fantasy” that masquerades as psychology and social theory, and proponents of it encourage men to go and act it out on the bodies and in the lives of real live women, with or without their consent.

    I’m with you through most of this, but I think you’re coming down a bit too hard on the “fantasy” when it’s really an inability to separate that fantasy from reality (and the subsequent psychology and theory that comes from that) that is the issue.

    I think it’s okay as a person to have fantasies that put them into (for example) a position of power over something or someone that makes them feel powerless. Whether this fantasy life is lived through movies, video games, or in your own head as masturbation material.

    The problem is when someone begins to believe that these fantasies are acceptable behavior in the real world. This doesn’t change based on the sex (or race or sexual preference) of the person having the fantasy.

    By all means we need to squash the idea that “women have rape fantasies and therefor secretly want unwanted sex” but I’m not ready to advocate thought policing people for whether their fantasy is acceptable or not.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:47 am | Permalink
  18. Jackie wrote:

    “Girls like Bill from True Blood, which means they want to be grabbed by the ankle and ravished by a guy who just recently crawled (naked!) out of his own grave.” I remember watching that scene and wincing in anticipated pain for Sookie, the heroine, because all I could think about was the nasty vaginal infections/UTIs she was most likely going to get after being roughly penetrated by muddy vampire dick. It certainly was consensual, but that whole-heat-of-the-moment-no-don’t-bother-to-wear-a-condom-or-wash-off-your-nasty-graveyard-penis-thing might really suck later. So, Bill may not be a rapist, but he sure as hell didn’t learn very much about women’s lady parts in the 150 whatever years he was around. Obviously, I’m not very good with the whole “divorc[ing these things]from reality” bit.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:52 am | Permalink
  19. Sady wrote:

    @Scott: That’s a fair point, and well phrased.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:53 am | Permalink
  20. kel d wrote:

    You know, the rape scene that got to me the most in that show was the one with Jason (the human). But there we are.

    I think Stephen Moyer just doesn’t know what he is talking about and he is underlining that most people in our culture don’t know what they are talking about.
    I am glad that he knew that what his character was doing in the graveyard was rape (even if it stopped being after she recognised him), that shows some insight but there we are.

    Our culture has things sewn up. If a woman is sexually frustrated, now her boyfriend can say “it is because I do housework and you would prefer a real man” etc etc.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 11:17 am | Permalink
  21. Roxie wrote:

    Sady, I absolutely agree with what you’re saying here. When I’ve tried to convey this to some males I know they find it hard to imagine and for some reason can’t separate the idea of fantasy rough sex from actual rape.

    One thing though, Edward can’t fly. He just jumps really far.

    Sarah: I would suggest you keep watching the show to get a better feel. Sookie isn’t always smart, but she is very in control and unafraid to express her independence

    On the whole, the show is an improvement on the books.

    Jackie: Those were my thoughts exactly. He should have a shower & she is probably dry & it wouldn’t be at all comfortable. It’s supposed to be this “OMG I THOUGHT MY LOVER HAD LIQUEFIED! BUT REMAINS UNDEAD! <3!"

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 1:35 pm | Permalink
  22. Kripa wrote:

    Um, anyone else notice how similar “Stephen Moyer” and “Stephenie Meyer” look? Just saying.

    Friday, August 28, 2009 at 1:39 pm | Permalink
  23. OlderThanDirt wrote:

    @Roxie, I haven’t seen the show but I’ve read the books. Sookie in the books is very strong, in control and intelligent. She is also someone who doesn’t enjoy being raped. POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD. The only time that Bill rapes Sookie in the books is when she has just rescued him from being tortured. She’s about to transport him while he’s unconscious and it’s daylight so she’s put him in the trunk of a car. She gets pushed in with him and when he wakes up, he’s ravenous and starts feeding and then rapes her. When her crying and screaming his name finally gets through to him, he stops immediately (no completing the act) and is appalled at what he’s done. Sookie is shattered by the experience, being raped by the man she loves.

    I relate the whole thing to contrast it with the scene being described from True Blood. There’s no point in the book where Sookie becomes a willing participant. It’s exactly the opposite despite the fact that it is the man she loves. In fact, part of the horror is that the perpetrator is Bill.

    If the series is better than the books, I have yet to hear how.

    Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 8:00 am | Permalink
  24. masagoroll wrote:

    I heart you, Sady!

    I am in a Twilight community on LJ (shameful, I know), and people have been discussing this quote and their disgust with it quite a lot! (The comm I am in is kind of anti-Edward, though, so we are not fond of vampire boyfriends in general!)

    Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 11:34 am | Permalink
  25. mouse wrote:

    @ Scott

    I think part of the difference between male rape fantasy and female rape fantasy is the imbalance of power between the two groups. The power imbalance means men are continuously having their ability to abuse, control and dominate women sexually reinforced as a neutral to positive circumstance. So when a man fantasizes about raping a woman there is not the same motivation to distinguish fantasy from reality because rape is unlikely to be costly to him physically, emotionally or socially. The consequence is our current situation where somewhere between 1 out of 4 and 1 out of 6 women are sexually abused in their lifetimes.

    No, it would not be a good idea to try and police fantasy. However, in the case of male rape fantasy it would be fair to say that the cultural circumstances that those fantasies take place in encourage a blurring between fantasy and reality. Unless the man is very aware the reasons why the fantasy is not an okay reality, and retains ahold of them, it can contribute to dangerous situations for women. Not only because it might lead to him raping someone, but because even if it doesn’t it can contribute to a background acceptance where men do not find it costly physically, emotionally or socially to rape.

    @ Sady

    This was just brilliant. I’ve read a bit in the past about why women indulge in rape fantasy, but I love the way you broke it down and spelled it out so clearly.

    Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 8:49 pm | Permalink
  26. Christina wrote:

    One of the real problematic things with the “women have rape fantasies” tack is that even though the idea of the “rape fantasy” is widespread, it’s not actually a desire to be raped. More aptly put, it’s a ravishment fantasy, where there is the illusion of nonconsent and hence an illicit thrill. I know this mislabeling is widespread, which is why I’m not going to jump to the conclusion that the actor thinks actually raping someone is OK. Perhaps someone should shoot an email to him or his publicist for clarification, though, because really the clarification should come right from the horse’s mouth. He should be aware of how his words are being received– that is, taken literally, they’re freaking disturbing.

    Twilight, though… ugh. That’s a manual grooming little girls to unconditionally love sociopaths. UGH.

    Sunday, August 30, 2009 at 3:39 pm | Permalink
  27. Devonian wrote:

    One thing though, Edward can’t fly. He just jumps really far.
    “You can fly?!”
    “No. Jump Good.”

    Monday, August 31, 2009 at 12:41 am | Permalink
  28. Roxie wrote:

    @OlderThanDirt
    Yay! I’ve read all the books too. But the part they’re talking about here isn’t that one. It’s from the first book when she thought Bill had been fried/liquefied.

    The scene in the series is different than the scene from the books.

    In the series, Sookie sees that it is him, kisses him, then dirty (literally. lots of dirt. ew) sex ensues.

    I think the series is better in the way that it expands on characters that barely receive a crumb in the books (Tara, Lafayette, Tara’s mom). They also make those characters poc. They’re so well written & acted! I think there is an advantage in the show by not having to be in Sookie’s head all of the time.

    Monday, August 31, 2009 at 8:31 pm | Permalink
  29. Rachael wrote:

    Stephen Moyer…Stephenie Meyer…

    This confused me terribly.

    Thursday, September 3, 2009 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

One Trackback/Pingback

  1. links for 2009-08-29 « Embololalia on Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 11:05 am

    [...] Tiger Beatdown › Stephen Moyer Thinks You Want To Be Raped By Your Vampire Boyfriend The difference is that the idea of women secretly craving abuse and sexual mistreatment is mostly a male fantasy. And a popular one, at that. And this fantasy, unlike the vampire boyfriend fantasy, is actually not fine – because all too often, men actually buy into it, and refuse to acknowledge the stated boundaries of others or pretend that those boundaries don’t actually exist. They think they know what we “really” want; they think that we’re just not saying it, for whatever reason, because women are liars or confused or “corrupted” or “betrayed” by feminism. The problem with Stephen Moyer’s statement is that he seems to be getting his fantasy and “women’s” fantasies confused. And his fantasy is a lot scarier than vampires. (tags: tv trueblood sexualviolence consent101 rapeapology) [...]