“Basically Nonconsensual:” Simon’s Sexual Assault in Bridgerton

TW: Sexual Assualt

Because this never seems to go away, I am once more diving into the this-should-not-even-be-a-question question as to whether what Daphne does to Simon is rape. I just read an Entertainment Weekly article where the writer stated that what Daphne does is “tantamount to rape in the eyes of some viewers” and “basically nonconsensual” in the show.

Me: *screams into pillow

Okay, let’s get a few things straight. What Daphne does to Simon in Bridgerton Season 1 is sexual assault. There's no getting around that, but I’ll lay out the case for anyone who doesn’t see it. And I don’t blame you for not seeing it: the show doesn’t act like it is, so it makes sense people missed it. But it is, for so many reasons.

First up, I hear a lot of people talk about how naive she is and that she doesn’t know her ass from a hole in the ground in this area, apparently. Or, I guess, maybe doesn’t know her ass from her vag, might be a better metaphor? But I digress. However ignorant she was at the beginning, she’s had a pretty rapid education about her own body via Simon, and the housekeeper gives her a much more academic understanding about baby making. But the crux is that she knows about the process of conception now, so no argument for ignorance can be made. She’s testing him. She doesn’t question him or see any need to maybe ask why he might be doing this, but instead is so obsessed with her own feelings she stops treating him as a human being.

Huh, sounds like pretty textbook dehumanization that rapists use often to justify their behavior. Their feelings, their trauma, their desires, are most important, and everyone else doesn’t matter. Which brings us to how she is deliberate about the positioning so it is in fact premeditated. This isn’t some in the moment choice; she has a look of determination and fury the whole time. She is not messing around. She’s furious, but she marches him to bed, shoves him down, climbs on top, with exactly one intention. Even if it wasn’t premeditated, it wouldn’t have been all right, but she is deliberate and intentional with every move she makes here. It’s honestly chilling. She even holds her legs to her chest afterward, trying to increase her chances of getting pregnant, even after that level of betrayal.

Now let’s talk a little about historical accuracy. Well, it's a show that has a colorblind aristocracy, historically inaccurate costumes, and a myriad of other creative choices that don't fit the time, so you can't pick and choose when to use that argument. And even if you could, then Simon is completely within his rights to lie to Daphne, use her sexually however he wants, have kids or not. And she had no right to retaliate because she's just property. How's that for historical accuracy? I’ll get more to the lying in a minute, but frankly, the “accuracy” is just not a consideration. If everyone was behaving exclusively by the standards of the day, Daphne would never have dared to challenge him. She would have primly sat by and done as he wished, never daring to challenge his authority as her husband. She’s allowed to behave out of societal norms all we want that way, so why should she not be held accountable for that behavior?

Absolutely at the time they would not have had the same understanding of rape as we do, but no one is saying that she should be held like, legally accountable for it because that wouldn't make sense in the time period. But "illegal" and "wrong" are not the same thing. You can't justify bad things by saying it isn't illegal or wasn’t at the time. If someone is a terrible friend, they're still a terrible friend even if there isn't legal consequences for that. If someone commits sexual assault, it was still sexual assault even if they didn't have the vocabulary to describe it.

Here's another one: if you get stabbed in the back, you're just as hurt even though you don't know what weapon did it to you. The behavior might have been justified in Daphne's eyes, but it is so not OK. Simon's lying was justified in his own. Why is there no argument for that being OK? Women were property back then. He doesn't owe her honesty. Why aren't people arguing that's OK then, if all we care about is the standards of the time? Seems to me like it has nothing to do with historical accuracy.

Yeah, he lied. But when I hear people say that as a justification for what Daphne did, it makes me sick. There’s nothing, no wrong plus a wrong, that ever make a right. How much more victim blaming will we allow? Saying that because of what she was wearing, because she was a tease, because she started something she didn’t intend to finish, because she changed her mind, the rape was somehow less…that’s the same as what people are doing here with Simon. Simon lied; he’s a flawed person, absolutely, but that does not make Daphne’s behavior justifiable.

Then we get to what, for me, is the absolute worst part. Simon says "Wait" TWICE in that scene, so you yahoos who still think a "no" is required got one. Two, actually. And, I don’t care what history says or what she knew or didn’t. I don’t care how mad you are or hurt you are. If the person you’re with tells you to wait, you wait.

Think about this, about Simon as the young boy who was dehumanized and treated as trash by his father, a boy who had to fight for control of his own body through a speech impediment that, from his perspective, separated him from the love and affection of his father. Think about how he has rended himself in two for this vow, for the pain that’s inside him, and to suddenly have that all snatched away by the woman he was beginning to trust?

And in our own world, it’s seen by some as a twisted form of female empowerment. Even from Chris Van Dusen himself, who in that same EW article, referred to this scene as “part of her journey” on “The Education of Daphne Bridgerton” that is the subtitle he gives Season 1. Education? Part of a journey? That’s the perspective we want to take on sexual assault?

It wrecks me. It baffles me. It hurts me. For all those who have suffered this, it shatters me. And for all those who have tried to voice this experience and had it dismissed or lessened, I am at a loss. For all those who are afraid to speak up because they fear they’ll be silenced, they fear the perpetrator’s actions will be justified away by those who seek to victim blame rather than face the truth, I am so sorry. I am sorry that media is furthering this problematic idea and I’m sorry that our society is too often still subscribing to it.

That’s why I won’t stop talking about this. That’s why we need to come together when things like this happen and make sure that the people who create media know that we won’t stand for it. And I do believe it was us speaking up about this, the collective outrage from the section of the fan base that did stand up for what’s right, that gave us the change for Season 2. That brought Bridgerton into a state of firm, vocal, and enthusiastic consent.

We can make the world a better place, a safer place, in media and, through that, the real world. Media is a reflection of our ideals, but it also helps to shape them. We’re raising the next generation on what they see as romantic or acceptable, and we need to demand that our shows do better. Show the rapes, but show them well. Show them for what they really are and the damage they do; don’t call it a “part of her journey.” Don’t call it “basically nonconsensual.” Don’t be a passive or active part of further silencing survivors.