On Tyrants & Tributes : Real World Lessons From The Hunger Games discussion

Personally, I don't find the lack of sex objectionable (to be honest, I didn't even notice it until someone pointed it out to me), but it seems like some people do (see, for example, http://www.film.com/movies/sex-in-the...).

I am curious as to what my classmates here think.

*spoilers for Mockingjay*




I would argue that sex between Katniss and Peeta is implied at the end of Mockingjay.
However, I think it's great that Katniss, never having "chosen" anyone until that point, doesn't feel any pressure to have sex, and that it happens organically as their relationship strengthens and heals. I think the fact it happens that way speaks to the respect both Peeta and Gale show towards her and her boundaries in general. Not that they are perfect in that area, but overall I would say there isn't a lot to complain about.

Oh wait, wouldn't the Finnick's forced prostitution (we could call it sex slavery/rape as well I think) in the Capitol factor in here? It's quite beautiful that he escapes that and gets to be with Annie for a time in District 13. Man, their wedding is a beautiful moment in the books.
There's also the implication that some of the other victors, Johanna being a possible example, refuse and lose all of their loved ones as a result. Did anyone else get that impression?

I'm glad theirs no sex in it. There's enough violence to make up for the lack of sex, by today's standards. =[

It's refreshing to see no sex in the book or movie.

As a mother, I'm glad there was no ostensible sex in this trilogy, as this series is marketed to young adults. I think our society glorifies sex.

I'm glad their is no sex in the Hunger Games. We already have enough of that everywhere else on TV.

[spoilers for Mockingjay]

Given the particular complexities of her love-triangle, and her age at the start of the series (16) it does make sense within the story that Katniss doesn't have a whole lot of sex till right at the end (she does have kids).
The first two books, when she's with Peeta, she really is too busy staying alive given that they're often competing in The Hunger Games. The other times she doesn't want to do anything because of Gale. Then she's kind of forced into an engagement with Peeta and Peeta knows that she lied to him about being in love with him. Then Peeta is taken by The Capitol and, at this point, she actually has fallen for him.
When she's with Gale in Mockingjay, she's usually too upset about Peeta... and then Gale starts building death traps...
And then Peeta shows up but he's crazy and he hates her...
Then, when he's no longer crazy, Gale and Peeta and Katniss all essentially live together in a war zone.

Maybe Collins wrote the complexities of the love-triangle as a way to ensure that Katniss never has sex ever :-p

I think that there's no explicit sex in the books is a good thing on Collins' part. In some series, it's all about the romance and so sex would be considered okay. But The Hunger Games is about Katniss trying to protect her family, and most importantly her sister, from a tyrannical government. The romance between Katniss and Peeta seems forced, to me, and not real until the very end of Mockingjay. Sex in the series would just be a distraction from the real story.

I'm fine with it not having sex. There is enough other things going on.

"The romance between Katniss and Peeta seems forced, to me, and not real until the very end of Mockingjay. Sex in the series would just be a distraction from the real story."

Well, yes, it WAS forced - by the Capitol! And I wholeheartedly agree. Even her choice at the end of Mockingjay seemed to be less about the concept of romance in today's oversexed culture and more about loyalty and growth.

Frankly, it was refreshing to see characters who weren't obsessing over sex; and I'm glad that Collins did not force the issue just to appease someone who might have wanted it - like others have said, it would have been a distraction, and "out of place" considering that she was focused on keeping herself and her family alive.

I don't find it weird that there is not any sex in the Hunger Games. I prefer a no sex I feel that an emotional connection does not need sex. I want to feel love between two characters through there actions but I do not care for one of those actions to be sexual activity. I just all around lose interest when sex is involved in a book or a film.

Sex was not necessary for the story. Without adding a scene for the sole purpose of sex how would it fit into the story? It wasn't needed and would have made the story less appropriate for younger audience it appeals to.

Sex is not necessary for these books because it's all about the struggle against good and evil and ultimate survival Katniss is too busy trying to survive and help Peta that the last thing on her mind is sex. Quite frankly, I thing that it is refreshing that a great story that doesn't involve sex for once.

There was quite a lot of implied sex(uality) in the series:

1) Attractive tributes being forced to prostitute themselves
2) District 12 girls giving themselves to Cray
3) Rumors that Katniss and Peeta were sexually-involved on the train (and the reader should catch the hint that the rumors were not just about the sleeping part)
4) Finnick, Johanna, and the other victors acting the way they did towards Katniss
5) Annie has a baby
6) Katniss has children at the end
7) Katniss knowing that Gale has probably been involved with other girls

May it was not so realistic that teenagers were not having sex, but here's another list on why I think it was a good idea that it was left out:

1) Takes too much attention away from the real story (I personally feel that even the love triangle was too much, too unrealistic for me)
2) There is already enough violence to put people on edge - Americans would probably be freaking out more if there was sex
3) Young adult fiction - kind of like the above. Less sales if parents don't want their children reading books that have sex scenes in them (or whatever) in them

NO its not weird because movies don't always need to have sex all the time and I don't think the Hunger Games need to have sex in them because its a great movie without it.

Its about the message more than any thing. When I seen the first movie I thought nothing of it. The emotions of the characters got to me and the whole matter. Many movies are sexed up enough, but this was based off a book based for young readers, and I am glad that it stayed grounded in that. I am attracted more to romance than sex in stories, you know naturally it can come behind the scenes any way. Romance is the bigger part of it.

Sex doesn't give anything to the story so why should be added?

In many of the dystopian novels Prof. Sturgis talks about, sex plays a major role in how it is a symbol of people not having any self morals or higher faith. In this book, it seems to be just as if the time they would have put towards sex, is put towards the fear of being tribute or that their child would be taken as tribute.

Jacob wrote: "It's refreshing to see no sex in the book or movie."

I agree wholeheartedly with you! It's one YA book that ISN'T trash.

The reason I love the (small bit of) romance in this book is: it is not about sex. Katniss does not love Peeta because he's so attractive to her and she wants to get his clothes off; it's because she wants HIM. The fact that they sleep with each other so often but don't have sex seems to imply that, for them, it's not about the pleasure and what they can get from each other; it's about the other person. For them, it's just enough to be NEXT to the frickin' person.
The story deals a lot with the subject of sex, but it's actually pretty negative about it; the Capitol glorifies sex and makes it a god, going along with the materialism. To me, this book is all about the decaying of OUR culture and how far it can go. The author sees our culture's love of materialism and entertainment, just like the Romans, and ultimately sex goes a lot into that.
I for one, do not find sex in books (or movies) at all tasteful. I don't necessarily mind implying it, but if it portrays shallowness, I still don't like it.