The Actual Exploitation of Ian’s Sexuality, and Why We’re Actually Angry

An article titled “The Supposed Exploitation of Cameron Monaghan” has been released, and it’s such a mess that I don’t even know where to start. It isn’t an informed article by any means, but a straw man attack on a frustration we’ve been trying to express for a long time now. A frustration that is constantly belittled, and denied as an actual problem. To have that frustration misrepresented in a more visible way, is so damaging to a lot of us and a lot of us are genuinely hurt by it.

A major problem here is the fact that the author cannot discern between sexual exploitation, and on screen sex that is portrayed in a healthy manner:

I must admit that I find it quite ironic fans who have expressed concern over Ian Gallagher’s continued employment as a male dancer are usually the same ones clamoring for a hot & steamy sex scene between him & Mickey.

My question is, where is the irony? Ian Gallagher is a teenage boy about the age of 17/18 who has experienced a terrible trauma, and likely more trauma that went unseen. He is trying to cope with mental illness at the same time. In addition, his employment as a male dancer leaves him vulnerable to sexual abuse that we’ve seen occur on screen. It is logical to find his current employment concerning when it has had some negative impacts on his life.

Ian and Mickey are in a consenting relationship. They are of similar age. Mickey does not attempt to drug Ian, nor does he see sex as more important than Ian’s well-being. We know that they do have sex, but it’s off screen most of the time. When it is shown, it often becomes a site of violence (ex. Mickey getting shot. Mickey getting beaten, and sexually assaulted. Mickey being forced into a corrective marriage.) Whether intentional or not, this pattern becomes problematic. Their sexual relationship that is seemingly healthy and happy becomes pushed to the side unseen, in favor of continued exploitation and abuse. Wanting them to treat the two fairly, by showing positive aspects of their relationship, is a very logical stance.

There is no irony in that different approach to Ian’s sexual exploitation at the club, and Ian and Mickey’s sex life.

In addition, by saying “hot and steamy,” you’re effectively exaggerating our frustrations, and trying to posit them as perverted and/or superficial. We’re not asking for pornography here (though Shameless has practically given us soft core heterosexual porn before), just happy and healthy sexual and/or intimate moments between Ian and Mickey that normalize their relationship and isn’t a site for abuse and/or sexual exploitation. The fact that the author seems to think that “we want happy and healthy sex scenes” must mean “hot and steamy,” shows the detrimental effects of this show not giving them happy and healthy sex scenes. People automatically assume sex needs to be hot and steamy, and in addition: exploitative.

It would seem that having a character – who is a minor – dance for the visual pleasure of others is exploiting not only the character, but the actor, Cameron Monaghan, as well. But apparently having him engage in a sexual relationship for the visual pleasure of the audience is not exploitive and therefore is perfectly acceptable.

“It would seem” more like the author chooses to assume based on a false understanding. Considering that Ian has experienced sexual abuse at the club and as a result of his work at the club (reminder: you cannot consent while drugged), it is exploitative. Nudity and sex scenes become exploitative of the actors when it is gratuitous. If they continue to show Cameron’s character in sexually exploitative situations, where he is required to be semi-nude or fully nude, it could potentially become gratuitous and exploitative of the actor.

Will people find sex scenes visually pleasurable? Perhaps, but the argument for sex scenes is not based on the potential pleasure derived. It is based on showing Ian and Mickey’s sex life as casually as they the sex lives of heterosexuals. It is based on valuing happier and healthier experiences for them. It is about representation, and equality. We do not wish to exploit the actors in any way, and we’ve mentioned many times that the actors have stated being comfortable with one another on set. If they felt they were being exploited, and that the scenes were unnecessary, that would be different.

So, somehow canonical sexual exploitation where the actor does have to be semi-nude or fully nude in uncomfortable and harmful situations for their character with extras surrounding them that they barely know is the same as portraying happy and healthy sex between two characters on a closed set where the actors have established they feel comfortable with one another? I don’t think so.

Fans seem to have no problems with Veronica earning money by performing sexual acts over the internet. Nor do they seem bothered by the barely there uniforms Fiona is made to wear in.

Where is the author even getting this information, and how is this relevant to Ian and Mickey’s sex life? It isn’t relevant. First of all, Veronica’s sex work is very different. She is an adult. She has made the conscious decision to do this for money, and she’s in a lower risk environment. Second of all, who says that Fiona’s uniform in that one episode wasn’t exploitative and bothersome to us?

Still…

Why would we even be discussing it now when our issues pertain to Ian and Mickey’s sex life, and these things pertain to earlier seasons?

Frank, Kevin, Mickey and Lip have all appeared naked at one point or another – make that multiple points – but I have never seen fans worried that Jeremy Allen White is being exploited. Perhaps they have forgotten that White is only 2 years older than Monaghan.

Again, relevance? This is based on the assumption that our primary concern is on the exploitation of Monaghan and the supposed irony or hypocrisy of that when discussing Ian and Mickey’s sex life, when that is not the issue we’ve been discussing. We’ve been discussing Ian and Mickey’s lack of screen time focused on their intimacy and sexuality, in a manner that is not exploitative or abusive.

When they focus too heavily on the sexual exploitation of their characters, they run the risk of gratuity which might involve exploiting their actors. Emmy Rossum has discussed refusing to be topless in a scene where it wasn’t necessary, and all actors should have the right to do that. When it is unneeded or exploitative is key here, and what we’ve been discussing is not unneeded nor is it exploitative.

Furthermore, characters like Kevin and Lip have had screen time devoted to relatively happy and healthy sex scenes. They’re heterosexual characters, and their sexual orientation will never be framed as the cause of their problems. Their characters aren’t often and consistently sexually exploited.

Also, if Shameless is willing to show underage characters having sex (ex. Lip & Karen, Lip & Mandy) and frequently at that then what is the big issue with showing Ian and Mickey having happy and healthy sex? There is nothing in their way of doing that, aside from the continued stigma of portraying happy and healthy non-heterosexual relationships on screen, which they continue to contribute to by using their sex life as a site of violent acts.

Aside from the younger actors, Monaghan has appeared nude on-screen less times than any of his on screen siblings. Part of this was due to him being underage for the first one and a half seasons and the other part is he hasn’t had as many sex scenes as the others have. If you are really quiet you will be able to hear the other half of the fandom crying out in anger over this perceived slight. It would seem that there are those who believe the writers are conspiring to keep the audience from seeing a healthy and happy homosexual couple engage in an active sex life.

We are fully aware that Cameron was underage during the first two seasons, which would be why their ability to portray intimacy and sex was limited. The patronizing tone and sarcasm are not needed, and it is not a perceived slight when nothing is stopping them now from portraying a happy and healthy sex life between the two characters. When they can show Cameron as Ian in sexually exploitative situations, but neglect the happier and healthier sexual contexts in which Ian is with Mickey, there is a huge problem.

This hasn’t been an issue since season 2. Please do try to catch up to 2014, then we’ll talk.

To that I’d like to remind them that out of the Gallagher siblings Ian is the only one who has come even close to being in a healthy relationship. So, yeah, they’d have an easier time making the argument that the writers are conspiring to keep everyone on Shameless from being happy. Now that I believe.

If he’s the only one that has come close to having a healthy relationship, why not show it? They have shown other couples in healthier sexual contexts. So this “reminder” is not needed from the author. We who are very much drawn to their story and invested in it, are aware that Ian and Mickey’s relationship is healthier than it seems (though it still has its problematic aspects). However, when there is a lot of victim-blaming going on and a failure to realize that Ian has experienced sexual abuse, modeling the healthier aspects of their relationship would provide a good way to counteract that. That is, people need a “reminder” of what healthy non-heterosexual relationships look like because it would seem like some people can’t tell the difference between sexual exploitation and a happy and healthy sex life. Ahem.

Is it possible that the people responsible for Shameless are exploiting the actors because they know people will tune in to see their favorite actor naked? Sure, of course it’s possible. It happens all the time. Is it right? No, but if audiences really had a problem versus just saying they have one, then nudity on television shows wouldn’t exist. It’s a simple case of supply and demand. And the demand is high, or at least it is judging by the number of times gifs of Ian dancing or getting into the shower have been reblogged on Tumblr. So really, who’s exploiting Monaghan again? The people behind the show or the people watching the show?

Again, again, and again: relevance? Are we trying to argue against portraying nudity and/or the problematic and sexually exploitative contexts altogether? Nope. We’re frustrated over the lack of happy and healthy sex scenes and casual intimacy shown to us in comparison to heterosexual pairings, and how using their sexuality as a site of violence and exploitation is favored. That may or may not involve gratuitous scenes in which the actors’ bodies are exploited (and here I am talking about all the actors), but that’s an entirely different argument that only has a small part to do with our main argument which I have stated ad nauseum here.

It’s not a simple case of supply and demand, and that statement is gross. The demand is high for a fair representation of a non-hetereosexual couple. It is foolish to belittle such arguments based on people’s genuine attraction or appreciation for Cameron’s naked body, and how much they’ve ‘reblogged’ gif sets of him as Ian dancing or in the shower. People are bound to enjoy those aspects on some self gratifying level, but ultimately there are things that are more important to us all. There is no point in answering that final question, as it is irrelevant to our arguments and frustrations. In addition, to act as if that needs to be an either/or situation, neglects how there are a multitude of factors that go into the production and consumption of media.

In conclusion, this article is a gross misrepresentation of our feelings and is presumptuous based on false understandings. A little research, and a less talking out of your ass would do you some good, Mendie.