Flypsyde

This is beautifully stated. Thanks for sharing this perspective, with which I completely agree, without the snark I find it so difficult to prevent exiting my fingers into the keyboard when I comment on this matter. :D

So drop the show. Nothing wrong with that.

Don't worry, dear. It's all good. When I take breaks from the studio, I often check these comments and respond. Besides, I'm of the opinion that reading, thinking and writing are constructive pursuits. Every time we write something the hope is that we get a little bit better at expressing ourselves in writing in general and in thinking things through. So...worry if you wish, but it's really not necessary. :)

Oh, and what sexist assumptions are you implying with your last comment? I'd like to know.

That passage was from some web site on sexual health, not a quote from a definition of a law.

"screaming like a banshee..." Yes, passionate disagreement with your puritanical, comically professorial epistles on the subject are definitely "screaming like a banshee." lol I'd expect you to do better than that cliche term too, but alas, you didn't.

I don't care how you perceive my style of commenting. I don't care what you expect from me. It's irrelevant. I think your comments are faux-intellectual treatises heavy on arrogance and light on common sense. But I doubt you care what I think either.

Admittedly, my style is to call bullshit when I see it and I am more emotional about doing so. I enjoy "screaming like a banshee" that the RAPE emperor has no clothes, while you enjoy parading through comments imagining yourself in a floor-length velvet robe with ermine trim, wearing your gold and diamond tiarra with a big PC emblem in blue sapphires at the top. It is gorgeous, but it's only in your head.

That IS sad. I despised the Catholic Church long before the explosion of sexual abuse cases and their coverup made it clear what a monstrous organization it is. That said, I am totally with you on the idea that something like that does NOT have to be the end of the world, super-traumatizing, my life is over kind of experience it's currently made out out to be. Of course the priests should be criminally prosecuted but to me the worst of the abuse is the over-arching mind-fuck of the puritanical sexual teachings of the CC being co-mingled with sexual experiences with the very person who teaches you that what is happening between you two is a mortal sin. Jesus!

I worry that many young people are extra-shamed by the hysterical reaction to the abuse. What if they don't feel as traumatized or upset about it as their parents and culture demand they be? It's like they're double-fucked then. I'm not in any way minimizing CC sexual abuse. I just want the reaction and the treatment arranged for each kid to specifically fit that individual case and the victim's feelings about it.

I was (legally) "sexually-assaulted" by a doctor during a sports physical when I was 13 years old. It was intense and mysterious and hot and overall I liked it. I never thought much about it at all after it happened and certainly felt no guilt. It's more likely I wished there would be such physicals more often than once a year. Then later the doctor was caught in some kind of sting operation and things went public. My mom asked if he did anything to me. I lied and said no, of course as I saw no point in enabling the overreaction that would come if I told the truth. It's amazing the degree to which many children go to "take care of" their parents and families in such situations. I might have told her the truth if I'd known she wouldn't freak out about it.

My god, where have you been? I'm not going to rehash my comments. Read through the thread and all the arguments from other sides, if you're interested. But judging from your all-caps yelling you're not exactly here to listen to opposing points of view.

So you're OK with rape scenes as part of a plot if the "rapist" is punished as part of the plot? But rapists and robbers and murderers and embezzlers get away with their acts all the time IRL. What if the fact that they "get away with it" is part of the story? There is a great old murder/adultery/thriller from the late 70s in which a woman deliberately seduced a man and carried on a torrid affair with him for months for the sole purpose of manipulating him into illegally acquiring a vast sum of money and killing her husband. At the end of the movie, he was rotting in jail having been convicted and sentenced while she sat on a tropical beach in a foreign country sipping cocktails. She literally got away with murder and embezzlement! Is it your position that therefore this movie "teaches" people that murder and theft and framing a lover are things that they SHOULD DO? Or is it a wild and crazy, and very well-made piece of art and entertainment that stands simply for what it is..a very torrid and dramatic slice of life?

I am totally OK with fictional stories in whatever medium that include rape as part of the story. I don't think the show-makers are under any moral obligation to make sure the "rapist" ends up in prison as a result. A sexual offender getting off unpunished, which I've seen happen in a number of films now that I think about it, can be an even STRONGER warning of caution to others than would be a pat ending in which the perp is predictably caught and punished.

How will letting the dad know that they had consensual sex, or any other sex, work out as a positive thing? The dad's going to approve the relationship because they had sex? What? He's going to be OK with it if he knows YJ raped Xingsi? WTF?

"Consent is often conveyed non-verbally but stating that it is only TRULY given by a verbal affirmation in the eyes of the law stands as a warning that initiators have little to no way to evade responsibility should they be charged."

Just one of the many passages from your post that beggar belief. Are you saying that someone who is accused of rape is presumed guilty and "have little to no way to evade responsibility should they be charged?"

What exactly is the point of that lengthy passage from some web site on sexual health? It is merely the philosophy and perspective of one organization and if I understand this correctly, is not actually a definition of consent included in any of your laws. Is that correct? If so, posting it may make you feel great but it has no practical application to this discussion. Just because some organization pushes the idea that you need to get a verbal "yes" with every passionate escalation that takes place during sexual activity doesn't mean that's a good or practical idea, it's just one perspective.

And it's a perspective that pretends that human beings are passionless automatons, that emotion, desire and a thousand other feelings aren't involved in sexual activity. According to this web site, acts of consensual sexual congress are mechanical, impersonal and void of all that makes us human. People having sex need to have a legal pad and pen handy, it would be a good idea to film the sexual act to provide evidence if someone regrets it the next morning and wants to accuse the other of rape, and while we're at it, it's probably best to have a few people stand in a semi-circle around the people having sex so there will be eye-witnesses to every grope, caress and moan of desire and pleasure. (Wait, was that a moan of half-pleasure with a half-tone of resistance?! Make a note of that!) Just comically insane.

What the hell do we do if someone, god forbid!, proposes a threesome or orgy?! We'll need lawyers on-site to observe the proceedings and advise their clients as they insert body parts or grope erogenous zones, just in case!

It sounds to me as if your passage actually presents as rape a situation in which a person decides to consent to sex because they perceive that if they don't do so they will get dumped, even if the other party gives no indication that this is the case. It is all about what someone might perceive as reality, no matter how far from the case it is or how "lazy" they might feel at the moment.

Perhaps most comical is the assertion that no one should ever drink before having sex so that all these negotiations, note-taking, recording and other documentation can take place in a sober and thoughtful state of mind. No cocktail parties and hot sex after two or three glasses of wine! No sipping scotch to relax and enable yourself to have fun, relax and let go of some useless inhibitions! Be sure to have a breathalizer in your pre-sex briefcase that you take with you everywhere, as we need to know if you were legally drunk or just slightly intoxicated as evidence in the coming court case.

Your comment is just one example of why PC culture has become such a joke and is largely irrelevant to the way people actually live their lives and muddle through relationships and sex as the messy, multi-layered involvements they are.

"So yes, I let someone have his way with me out of laziness," lol So...do you consider this a case in which you were raped? It's sad that the meaning of that word, which used to carry the horror and violation inherent to the act, is now being used to define a situation where someone basically says "yes, ok, fine, go ahead, I'll just watch tv until you get off."

Someone "too lazy" to prevent their own physical violation is now the equivalent of someone who fought and resisted their assailant with every word and use of physical strength possible. That those two situations are now placed under the same categorical term as RAPE is so far beyond common sense and decency and logic as to be absurd. PC culture started becoming ridiculous as much as thirty years ago and it continues to degrade our social standards and legal system to the point of meaninglessness.

I completely and totally disagree with you here. Being "talked into" sex or being "guilt-tripped" into sex is most definitely not rape. My god, by that definition the jails around the world would overflow with men and women who have talked initially reluctant partners into having sex with them. Talking is not forcing, being convincing is not criminal and if I change my mind and say "yes" because of someone's sweet words then that decision and choice are on ME and no one is being raped. We're in Wonderland now.

The "friend" said YES. That is consent. If all it takes to get her in bed is to cry a little, well then she's got problems that need to be addressed with a therapist but no one raped her.

Imagining that someone MIGHT get violent is not the same as if he ACTUALLY got violent. Imagination and reality are two different things. That I even have to type those words is depressing to me.

Your friend was not raped and your saying she was a thousand times will not make it so. She gave her consent in the form of the word "yes." To say she is so feeble-minded she couldn't form the word "no" or was so desperately tired that she couldn't stand up and say "no, you asshole. Now get out of here" or "i'm sick of listening to your bullshit and I'm leaving" is to make her out an idiot, not a rape victim. No, it may come as news to you but saying "I got raped" does not automatically make it so.

So no, I don't know how many people are raped this same way because it is not rape. Your argument that it is is comical and absurd.

Good. That's an excellent decision on your part.

You see rape. A lot of us don't. Go to the Disney Channel.

"rape supporter!" "victim blaming!" "you need to reevaluate yourself as a person!" It's always revealing to read the final comments and insults of someone who can't successfully support their argument.

Your comment is just another summation of many of the assumptions you make about the drama with which I don't agree. With personal attacks on my character tossed in for fun. So what? Saying stuff twice doesn't' make it more true the second time around.

I don't know how old you are, but perhaps your black and white, I'm right and you're wrong, you're a bad person if you don't agree with me mode of thinking will change and gain nuance as you mature. Hope so!

Have a delightful day.

lol HOORAY!

May I ask which one? :D

In what way did you find the sex scene less than realistic?

I didn't call "people" "dim-witted horse shit." That is the term I applied to the name-calling and denunciations made by all the aggressively sex-negative people in this thread.

That there was a major consent issue is not clear at all. In my book the sex was fully consensual, even enjoyable. That's what we are all arguing about. You want to pretend it's clear so you can claim some kind of moral high ground, as you so condescendingly do in your last sentence.

Do you see me in that thread arguing that the show should be censored or changed in other ways so that I will like it? The truth is that "hate-watching" is about a show that one finds extremely annoying in some respects while at the same time actually enjoying enough about it that I want to remain engaged. The annoyance actually adds to the experience.. I am admitting that I ENJOY the strong emotions it elicits from me, that I am getting off on my outrage at how stupid parts of it are. "Hate-watching" is an old term written with tongue in cheek. It is also true that I like the two lead actors and other quirky elements of the show. it is the stupidity of the story arc and writing I've been bitching about.

Try to get any hysterics here to admit they are ENJOYING the outrage they claim to be feeling in reaction to this show.

The problem is people are not black and white, they don't operate in a black and white world, and MOST adults use alcohol to one degree or another at times to lower their own inhibitions. That's why people drink. Do you think they drink because vodka tastes good? lol

"rape is rape" such a thoughtful, statement. I counter: "non-rape is non-rape!" Oh I see how easy that is now...

"victim-blame" lol Did you fit in "problematic" somewhere and I missed it?