I liked the scene between Sam & Janet, which I think is the first one we get.

I like that MS put effort into making Daniel seem traumatized, which I suspect was greatly a product of the actor, not the writers.

Otherwise that episode was problematic. With just a little tweaking, it could have been a very good episode as it does deal with a sorta of reversal of societal gender roles. It would have been a disturbing but meaningful episode. Instead….*sigh*

I did a rewrite of the rape scene on my blog, as revenge.

That’s no excuse for someone being paid to write fiction in a media that is regulated by the FCC specifically because the government believes in its ability to influence the masses.

How do you suppose you would feel, watching Hathor, if at some point in your life a woman had drugged and raped you? Most likely, 99% of the people you told about it would have laughed and congratulated you for getting some, because you’re a guy, and that’s what guys are for. The police wouldn’t have taken you seriously – sheesh, they hardly take women seriously. The D.A. wouldn’t have cared. And eventually you might have even questioned your own assessment – did you do something to lead her on? Did you want it on some deep level? And then to see that episode, reaffirming that it’s not rape.

This is what women have been dealing with for years, until probably the 70′s or 80′s when we got a national dialog going. But boys who suffer sexual abuse of any sort are still fairly marooned out there. And where do you think male rapists come from?

It’s a cycle we need to be working on from EVERY angle. Protect boys from abuse, and you will reduce female rapes. Teach everyone how to handle male rape victims with sensitivity, and we’ll reduce rape in general. Etc.

I can think of at least one case where it is clear that the sexual encounter was not consensual, but because the perp was a female and the vic a male the idea that it was rape did not occur to me until I thought about it (and it clearly did not occur to the writers).

In 40 Days and 40 Nigths, Josh Hartnett’s character’s 40 day celibacy vow is broken at the last minute when, after he has tied himelf to the bed so to make certain he doesn’t masturbate (which would break his vow), his ex-girlfried, who has bet money on him not making it, comes in and has sex with him while he is asleep.

While his new girlfriend finds her and assumes he cheated, it is very clear from the context that he didn’t want to have sex with his ex. It is also made clear that this was done maliciouly against him, and that he should be considered the injured party. Yet the idea that this encounter was rape is never suggested, and it is never made clear that he was violated, rather, the implication is that she wronged him by defeating his “chastity quest.”

Either Daniel was raped by Hathor, or he cheated on his wife.

There is no in-between. You have to pick one interpretation or the other. If he made a choice, it’s adultery. If he didn’t get to make a choice, it’s rape.

The fact that the writers never implied it was infidelity suggests to me they knew what they were writing: rape.

Ah, I did think you meant the ex-wife and not the other woman you talked about. As for that rape, I’m still not sure what to make of it. From a story perspective, it’s a rape and that’s interesting, but of course I like to evaluate what the creative powers make of their storylines and the messages they seem to be sending.

At this point, all I can say is Leary needs to pull his head out of that smelly place he’s jammed it.

I can’t really evaluate her rape of him, though.

I am sorry if I was not clear. Janet (hiss ex-wife) was raped by him. Sheila (his late cousin’s widow) raped him.

I can’t really evaluate her rape of him, though. If he’s unconscious at the time, it hardly sounds like she can expect him to be traumatized, or recognize that she’s had revenge.

I’m not sure she cares if he knows as long as she knows. As far as trauma, he is a recovering alcoholic who hasn’t had a drink in over a year (if I recall correctly) and she has made him think that he fell off the wagon and had a blackout.

I have a bad feeling it’s going to come off more like “she can’t get enough of him” than “she’s hurt him”.

I don’t think so, as Sheila hasn’t bee ni nvolved with him sexually or romantically for at least a year. It is pretty clear, though, that she wants to get back together with him. He has made it fairly clear, though, that he does not want any sexual relationship with her.

Since the end of the previous epsiode, Sheila has been portrayed as jealous and angry to the point of being enraged. More than anything, she seemed to be defying Tommy’s rejection of her. I don’t see this event as having positive repercusions for Tommy.

Ultimately, if a partner says “no” or “stop, there can be no further legal debate as to whether it’s rape. Obviously, S&M can put a wrinkle into this set up, which is why you have “safewords” other than “no” and “stop”, which you might want to moan as part of the roleplay.

But I’m seeing no indication any previous S&M has been depicted with this couple, so that’s irrelevant. It’s rape.

Also worth mentioning: normal, sane men do not segue from anger/frustration to sexual frenzy – that connection is only made in insane minds. That’s the pathology that allows rape. And rapists are chronic and serial. It’s virtually guaranteed he’s raped her before, and perhaps that’s why she acquiesced and tried to enjoy it (if indeed those were moans of pleasure).

I can’t really evaluate her rape of him, though. If he’s unconscious at the time, it hardly sounds like she can expect him to be traumatized, or recognize that she’s had revenge. So I’m not seeing it as revenge. I have a bad feeling it’s going to come off more like “she can’t get enough of him” than “she’s hurt him”. If for no reason other than the average viewer still seems to think men should define sexual violation as “getting laid” and feel grateful.

What is beyond inexcusable, however, is Leary’s public statement that it’s not rape. A lot of rapists will agree with him. I don’t object to realistic portrayals of rape, but I very much object to portrayals of rape which we’re told to look at as consensual, somehow.

Here is a recap of the episode (Last two paragraphs of the main post.

It seemed like a rape to me, and it seemed like she had just rewritten it as consensual sex in her head because she was too weary to deal with it. But the producers and Leary seemed to hem and haw a little at the idea that it was rape, and in later episodes, she doesn’t seem to hold this against him. (As I said initially, she recreates the scene in reverse with him later on, except that in the recreation he is obviously a willing participant).