The Believer as film is only ok, but as an exploration of Gosling's character is awesome.

Thank you, I think men have a hard time understanding, but insertion = rape...always. I also happen to refuse to adopt the youngin's view that oral sex is not sex, and that colors my view of what is and is not rape, but unwanted sexual touching always feels invasion, but actually insertion takes it to a new level.

I just got back from seeing Crash. I'm not nearly as high on it as some of you. It did have some very strong moments. I liked a lot of the things about it, but it was too over the top with the racism.

Most racism isn't overt. It is thought rather than said aloud. If talked about, it comes behind closed doors. That's what makes it so truly dangerous. You don't really know who thinks what.

All of the racism in Crash is blunt. It is seen and talked about and confrontational. Obviously I understand when you make a film that you have to dramatize things in a way to move the action of the story forward. Still, there was virtually no subtlety. I find that is lazy writing or simplistic writing and I don't like either option.

I also didn't like the fact that everyone was a victim. I get the point and it is an interesting storytelling device, but it felt a bit forced to me. I'm a fan of using character crossovers in film (Short Cuts and Magnolia were very good), but it has to be give and take for it to feel real. I liked what happened to Matt Dillon's character. That was well done. It was interesting to see him go from aggressor to victim to in-between.

The film was pretty well acted. Brendan Fraser was okay, but a stronger presence in that role could have helped. It was also hard to take Sandra Bullock as an over the top bitch, although her rant against the locksmith was a good scene. I thought Ludacris's character was borderline ridiculous at times. He kept spewing racial philosophy, but was a two-bit criminal. Odd mix. Felt a bit like a rip-off of Boyz in the Hood, excpet Fishburne's character in that preached philosophy from the moral high ground. Ludacris wasn't bad int the role, but it was poorly written. Don Cheadle was his usual brilliant self. Terrence Howard did a good job with his character. He went from completely rational to off his rocker, but you can understand the reason for the change. I didn't think there was good chemistry between he and Thandie Newton.

Don Cheadle's opening dialogue about how LA is different from other cities and that people just crash into each other seemed very odd in retrospect. It is a good premise for a film, but not this one. Crash was about racism more than lives intertwining. There were too many good elements to call it a bad film, but it fell short of its potential. There is a good mixture of humor and drama. I also liked that the film never got preachy against just one group of people. Director Paul Haggis used music well throughout the film. His direction was fine, but I did find the story flawed. I am glad I saw it because it was a character driven story and not a big budget epic, sci-fi thriller, or comic book come to life. We need more films about people.



@dolcevita...

Excellent point about The Believer. Very powerful film with a brilliant performance that explored just how complicated a person's soul and mind can be.

Yes. Believer was a bit rougher of a film, but anyone exploring a multifaceted person with such extreme motivations is going to have a film that isn't so neat. Its that Gosling's character dictated the movie, and since he was so hard, the movie was hard. I thought it was a very rich movie actually, and gave the character the attention it deserved as a point of exploration rather than exposition.

That's already two people that have seen it. I didn't know it had that much distribution. I don't even remember it coming out in theatres. Perhaps I'll start a thread on it in indies section and see who else has something to say about it?

Its just that I've seen so many movies that either explore racial friction, or explore character complexity that I'm getting to the point where I don't think you can have it both ways with a dozen characters tossed in for the mix. It felt like an after-school special with the high ambition of being more. But that ambition to be more was a downfall, since it lead to some pretty insulting stuff. Ludacris' character being one of them. Dillon, Farhad, and Newton being the other ones. Everyone else fell into a gray range, but none had enough attention to really flesh out into Believer type treatment of subject. I didn't really think of that comparison until I posted it, but now it seems like an interesting one to make both as far as content, motive, and execution.

On the subject of rape, dolce and Ripper, everybody is different. Why didn't Thandie Newton have a problem with what you ladies had a problem with? Why didn't Sarah Finn, Marina Grasic, Randi Hiller, Jan Körbelin, and Cathy Schulman, who were all producers and executive producers? Why didn't the women who enjoyed and are still enjoying the film? I think it's unfair to pin this on the guy's perspective, when this is not exactly something that women across the board had an issue with.

I think alot of women have a fiarly lose defintion of rape, I woudl argue goign through maks it damn easy to see clearly what should and shouldn't be considered rape. Secondly, I'd argue that few films deal with any issue like rape well at all, if a female actress is sitting around waiting for a film that gets everything right, well she'll never work again. Also, I have no idea what the Crash script wa lsike when Newton read it (or even she even read it, I mean, she could have a cript reader who said do this movie). And why actors or actresses do movies is rather complex, sure we hear alot of the work speaks to me...but it more then that. I do alot of things at work I don't always like, I say I don't like, but I may still have to it.

I don't its simple as, women work on a film so therefore it must address women's issue well since they didn;t have any issue...they may have had an issue with it, they may not, I don't know. I still think the very idea of the scene is insulting to my intelligence and laughable.

Honestly, if women think they could hug a man who rapes them 20 hours later without any feeling of repulsion, I hope to god they are never in position to have to do that. Because it sure is not fun to have to be around a perosn who attacked you after, even if the day after they are not showing signs of what they did.

I'm saying Newton;s character shouldn;t be thankful, but some complexity of emotion on her part after he saves would have gone along way to me finding the scene even remotely believable and less insulting. Instead it came stright out of the heoric save me filmmaking 101.

You're kidding right? Ever think Thandie, Sarah, Marina, and Co. thought the fingering was a big deal? And thought to include it because they felt a scene that was that invasive was necessary? Frankly you can argue 'til you're blue in the face that what classifies something as rape is the difference in circumference between a finger and a penis, but either way, it went were it shouldn't have, and its rape. If you like the movie or not is one thing, but when I mentioned a guy's perspective toward rape, it had nothing to do with the movie at that point. Look at the court system for goodness sake. Look at people's bs arguements about women proving they had been raped as the only option for abortion, look at domestic violence numbers, and just contemplate date rape numbers since there aren't any official statistics on it.

Women enjoying Crash have nothing to do with it. I was responding to your statement that you, personally, wouldn't classify a forced fingering as rape. That's a gendered discourse, since clearly size does matter in your mind, when it shouldn't. The movie had nothing to do with it. But honestly, argueing with you agout race and rape isn't going anywhere, since I have the feeling you needed to tie it into the movie. So I apologize for any misconceptions that me talking about what is and isn't rape at this moment has anything to do with Crash. It doesn't. No need to find production members to support your arguement, you already said that you don't consider it an equal violation of a female body, and Ripper and I said it did. I also said alot of men say that, and alot of courts let them get away with that arguement, lessen their sentences, etc. I also think oral sex is sex, and forcing someone to give oral sex is rape as well. I just wanted to make that position clear, since I couldn't let slide a comment that demotes particular forms of forced entry into any female orifice from being considered rape.

dolce, if you considered it rape, and are so passionate about how much that offends you, can you show me where you discussed that issue before Ripper brought it up so I can get more of your perspective on it?

Sure. I've never directly talked about the distinction we are now, because it hasn't come up before, but there are plenty of comments I've made about what a degrading position a woman would have to be in if she had to prove being violated in court and some comments about oral sex being sex, etc, here:

http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... rape#29201
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... rape#30430
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... rape#70343
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ape#109281
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ape#164590
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ape#210840
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ral#159712
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ing#159894
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... ing#160282

I'm sure there are more, I just couldn't find them right now.

I think it's disgusting, I think it's a violation, and I think it's degrading, but I think calling it "rape" is exaggerating. It's pretty far removed from a full blown case of rape. Maybe not to you, Ripper, and many others, but it is to me and many others. That doesn't mean I think it's right or justified.

I say this without anything personal being met, but I hear this from a lot of guys, and quite frankly that fact scares me.

How would you feel if a guy held you down and inserted his hand in your ass?

I don't think its far removed from a full blown case of rape, and the idea that is is precisely why women are afriad to talk about being attacked, because if you walk away from the situation before he sticks his cock inside its not rape.

Secondly, I ask, what if this wear your girlfriend, your daughter, etc?

Lastly, what is it then?

Having a man define what's rape when it comes to a woman is something that's not going to sit well with me, because no matter how many times I explain it, show movise abou tit, etc...none fo that can tell you what it feels like.

Just like, you have experiences in your life that are unique to your gender that you would be better at defining then myself.

Well, let's use a girl doing it to me, and it takes on a whole different perspective than a homosexual act being performed on me. Even so, remember the movie Back to the Future II? When the girl in the future in the diner grabs Marty's son by the balls? That wasn't rape either, even though it was a violation of his private sexual organs. If a girl grabbed me by the balls, I wouldn't like it much at all, but I wouldn't consider it rape.



Why does it make you afraid to talk about it just because others don't have the same perspective? You're entitled to your opinion about it, but you can't expect others to feel that way, and shouldn't consider them evil and something to fear because they hold things in a different perspective. Rape is a strong word.



I'd be pissed. I would have probably been shot, because I wouldn't have stood there and took it.



Sarah Finn, Marina Grasic, Randi Hiller, Jan Körbelin, and Cathy Schulman were just as responsible, as was Thandie Newton, and they don't seem to consider it rape. Again, why the "it's men" comments? Cynthia, my heart really goes out to you, honestly, but you can't hold a whole gender accountable for what some idiot did. You can only tell what it feels like to you, and that's fine, but I will guarantee you that other women, even those that have been raped, draw a distinction between what Dillon did to Newton and what their attacker did to them. If you don't, it's understandable, too, but everybody has different views, especially on subjects like race, sex, etc...

Cynthia, I know this is a touchy subject with you, so let's just back off so you don't get upset.

Someone grabbing my breasts isn't rape, but insertion is different, that's the point I am making, once you get to the level of insertion were talking rape.



Why woudl i talk about what happened, when if there is no penal penetration I'm going to be told its not rape. Given one's fragile emotional state after, knowing that someone is going to hear me talk about it, but in their mind think its not rape means I don't want to talk about it with them. Them thinking its not rape essentially undermies my feeling it is. It one of the reasons I rarely talk about the exact detials of what happened with people, if I heard another person say "well lucky he didn't get rather" right after I would have screamed, as if what happened wasn't bad enough.

I realize you have your own perspective, but your perspective is essentially telling me I wasn't raped.

On that note, what if he had inserted soemthing inside of her but his fingers, what is it then? Insertion = rape, I don't care what you use, finger, object, penis..in you insert somethign in a woman against her while, its an act of sex and is rape.



I meant more along the lines of, if it happened to someone you knew, your definition of rape might be different.



I don't know whether these women think what Dillion did is rape, nor do I care, I was referring to you, as you hold an opinion that I have heard from alot of men.

I don't hold a whole gender accountable for what my former best friend did, I do hold the male gender accountable for trying to tell me what does and does count as rape for my gender. As far as I am concerned insertion is always rape. What happened to me makes it easier me to understand what that feels like, but that was teh defintion I went with before, not I just feel more strongly about it.

Sex for a woman, unlike a man is all about insertion, the act of being groped by man in an appropiate manner is totally different, heck that happens to women everytime they go to a club, but actual insertion takes it to the next level.



Its less touchy then you think.

Ok, what do you consider non-rape insertion? What if the guy has, excuse the language, a pencil dick huh? What if its only the size of a finger? Is it rape then. Where do you draw the line for what rape is and isn't once something is up a woman? Circumference, length, surface area, std producing subtance ejaculation, how hard of soft a material is? What if someone forced a dildo up a woman? Would that be rape? You're not thinking it through argueing that an outside grope is the same as an insertion. In that case, we'd be saying grabbing a woman's crotch is rape too. And while I'd assign alot more severity to any sexual violation I'll say there's the boundary between molestation and rape.




It makes every woman afraid to talk about it because she gets to stand up in front of a bunch of idiots that think there's a difference between a penis and a dildo when it comes to rape and plead the case of her own violation while they sit around and deliberate if an external grope to the breast or ball is the same thing. Then, most of the time, the offender gets off with nary a warning, if even, while her entire sexual history has been put forth into paper for all to see. Plus she needs to sit there and detail the experience in some linear dumb simple method to try and make people understand the damage such things do. Ask all those people that did or didn't give testimony against childhood molestation/rape cases recently about the implications on one's entire being and life. Your comparison to a comic ball grab in back to the future actually confirms why most women are afraid to talk about it. Clearly its not taken seriously.

Again. You're speaking for Thandie in an attempt to say women support you in rape being only inserction of an actual penis. Did you ask her? Don't bring women you haven't spoken to (from movies no less, that have alternative motives for being made) up when defending your position on the difference between penises and dildos unless you know what they're thinking.

Thandie made the movie and put her heart into the performance, so my common sense tells me that I don't have to ask her. If you have a problem with it, write a letter to her agent.

Oh, and dolce...how about dropping the bitchy tone?

Your entitled to your opinion on this subject but I don;t think you understand how much that fact that lots of men, not just using, defining fingering as not rape is a huge isue for women.

Dolce brings up a good point, which I also brought up...to you fingering isn;t rape, what about with any object, what makes inserting your dick so different then a finger? It created the same bodily response, the same feelings of pleasure, sure one has the ability to lead to procreation, but rape is about power not sex. The insertion of anything into my body down without my permission is rape, is crossing that line.

I agree with dooce on this, though my response show less emotion, in part because over the last year I've had to discuss being attacked without lot of people, on varying degrees or reactions and I learned to discuss this topic and leave my emotions on it hidden.

Its insulting to have a guy tell me that insertion isn't rape, it maybe his opinion, but it doesn't make me want to poor my heart out to him on the subject.

In your case, I took this as a chance to have a real discussion, since for you it isn;t rape, I am really curious, where is the line then.?

Someone grabbing my breast isn't rape either, but a breast on a woman is hardly comparable to a man's balls...lol




Nobody is undermining your opinion just because they don't see things your way. How do you figure that?



I never said any such thing.



Rape is an act of violence, not sex. I don't think I ever said a penis is the only thing that you can rape someone with. George Lucas raped many with The Phantom Menace, or so I've heard.



Maybe, maybe not. I do know that I would be very pissed off. I don't know that I would go so far as to start crying rape. Rape is a very very strong word. I'd call it a degrading violation. I'd call it disgusting. It's not something I would ever do and I'd never want to know anybody who ever did something like that.



I'm sure that some men consider it rape just as some women don't. It's not like a support or condone it just because I don't specifically call it rape. I think it's awful what he did.



That's fine, Cynthia, and understandable for some people to feel that way. I consider rape to be a lot more brutal and physical and struggling and a hell of a lot worse than an insertion. Not to say that a forced entry is justified at all, because it in no way is, and I don't appreciate dolce trying to spin my character into that.



How about gay men? Aren't they men? If you are speaking for all women, then why hasn't every single woman who has watched this movie voiced their complaints. It's just 2. Where are these offended women? Where are the protests like Million Dollar Baby got over assisted suicide? Where is the outcry from these victims who are repulsed? Surely you can't blame this on my opinion being undermining to your own, when none of these rape victims are getting organized to bring this to the attention of everyone. Why aren't you ladies questioning their motives? I'm not the bad guy here, especially when the people who should be upset aren't.



Good, I'm glad. Dolce seems to be touchy on it.

Well, Cynthia, I'm all for discussion on the subject, just not being jumped on and lumped in with "idiots" and talked to in a condescending way like she did, and only does when she has strength in numbers with you. If she wants to discuss it with me, too, she's more than welcome, but if she wants to go into attack mode, that's different.

Remember, "clearly, I don't take rape seriously"

How insulting was that to say?

Grabbing a man's crotch isn't comparable to inserting something into my vagina..its fundamentally different.

A male breast is not considered sexual, you can walk around shirtless without it being indecent exposure, my breast is. My point is this, grabbing, while being a huge violation, is alot different then insertion.






Intentionally, no you never said that, but by proxy of your defintion of rape, you have. I am not blaming you for that, I am just saying the perception that what happened to me may or may not be raped played into my not going to the police. The idea of reocunting what happened to a roomful of people, and having some of them think its not rape was not my idea of a good time.



Ok, but that still doesn't answer my basic question, so inserting a finger isn;t rape, where is the line then? What things can insert and it is rape, and what things can I insert and its nor rape.

I am trying to understand your perspective.



Given that 1 out of 4 women over the age of 18 has been raped/attacked, the chances that you know no one who has been attacked are slim, just as teh chances that you know zero males wo have crossed that line with a women is slim.

I'd say better then 50% of my female friends have been raped, how many of the males around them know this...a very small percentage.



I know you do, but all I can say is, after soemthing like that happens, thinking its awful is not enough. There are so many complex emotions that go on, that any hint that someone doubts you, or doubts what you went through is rape makes the situation really bad. Now that its been ayear, I can hear someone say I don;t think something like that is rape and have some distance and discuss it like I now.



I understnad her reaction, she's is feelign rather protective of me, as I am sitting here openly discussing a very personal thing, and so I can see her being a bit harsh. When we feel strongly about something, we often let our emotions show.

You keep saying jsut any insertion, any insertion done without permission is violent. Dillion groping of Newton was terrible, and certainly the insertion didn;t seem violent, but he was searching her, which gave him someone leeway tot ouch her, she wasn;t expecting it till it happened, so while on screen it may not have seemed "violent" it is.

Is it only rape if they girl is bruised after? How do you define violence?

i ask these quesitons, because I am trying to get you to see my perspective on this, any unwanted insertion is violent, it hurts, both emotinally and physically...whether the effects are visible or not.



I've heard alot of complaints about this film, several scenes, specifically here at this forum no, but that doesn;t mean they don;t exist. I honestly missed the uproad over Euthansia for MDB. Secondly, at first I didn;t mention my irritation with the scene, in part becuase it falls inline with alot of other scenes in the film which I find emotionally faulty. If this scenes appeared in a film that I otherwise like I;d be alot more offended by it, in the case of this film I wasn't terribly surprised to see it in there. Also, honestly rape scenes in movies are in general not done well, so its par for course at this point. I can think of maybe 2 or 3 movies where I think the rape scenes were done well, and that is if I try really hard.



I have the benefit of hearing some pretty not fun things from people who lifelong friends, it made it a bit easier to discuss this subject and not get angry. Nothing anyone else says can be as bad what has already happened; and maybe just maybe my discussing this with you will mak eyou and others thing about what is and is not rape, so that if some women comes to you and tells you her story you'll understand a little bit better what she is saying.

I know, and I am saying this is a really senstive topic, especialyl for woman, we'll all gotenn heated over something sometimes. Sometimes you just need to asnwer a person and remian calm, and let them calm to.

I don;t doubt rape is serious to you, but if something to means and i think its rape and you don't, its insulitng because essentially your are saying that my emotion reaction to it is in some ways unwarranted...I am wrong in calling the guy who did this a rapist, I am wrong in lumping myself in with other rape victims. In some ways it invalidates what happened.

Which isn;t to say you set out to insult me, hence I am not angry with you, instead i am trying to understand your point of view. My continue discussion of this should not be seen as an attack, more a curiousity, and I certainly see now why this scene in the film worked fo ryou when it didn;t work for me.

Most rape is not for sexual gratification, but for power control. It's more a mental aspect than a physical aspect. Personally, that action constitutes rape. The man should be appropriately castrated.

If you had balls, you would know that it is a violation that is not acceptable. It's touching somebody in a way they don't want to be touched in their private areas, and they are fundamentally the same.



I would disagree and say that a man's breats are considered sexual. A woman's legs are too, and they aren't always covered up. Like I said, you would have to have balls to know exactly how much of a violation something like that is.



I really don't know all the details, Cynthia, but if you consider it rape to you, that's how you feel, and I support your feelings on how you feel. I don't think that I have to project your feelings on the world, though, and classify it as such. It's like I said, none of these rape victims are bothered, so why should I be angry at them for not feeling it's rape. Everybody has a different definition, and your own is good enough for me to support in your individual case, but I wouldn't support your position in a case where somebody didn't feel they were raped, just degraded and violated in a disgusting way.



I would never do something like that, or ever be friends with somebody who did, but I would think that rape would have to involve violence, somebody's orgasm, etc... I don't think it really matters what is used, but the manner of the attack.

Have you ever seen the movie Double Impact.



I don't know any girls that were raped. I don't know any guy's that have ever been in trouble for such a thing or would ever do anything like that. I know that I wouldn't, nor would I touch a girl in an inappropriate way in anyway, which includes pinching or patting her ass.



I wouldn't want to have to deal with something like that, and I'm very glad that you are able to deal with talking about it more openly. I have no idea why so many women feel it's their fault or that they'll be ridiculed.



Well, she should know that I've always been protective of you, and am not going to hurt you.



I agree it was horrible. It was absolutely degrading. She wasn't too happy about it. The dramatic impact of what he did was played out in later scenes.



I would say that if a girl was finger searched like Newton was and considered herself raped, and then she was thrown down, stripped roughly, and had some harry slobbering guy insert (whatever) repeatedly over and over until he had his fill, she would draw a distiction between rape, and a seriously degrading violation of her private area.



There was lots of protests and articles about Euthansia, and not one mention of rape being undermined, and I would think that if many felt that way, they would have created a big uproar. Again, this doesn't mean that you're not justified to feel it is rape, just as anybody else is, but most don't seem to care, and I'd love to see somebody show that they do.



Well, I'm glad that you could discuss it, and I do hope that your openess does help everyone to understand, and like I said, I wish I would see some women protesting this, because that would raise the issue on a national level.

Someone grabbing my balls and someone sticking something in my ass are two different things. Most guys would probably agree. The latter definitely constitutes rape and the former is fondling.

I didn;t say it wasn't violation I said it was fundamentally different, if you grabbed my crotch then its comprable, if I shoved a tube up your dick its comparable. Grabbing and insertion are to totally different concepts. Given that males are not on the receiving end of insertion most of the time, I can see a man not considering how fundamentally different it is.



I cannot walk around toples sin public, you can, hence society at large has said their is a difference between amale breast and a female breast. A body part may cause one to have sexual thoughts, that doesn't make it sexual..I coudl have an elbow fetish, touching aperosn;s elbow even if done in a sexually manner is not a violation of sexual body part. Legs are sexy, but touching a women's leg and touching her breast are very very different.



Soicety at large needs an actual definition for rape, everyoen having their own is precisely the problem. Secondly, there is an underlying issue here, how a perosn feels after an attack..its not so simple as to say, if they don;t define it as rape it not rape. Domestic Violence victims often don't define their beatings as violence, so we see it the same way. Its not easy to say, "I was raped." I refused to use the word in reference to what happened for a long time. If you don;t define it as rape, weell then you weren;t raped, and it wasn;t that bad, etc. IF individual get to decided, well then every rape case is stgnant as the victim says it was rape and the attacker said it wasn't.




Fingering a girl can lead to orgasm, and basing anythign on a female having an orgasm is jsut not goign to work given how complex the female orgasm is. SOme women never have them, soem women have them when you touch their nipples. A women havign an orgasm lacks the consistency, unlike males, so its not a barometer of what is and is not sex.

You keep saying it has to involve violence, you have yet to define violence. I say unwanted insertion is very violent.

If women is raped, but it was a particualrlyviolent atatck is it still rape?

It seems to me that you focusing on rape in it most extreme violent form, most instances of rape are not like this.



A long time ago, I don;t recall any of the details.



The bolded parts are assumptions on your part, you assume that if a girl you knew was raped she would have told you and you assume that a guy you knew hwo had raped a girl would have a. gotten in trouble for it or b. told you about it. I consider all of these unlikely.

Given that one out four women above the age of 13 has been sexually asualted, and in most crime the victim knows her attackers the chaces that you have gotten through life and never know a rape victim or an attacker is statistically unlikely, this is true for all people. We've all known girls who have been raped, and guys who have aped women, who jsut didn't know about it because as a rape is criminally under reported.



The very first tiem I was attacked I was 13, when I was older I volunteered at a rape crisis center for a time, I was traiend in how to speak to rape victims..niether of these experiences stopped me from blaming myself when my "friend" attacked me last year. The complexity of emotions which occur is not easy to explain, but its extremely rare for a victim not to blame herself.

When you report a rape, more so then any other crime, the victim is placed on trial, every causal sex encounter, what you were wearing, any sexual comments you make...everything is suddenly fair came to prove you wanted. In my case, it was my best friend who I had lots of frank sex talks with, he was amy best friend, that not out of the ordinary, but had I goen to the pplice my friendship with him would have been used to show I consented when I didn't.

When you cry rape, as a victim you ahd better be prepared to be labeled whore...not exactly what a perosn wants to go through after. On top of that, when you do stop blaming yourself, if you did not report, you suddenly feel guilty about that. The amount of guilt that goes along with being raped is enormous, in that no matter what decision you make you hate yourself.



Docle has a strong maternal instinct, she can be very protective of people, which i can understand, I do that to,s oemtimes when you do this, you lash out, it happens.

Ultimately though, this is a rather senstive issue for alot of woman, and so when a man says "that's nto rape" it tends to inspire heated responses. For an anlogous situation, I remember in a class once discussing a incident of racial discrimination that had happened to me, one of myw hite classmates told me that I was mistaken as to what had happened...I said some rather awful things to that person b/c I didn;t feel they had to right to tellme whether or not I shouod be offended. late rI talked ot this perosn and realizzed they had limited exposure to multi-culturalism and they didn;t realize that the incident would bother me. Whne something effects us, we tend to react strongly, if if a calmer reaction would be more effect.



That is where I disagree, I thought the scene where she got home iwth her husband and yelled at him was ok, but they sho w her about to cry as he's doing it...after that, it seemed like an afterthought. Her intial reaction to him in the car is the only other occurance I can think of where we get some sense that anything happened to her, but that is dropped rather quickly.



That's the problem, insert whatever is precsiely what I want to pin down...what is "whatever"?

Why sis he hairy and slobbering? Most rape victims knwo their attacker, most of the time it happens on date, or in a date like encounter. They hairy slobbering stranger who rapes you at kinfepoint is rare, instead is more often that nice guy who asked you out, doesn;t want to stpo when you say so, and forces himself on you...it may not be particularly violent (the viticm may nnot be totally bruised, bleeding, etc), but its still rape.



Rape is a "women's issue", euthanisia is is conisedered a people issue, its different. Men are often disinterested in issues that they see as effecting only women, which is typical, we care most about what effects us. I care more bout things that effect me directly then about ranbom shit in the middle of nowhere.



There have been alot of national Rape Awareness compaigns, things like Take Back the Night and scuh, typically these only garner interest amoung women.

How about if a someone stuck a finger in your anus? It's not a penis and it could be considered fingering.

Also, on a sidenote, Canadian courts had a discussion about this. Prior to some date (dont know when) Sexual assualt was only seen as penetration of the vagina, until a guy knew of this and raped little girls without penetration and by fondling their breasts since that was not considered in the definition os "sexual". Any sexual actoin that is not consented by a person and that is sexual" as it is now redifined, is seen as sexual assualt (here anyways).