They're not even close to comparable, Dominic. Just shut up now before you dig your hole even deeper.

But props for finally using the right word!

This bothered me as well. As soon as it became clear he's just a scumbag broker it became much less interesting to me. Also much less timely, because the people who society thinks of as the most villainous in the current era are not the measly brokers.

It barely even qualifies as a critique of Wall Street.

I stand by my statement. Both are equally ridiculous conclusions.
And yes, I'm happy I'm finally learning proper vocabulary terms.

Another problem I have with it being called rape is that she realizes she can use it as a tool to punish him one last time. It seemed like she had the power in this scene much more than he did similar to the scene when she is taunting him opening her legs with the security guards watching earlier in the film. I just cannot wrap my head around her being "raped" in this scene.

Yeah, that's basically what I guessed.

Seems weird to me, but I can't exactly put my finger on why.

Jesus ****ing Christ, she doesn't start "using it as a tool" (if you can use being raped as a "tool") until she has angrily said no several times and he winds up (presumably) forcing her down and getting inside her.

Like, there's a slight chance that it wasn't rape depending on semantics and what happens in the cut between them standing and them lying down (plus most of us only saw it once). But a lot of you are going way too far in the other direction and are taking clear misogynist moron positions. Wake up.

Question: If the movie had shown him wrestling her down, with her fighting and saying "no" until he forces his way inside of her, with her finally deciding to work with it after that, would you still consider it clearly not-rape?

Dude, just stop with this dumb argument. You're wrong.

So now you're asking to define whether something was rape that is not in the movie?

I'm definitely starting a thread next month called 'I Spit on Your Grave: Male Rape Fantasy or Feminist Revenge/Empowerment Tract?'

...can't it be both?

I'm impressed, quite correct. Of course it is, but most people would only see it as one or the other, depending on their point of view.

As is the case for what one thinks happened in WoWS.

Rape, lol.

That whole lemon quelude scene was fkn awesome.Wish they still had those, I'd love to try!

The thread was created explicitly to discuss this argument, so if your contribution is "stop talking about this", move along to a thread more suited to your tastes. FYI, misogynists are on the wrong side of history.

It's quite possibly what happened during the jump-cut. We don't know, and for whatever reason it was left ambiguous (but I'd lean towards that being what happened and that's a perfectly defensible interpretation).

Now seeing it as rape is "defensible", but before even speculating that there might not be enough there to call it rape was "****ing gross". You mewling clay-brained foot-licker. Seriously after all the people who simply lolled at it being rape, you called me out.

Guys, I thought we were past this, it was rape.

She says no, there is a jump cut, she says get off me, he says he just wants to love her, she says fine you want to **** me then cum for me like its the last time.

If their was consent during the jump cut then it doesn't really make sense for her to then say get off me. And even if there was consent in the jump cut when she removes consent and he doesn't get off then it rape.

There is absolutely nothing ambiguous about the rape scene. You guys should just accept that it was a rape scene and go back to making the distinction that it's ok to film rapey behaviour since it's a story about a rapist (which is a perfectly reasonable view, IMO).

I also don't understand the whole "she's REALLY the one taking power from him" argument. I'm sure that's what all the rapists tell themselves to convince themselves it's not rape. It's in no way a feminist power fantasy as I'm pretty sure most feminist would find that scene disgusting and horrible for the woman involved.

I would agree with this. But there is a difference between giving consent for something you aren't 100% into and what happened in WOWS.

Are saying I said the scene in question may be interpreted as feminist empowerment? Cos I didn't.

You missed my point entirely. I should be clearer in future.

Ya sorry, I wasn't entirely sure if you were joking because others were making that argument.

I should have quoted this guy

OK fair enough

In what way is his stupid analogy at all comparable? If you're a woman saying 'no' to a man, you always know that he doesn't have to listen to you because he's bigger and stronger. As a women, you can always be 'cajoled' to say yes. If you're a man and your wife wants to buy something that you don't want to buy, how exactly is she forcing you to say yes? Is she gonna physically hold you down and force you to hand over the checkbook?

It's a stupid ****ing analogy and it minimizes exactly what happens in a rape to a woman. There's no comparison, point blank.

You can't redefine the meaning of the word "cajole" to make it fit into "rape" or, (like I accidentally did) "coerce."

Yelling and stomping your feet up and down, insisting that what I'm describing is, in fact, rape, does not make it so.

Yes, the man can physically overpower the woman in a marriage. I'm not in any way shape or form saying that if that happens, then it's okay. As you well know. But you just want to antagonize and not discuss. Got it.

And yes, let's also minimize the power a woman has to emotionally, financially, and sexually control her husband...but that's okay, I guess, because when she does, it's only a woman empowering herself, right? As long as she doesn't physically intimidate him or hit him, no worries!

It's only the big, bad Man that does unsavory things in a marriage.

Still thinking on the issue. He doesn't actually go inside her until she says "you want to cum inside me...go ahead...**** me like its our last time" correct? Like isn't it possible he doesnt realize she doesnt want to sex and is trying some type of fourplay (sp?) to get her in the mood with all the other antics?

It's fine if you want to criticize but literally the whole time I was watching the scene I was thinking damn, she did him dirty right there and not the other way around. Let's be real also, she didn't really resist very much. I understand when a girl says "no" that means no but when we are talking about marriage I think the situation becomes dependent. Some marriages don't consist of crazy sex and fourplay so in this instance I would understand calling it rape. However, in WOWS it's pretty clear that these two had a rather promiscuous sex life and therefore I think the lines are a bit different throwing this scene in the fourplay category. I'm sure there are many times in these promiscuous marriages that this **** is just normal. The real question is does the wife think she was raped. Given her character played in the movie and the way she reacts in the movie following the scene I would say she did not feel she was sexually taken advantage of.

The rape defendants acting as if every situation is the same in every marriage are tilting the **** out of me. Things are situation dependent and you are inferring just as much as I am in the above. So saying things like "It's rape, get over it" aren't helping anyone. The true answer is in some situations this would be considered rape and in some situations it won't. So get over it.

This is the last time I'm addressing this because I find this whole conversation around WoWS personally disturbing in ways you can't even begin to understand. This is your post from the Movies thread re the scene in question:

You are saying that it's OK for a man to physically overpower a woman in marriage because you don't consider that scene in WoWS to be rape. How do you not see that couching it in a different, softer term like 'cajoling' is effectively rending those actions acceptable? If he's laying on top of her in WoWS so she can't move and she's already said no, how is that not physically overpowering her? In a nutshell, this is what my issue is in regards to your past posts.

And I have no idea what relevance your last two paragraphs have on the discussion at all.