Audiences too sensitive when it comes to sexual aggression?

Post Reply New Topic

Oh okay, and that is what I mean, I am not endorsing any real life assault, but if a person can be turned on by this sort of thing in the movies, than is it really that bad to have it in modern movies then, and not be so PC all the time?

It seems me to that moviegoers have this attitude that if a woman is turned on sexually by something, it has to be a politically correct turn on and she cannot be turned on by any type of aggression, with I think is kind of silly, cause why does a forbidden fantasy scenario, have to be politically correct, if that makes sense?

I think that having it portrayed positively in movies could lead some to think that it’s okay in real life.

I just think that it’d be really irresponsible as well as triggering for some.

It would make a lot of movie-goers stop routing for that character, too.

There are lots of different ways to portray sex other than from an aggressive stance.

Why is this such a big deal to you? It’s a little odd, honestly.

Oh it's not a big deal per say, I just felt that maybe audiences were being too PC about it maybe. As for being irresponsible, well the movies show characters do all sorts of things in real life that are not good, so would this be any different really?

I didn't think the line was drawn here at this point, compared to everything else that goes on, unless I am wrong. As for whether or not it is irresponsible, I suppose I'd just prefer whatever serves the story and characters best, not what is looking out in the best behavior of the audience, unless that's bad of me.

I think it’s irresponsible if it’s portrayed positively - if the character responsible for the aggression is the main character who we are supposed to be routing for.

It’s different if sexual violence is committed by a villain although I’d probably avoid a movie with any sexual violence in it.

Most audiences just aren’t comfortable with this stuff, so it’s in most people’s best interests to leave it out.

Oh yeah that makes sense, I just thought if the woman responds positively and is into it, and wants the guy back such as the case in Thunderball, then it's okay, if she thinks so, and therefore no reason to hate the main character necessarily. If she doesn't respond positively than it's more villainous for sure. But I thought that her positive response, would make all the difference, wouldn't it?

I haven’t watched Thunderball.

What if she didn’t respond positively? You can’t decide if something is or isn’t okay by the way a person responds to it because by then it is too late.

In real life, I’d never respond well if a guy forcefully tried to kiss me. In movies, a woman often dislikes it at first then changes her mind halfway through the kiss. That’s really not cool.

I haven’t seen the movie, though, so it might be different than I’m envisioning it.

The movie is kind of along those lines where the kiss is forced, and then she resists, but then responds and likes it. Yeah if she didn't change her mind at all, then that would be bad.

But as far as the woman deciding to like it, being not cool, why is it not cool though exactly? I mean if the character doesn't care and she think it's cool, then why should we the audience be bothered by it, if she isn't it?

*TRIGGER WARNING*

No that's a dangerous thing to portray. If the man on screen is forcing her to kiss him and she doesn't want it, but then she stops resisting and seems into it, that sends not only a bad message, but a dangerous one.

It can make men think that they can just force women into sexual situations and if she struggles then he'll think, "it's ok, she'll melt into it and like it if I keep going." When in reality, she stops fighting because she's not strong enough to push him away and freezes, waiting for it to be over. That's how (Well one way) sexual assault and rape happens.

Also it could lead others to disbelieve the victim and they think, "Oh but you must have wanted it"

There have been people who have said no to sex and then accepted sex for whatever reason. The person who initiated the sex still committed a crime. If the person says no then it's rape, and guess what, that will send you to jail. Just because Bond's partner eventually accepted the kiss doesn't mean that it wasn't sexual assault. This has come up recently with Katy Perry. She kissed a contestant who said he was a virgin and wanted his first kiss to be with someone special. Instead she forced a kiss on him. There was barely any outrage for this assault. Katy Perry is sick.

Good video about consent. James Bond is rubbish at this.

Good video about consent! ^^

The stuff portrayed in Bond movies and countless others is depicting and encouraging male entitlement. It’s not good.

We’re gradually moving away from that as a society, so I’m really happy that movies aren’t showing sexual aggression in a positive light as much anymore.

Yay for progress!

Oh okay I see, I just thought that since the woman chose to be with Bond after, then it must not have been bad for her, if she chooses to be his gf.

I just watched the Kate Perry thing. After she kisses the guy, the guy reacted positively too it and did seem appalled or disturbed by it in anyway. He was smiling about it, so should we care, if he doesn't seem to?

Yes because he didn't want to be kissed and he was in shock, not happy about the kiss. She sexually assaulted him and nothing is being said.

He should have filed charges but he didn't want it https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/0 ... l-assault/

Oh okay, I read here he was uncomfortable about it:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 57726.html

Well that stinks, if he feels that he was assaulted, why aren't charges being pressed? No one wants to take Katy Perry to trial with her money? They still might be able to talk into plea bargaining to avoid a trial, so why don't they?