- Feb 16 2009, 10:31 PM
No matter how you slice it, that scene was written as a rape.
- Feb 16 2009, 10:18 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deepDENA HIGLEY
That is what I disagree with - I don't think it was originally written to be construed as a rape at all. But their was a viewer backlash with the scene and the next thing you know 'EJ raped Sami'.
The word rape wasn't even said originally - and then a few weeks down the road it's the only word that is EVER used.
Just another example of a horribly executed story that sacrificed multiple couples and potential couples in it's long destructive path. I really believe 12/29 may go down in history as on of the WORST blunders in the history of Days if not all soaps. The far reaching effects of how completely short sighted and craptastic the writing was are astounding IMO.
I'm just jumping in right here for a second. I'm not going to get into the whole rape debate again, but I will say this, no one "caved" to the rape is not romance campaign. If they had, Sami NEVER would have gone to bed willingly with EJ in May. Prior to the campaign ever existing, spoilers indicated that EJ was going to rape Sami. The word "rape" was actually in spoilers before it ever happened on our screens or any campaign was ever organized. So I really wish that some would stop trying to villify a campaign that some felt very strongly about. The purpose of the campaign was to express a strong opposition to the romaticizing of a man who raped a woman, and the woman in question.
One more thing, when those opposed to EJ and Sami ever pairing up because of the rape (and all of the other horrendous things that he did to her and her family), several of us were accused of trying to get James fired. We were accused of wanting EJ written off and therefore wanting James to be out of a job. However, when some of us found that we could accept and even enjoy him with another female character, we are accused of being "interesting" hypocrites because we couldn't accept him with the woman he raped, but we can accept him with another woman even though "once a rapist always a rapist". :shrug:
So what I am gathering from that, is we either accept EJ with Sami, or nothing at all, otherwise we are "interesting".
I hated Jack when he raped Kayla. I never would have accepted her forgiving him and then staying in a relationship with him and continuing some preposterous "romance". I did, however, fall under the spell of Jack and Jennifer. I found myself pulled into the heart-wrenching story of a man who hated himself for the awful thing he had done, who believed himself unworthy of love, and resisted the love of a beautiful young woman who would not give up on him. Through Jennifer, Jack grew, healed, and moved forward as a character, and developed an enormous following. Clearly, some EJ fans do not want that for EJ, they want Sami or nothing at all. Which is fine, but I think accusing those fans who do genuinely appreciate his character in a different story with a different female of being false and/or hypocritical is extremely biased and unfair, not to mention wrong. And throwing around the Rape is not Romance campaign as a scapegoat for why Ejami didn't work, or why the "event" on 12/29 was called rape, is ridiculous and insulting to those of us who took that campaign very seriously, and were genuinely repulsed by the idea of a character willingly getting romantic with the man who raped her and so much more ...