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.
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".
This seems to be directed at my posts so I will respond in kind.
I am not in any way 'vilifying' the RINR campaign. I think it was very effective. I think many viewers believed it was rape and expressed their feelings through the campaign and I do believe the campaign affected the story.
I do not believe it was rape and never did but that is MY opinion (as well as the opinion of others). I still believe a very effective campaign contributed to storyline direction. If there were spoilers PRIOR to the events of 12/29 I have no memory of ever seeing them. I'd love to know where they were published because again I can no believe the lack of media attention such a devastating story should generate. In fact I can't remember a single rape on daytime that wasn't covered extensively.
I do find it interesting that viewers are ok with EJ (if they believe he raped Sami) without undergoing any extensive therapy or self examination, recriminations etc.. I watched Jack Deveraux go into therapy, saw his ghost daddies mess with his head, saw him turn away Jennifer again and again. I saw him unable to be in the same room with Kayla and do whatever he could to somehow atone for what he did. EJ did none of this. So yes - I do find it interesting that a character capable of rape in your opinion, is worthy of being shipped in another relationship without any of this type of work.
FYI - I no longer give a rats ass about Ejami or any other couple on Days - as it is now the suckiest of all crapfests on Daytime.
I'm a former Ejami fan, former Days fan and am just stating my opinion. I'm not here with any axe to grind against Ejole or Lumi. I liked Lumi. Ejole is a snorefest of major proportions and why I finally tuned out. Just because someone disagrees with a point of view doesn't mean they are out to smear an entire fanbase. At least not in my world.