As far as I'm concerned the entire argument of it being a sexual 'assault' committed by Amy is invalidated by the fact the Doctor kisses her back. And then he decides no no, you're getting married, we can't do this.
I think he kissed her back a little when she pressed him against the Tardis. Or rather, he does pucker up his lips a bit thereby making it easier for her to kiss him rather than keeping his mouth resolutely closed and shaking his head around the way you might under serious attack, which could arguably be counted as responding.
However: 1. He spent plenty of the time resisting. 2. It doesn't matter whether he kissed her back a bit if he was saying "No!" and trying to push her off. Which he was. Furthermore he doesn't kiss her back and then change his mind (although if he did, that doesn't invalidate is as assault in any way) - he resisted verbally from the outset.
Frankly Ash I saw this comment yesterday and decided to leave it well alone as the poster is clearly several chapters behind everyone else in their copy of Rape Culture For Dummies.
So he kissed her back, which you agree. And then if the Doctor felt assaulted by her? Why did he take her to Venice?!
People who are sexually assaulted tend not to kiss back their attackers, nor do they invite their attackers to romantic holiday destinations.
I'm sorry, I just do not see your argument that it was sexual assault, when the Doctor kissed her back, and at no point told her to stop because it was wrong, he was telling her to stop because she was getting married tomorrow.
And there was no need to be so rude and say I am clearly several chapters behind in 'Rape Culture For Dummies', just because I happen to disagree with your interpretation of something. Discussions on these topics are always very emotionally charged, and for you to wade in with open insults is I think deeply offensive.
there was no need to be so rude and say I am clearly several chapters behind in 'Rape Culture For Dummies', just because I happen to disagree with your interpretation of something
I wasn't disagreeing with your interpretation of whether the Doctor kissed Amy back or was being assaulted or not.
I was to your assertion that when someone responds to sexual contact, then resists, it can no longer be considered assault. That idea is repellent, offensive, backward and ignorant.
Well, I'm sorry, I'm still at a loss. If it was sexual assault as you claim, why on earth did the Doctor take her with him on his continuing adventures? Why did they continue to be friends? Are you arguing that the Doctor is such an abused victim that he's unable to break away from Amys controlling sexual violence?
My reading of the scene was that Amy tried to jump his bones, he was startled, he started to kiss back, but then he remembered that she is engaged and it would be terribly terribly wrong. Which is what he said.
At no point did he say 'Stop you're assaulting me', instead it was 'Stop, you're getting married tomorrow! And I'm too old for you!'
And I'm not saying that in all cases responding to sexual contact then resisting means its not assault. I'm saying in this case of the Doctor and Amy, I do not think it was sexual assault.
I'm not saying that in all cases responding to sexual contact then resisting means its not assault.
You used the criteria that the Doctor kissed her back as the single invalidating factor in the definition of the event. In what way, exactly, was that not a blanket judgement? You're welcome to take it back, of course - I'm always happy for people to say "No, that's not what I meant, I said it wrong." But you did say it.
If it was sexual assault as you claim, why on earth did the Doctor take her with him on his continuing adventures?
There's a strong argument that I once sexually assaulted the person whose ring I now wear. I continue to be good friends with people on whom I have at some point in the past made unwelcome physical advances. I also continue to be good friends with people who have in the past made physical advances on me that made me uncomfortable.
I'm trying to get away from the semantics here. Much though I got sucked into the argument, I don't really care what people call what happened at the end of that episode. What bothers me is whether people felt that what Amy did was okay - not when she kissed him - but when she persisted in kissing him when he was plainly uncomfortable.
You and your friends didn't read the situation as uncomfortable. You persist in saying that as he didn't say "I'm uncomfortable" that meant he wasn't uncomfortable. You persist in saying that he wouldn't have continued to be friends with her if she'd made him feel uncomfortable. I say that that tells me something about you, your friends, your understanding of sexual politics, and your world view, and I say that I don't like it.
I feel that people here are hiding behind the semantic argument "It doesn't count as assault because..." to try justify the fact that they weren't made to feel uncomfortable by a scene that others think was clearly displaying disrespectful, inappropriate behaviour on the part of Amy. Whether it's because it was female on male, because it was funny, because it was a character that they like perpetrating that offense, I don't care. I just don't care. The fact is that if you watched that scene and Amy's behaviour didn't make you squirm in your seat, then I think you are missing something.
Well okay, thank you for explaining your position. I can definitely see a lot more clearly where you are coming from on this now. Which I very much appreciate.
(And indeed I did not intend for it to be a blanket statement, my opinion was in this case the Doctor kissing back, along with the other stuff I've mentioned, said to me that if she wasn't getting married the next day, he'd have been totally into her. Indeed I think he is totally into her, which is probably a large part of why he then rushed off to take her and her boyfriend to Venice the next day.)
I do still disagree with you though.
I don't think she did persist in kissing him, it took her maybe... 30 seconds? Before she realised it wasn't going to happen, and then she stopped. And up until that point she did have a lot of reasoning to think it was going to happen. (And then there is that greater issue I think of how the Doctor visited her as a little girl, imprinted himself on her, and then returns when she's a hot and sexy young woman. Which is potentially very dodgy if they had ever gone down the Doctor/Amy romance subplot.)
Of course I'm not saying I think your interpration is wrong. As said elsewhere, I think it was one of those scenes that different people are interpreting in very different ways.
I will respectfully disagree with your assumption that me and my friends holding this alternative interpretation tells you anything negative about our understanding of sexual politics however.
Again you're making an assumption here that if a person is into you they are therefore up for whatever you want to force on them. The Doctor absolutely fancies Amy - certainly a bit at least. That doesn't mean he wanted to be jumped by her and it just cannot be used to dismiss the concept that she was wrong to act as she did. This application of information is just so problematic on so many levels.
I think the part I find problematic is, okay. I don't think it was sexual assault. Leaving that to one side, because what I think really doesn't matter a damn in these situations. The person whose opinion really matters, is the victims. If they decide something was sexual assault, then it was sexual assault.
So in this case, did the Doctor think he was sexually assaulted? And, I just don't think he did.
Which... maybe this whole thing was meant as a comment on the RTD era of Ten?
Why on earth would you go and round up someone's fiancee and take them both to Venice together if you were into them???
In fairness, this is totally in-character for the Doctor, particularly given that he has some reason to believe that it's vital that Amy get 'sorted out' somehow and has decided that this means he needs to fix her relationship.
Well, first of all, I think the Doctor and Amy have a lot of flirtatious chemistry. And the Doctor having a bit of a history when it comes to picking up young women to travel with...
Only as we have seen with Rose, when he gives in to these feelings, it always ends badly, because they die, or go away, or something happens. So when he picks up yet another young woman who has a crush on him, it makes sense for him to distract her by fixing things between her and her fiancee, to get him off the hook as object of attraction, no?
I mean, if the Doctor thought she had sexually assaulted him, his Tardis was right there, why did he take her with him?
I'm not saying she was right to do it. I agree, jumping on somebody who genuinely isn't into you, is absolutely not on.
But I don't think this makes what Amy did, a sexual assault. I think that's far too strong a word for it because my personal feeling is that calling it a sexual assault does a dis-service to people who have been sexually assaulted.
Also, I didn't think I'd need to divide it out given my long explanation, but to clarify...
You and your friends didn't read the situation as uncomfortable. I say that that tells me something about you, your friends, and your world view.
You persist in saying that as he didn't say "I'm uncomfortable" that meant he wasn't uncomfortable. You persist in saying that he wouldn't have continued to be friends with her if she'd made him feel uncomfortable.
This tells me something about your understanding of sexual politics.
Just when she throws him against the Tardis, he kisses back, and then he breaks away being all no no, its wrong, you're getting married tomorrow, I'm 900 years old.
(Not it's wrong because you're assaulting me, I might add.)
Well, it pretty much definitely looked like he was kissing back to me and my friends anyway.
The other comment (you just made) is a good one - telling him what you disagree with, and why.
That statement that "if you and your friends pretty much definitely think he was into it then I guess that tells us all we need to know." comes across as saying that if they saw that then that tells you all you need to know about them, which is just pejorative.
If that wasn't what you meant, then fair enough, but try to be a bit clearer, and stick to attacking people's ideas, rather than attacking the people just because they're not in the same place you are, culturally speaking.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2010-05-25 01:04 pm
no subject
no subject
no subject
However:
1. He spent plenty of the time resisting.
2. It doesn't matter whether he kissed her back a bit if he was saying "No!" and trying to push her off. Which he was. Furthermore he doesn't kiss her back and then change his mind (although if he did, that doesn't invalidate is as assault in any way) - he resisted verbally from the outset.
Frankly Ash I saw this comment yesterday and decided to leave it well alone as the poster is clearly several chapters behind everyone else in their copy of Rape Culture For Dummies.
no subject
People who are sexually assaulted tend not to kiss back their attackers, nor do they invite their attackers to romantic holiday destinations.
I'm sorry, I just do not see your argument that it was sexual assault, when the Doctor kissed her back, and at no point told her to stop because it was wrong, he was telling her to stop because she was getting married tomorrow.
And there was no need to be so rude and say I am clearly several chapters behind in 'Rape Culture For Dummies', just because I happen to disagree with your interpretation of something. Discussions on these topics are always very emotionally charged, and for you to wade in with open insults is I think deeply offensive.
no subject
I wasn't disagreeing with your interpretation of whether the Doctor kissed Amy back or was being assaulted or not.
I was to your assertion that when someone responds to sexual contact, then resists, it can no longer be considered assault. That idea is repellent, offensive, backward and ignorant.
no subject
My reading of the scene was that Amy tried to jump his bones, he was startled, he started to kiss back, but then he remembered that she is engaged and it would be terribly terribly wrong. Which is what he said.
At no point did he say 'Stop you're assaulting me', instead it was 'Stop, you're getting married tomorrow! And I'm too old for you!'
And I'm not saying that in all cases responding to sexual contact then resisting means its not assault. I'm saying in this case of the Doctor and Amy, I do not think it was sexual assault.
no subject
You used the criteria that the Doctor kissed her back as the single invalidating factor in the definition of the event. In what way, exactly, was that not a blanket judgement? You're welcome to take it back, of course - I'm always happy for people to say "No, that's not what I meant, I said it wrong." But you did say it.
If it was sexual assault as you claim, why on earth did the Doctor take her with him on his continuing adventures?
There's a strong argument that I once sexually assaulted the person whose ring I now wear. I continue to be good friends with people on whom I have at some point in the past made unwelcome physical advances. I also continue to be good friends with people who have in the past made physical advances on me that made me uncomfortable.
I'm trying to get away from the semantics here. Much though I got sucked into the argument, I don't really care what people call what happened at the end of that episode. What bothers me is whether people felt that what Amy did was okay - not when she kissed him - but when she persisted in kissing him when he was plainly uncomfortable.
You and your friends didn't read the situation as uncomfortable. You persist in saying that as he didn't say "I'm uncomfortable" that meant he wasn't uncomfortable. You persist in saying that he wouldn't have continued to be friends with her if she'd made him feel uncomfortable. I say that that tells me something about you, your friends, your understanding of sexual politics, and your world view, and I say that I don't like it.
I feel that people here are hiding behind the semantic argument "It doesn't count as assault because..." to try justify the fact that they weren't made to feel uncomfortable by a scene that others think was clearly displaying disrespectful, inappropriate behaviour on the part of Amy. Whether it's because it was female on male, because it was funny, because it was a character that they like perpetrating that offense, I don't care. I just don't care. The fact is that if you watched that scene and Amy's behaviour didn't make you squirm in your seat, then I think you are missing something.
no subject
no subject
(And indeed I did not intend for it to be a blanket statement, my opinion was in this case the Doctor kissing back, along with the other stuff I've mentioned, said to me that if she wasn't getting married the next day, he'd have been totally into her. Indeed I think he is totally into her, which is probably a large part of why he then rushed off to take her and her boyfriend to Venice the next day.)
I do still disagree with you though.
I don't think she did persist in kissing him, it took her maybe... 30 seconds? Before she realised it wasn't going to happen, and then she stopped. And up until that point she did have a lot of reasoning to think it was going to happen. (And then there is that greater issue I think of how the Doctor visited her as a little girl, imprinted himself on her, and then returns when she's a hot and sexy young woman. Which is potentially very dodgy if they had ever gone down the Doctor/Amy romance subplot.)
Of course I'm not saying I think your interpration is wrong. As said elsewhere, I think it was one of those scenes that different people are interpreting in very different ways.
I will respectfully disagree with your assumption that me and my friends holding this alternative interpretation tells you anything negative about our understanding of sexual politics however.
no subject
no subject
So in this case, did the Doctor think he was sexually assaulted? And, I just don't think he did.
Which... maybe this whole thing was meant as a comment on the RTD era of Ten?
no subject
This is all very well but that is not what you said. You are making blanket definitive statements, and then qualifying them endlessly.
(no subject)
no subject
And I'm totally with
no subject
In fairness, this is totally in-character for the Doctor, particularly given that he has some reason to believe that it's vital that Amy get 'sorted out' somehow and has decided that this means he needs to fix her relationship.
no subject
Only as we have seen with Rose, when he gives in to these feelings, it always ends badly, because they die, or go away, or something happens. So when he picks up yet another young woman who has a crush on him, it makes sense for him to distract her by fixing things between her and her fiancee, to get him off the hook as object of attraction, no?
I mean, if the Doctor thought she had sexually assaulted him, his Tardis was right there, why did he take her with him?
I'm not saying she was right to do it. I agree, jumping on somebody who genuinely isn't into you, is absolutely not on.
But I don't think this makes what Amy did, a sexual assault. I think that's far too strong a word for it because my personal feeling is that calling it a sexual assault does a dis-service to people who have been sexually assaulted.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
You and your friends didn't read the situation as uncomfortable.
I say that that tells me something about you, your friends, and your world view.
You persist in saying that as he didn't say "I'm uncomfortable" that meant he wasn't uncomfortable. You persist in saying that he wouldn't have continued to be friends with her if she'd made him feel uncomfortable.
This tells me something about your understanding of sexual politics.
no subject
no subject
no subject
(Not it's wrong because you're assaulting me, I might add.)
Well, it pretty much definitely looked like he was kissing back to me and my friends anyway.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
That statement that "if you and your friends pretty much definitely think he was into it then I guess that tells us all we need to know." comes across as saying that if they saw that then that tells you all you need to know about them, which is just pejorative.
If that wasn't what you meant, then fair enough, but try to be a bit clearer, and stick to attacking people's ideas, rather than attacking the people just because they're not in the same place you are, culturally speaking.
no subject
no subject