Supporting Audra's joke about being raped on-stage.- Page 6

[JuliesPoolie]

Posted: 6/11/12 at 10:30pm

All I have to say to you is this: go rent The Crucible. Women can do quite a bit lying in the courtroom. For personal gain, for fun, whatever their reasoning, it happens.

In fact, get a ticket to Chicago! Satire is based in reality. The whole notion of women escaping murder charges in the 20s is true. Better yet, why not examine the entire Red Scare which The Crucible is based upon. A lot of people lied up on those stands.


Updated On: 6/11/12 at 10:30 PM

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 6/11/12 at 10:34pm

Heffer, you cray.

[dexter3]

Posted: 6/11/12 at 10:48pm

Oh man...let's drop this...no one thinks audra is a bad person. If you were offended, SURELY you know that she didn't mean any offense. We get that rape is a touchy subject. Maybe she shouldn't have said it...but it's time to move on.

[KylePKJP]

Posted: 6/11/12 at 10:54pm

Anybody think Audra gives a rat's a$$ about any of this?

Even if you were to only follow her Twitter, you would know what a classy, considerate, down-to-earth yet fierce champion of women she is. She had a pretty good idea she was going to win and likely had a pretty good idea of what she was going to say. She's not a lady who would get up on that stage and "Kathy Griffin" her speech. (No diss to Kathy Griffin)

She said it. She isn't going to take it back. She doesn't have to apologize for it nor go to rehab over it. It was her speech. She knew the context in which she was speaking, and so did her co-stars to whom she was directing her comments. That's it. End of story.

This has nothing to do with us. WE have bigger $hit to worry about.



Updated On: 2/5/13 at 10:54 PM

[tazber]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 4:21am

What is this thread even about anymore? I mean it always smacked of faux outrage, but now it seems to have devolved into one person's private psychodrama.

[Dave19]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 7:20am

Why is there a thread in the first place?

What kind of life does one have to make a problem out of Audra's speech?

[Patash]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 8:03am

"She said it. She isn't going to take it back. She doesn't have to apologize for it nor go to rehab over it. It was her speech. She knew the context in which she was speaking, and so did her co-stars to whom she was directing her comments. That's it. End of story."

So true -- and what does this show? That Audra is a whole lot more intelligent, logical, and sensible than all those people ranting here about things that have nothing to do with an acting performance, winning an award for that performance, and recognizing one's fellow actors who contributed to that performance. That's all the speech was -- are some of you so completely daft you really can't comprehend that fact?

[ShowQueenNYC]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 11:18am

This thread give me the opportunity to ask a question about PORGY AND BESS that I have been meaning to ask for a long time. I saw the show at the first preview, and was a bit confused by the 'rape scene'. I may have been changed later on, but it seemed to me that Bess stopped fighting and may have even used the words "come on" or threw up her arms and gave up...yet went offstage. I am HONESTLY asking this question, not trying to be offensive or flip, just trying to understand one of the many points that seemed to be changes to the show.

Can anyone else shed light on this?

[JuliesPoolie]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 12:13pm

Some of the more psychologically fragile women in this thread will tell you that once she said "no" she meant no. Even if she changed her mind, it's still rape.

And yes, like "I" said a couple of pages back, Audra is one of the most talented, humble, and down-to-earth actors we have in the theatre world right now. Her speech was EXTREMELY heartfelt and just proved, once again, that she can be classy just as much as someone who'd probably be totally down to go out for a beer with you after a show. We're lucky to keep getting her back from Hollywood.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 12:27pm

Really, Julie?

Now you are speaking on behalf of 'fragile women'?!

You've killed the horse and still want to sit here and beat it, don't you?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 1:42pm

Great question Showqueen. The following is from my recollection of what happens in Porgy and Bess, or at least as presented in this production:

Once the boat leaves and Bess is alone on the island with Crown with no safe place to retreat, she submits to forcibly compelled sex.

Obviously many women alone with stronger men with no means of egress might feel that they have no choice but to submit to a sexual advance. But having manifested their agreement, the issue would remain whether the man would then be guilty of rape. Certainly if the man did NOT orchestrate the operative reality of no means of retreat, and the woman ultimately agrees, then it would not be rape. (the same, of course would apply if the two parties were both men).

What distinguishes this scenario is that Crown, against Bess's will, has forced her to stay with him, alone, on the island. That's very different than someone consensually putting her or himself in a situation where she or he is alone with someone else with no ability to leave (or at least when neither party has conceded to the inability to leave the scene - here Crown did much more than concede to the inability to leave the scene, he manipulated it), and then has sex with that person. This distinction - that Crown, with the intent of having sex with Bess, whether she agrees or not, places her against her will in a situation where she is alone with him with no means of retreat, makes it rape. As well as false imprisonment and kidnapping.

Women, or men for that matter, certainly can change their minds having said no to a sexual advance. Having done so, the sex would be consensual. However, when a person is trapped against her or his will by the person making the sexual advance with no means of retreating, and that person intends to, if no consent is acquired, force himself on his victim, that's rape. And when what would otherwise be apparent "consent" - that is, an ultimate "yes" - is acquired only because the victim feels she has no choice but to do so (given that she has no means of escape and the man is clearly intent, no matter what, on having sex with her - as concluded either by her, subjectively, or to any reasonable person in her situation; what the precise standard would be would be a further legal issue - this is not the typical sexual assualt situation so it would be difficult to predict what the standard would be).

***
"You're not answering my question. Someone cited the correct statistic that only 7-9% of rape reports are falsified in some way. So please explain to me why we should penalize, blame, and shame 91% of honest victims who have been through something traumatic because of that small of a margin of "error"? Who wins by doing that? Anecdotal evidence is not enough to punish millions of women who have been through any kind of sexual assault."

I'm not clear on this. Who is punishing women who complain of sexual assault? It is not punishing women to state that there are indeed fabrications of sexual assault - as there are fabrications of all types of crimes. And the statistic you refer to only acknowledges that 7-9% of rape complaints are indisputably fabricated; it in no way answers the question how many are in fact fabricated; we have no way of knowing that. We only have the imperfect but necessary criminal justice system.

But the fact remains that there are fabricated complaints of rape (the Scottsboro Boys, for one instance), as well as wrongful convictions because although a rape quite clearly occurred, the wrong people were convicted (the Central Park rape case - and, if you were in New York then, you would know that the public at large condemned the defendants as guilty long before the wrongful conviction came down; only decades later is it indisputably known that they were not the rapists).

No one should be punished for accusing someone of rape. It is not punishing complainants to submit their accusations to proof, as all accusations are submitted in court, and to consider the possibility that the accusation may in fact be false, a consideration that generally applies in all accusations of all crimes.

The criminal justice system has a horrible record of rebrutalizing complainants in rape cases. This and societal attitudes toward rape victims have thankfully for the most part been corrected. However, one still hears idiotic things (such as the Fox reporter - female by the way - who when addressing rape complaints by female soldiers, stated "What did they expect?" thereby insulting not only these women but male soldiers as well, by implying that male soldiers should not be expected to not rape women because that's what men, given the chance and under sexually limited conditions, do - force themselves on unwilling victims - does she also believe that rape in prison is justifiable????).

Uncertainty is not punishment. Putting facts to the test is not punishment. All we have is the criminal justice system, in which witnesses for the prosecution and the defense, not infrequently, do lie. The point is that the system should treat complainants with respect and the accused with the presumption of innocence. And that the public at large should ideally have the intelligence and understanding of history and its mistakes to keep an open mind, treating everyone involved fairly as well.

Updated On: 6/12/12 at 01:42 PM

[JuliesPoolie]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:25pm

Thank you, henrikegerman, on so many accounts!

[Kelly2]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:41pm

Oh lord. The problem is that rape victims are often subjected to an unfair burden of proof that is much more subjective than that of other crimes. The bigger problem is the way society treats rape and treats women who dare to speak out about it. You can shove all the facts and legal terminology you want into this thread but it will never negate the proven and studied bias against women the process of reporting rape has always had and the FACT that many women, because of people like you and the way the system is constructed, are too scared to report rape when it happens to them. If all women who were raped reported it, the amount of "false" claims would be almost nonexistent, but as it is, the majority of violent sexual assault claims go unreported.

It's gross to suggest otherwise and I think maybe it's time for this thread to go away and a new thread to be started purely for discussion of the show and the handling of rape within that context.

[JuliesPoolie]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:49pm

And you know what, rape committed by women towards men is almost always NEVER reported. Again, if an ugly girl convinces a hot drunk guy who would never sleep with her otherwise to have sex with her, that's rape too. And I'd honestly like to see a lot of those ugly girls see some time behind bars and have to deal with what a lot of men who've been accused of rape have had to go through. It truly can ruin one's life to get accused if the claim is ill-founded or in fact FALSE.

You'd come off a little bit better if you were an advocate against the crime in itself but you're really coming off as just an advocate for the women you choose. It's rather disgusting that you have such a sexual bias.

Updated On: 6/12/12 at 02:49 PM

[Kelly2]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:51pm

Julie,
Men do not need me as an advocate. Society and the justice system are biased enough towards them already.

[JuliesPoolie]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:55pm

Except when it comes to rape cases. See the Central Park rape case.

Updated On: 6/12/12 at 02:55 PM

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:55pm

Of course it would have to be an ugly girl doing the raping. Hot girls don't have to rape anyone. Speaking of a gender bias.

[RainbowJude]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:56pm

All this controversy about a "rape joke" that never happened. It's bizarre.

[JuliesPoolie]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 2:57pm

If it's someone the defended (in this case male) would NEVER sleep with sober and she initiated the sex, then yes, rape all over.

[KylePKJP]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 3:06pm

This seriously needs to go to Off-Topic now.

[Kelly2]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 3:09pm

I think this seriously needs to go to the glue factory.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 3:52pm

"The problem is that rape victims are often subjected to an unfair burden of proof that is much more subjective than that of other crimes."

Kelly2, I would agree with you about changing the system further if I agreed with your premise that rape victims are treated unfairly in court. But I don't.
With all do respect, why do you believe this is the case?
In what way is the burden of proof on the prosecution unfair and in what way is the burden more subjective than in other crimes? How would you change the system to be fairer to the complainant then you believe it to presently be?





Updated On: 6/12/12 at 03:52 PM

[Playbilly]

Posted: 6/12/12 at 4:13pm

You people are still talking about this? So last Sunday ago.

[CurtainUp2]

Posted: 6/14/12 at 2:19pm

I agree. It was highly insensitive. And I'll thank the poster above to refrain from being judgmental by saying things like "not getting our panties twisted" or whatever his or her expression was.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 6/14/12 at 2:26pm

"Gentlemen, you can't bicker in here. This is the internet!"