Irresponsible (313)

[Luz]

I think we have an issue of semantics here.. of meaning perhaps not translating well? My understanding of what Ken is saying the writers think is funny is the timeless story device - not the over-analysis of the fans. However, if I am misunderstanding Ken, then I still don't see how that equates to the writers thinking it's funny that people have gotten upset over this ep. Thinking it's funny that the fans analyse every ep down to the microscopic level - and let's face it, we *do* - is a far cry from suggesting that they think people like yourself getting upset over the subject of sexual assult (which was never meant to be the focus of the episode anyway) is entertaining.

I thought it could be read two ways, I'm not sure what he meant and each way I try still sounds pretty insulting. What's he saying?, a) The writers thought the device of the love potion (or having Lucius drugging and raping those women) would be funny, or b) that it's funny having people thinking that Lucius using that potion to force himself of those women was rape.

[Trialia]

*frustrated sigh* You're generalising, and I did say that I am not in this discussion just for myself. If I knew I was the only person who'd been badly upset by this episode I probably wouldn't be here.

There are some things - yes, any form of sexual assault is an example, but not the only subject - that should be treated with a damn sight more sensitivity than has been shown here. I'm not being selfish. Worldwide media have a great deal of power and that power needs to be exercised with responsibility.

Violence is one thing. Stargate has always been a franchise wherein a certain level of violence is usual and therefore anticipated. Something like this isn't usual and it isn't anticipated and it should have been handled a damn sight better than it HAS been.

Am I making myself sufficiently clear and comprehensive? Or are you just wilfully ignoring me because you think I'm hopelessly biased?

[jonno]

This is exactly what Lucious does. He takes a formula (He does NOT as you say "Give a woman mind altering drugs."") that makes him appear as a charming sexy guy. The woman is not foggy and drug addled, unconcious or drunk -- she is just seeing things from a diferent perspective.

OK, as a Biologist, i'd say you could argue that that is exactly what he does do, in a round about way. A pheramone is a chemical that interacts with receptors in the body that send messages down neurones to the sunconscious part of the brain, affecting it in some way. In this case, the potion causes Lucius's body to synthesise the pheramone in question, which comes into contact with the victim, and ALTERS the brain on a SUBCONSIOUS level, and as it's an especially powerful signal in this case, the consious brain apparently can't overpower it - ie there is nothing the victim can do about it. In this case, it makes a revolting person seem like a love god. It is also apparent from the withdrawel effects Carson and the villages went through that it also caused a change in concentrations of the brain chemicals - changing the brain chemistry (i'm not an expert in brain hormone chemistry, but I do know that what makes something feel good etc is all to do with the release and concentration of various neurotransmitter chemicals and the like).

A drug is a chemical that is absorbed into the bloodstream and moves to the brain where it ALTERS the brain chemisty on a SUBCONSIOUS level - ie, there is nothing they can do about it.

OK, so the pheramone gets to the brain as a different signal to a drug, but in both it effects the signal pathways and chemical balance in the neurones of the brain at an unconsious level.

If you don't like the comedy episodes of Stargate, hey, that's cool -- I won't try to change your mind -- but why try to ruin the fun for those that do, by over-analysing the character and trying to apply "real-world" concetes to classic sci-fi story devices (such as the Love potion).

And that's one to grow on.

Ken

Hold on - that's part of the reason why we're here on the forum - to analyse and discuss the characters and concepts the writers have put in the show. Or to throw it back to the writers perspective, do you want to write a show where character and plot continuity can be disregarded just to serve the story the writers think is the bees knees, or do you want to write a well rounded action-drama with a touch of darkness at some times and humour at others, which just happens to be set in the background of a sci-fi universe.

Personally, and in the early seasons of SG-1, I thought the franchise was the second of the two options. And i had no objection to the humor episodes - Window of Opportunity is my fave, and from an Atlantis perspective, Duet was also darn amusing. However in this episode, the vast majority of comments here (and i'm basing this on the comments ... as a Brit I can't see it yet) have indicated that Joe and Paul have for some unknown reason disregarded continuity in terms of the shield device and apparently have plumped again for the 'lowest common denominator' type humour.

I like my Stargate humour to be intelligent and slick not oily and creepy as Lucius is.

I should also point out that this episode has drawn the most negative comments for an individual episode in a while. That usually means in a place like this where people are often die hard fans that the vast majority of people thought it a poor episode - and as a writer, shouldn't you try to please as many people as possible? To draw a response like this, you must have done something bad.

Finally - sorry if this appears as an attack on you Ken ... it isn't. From all reports you have a great grasp of character continuity etc. I think many people are concerned that this is the second JM/PM Atlantis episode in less than one season that have for the vast majority resorted to the lowest common denominator humour - the humour that evidently draws the most negative reaction from fans here.

Wow. For an episode that i haven't seen, that was longer than i thought!

[caty]

*frustrated sigh* You're generalising, and I did say that I am not in this discussion just for myself. If I knew I was the only person who'd been badly upset by this episode I probably wouldn't be here.

There are some things - yes, any form of sexual assault is an example, but not the only subject - that should be treated with a damn sight more sensitivity than has been shown here. I'm not being selfish. Worldwide media have a great deal of power and that power needs to be exercised with responsibility.

Violence is one thing. Stargate has always been a franchise wherein a certain level of violence is usual and therefore anticipated. Something like this isn't usual and it isn't anticipated and it should have been handled a damn sight better than it HAS been.

Am I making myself sufficiently clear and comprehensive? Or are you just wilfully ignoring me because you think I'm hopelessly biased?

That's just it... In your opinion there was some form of sexual assault, in mine there wasn't... If I didn't visit this forum, I never even would have gotten the idea. I took it as humerous as it was meant to be..

Nobody is wilfully ignoring you, but I do think you're hopelessly biased... You have said that yourself more than once.

[The Ori]

Need more action!!

[Trialia]

That's just it... In your opinion there was some form of sexual assault, in mine there wasn't... If I didn't visit this forum, I never even would have gotten the idea.

Lucius' six wives. Those marriages, as Lucius said himself, made after a lack of consent on the part of at least one of his wives, were made under the influence of his herb. Therefore, non-consensual, therefore, any consummation of any one of those marriages, and one would naturally presume most marriages to be consummated, would de facto be rape. Does that explanation clarify my opinion on the subject?

[caty]

Lucius' six wives. Those marriages, as Lucius said himself, made after a lack of consent on the part of at least one of his wives, were made under the influence of his herb. Therefore, non-consensual, therefore, any consummation of any one of those marriages, and one would naturally presume most marriages to be consummated, would de facto be rape. Does that explanation clarify my opinion on the subject?

Sorry, maybe it's the language but you've totally lost me there...

EDIT: But your opinion on the subject is crystal clear...

[Luz]

Nobody is wilfully ignoring you, but I do think you're hopelessly biased... You have said that yourself more than once.

And so what if a person is biased?, will you disregard her opinion?, because that's what it seems with your bringing it up. I felt insulted by the way the issue was handled on Irresistible, and by the fact that Lucius got away with it (when I think as a punishment he should have had his skin ripped off of him, and lemon juice and salt throw over him). I have never been sexually assaulted though, is my opinion more valid because I'm not 'biased'?, oh wait, I absolutely loath Lucius, so I guess my opinion is 'biased', and not valid.
But then off course you'll say you were never implying that anyone's opinion isn't valid based on their feelings on the subject, or their feelings towards that filthy scumbag.

[Trialia]

Sorry, maybe it's the language but you've totally lost me there...

Sorry. Give me a moment and I shall try to translate (my German is quite rusty).

[caty]

And so what if a person is biased?, will you disregard her opinion?, because that's what it seems with your bringing it up. I felt insulted by the way the issue was handled on Irresistible, and by the fact that Lucius got away with it (when I think as a punishment he should have had his skin ripped off of him, and lemon juice and salt throw over him). I have never been sexually assaulted though, is my opinion more valid because I'm not 'biased'?, oh wait, I absolutely loath Lucius, so I guess my opinion is 'biased', and not valid.
But then off course you'll say you were never implying that anyone's opinion isn't valid based on their feelings on the subject, or their feelings towards that filthy scumbag.

I did not bring it up, Trialia brought it up herself... She asked if we thought she was biased and I answered her honestly... How is that disregarding an opinion? Have I ever implied that she can't have her own opinion or that her opinion isn't worth anything? Read before you say something like that.

And BTW: She did not seem upset that I answered her question...

[expendable_crewman]

I've never liked the "love potion" as a plot device in any media, I find it childish. I don't find it funny that the writers seem to think it hilarious that this episode upset so many people in such a very serious way. Sexual assault isn't something that should be played with like that. We've been trying to change that in the world because comedy like this just encourages the culture of silence around SA if victims think that they are going to be involved in a humour device and embarrassed if they come forward. It wasn't anything like as well done in "Irresistible" as it needed to be, and you need to address the possibility that your work may upset people as seriously as it has here.

Honestly, it disgusts and angers me that y'all seem to think people getting upset over this is funny. And you think his not getting the hearts of the women he assaulted is sufficient comeuppance? Are you mad? Do you have any idea what something like that will leave with those six "wives" for the rest of their lives? At all?

Trialia, I tried to find a character on TV I intensely disliked and remembered a character on Prison Break who so flips my switch that I've given up the show until he gets killed off. [Edit] I like Prison Break but the guy's part of the regular cast, so I'm out of luck. [End Edit]

Reflecting on that choice helped me put your comments in perspective.

Listen, I've worked with SA survivors, and that's all I'm going to say about that, except I know the trauma you're talking about.

For me nothing works after something on TV flips that switch except changing the channel.

I stated in the Irresistible thread that I think Lucius's herb caused a "free will" disconnect, which in my state is rape. But for me Irresistible was about Sheppard reacting to a scenario in which his peers and staff turned on him. Lucius was a device, not the main event. And for me, Irresponsible had the team together and in danger and it had Kolya.

Did I cringe when Sheppard said hey maybe Lucuis had learned his lesson? You bet.

I picked up on the "redemption" angle the ep was trying to take. It missed its landing with me, maybe not so with others, and that's okay. I'm just one person. After reading the thread, I'm thinking it won't take with me until the writing for this character (if he returns) addresses the "skeeve" factor. If the writers don't get it, they will never address it, and I'll cross that bridge if I have to. So far, there's more to like in the two Lucius eps than dislike and I'm comfortable enjoying the parts I liked.

Anyway, I just wanted to say that although I don't see the ep or Lucius the way you do, I get where you're coming from.

[caty]

Sorry. Give me a moment and I shall try to translate (my German is quite rusty).

You don't have to do it in German, just explain it some more.. I'm usually quite good at English

[Trialia]

You don't have to do it in German, just explain it some more.. I'm usually quite good at English

Well, okay then! At least that means I don't have to dig out my dictionary (it's been years since I've actually used my German in conversation).

Lucius' marriages were made while his wives were under the influence of his herb. He said himself that at least one of them wouldn't have married him without it. Marriages are usually cemented by a sexual relationship, so going by that, he had sex with all of them, and going by the fact that they were drugged, it was without their unimpaired consent, so it was rape.

That any better of an explanation? I'm sorry for getting a little windy in my word usage. I tend to try not to use more words than I must with something this important in case I veer off point and end up sounding like I'm saying something very different.


EC: thank you.

[Skydiver]

Guys please.

I am well aware that aspects of this episode are treading close to some very 'dangerous' waters and personal issues/squicks of people. And perhaps that is the sign of a good episode, one that gets the discussion going. However, please, let's take things down a notch please. While i am aware that sexual assault/non-con sex is not a joke amongst some, not everyone may share your particular point of view.

Let's see if we can discuss the episode without sidetracking that discussion into the aspects of non-con. And if the non-con angle does come up, let's please try to discuss it clinically please.

And while we're doing all this, let's please try to maintain a level of respect towards each other

[Luz]

I totally agree, Ali! You practically took the words out of my mouth!

Trialia: You want people to put themselves in your position, but keeping in mind what Ali said, you don't put yourself in the position of the 'normal' viewer whose judgement isn't shadowed by personal experience.
If TPTB indeed thought of everything that people might associate with something they film, we would have no show cause there'd be nothing left...

Have I ever implied that she can't have her own opinion or that her opinion isn't worth anything? Read before you say something like that.

When you said that she couldn't see the episode in the same light a 'normal' viewer whose judgment isn't shadowed by personal experience, what did you mean?. Because to me it seemed like you were saying that her opinion didn't hold the same value than that of a person who hadn't suffered from a sexual assault. And btw, she didn't ask you if you thought she was biased, she asked you if you were willfully ignoring her because you thought she was biased.