Does Melchior rape Wendla in SPRING AWAKENING?- Page 7

[insertclevernamehere]

Posted: 2/3/08 at 9:09pm

Snl89, even if the concept of rape is unknown to Melchior, Wendla said stop. She said no. Those words were not unknown in 1900 Germany.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/3/08 at 9:09pm

You really need to spend a minute looking up the meaning of "facetious."

No means no. Rape is non-consenual. Not limited to one KIND of non-consensual sex.

ETA: Yes, exactly, insertclevernamehere. I'm sure he learned the basic etiquette of what someone telling you "NO" or "stop" means. In whatever context.

I'm done with this discussion.

Updated On: 2/3/08 at 09:09 PM

[snl89]

Posted: 2/3/08 at 10:02pm

Ok, last response, and then I promise I'm done with this convo as well haha


Snl89, even if the concept of rape is unknown to Melchior, Wendla said stop. She said no. Those words were not unknown in 1900 Germany.

Yes, of course he should no that when someone asks you to stop something, you stop. This is why, when she did ask him to stop, he didn't just keep going and ignore her. He responded to her. He told her not to be scared, and that it was just him. And, most importantly, he didn't actually do anything more than kiss her until she agreed to it. Yes, he pushed her into it, and yes, it wasn't great of him to do that. But I'm just saying that that's the difference between what he would have known back then and the way we grow up in today's society. To him, when she says no, he doesn't realize it's wrong to try and persuade her farther. The way I see it is if you compare it to any teenager trying to convince their parents that they want something. If a kid in high school walks around all the time pestering their parents for a car, we don't really view at WRONG, do we? annoying maybe, but nothing bad. Now we've been taught that when someone says no, you respect that, but that doesn't mean that we can't get caught up in selfishness and push things like that, right? Well, to Melchior, THAT is what sex is. It's simply a thing. A thing that he has read about in books and wants very badly, which is all the more perpetuated by the fact that he knows he's not supposed to have it. So yes, he becomes pushy in the SAME way that a teenager today would become pushy about wanting a car or something else like that. And that sounds so wierd to US because WE have grown up in a society where we have been taught from day 1 that sex is a very intimate, emotional act that is not to be taken lightly and not to be undetaken without the FULL consent of both parties. But to him, his learned politeness causes him not to ignore her when she asks him to stop, but it doesn't stop him from pushing it until she gives in, just like any teenager might do with any other thing they might want very badly.



AGAIN: not trying to say that he's totally innocent. I'm just defending where he's coming from a bit because I DO think there are very valid points to it and people tend to see those valid points in Wendla's case but not so much in Melchior's.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 3:55pm

snl, people like you are the reason so many rapists get away with their crimes. Your comments on this topic aren't just wrong, they're seriously disturbing.


I'm very, very willing to bet none of the books he read ever delved into the idea of sex, if it is not wanted, being a painful and scarring experience.

What, when you see Spring Awakening for the 30th time, do they give you a special reading list of Melchoir's personal library? You continue to claim he didn't know rape existed, but there have been books delving into rape since Ancient Greek mythology and the women killed themselves after being raped by gods. Since he is very clearly portrayed as well-read in the play and the musical, of course he would have come across the concept and the consequences of rape.

You're just making things up to support your argument and hope no one will notice your repeated "guarantees" are biased, narrow-minded assumptions and not provable facts.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:05pm

I don't know who said it, but I'm most disturbed by the remark that once Wendla stopped resisting him, it was her own fault.

[snl89]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:25pm

wow, I'm sorry, I'm not even quite sure where to begin in responding to that. First off, I'd just like to reiterate for the gazzilionth time that I am NOT condoning rape in the least. I never, NEVER would. And I am obviously not the only one who doesn't feel that what Melchior does is truly rape, or else we wouldn't be debating it. So to imply that somehow my opinions on this issue condone rape is very offensive to me. This is a case where the situation is not that clear cut, and so people are going to have differing opinions on it. Just because someone's opinion does not match yours, that doesn't mean it's "seriously disturbing". I hope that I have not come off as though I'm bashing other peoples' beliefs that it is rape (if I have, please, by all means, let me know, because I didn't mean to), and all I request is the same courtesy back.

Secondly, maybe you're right. Maybe I'm WAY off base here. But I still tend to lean toward the idea that Melchior probably does not know the idea of rape. And I guess I was admittedly a little bit strong in my wording on the issue. There might have been mention of rape in books back then. The books in which he read about sex might have touched on it. But I do not think I was entirely wrong to guess, based on what we know of the society in which he grew up, that he might not have read about it. I'm not making it up for the heck of it; I just don't think that it seems that realistic that the books he read would discuss rape. And if they did, then I do have a weaker basis for my argument and I fully aknowledge that. I don't think it would be entirely dimminished, as it's still painfully obvious that their society did NOT have the same "no means no" standards we have today, but yes, it would be quite a bit weaker.

But just like I don't have clear cut evidence that he hasn't learned about rape, you also have no clear cut evidence that he has, and yet you too say "of course he would have come across the concept and the consequences of rape". The argument doesn't just go one way- if you're going to say things like that, I should be able to also without getting bashed for it

Updated On: 2/4/08 at 04:25 PM

[bwaygal1]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:30pm

She said no. End of story. She may believe she 'let him love her' but from the moment she said no, it became rape.

[Jonny boy]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:32pm

It wasn't rape in the slightest!

[george95]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:37pm

SNL89, I do not know how you deal with all these people and their rude postings to you......Seriously is there a rule on BWW that if if you disagree with somebody, you have to be insulting when you criticize their argument? But wow good job to you SNL89 for not stooping down and getting rude back.....I dont think I could have kept my cool that well.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:40pm

I am NOT condoning rape in the least.

Oh, but honey, you ARE. You're going on and on with excuses for Melchior and about how we owe Melchior some sort of courtesy. She said no. She did not give consent. He did. it. any.way. Non-consensual sex. Form. of. rape. And you are making excuses for it. You may not be condoning the modern criminalized "version" of rape, and no, you're not saying it's okay for a man to rape a woman as you see rape, but that's only because you refuse to expand your narrow-minded definition. You are finding all sorts of reasons why what this character engaged in is not so bad.

Why don't you spend a little less time repeating yourself and a little bit more time getting the idea of non-consent through your pretty little head?

And I am obviously not the only one who doesn't feel that what Melchior does is truly rape, or else we wouldn't be debating it

And this is why I have said over and over again that this is due to problems with the writing.

don't think it would be entirely dimminished, as it's still painfully obvious that their society did NOT have the same "no means no" standards we have today, but yes, it would be quite a bit weaker.

How do you know that? How is that "painfully obvious?" How do you know he didn't just ignore what he was taught because he had a hard-on? Going on about lack of evidence and then saying stuff like that is pretty hypocritical.

But just like I don't have clear cut evidence that he hasn't learned about rape, you also have no clear cut evidence that he has, and yet you too say "of course he would have come across the concept and the consequences of rape".

At least orangeskittles had some historical background to support what she's saying. You're just making things up based on how you feel about the characters.

Updated On: 2/4/08 at 04:40 PM

[Jonny boy]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:41pm

You get use to it here george95

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:48pm

The Rape of Lucretia, anyone? If he's studying the classics, he'd know it.

[george95]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:50pm

well I'm an academic so its challenging for me to deal with people who are so condescending and seemingly anti-intellectual. Could you imagine having an argument in a university classroom and saying this like "well honey" and "why dont you get it through your pretty little head"
I know this is just a message board and we joke around a lot, but this thread could be a real actual discussion if it werent for the mean-spiritedness.

Wow.

[Jonny boy]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 4:56pm

I totally feel you..... I was put off at first also.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:06pm

It's a sensitive subject, though. Some people get very easily miffed when it comes to this sort of issue.

[East Village]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:07pm

I know a lot of folks' read is that she gives in when she places Melchior's hand on her breast. But she also said "no" -- so guys you have to stop looking for wiggle room. Once the no word is said you're in rape territory -- no matter what happens afterwards.

Now I don't see any indication that Wendla is going to turn around and make that charge -- but if she did, you'd have a very confused Melchior being accused of just that.
Updated On: 2/4/08 at 05:07 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:15pm

Yeah, exactly. It's easy to get heated about a topic like this. It's frustrating to be reading things that are as disturbing as some of us are finding things in this thread. I'm surprised by the idea that emotionality bleeding into your arguments somehow makes you not an academic or an intellectual. I'm "an academic" too, and I think part of what makes academia worth the while is passion. For example, I'm writing my undergrad thesis right now, and I've never been more passionate about anything in my entire life. That makes it no less real or legitimate. I hate the idea that the academic world is stale and boring. So the assumption that academic ideas can't coexist with emotionality is very, very odd to me. I won't try to argue that mean comments are the best way to communicate, but you can absolutely have an "actual" discussion with real, legitimate ideas even if it's a heated one. Thankfully, this is not a university classroom, and I can still be an intelligent, academically-bent individual without being expected to behave like I'm in one. I spend enough time in libraries and university classrooms.

Updated On: 2/4/08 at 05:15 PM

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:20pm

My academic focus actually sort of includes this area (sexual abuse), so.

[george95]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:23pm

Of course you can have a heated argument that's still very much intellectual and academic in the traditional sense. And of course you can be emotional about it, especially with something thats as shockingly emotional as rape.
But luvthemcee, I'm disappointed that it seems like you got the idea that I suggested that academic discourse must be stale and boring. Nothing is further from the truth, especially when it comes to a shockingly emotionaly topic like rape. (Today in my religion class, we discussed abortion politics! wow! talk about emotions!)
And I dont think there's anything wrong with acting like we're in a university classroom when we're talkin about something like rape. I think its appropriate.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:29pm

But just like I don't have clear cut evidence that he hasn't learned about rape, you also have no clear cut evidence that he has, and yet you too say "of course he would have come across the concept and the consequences of rape". The argument doesn't just go one way- if you're going to say things like that, I should be able to also without getting bashed for it

Any well-read person in his time period would have been reading the Greek and Roman classics- the Rape of Lucretia, Rape of the Sabine Women, rape of Leda in The Illiad. There's even the rape of Tamar in the Bible. It is a fact that these characters have read the Bible; you can't dispute that, so that already disproves your argument that no one could have known about rape in Victorian-era Germany when it's shown in the best selling book of all time. That's more logical, provable evidence than any of your repeated guarantees that Melchior doesn't know rape exists. So yes, you deserve to be "bashed" for it, because you've given NO evidence to back up your argument and are basing it entirely on your personal feelings and affections for the character instead of facts.

Come up with something, ANYTHING as proof of your "feelings", and maybe you'll be able to convince people that you have some sort of intellectual basis for your views and it's not just that you think Jonathan Groff is too cute to rape anyone.

Updated On: 2/4/08 at 05:29 PM

[East Village]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:36pm

I think SNL is essentially right. Melchior has no idea what he's doing or that he's committing rape. Half the guys on this board don't think so either.

As for having affection for that character, you're suppose to. He's a sympathetic and tragic character.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:39pm

Then half the guys on this board need counseling.

I didn't say you can't have affection for the character, but your affection shouldn't cloud reality and prevent you from admitting to his obvious faults.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:42pm

A lot of guys think that sort of situation is okay. Doesn't make it okay.

[snl89]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:48pm

orangeskittles, just for the record, you HAVE read my many, MANY posts saying that I am NOT just saying "no, he's totally innocent, he did nothing wrong!!", right?

In fact, I'm essentially AGREEING that he was irresponsible and didn't think his actions through, and that Wendla WAS a victim of his irresponsibility. He made a huge mistake. I just don't consider it RAPE. And I feel like to consider it rape actually undermines TRUE rapists, like Martha's father for instance. Because I can sympathize with Melchior (and no, it's NOT because he's "sooo cute and dreamy". It's because it was WRITTEN so that you sympathize with him, as a CHARACTER), but I can NOT sympathize with someone like Martha's father. So to put them in the same catagory doesn't feel right to me.

That is ALL I am saying.

[misschung]

Posted: 2/4/08 at 5:56pm

As for having affection for that character, you're suppose to. He's a sympathetic and tragic character.

Just like Lester Burnham in American Beauty. *Shudder*