Options

EE: Over 200 complaints re the rape storyline

MoJo-GirlMoJo-Girl Posts: 979
Forum Member
✭✭
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2/eastenders/news/a601880/eastenders-dean-linda-rape-story-defended-by-bbc-after-complaints.html#~oS1h3taZGilp4q

According to the above story, the BBC have received over 200 complaints about the rape of Linda by Dean. The complaints have included reasons such as it was too explicit and unsuitable for viewing before the watershed.

What is everyone's opinion on this?

I personally think that the scene was handled very well. The act itself wasn't televised and you only saw the build up and the aftermath. They could have shown much, much more...

In my opinion, there has been enough coverage of this particular story line and if you don't want to see this sort of thing (or the parent of a young child), perhaps it's best that you don't watch/don't allow your children to watch these particular episodes? I'm not saying avoid the programme completely, just avoid particular episodes.

There are films that I know I wouldn't enjoy and therefore I have no intention of watching them - I avoid them because I know they would upset/disturb me.

What is the general consensus on this? Were the BBC in the wrong or have people been a bit quick to react?
«13456

Comments

  • Options
    The RhydlerThe Rhydler Posts: 4,494
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think if EE are portraying the show as something young people can watch, then yes it was a little strong, but if they are directing the viewership towards the over 16 age bracket, then it was just about ok.

    Its the parents jobs to make sure that their children aren't watching things they shouldn't, the watershed is only a guideline, they aren't obliged to air all things of an adult nature until after 9.

    EE has had enough rapes and murders over the years to give any parents an idea whether their kids should watch or not, personally, I don't think it was suitable to anyone over 15. The storylines are well known ahead of time so I think the BBC are blame free here.
  • Options
    O-JO-J Posts: 18,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I really think the Watershed should be adjusted to 8pm and over.

    Blame the parents.
  • Options
    Sick BulletSick Bullet Posts: 20,770
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A bit strong for the younger viewers I thought, but you'll always get the sad who ring up.
  • Options
    Scot_JJScot_JJ Posts: 1,059
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's rediculous...
  • Options
    J-BJ-B Posts: 18,616
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It isn't the televisions job to parent their children.
  • Options
    0...00...0 Posts: 21,111
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Scot_JJ wrote: »
    It's rediculous...

    I'm scarlett with anger.
  • Options
    margarite6666margarite6666 Posts: 2,969
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You have to remember people complained about a little gay kiss. Some people believe that because they pay a licence fee they can tell the BBC exactly what they can and cannot show. They have a duty to produce educational content. EE is watched by millions. Even if they produced a documentary or play only about half that number would watch. This show will have people discussing the story at home and in work which is want you want. Sexual assault/rape and any social issue will never be changed in a climate of silence.
  • Options
    ScrabblerScrabbler Posts: 51,486
    Forum Member
    I think if EE are portraying the show as something young people can watch, then yes it was a little strong, but if they are directing the viewership towards the over 16 age bracket, then it was just about ok.

    Its the parents jobs to make sure that their children aren't watching things they shouldn't, the watershed is only a guideline, they aren't obliged to air all things of an adult nature until after 9.

    EE has had enough rapes and murders over the years to give any parents an idea whether their kids should watch or not, personally, I don't think it was suitable to anyone over 15. The storylines are well known ahead of time so I think the BBC are blame free here.

    :D

    It's fine for kids to watch but not adults? :D

    I do agree that ultimately it's down to the parents themselves. Last week there was a shooting but that's fine for the kiddies I suppose as that didn't generate any complaints.

    Loose Women talk all sorts of adult topics during the middle of the day, not early evening. In fact didn't doctors show a rape?

    Anyway it's good that eastenders is back to ruffling feathers and getting people talking.
  • Options
    J-BJ-B Posts: 18,616
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    You have to remember people complained about a little gay kiss. Some people believe that because they pay a licence fee they can tell the BBC exactly what they can and cannot show. They have a duty to produce educational content. EE is watched by millions. Even if they produced a documentary or play only about half that number would watch. This show will have people discussing the story at home and in work which is want you want. Sexual assault/rape and any social issue will never be changed in a climate of silence.

    Great post margs. Only us here on DS should tell them what they can and cannot show.
  • Options
    ScrabblerScrabbler Posts: 51,486
    Forum Member
    J-B wrote: »
    Great post margs. Only us here on DS should tell them what they can and cannot show.

    You might want to rethink that :D
  • Options
    The RhydlerThe Rhydler Posts: 4,494
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Scrabbler wrote: »
    :D

    It's fine for kids to watch but not adults? :D

    I do agree that ultimately it's down to the parents themselves. Last week there was a shooting but that's fine for the kiddies I suppose as that didn't generate any complaints.

    Loose Women talk all sorts of adult topics during the middle of the day, not early evening. In fact didn't doctors show a rape?

    Anyway it's good that eastenders is back to ruffling feathers and getting people talking.

    Yeah, I meant UNDER 15...my bad
  • Options
    Keyser_Soze1Keyser_Soze1 Posts: 25,182
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    J-B wrote: »
    Great post margs. Only us here on DS should tell them what they can and cannot show.

    My God that would be an evening's viewing to remember! :D
  • Options
    2shy20072shy2007 Posts: 52,579
    Forum Member
    Thats not many, I didn't watch it on purpose, I don't want to see a woman being raped on my telly, but I think there will be a lot more complaints if he doesnt get caught /punished/ jailed . hopefully the BBC will do the right thing, or else it will put other women and men off coming forward if they can't see that rapists get punishment
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 311
    Forum Member
    I don't see what all the fuss is about. Barely anything happened, you don't hear any screaming. No real sign of resistance, it looked consensual to me.

    The only way we know it's supposed to be rape is because of the long face she had after for the rest of the episode.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 101
    Forum Member
    I don't think it was too explicit, if at all.
    I'm sorry but I've got no time for people who complain about tv shows. I've watched things I've found uncomfortable or offensive but I would never in a million years officially complain. It really grinds my gears.
    To me it's on level with people who complain about a shop assistant not smiling at them.
    Get a grip.
  • Options
    2shy20072shy2007 Posts: 52,579
    Forum Member
    2p wrote: »
    I don't see what all the fuss is about. Barely anything happened, you don't hear any screaming. No real sign of resistance, it looked consensual to me.

    The only way we know it's supposed to be rape is because of the long face she had after for the rest of the episode.

    They made it look like she was consenting?? oh dear. I hope not.
  • Options
    ScrabblerScrabbler Posts: 51,486
    Forum Member
    2p wrote: »
    I don't see what all the fuss is about. Barely anything happened, you don't hear any screaming. No real sign of resistance, it looked consensual to me.

    The only way we know it's supposed to be rape is because of the long face she had after for the rest of the episode.

    She said no more than once, that should have been sufficient. You cannot use a lack of screaming as an excuse for it being consensual, she may have been in a state of shock or she may not have wanted her children to witness it.
  • Options
    ScrabblerScrabbler Posts: 51,486
    Forum Member
    I don't think it was too explicit, if at all.
    I'm sorry but I've got no time for people who complain about tv shows. I've watched things I've found uncomfortable or offensive but I would never in a million years officially complain. It really grinds my gears.
    To me it's on level with people who complain about a shop assistant not smiling at them.
    Get a grip.

    I prefer it when shop assistants don't smile at me :D
  • Options
    TellMeMoreTellMeMore Posts: 1,067
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    2p wrote: »
    I don't see what all the fuss is about. Barely anything happened, you don't hear any screaming. No real sign of resistance, it looked consensual to me.

    The only way we know it's supposed to be rape is because of the long face she had after for the rest of the episode.

    You cannot be serious.
  • Options
    guestofsethguestofseth Posts: 5,303
    Forum Member
    2shy2007 wrote: »
    They made it look like she was consenting?? oh dear. I hope not.

    No they didn't, there was nothing shown last night that could make people think it was consensual. Nothing. Why take the post of one poster as fact, when nearly everyone else has said the opposite?
  • Options
    shrinkingvioletshrinkingviolet Posts: 3,372
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Anyone who takes a woman saying no repeatedly, struggling against her attacker and being forcibly pinned to the table as being a consensual encounter is either a troll or in need of serious help.

    As for the complaints...some people will complain about anything. Clearly it's a way to feel important for some.
  • Options
    dazza89dazza89 Posts: 13,909
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It was obvious it was gonna get complaints from the PC Brigade, I would have been more shocked if sad people out there hadn't done it to be honest.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 311
    Forum Member
    No they didn't, there was nothing shown last night that could make people think it was consensual. Nothing. Why take the post of one poster as fact, when nearly everyone else has said the opposite?

    When did I state what I posted was a fact.

    Facts: It was a short scene. Not much could be seen. Dean was drunk. Linda was aware of Dean's feelings yet still got close to him.

    Opinion: Showed little sign of resistance, a drunk Dean would see that as consent. Women often say the opposite of what they mean, and while Dean is drunk rational thoughts go out of the window.

    Just because many other people choose to ignore facts, that does not give you a reason to belittle my post.
  • Options
    Kim_xKim_x Posts: 3,635
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I personally thought that Little Mo's (second) rape was much more graphic. That only got a handful of complaints. Maybe we just live in times now where people complain about everything.

    It would be interesting to know how many of those complaints were by people who are just unhappy with the direction Dean's being taken in, rather than thinking that the actual scenes were too much.
  • Options
    Joe_ZelJoe_Zel Posts: 20,832
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    2p wrote: »
    When did I state what I posted was a fact.

    Facts: It was a short scene. Not much could be seen. Dean was drunk. Linda was aware of Dean's feelings yet still got close to him.

    Opinion: Showed little sign of resistance, a drunk Dean would see that as consent. Women often say the opposite of what they mean, and while Dean is drunk rational thoughts go out of the window.

    Just because many other people choose to ignore facts, that does not give you a reason to belittle my post.

    He had about 2 glasses of wine, don't think he was drunk at all.

    Even then that's no excuse.
Sign In or Register to comment.