Not only is Holly ruining Dodgers life, but her Mums and Dirks. She does not reliaze what effect this will have on Dodger being branded a rapiest and this will probably split up Cindy and Dirk. who are probably the only couple who actually love his other...>:(
Exactly
Cindy and Dirk have been through so much that it would take something massive to split them up. Is this HO's vehicle to split them up? It's a no brainer that Cindy will side with Holly and Dirk with Dodger so it effectively makes "Dindy" untenable I wonder if this is the primary SL not JP.
I think Tony hugged her and she accused him of touching her inappropriately. I think. Someone else will probably know more.
I'm pretty sure they had sex. It was when she first arrived and she was a bit of a minx and came on to Tony and he had no idea what age she was. I think she lied that he forced himself on her when she found out about Jacqui and him. Sounding a bit familiar :cool:
I think the trouble with Hollyoaks and these kind story lines is the liar rarely gets their comeuppance. Theresa didn't and I'm sure Holly won't. It reminds me as well of Robbie in the current JP rape story line. He is going to come out of that as a stand up character and never face any punishment for his awful homophobic bullying.
Im dissapointed this is happening. Hope she confesses quickly..will just have to wait for the spoilers for the week after.
I didn't mind her and like jason and holly as a couple but the last few episodes she seems to changed.
What a stupid thing to do. People who lie about been raped are idiots. First of all, they are risking an innocent person going to prison for something they didn't do. They could end up ruining that person's life. And secondly, they make REAL rape victims less believable. The more people that there are lying about been raped, the less people are going to trust claims from real rape victims, as they will think that they are just one of liers.
I agree completely with this.
I also think that the word "rape" is used too much. While I agree that it's not always a "stranger in an alleyway" situation, and that people can be raped by people they know e.g. JP, Carla Connor, I do have an issue with pinning the word rape on a man who continues to have sex when the woman/man says no. While yes it's wrong and discourteous and maybe even aggressive, for cases that are less clear cut than the JP/Finn one, you have to be more careful. Usually in the majority of rape cases, there is the ripped clothing and bruising/cuts which suggest force - unless there is strong evidence like that, or unless the person was particularly violent, it's just irresponsible to throw around such serious allegations imo.
I'm pretty sure they had sex. It was when she first arrived and she was a bit of a minx and came on to Tony and he had no idea what age she was. I think she lied that he forced himself on her when she found out about Jacqui and him. Sounding a bit familiar :cool:
I think the trouble with Hollyoaks and these kind story lines is the liar rarely gets their comeuppance. Theresa didn't and I'm sure Holly won't. It reminds me as well of Robbie in the current JP rape story line. He is going to come out of that as a stand up character and never face any punishment for his awful homophobic bullying.
He apologised to JP, stopped bullying him and told him the truth about the switched statements - apart from playing his part in giving evidence against Finn and learning to be a better person, there isn't anything else he can do. His past bullying of JP is in the past. Even JP wouldn't go on and on about it the way you guys do - he would move on.
I also think that the word "rape" is used too much. While I agree that it's not always a "stranger in an alleyway" situation, and that people can be raped by people they know e.g. JP, Carla Connor, I do have an issue with pinning the word rape on a man who continues to have sex when the woman/man says no. While yes it's wrong and discourteous and maybe even aggressive, for cases that are less clear cut than the JP/Finn one, you have to be more careful. Usually in the majority of rape cases, there is the ripped clothing and bruising/cuts which suggest force - unless there is strong evidence like that, or unless the person was particularly violent, it's just irresponsible to throw around such serious allegations imo.
Absolute cobblers. What is rape if it isn't continuing to have sex with someone after they have said no ?
Absolute cobblers. What is rape if it isn't continuing to have sex with someone after they have said no ?
I've always thought of rape as being something similar to what happened with JP/Finn where it's one person well and truly forcing themselves on another whether for power, control or whatever and violently but in less clear cut situations it varies from case to case. This is exactly why Holly was able to lie about poor Dodger because it was only the two of them in the bedroom and poor Dodger can't prove that she didn't ask him to stop. If the word rape applied only to these clear cut situations where there is bruising, ripped clothes, violence etc then people like Holly wouldn't be able to lie.
He apologised to JP, stopped bullying him and told him the truth about the switched statements - apart from playing his part in giving evidence against Finn and learning to be a better person, there isn't anything else he can do. His past bullying of JP is in the past. Even JP wouldn't go on and on about it the way you guys do - he would move on.
I agree here but that's because the writing is dire and the story lines totally contrived. If JP ever gets married in the future I'd put money on Robbie being his best man or some such nonsense ^_^
Robbie has had ample opportunity to tell the truth to someone that matters and intervene in JP's jailing. Unfortunately he seems to busy pretending to be scared of Finn as that seems to make him more attractive to the personality transplanted Phoebe >:(
I've always thought of rape as being something similar to what happened with JP/Finn where it's one person well and truly forcing themselves on another whether for power, control or whatever and violently but in less clear cut situations it varies from case to case. This is exactly why Holly was able to lie about poor Dodger because it was only the two of them in the bedroom and poor Dodger can't prove that she didn't ask him to stop. If the word rape applied only to these clear cut situations where there is bruising, ripped clothes, violence etc then people like Holly wouldn't be able to lie.
The police advise victims not to fight back though If what you want was the case in law etc then millions of victims wouldn't be seen as such because they didn't fight back
I agree here but that's because the writing is dire and the story lines totally contrived. If JP ever gets married in the future I'd put money on Robbie being his best man or some such nonsense ^_^
Robbie has had ample opportunity to tell the truth to someone that matters and intervene in JP's jailing. Unfortunately he seems to busy pretending to be scared of Finn as that seems to make him more attractive to the personality transplanted Pheobe >:(
He's not pretending. He was truly terrified when Finn threatened to rape him too and of course he got worried when Finn threatened to tell the police that Robbie told him to commit the rape and watched out for him while he did it because he can't really prove that's not true or at lest he couldn't until he told JP he didn't know. They should perhaps have had Finn do more to keep Robbie quiet like beat Robbie up or threaten to harm Jason so that it's more believable that Robbie didn't do anything about the swapped statements for 2 months though the swapped statements and the prison nonsense was contrived to accommodate James's break imo.
I would like a J/Robbie friendship to develop in time but I doubt it would go as far as you suggest - even if it did, what's wrong with that? The past is the past and things change over time. I ended up befriending some of the guys that bullied me when I was 12 in later years.
I've always thought of rape as being something similar to what happened with JP/Finn where it's one person well and truly forcing themselves on another whether for power, control or whatever and violently but in less clear cut situations it varies from case to case. This is exactly why Holly was able to lie about poor Dodger because it was only the two of them in the bedroom and poor Dodger can't prove that she didn't ask him to stop. If the word rape applied only to these clear cut situations where there is bruising, ripped clothes, violence etc then people like Holly wouldn't be able to lie.
In my opinion, this is a pretty backwards view of what rape is. If someone says no and the other continues, it is rape. Someone has to right to stop the sexual encounter any time during the experience. There is not just one type of rape.
The police advise victims not to fight back though If what you want was the case in law etc then millions of victims wouldn't be seen as such because they didn't fight back
I'm not going that far - after all poor JP didn't fight back but we know Finn still raped him. I just think you have to tread more carefully in less clear cut situations and use the word "rape" responsibly and only if you are really really sure. There may be all kinds of complications involved in one person who wanted to sleep with another but changed their mind half way through - being drunk slows down responses for a start and some people like me might give the person the benefit of the doubt if they were not explicitly aggressive/violent, and it might be difficult to stop in the middle of making love I imagine.
I've always thought of rape as being something similar to what happened with JP/Finn where it's one person well and truly forcing themselves on another whether for power, control or whatever and violently but in less clear cut situations it varies from case to case. This is exactly why Holly was able to lie about poor Dodger because it was only the two of them in the bedroom and poor Dodger can't prove that she didn't ask him to stop. If the word rape applied only to these clear cut situations where there is bruising, ripped clothes, violence etc then people like Holly wouldn't be able to lie.
If you genuinely believe what you have posted then it is pointless discussing it with you.
In my opinion, this is a pretty backwards view of what rape is. If someone says no and the other continues, it is rape. Someone has to right to stop the sexual encounter any time during the experience. There is not just one type of rape.
But is it really worth dragging someone through the courts and causing a scandal if they were not explicitly violent or dangerous? And defining it the way you say makes it easier for people like Holly to lie putting poor Dodger in a predicament because he can't prove his innocence.
I agree here but that's because the writing is dire and the story lines totally contrived. If JP ever gets married in the future I'd put money on Robbie being his best man or some such nonsense ^_^
Robbie has had ample opportunity to tell the truth to someone that matters and intervene in JP's jailing. Unfortunately he seems to busy pretending to be scared of Finn as that seems to make him more attractive to the personality transplanted Phoebe >:(
Why do you think he is pretending? Do you not think he is genuinely troubled by the damage Finn can do by opening his mouth re Uncle Ken? Do you not think that going from confessing all in his original letter to not refuting Finn's substitution isn't the result of Finn's threats? It was only Finn's threats that stopped him.
Why do you think he is pretending? Do you not think he is genuinely troubled by the damage Finn can do by opening his mouth re Uncle Ken? Do you not think that going from confessing all in his original letter to not refuting Finn's substitution isn't the result of Finn's threats? It was only Finn's threats that stopped him.
I agree. Also Finn does not make empty threats. He raped a man and tried to drug Robbie. Of course Robbie would be scared and take Finn's threats seriously.
But is it really worth dragging someone through the courts and causing a scandal if they were not explicitly violent or dangerous? And defining it the way you say makes it easier for people like Holly to lie putting poor Dodger in a predicament because he can't prove his innocence.
I'm sorry to get off topic, but this view is quite an old fashioned view of rape that suggests there is only one type of rape and only one type of rape victim. Yes, if one believes they are raped then it is worth it because rape whether violent or otherwise is one of the most horrific things anyone could ever experience. And people need to understand that they are not entitled to sex from anyone regardless of circumstance.
But is it really worth dragging someone through the courts and causing a scandal if they were not explicitly violent or dangerous? And defining it the way you say makes it easier for people like Holly to lie putting poor Dodger in a predicament because he can't prove his innocence.
Mmmmm bit of a dangerous stance as some rape victims don't put up a physical fight due to paralysis with fear. What if they complied and didn't struggle because of verbal threats made by their assailant? In the case of JP it could be dubious by your definition as even though he had a blow to the head the sex act itself probably wasn't resisted nor left signs of force. What about people who are drugged and physically cannot resist?
I'm sorry to get off topic, but this view is quite an old fashioned view of rape that suggests there is only one type of rape and only one type of rape victim. Yes, if one believes they are raped then it is worth it because rape whether violent or otherwise is one of the most horrific things anyone could ever experience. And people need to understand that they are not entitled to sex from anyone regardless of circumstance.
While I do agree, if it wasn't a violent case, wouldn't you hesitate In case you got it wrong and destroyed an innocent person's reputation?
Mmmmm bit of a dangerous stance as some rape victims don't put up a physical fight due to paralysis with fear. What if they complied and didn't struggle because of verbal threats made by their assailant? In the case of JP it could be dubious by your definition as even though he had a blow to the head the sex act itself probably wasn't resisted nor left signs of force. What about people who are drugged and physically cannot resist?
We saw some bruising and though JP didn't put up a fight he would not have had consensual sex with a student on the floor in the helpless state he was in. Plus the blow to the head to incapacitate him makes it clear that Finn forced him. In cases where people are drugged there would be physical evidence. But in a case where people got drunk and went to bed but one changed their mind half way through and the other wasn't violent to the point of leaving physical bruising - I would hesitate.
I think Tony hugged her and she accused him of touching her inappropriately. I think. Someone else will probably know more.
I think it was Cindy who accused him. If I remember correctly, Cindy had forgotten to pick Holly up from school so she'd gone to see Tony in ll gnosh. He took her in and gave her a drink, which she got all over her face. Cindy arrived just as Tony was wiping the drink off and leading her to the kitchen to get her some food. He'd just been charged for sleeping with Theresa and Cindy got the wrong end of the stick after seeing him with Holly.
Why do you think he is pretending? Do you not think he is genuinely troubled by the damage Finn can do by opening his mouth re Uncle Ken? Do you not think that going from confessing all in his original letter to not refuting Finn's substitution isn't the result of Finn's threats? It was only Finn's threats that stopped him.
I do not buy he feels physically threatened by Finn. That is a contrivance to suit the story line but if it is the case that his only reason for not coming clean and doing the right thing is his fear of his lie being exposed then I despise him even more.
But is it really worth dragging someone through the courts and causing a scandal if they were not explicitly violent or dangerous? And defining it the way you say makes it easier for people like Holly to lie putting poor Dodger in a predicament because he can't prove his innocence.
People lie about all sorts of things but crimes are NEVER downgraded or ignored because someone lied about it at some time so why do you think it's a reasonable thing to do with rape Having said that if you see a rape case in terms of 'scandal' and 'dragging someone through the courts' rather than trying to get justice for a victim of crime and punishment for a crime then maybe and sadly I get where you're coming from.
Comments
Exactly
Cindy and Dirk have been through so much that it would take something massive to split them up. Is this HO's vehicle to split them up? It's a no brainer that Cindy will side with Holly and Dirk with Dodger so it effectively makes "Dindy" untenable I wonder if this is the primary SL not JP.
I think Tony hugged her and she accused him of touching her inappropriately. I think. Someone else will probably know more.
I'm pretty sure they had sex. It was when she first arrived and she was a bit of a minx and came on to Tony and he had no idea what age she was. I think she lied that he forced himself on her when she found out about Jacqui and him. Sounding a bit familiar :cool:
I think the trouble with Hollyoaks and these kind story lines is the liar rarely gets their comeuppance. Theresa didn't and I'm sure Holly won't. It reminds me as well of Robbie in the current JP rape story line. He is going to come out of that as a stand up character and never face any punishment for his awful homophobic bullying.
I didn't mind her and like jason and holly as a couple but the last few episodes she seems to changed.
Edit - There's nothing on Wikipedia though so maybe I'm imagining it.
Oh sorry. I think I do remember vaguely something about Holly and Tony though not a rape accusation.
Whatever, this current story line is clearly a well recycled one.
I agree completely with this.
I also think that the word "rape" is used too much. While I agree that it's not always a "stranger in an alleyway" situation, and that people can be raped by people they know e.g. JP, Carla Connor, I do have an issue with pinning the word rape on a man who continues to have sex when the woman/man says no. While yes it's wrong and discourteous and maybe even aggressive, for cases that are less clear cut than the JP/Finn one, you have to be more careful. Usually in the majority of rape cases, there is the ripped clothing and bruising/cuts which suggest force - unless there is strong evidence like that, or unless the person was particularly violent, it's just irresponsible to throw around such serious allegations imo.
He apologised to JP, stopped bullying him and told him the truth about the switched statements - apart from playing his part in giving evidence against Finn and learning to be a better person, there isn't anything else he can do. His past bullying of JP is in the past. Even JP wouldn't go on and on about it the way you guys do - he would move on.
Absolute cobblers. What is rape if it isn't continuing to have sex with someone after they have said no ?
I've always thought of rape as being something similar to what happened with JP/Finn where it's one person well and truly forcing themselves on another whether for power, control or whatever and violently but in less clear cut situations it varies from case to case. This is exactly why Holly was able to lie about poor Dodger because it was only the two of them in the bedroom and poor Dodger can't prove that she didn't ask him to stop.
I agree here but that's because the writing is dire and the story lines totally contrived. If JP ever gets married in the future I'd put money on Robbie being his best man or some such nonsense ^_^
Robbie has had ample opportunity to tell the truth to someone that matters and intervene in JP's jailing. Unfortunately he seems to busy pretending to be scared of Finn as that seems to make him more attractive to the personality transplanted Phoebe
The police advise victims not to fight back though
He's not pretending. He was truly terrified when Finn threatened to rape him too and of course he got worried when Finn threatened to tell the police that Robbie told him to commit the rape and watched out for him while he did it because he can't really prove that's not true or at lest he couldn't until he told JP he didn't know. They should perhaps have had Finn do more to keep Robbie quiet like beat Robbie up or threaten to harm Jason so that it's more believable that Robbie didn't do anything about the swapped statements for 2 months though the swapped statements and the prison nonsense was contrived to accommodate James's break imo.
I would like a J/Robbie friendship to develop in time but I doubt it would go as far as you suggest - even if it did, what's wrong with that? The past is the past and things change over time. I ended up befriending some of the guys that bullied me when I was 12 in later years.
In my opinion, this is a pretty backwards view of what rape is. If someone says no and the other continues, it is rape. Someone has to right to stop the sexual encounter any time during the experience. There is not just one type of rape.
I'm not going that far - after all poor JP didn't fight back but we know Finn still raped him. I just think you have to tread more carefully in less clear cut situations and use the word "rape" responsibly and only if you are really really sure. There may be all kinds of complications involved in one person who wanted to sleep with another but changed their mind half way through - being drunk slows down responses for a start and some people like me might give the person the benefit of the doubt if they were not explicitly aggressive/violent, and it might be difficult to stop in the middle of making love I imagine.
If you genuinely believe what you have posted then it is pointless discussing it with you.
But is it really worth dragging someone through the courts and causing a scandal if they were not explicitly violent or dangerous? And defining it the way you say makes it easier for people like Holly to lie putting poor Dodger in a predicament because he can't prove his innocence.
Why do you think he is pretending? Do you not think he is genuinely troubled by the damage Finn can do by opening his mouth re Uncle Ken? Do you not think that going from confessing all in his original letter to not refuting Finn's substitution isn't the result of Finn's threats? It was only Finn's threats that stopped him.
I agree. Also Finn does not make empty threats. He raped a man and tried to drug Robbie. Of course Robbie would be scared and take Finn's threats seriously.
I'm sorry to get off topic, but this view is quite an old fashioned view of rape that suggests there is only one type of rape and only one type of rape victim. Yes, if one believes they are raped then it is worth it because rape whether violent or otherwise is one of the most horrific things anyone could ever experience. And people need to understand that they are not entitled to sex from anyone regardless of circumstance.
Mmmmm bit of a dangerous stance as some rape victims don't put up a physical fight due to paralysis with fear. What if they complied and didn't struggle because of verbal threats made by their assailant? In the case of JP it could be dubious by your definition as even though he had a blow to the head the sex act itself probably wasn't resisted nor left signs of force. What about people who are drugged and physically cannot resist?
While I do agree, if it wasn't a violent case, wouldn't you hesitate In case you got it wrong and destroyed an innocent person's reputation?
We saw some bruising and though JP didn't put up a fight he would not have had consensual sex with a student on the floor in the helpless state he was in. Plus the blow to the head to incapacitate him makes it clear that Finn forced him. In cases where people are drugged there would be physical evidence. But in a case where people got drunk and went to bed but one changed their mind half way through and the other wasn't violent to the point of leaving physical bruising - I would hesitate.
I think it was Cindy who accused him. If I remember correctly, Cindy had forgotten to pick Holly up from school so she'd gone to see Tony in ll gnosh. He took her in and gave her a drink, which she got all over her face. Cindy arrived just as Tony was wiping the drink off and leading her to the kitchen to get her some food. He'd just been charged for sleeping with Theresa and Cindy got the wrong end of the stick after seeing him with Holly.
No idea why I remember that!
I do not buy he feels physically threatened by Finn. That is a contrivance to suit the story line but if it is the case that his only reason for not coming clean and doing the right thing is his fear of his lie being exposed then I despise him even more.
People lie about all sorts of things but crimes are NEVER downgraded or ignored because someone lied about it at some time so why do you think it's a reasonable thing to do with rape