|
||||||||
Is rape more serious than murder? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,221
|
Is rape more serious than murder?
Serious question?
The depiction of rape is so stark and brutal, and then widely - and rightfully - condemned after the fact...but the taking of life seems to be less serious, like if the person was bad anyway its ok. So if Carl White was raped? It'd be fine? With increasing regularity there's a soap murder, rolled out as an almost comical aside, like a game of cluedo...oooh whodunnit? There are characters in the show right now - Ben and Ronnie - who have committed murder and are walking around happily going on with their lives. But the fact is, in the real world, a premeditated murder will get you jailed for life, whereas a rape will probably see you get jailed for ten years. A rape victim, while having to live with a brutal assault, is at least still alive. A murder victim is not. So it just winds me up to see a crime considered more serious in the eyes of the law, wheeled out like a plaything for desperate rating-gaining ploys, and rape treated as more foul, more contemptible, when it is at least equally so. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
|
You make a good point and I agree. Murder has become a soap staple and it's daft that in EE you have so many killers or attempted killers wafting around. I think it's an inevitable consequence of the slide into sensationalism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
I've always thought sexual crimes are worse than murder because of the nature of the crime and because in certain situations anyone is capable of taking a life whereas rape is committed by those of a certain caibre and has a deliberation to it regardless of whether it's violent violent or the way Dean did it, premeditated or losing control in the heat of the moment. I am a bit offended sometimes that a person committing a sexual crime gets a shorter sentence than someone committing premeditated murder (i.e. Tony Gordon would get far longer for having Liam killed than Finn would for raping JP but Finn was far worse than Tony Gordon imo) but that's the way it is in the world, though I accept that a dead person cannot be brought back to life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,221
|
Would you rather your relative was raped or murdered?
I think most people would say raped, its absolutely horrific but they can receive counseling and try to salvage their life...but if they are killed they are gone! |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
Would you rather your relative was raped or murdered?
I think most people would say raped, its absolutely horrific but they can receive counseling and try to salvage their life...but if they are killed they are gone! |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Suck it
Posts: 7,777
|
In reality murder is obviously worse than rape. But in fiction it's become clear that rape is worse than murder and the reason for that is (in my opinion) because a murder victim is dead and gone with no follow up for their character. Once they're dead, that's it for the character. A rape victim is still on screen and we see how they deal with what happened to them. Humans are inclined to gravitate towards what they can see and we saw Linda, Little Mo and Kathy dealing with their assaults. We're never going to see Hev, Carl White, Archie or the countless other murder victims in the afterlife dealing with their untimely deaths.
This storyline with Dean is going to be different because he's not being written like Trevor or Willmott-Brown. We only ever knew Trevor as a horrid wife beating thug. We did know Willmott-Brown for a few years prior to the rape and he was written in a slightly more sympathetic way but once the rape happened there was never any attempt made to have him be anything less than a depraved rapist. We were even told several years after his last appearance that he had raped again. Dean is not a horrible person. We know why he's the way he is but it doesn't excuse what he did. I do think it's a case of can you forgive a good person for doing a bad thing and I think a lot of viewers will struggle with this storyline and find it uncomfortable. I think it's a big risk and very brave of the writers to do the storyline in this way. Murder has lost all meaning in soap. I really can't take this subject seriously anymore as it is trotted out regularly in a whodunnit style and is seemingly done purely for ratings rather than there being anything substantial or interesting to say about the subject. I agree that it is ridiculous that so many murderers are walking around Albert Square unpunished or let off lightly for ending lives. I suppose the counterpoint is that most of the victims were not nice people but that doesn't really apply to Hev and I have a hard time believing anyone who has been murdered actually deserved to die. At a push I'll say I'm not exactly bothered Archie is dead since he was a pedo and I consider crimes against innocent children to be the worst of all but he wasn't killed for that. He wasn't even killed for raping someone. He was killed because his murderer didn't want him to find out she was pregnant with his child as best I can figure that one out. Again, I consider the Archie plot to lack substance and be a ratings grabber and nothing more. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,689
|
i'm stunned they're actually going to go through with the storyline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
In reality murder is obviously worse than rape. But in fiction it's become clear that rape is worse than murder and the reason for that is (in my opinion) because a murder victim is dead and gone with no follow up for their character. Once they're dead, that's it for the character. A rape victim is still on screen and we see how they deal with what happened to them. Humans are inclined to gravitate towards what they can see and we saw Linda, Little Mo and Kathy dealing with their assaults. We're never going to see Hev, Carl White, Archie or the countless other murder victims in the afterlife dealing with their untimely deaths.
This storyline with Dean is going to be different because he's not being written like Trevor or Willmott-Brown. We only ever knew Trevor as a horrid wife beating thug. We did know Willmott-Brown for a few years prior to the rape and he was written in a slightly more sympathetic way but once the rape happened there was never any attempt made to have him be anything less than a depraved rapist. We were even told several years after his last appearance that he had raped again. Dean is not a horrible person. We know why he's the way he is but it doesn't excuse what he did. I do think it's a case of can you forgive a good person for doing a bad thing and I think a lot of viewers will struggle with this storyline and find it uncomfortable. I think it's a big risk and very brave of the writers to do the storyline in this way. Murder has lost all meaning in soap. I really can't take this subject seriously anymore as it is trotted out regularly in a whodunnit style and is seemingly done purely for ratings rather than there being anything substantial or interesting to say about the subject. I agree that it is ridiculous that so many murderers are walking around Albert Square unpunished or let off lightly for ending lives. I suppose the counterpoint is that most of the victims were not nice people but that doesn't really apply to Hev and I have a hard time believing anyone who has been murdered actually deserved to die. At a push I'll say I'm not exactly bothered Archie is dead since he was a pedo and I consider crimes against innocent children to be the worst of all but he wasn't killed for that. He wasn't even killed for raping someone. He was killed because his murderer didn't want him to find out she was pregnant with his child as best I can figure that one out. Again, I consider the Archie plot to lack substance and be a ratings grabber and nothing more. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: EastLUNDERN
Posts: 6,247
|
Murder used to be taken as seriously as rape is taken now so I dread to think the storylines we'd be getting in 30 years time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #EE#TheCarters
Posts: 11,310
|
Ben killed Heather, he struck her and killed her and left her 2 year old son with his dead mothers body in the flat. Did he mean to? No but he still did it.
Dean raped Linda, did he think Linda wanted to have sex, yes he clearly did. So did Dean intentionally set out to rape Linda? Lets just say he didn't So with the situations above, which one is worse? If the viewers can forgive murder will they forgive rape? |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,221
|
Murderers will probably use it as their defence in court
'I saw it on Eastenders innit, nothing happened to them, so I thought cool' |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,520
|
In answer to your question, neither one is worse than the other in my view. They both created hurt, anger, rage from the ones who are directly affected by it (for rape, it will the victim and their friends and family; for murder it will those left behind who are denied the love and comfort of the one who has killed). And then of course it gets a bit complicated if the person who is murdered turned out to be a 'bad 'un' and had death coming to him because of the manner in which they chose to live their lives, but it still does not mean that their death won't be felt by their loved ones.
When you put all of that in a fictional context, then the need to create drama, suspense and tension takes second place to the immorality of the act. This has been particularly so whenn it comes to murder, whether it is in a police drama, a whodunnit or a soap. With rape, the passion it generates in viewers is particular acute if the person remains alive and we are given the opportunity to grieve and angry with them as they grieve and angry and so on. With a murder not so. The only people left to help us as viewers to get as passionate and angry over a murder are their friends and family, but we are rarely afforded opportunities like that. Broadchurch and The Killing did that superby for many who watched these two shows. Through a community, friends and family, these people become the voice, the heart and soul of the murdered one. They remind us that this was flesh and blood like us deserving of rememberance, respect and a sense of outrage. I think that sometimes in art (tv, books, film, video games) we have lost the art of making immoral acts like murder make our blood run cold. It certainly doesn't help that in many TV drama whodunnits, it is the blood, the disgorged red flesh, the gorotted neck, the stiff body, the photo of the victim slapped on a whiteboard in an incident room and the whodunnit takes center stage. The heart and soul of the person who has been murdered just seems to be forgotten because the people who would've reminded us are often very briefly seen or heard or get subsumed by the need to create drama, suspense and tension. It is perhaps it is worse in a soap because of the high rate of turning out a show. We can't linger too much on the emotional effects because there is some other drama to be aired, written, seen. Sometimes this also spills into how I would resonate with a character The Lucy s/l fails to generate any interest in me let alone a sense of feeling for Lucy simply because I just did not like the character. She fails to inspire in me a sense of fellow-feeling. She was particularly nasty and spoilt. Same with Carl. But that merely raises a question: are they any less deserving of the reaction we would have had if a well-loved character had died instead? After all murder is murder. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,221
|
Quote:
In answer to your question, neither one is worse than the other in my view. They both created hurt, anger, rage from the ones who are directly affected by it (for rape, it will the victim and their friends and family; for murder it will those left behind who are denied the love and comfort of the one who has killed). And then of course it gets a bit complicated if the person who is murdered turned out to be a 'bad 'un' and had death coming to him because of the manner in which they chose to live their lives, but it still does not mean that their death won't be felt by their loved ones.
When you put all of that in a fictional context, then the need to create drama, suspense and tension takes second place to the immorality of the act. This has been particularly so whenn it comes to murder, whether it is in a police drama, a whodunnit or a soap. With rape, the passion it generates in viewers is particular acute if the person remains alive and we are given the opportunity to grieve and angry with them as they grieve and angry and so on. With a murder not so. The only people left to help us as viewers to get as passionate and angry over a murder are their friends and family, but we are rarely afforded opportunities like that. Broadchurch and The Killing did that superby for many who watched these two shows. Through a community, friends and family, these people become the voice, the heart and soul of the murdered one. They remind us that this was flesh and blood like us deserving of rememberance, respect and a sense of outrage. I think that sometimes in art (tv, books, film, video games) we have lost the art of making immoral acts like murder make our blood run cold. It certainly doesn't help that in many TV drama whodunnits, it is the blood, the disgorged red flesh, the gorotted neck, the stiff body, the photo of the victim slapped on a whiteboard in an incident room and the whodunnit takes center stage. The heart and soul of the person who has been murdered just seems to be forgotten because the people who would've reminded us are often very briefly seen or heard or get subsumed by the need to create drama, suspense and tension. It is perhaps it is worse in a soap because of the high rate of turning out a show. We can't linger too much on the emotional effects because there is some other drama to be aired, written, seen. Sometimes this also spills into how I would resonate with a character The Lucy s/l fails to generate any interest in me let alone a sense of feeling for Lucy simply because I just did not like the character. She fails to inspire in me a sense of fellow-feeling. She was particularly nasty and spoilt. Same with Carl. But that merely raises a question: are they any less deserving of the reaction we would have had if a well-loved character had died instead? After all murder is murder. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
Ben killed Heather, he struck her and killed her and left her 2 year old son with his dead mothers body in the flat. Did he mean to? No but he still did it.
Dean raped Linda, did he think Linda wanted to have sex, yes he clearly did. So did Dean intentionally set out to rape Linda? Lets just say he didn't So with the situations above, which one is worse? If the viewers can forgive murder will they forgive rape? I agree with the bit in bold. The fact that we saw the build up and how messed up Dean was, that he's clearly delusional, wasn't "violent violent" and not evil means I feel nothing towards him rather than hatred or rage. Also the fact that Ben served his time for killing Heather but Dean hasn't had any comeuppance for raping Linda does make a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
I think we have become desensitized to murder in soaps, whilst rape can still shock.
I would rather have my children alive than dead, if that answers the question. |
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 411
|
No it isnt, I think because as its common for 'younger eyes' to be exposed to soaps and adult storylines rape is harder to explain, most children know what murder is, i would say , hope less know what rape is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: London
Posts: 719
|
Quote:
I find what Dean did more disturbing than what Ben did. Many people are capable when an argument goes out of control of lashing out in the heat of the moment or picking up an object or whatever but a sexual crime - I don't know - it's just harder to get your head round and you're more likely to recoil at it.
I agree with the bit in bold. The fact that we saw the build up and how messed up Dean was, that he's clearly delusional, wasn't "violent violent" and not evil means I feel nothing towards him rather than hatred or rage. Also the fact that Ben served his time for killing Heather but Dean hasn't had any comeuppance for raping Linda does make a difference. However premeditated murder, where the killer has planned out how to carry it out, execute it, and cover it up, I think is worse because they've taken the time to consciously think about how to do, do it to who. Most of time show no remorse. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
|
Some excellent and thought provoking posts. I agree with you Nilhonga and BA.
And I detest the drive to showing more extreme violence onscreen in every day dramas: The Fall, Trial and Retribution etc. I do think it desensitizes society to such shocking subjects. Then again it's easy to stumble upon real life horrific images online through Twitter etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
In this context I agree with you in bold, when it comes to a death via manslaughter it can be a split second difference from killing someone, hurting them, or them being fine, whereas a rape is prolonged and a different type of violence.
However premeditated murder, where the killer has planned out how to carry it out, execute it, and cover it up, I think is worse because they've taken the time to consciously think about how to do, do it to who. Most of time show no remorse. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 18,883
|
No it's not. As bad as it is at least they're still alive IMO. I'm glad they're doing this storyline
This article is exactly what I think. http://metro.co.uk/2014/10/07/easten...yline-4895282/ |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,658
|
Agree completely that murder isn't taken seriously on soaps. Over on Corrie, Tracy Barlow seems to be a pantomime murderer. In real life, she would be an outcast but more importantly people would be afraid of her, especially as she has never even admitted her guilt or acknowledged that she did wrong. We've often seen other characters on the street get into verbal confrontations with her over relatively trivial matters : would you go out of your way to clash with and wind up someone who had killed in recent years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,370
|
Both are the same but sometimes rape is seen as worse of the two because of the violation, obviously murder is a huge violation but I think it's the sexual element the sick depravity that messes people up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Mawdsley Street, Weatherfield
Posts: 8,702
|
Quote:
Agree completely that murder isn't taken seriously on soaps. Over on Corrie, Tracy Barlow seems to be a pantomime murderer. In real life, she would be an outcast but more importantly people would be afraid of her, especially as she has never even admitted her guilt or acknowledged that she did wrong. We've often seen other characters on the street get into verbal confrontations with her over relatively trivial matters : would you go out of your way to clash with and wind up someone who had killed in recent years?
Then again, crimes against males in soaps are treated less seriously, just look at Tyrone. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
Both are the same but sometimes rape is seen as worse of the two because of the violation, obviously murder is a huge violation but I think it's the sexual element the sick depravity that messes people up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 4,018
|
Well in Hollyoaks everyone gets away with murder, but Finn got sent down for rape last week.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:09.




This article is exactly what I think.