Superman Returns Superman: morals, ethics, law

[Qoèlet]

wouldn't that count as rape? (sorta like a date rape drug that wipes peoples' memories, etc). what a bad way to depict superman. bryan singer....what have you done?

You don't seem to understand either the drugs you're talking about or the crime you refer to at all. A date rape drug does not erase a person's memory, it makes her black out. It either gets her to pass out, or puts her in a semi-conscious state. Additionally, a person that is very intoxicated can be raped even if the intercourse is not physically forced because, due to the levels of alcohol or some other drug in her system, she is not able to intelligently form intent and consent to intercourse. This is the crux of the issue: Rape does not mean a person had sex without remembering it, it means a person had sex without intelligently consenting to it. A date rape drug or alcohol sometimes causes both things to occur, but only the latter is relevant criteria for assessing whether a rape has occurred.

If Superman's erasing Lois's memory retroactively diminished her capacity to consent to having sex with him, then it was rape. If his erasing her memory made her lose consciousness before they did the deed, and then in this new, altered timeline he had sex with her while she was unconscious, then it was rape. If she just forgot about it then no, that is in no way similar to a rape.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Just the notion that people think he raped her.....Goddamn, wow....****ing wow.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Just the notion that people think he raped her.....Goddamn, wow....****ing wow.

Yup, it's every day stuff over at the Superman Boards, things like that. It's amazing, I know...

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Yeah, I knew it was crazy....but where'd the rape thing even come from? I mean, where did the film even hint that?

That's just creative writing, there. It deserves a standing ovation.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Yeah, I knew it was crazy....but where'd the rape thing even come from? I mean, where did the film even hint that?

That's just creative writing, there. It deserves a standing ovation.

It started with people complaining (how rare in here) about the whole ''Spy'' scene in Returns and the vague history (amnesia kiss in Supes II....LOL) and they build it up from there....Somehow we're left with the concept of ''rape''. Even though she agreed to sleep with him and was in love with the guy.

 

[Matt]

Well, she figures out it's his kid.

So, no....she wasn't raped.

What? Ok, later on I am going to go slip a girl an roofie, sleep with her and impregnate her while shes passed out and won't remember. Years later I will show her a DNA test. She will realize the kid is mine, so it won't be rape.

 

[Matt]

You don't seem to understand either the drugs you're talking about or the crime you refer to at all. A date rape drug does not erase a person's memory, it makes her black out. It either gets her to pass out, or puts her in a semi-conscious state. Additionally, a person that is very intoxicated can be raped even if the intercourse is not physically forced because, due to the levels of alcohol or some other drug in her system, she is not able to intelligently form intent and consent to intercourse. This is the crux of the issue: Rape does not mean a person had sex without remembering it, it means a person had sex without intelligently consenting to it. A date rape drug or alcohol sometimes causes both things to occur, but only the latter is relevant criteria for assessing whether a rape has occurred.

If Superman's erasing Lois's memory retroactively diminished her capacity to consent to having sex with him, then it was rape. If his erasing her memory made her lose consciousness before they did the deed, and then in this new, altered timeline he had sex with her while she was unconscious, then it was rape. If she just forgot about it then no, that is in no way similar to a rape.

Lois consented to intercourse, correct. She did not however consent to having her memory erased. It may not be raped, but it is certainly unethical. Especially being as an unplanned pregnancy was a result of it.

 

[OzzMosiz]

What? Ok, later on I am going to go slip a girl an roofie, sleep with her and impregnate her while shes passed out and won't remember. Years later I will show her a DNA test. She will realize the kid is mine, so it won't be rape.

Lois was in sound mind when she slept with Superman, and consented , I quote Lois "I'm going to slip into something more comfortable"

We don't need name callers--Dew

 

[Matt]

Idiot. Lois was in sound mind when she slept with Superman, and consented , I quote Lois "I'm going to slip into something more comfortable"

I'm aware of that. I was pointing out the stupidity of what Bale said (to paraphrase, he said 'she figured it out so its not rape'.)

 

[C. Lee]

Idiot. Lois was in sound mind when she slept with Superman, and consented , I quote Lois "I'm going to slip into something more comfortable"

First....there is no need to call people names.

Second....Lois consented to having sex....but she did not consent to Superman tampering with her mind.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

What? Ok, later on I am going to go slip a girl an roofie, sleep with her and impregnate her while shes passed out and won't remember. Years later I will show her a DNA test. She will realize the kid is mine, so it won't be rape.

So.....Superman slipped her a roofie?

She consented....so how's it rape?

Whereas your situation, no....it is rape b/c she did not consent, so you'd be sent to prison where non-consenual anal sex would ensure.

Different situations.

Lois consented to intercourse, correct. She did not however consent to having her memory erased. It may not be raped, but it is certainly unethical. Especially being as an unplanned pregnancy was a result of it.

It's still not rape.

Sure, we'll get an arguement ala IDENTITY CRISIS, but.....she obviously KNEW she had slept with Superman. This has been confirmed, no?

I'm aware of that. I was pointing out the stupidity of what Bale said (to paraphrase, he said 'she figured it out so its not rape'

But the stupidty of what your saying is 10x worse. Rape is NON-CONSENUAL SEX. It's when a Man penertrates a woman with her NO WANTING it. That is rape.

Go read a dicitionary or something, man.

 

[Matt]

So.....Superman slipped her a roofie?

She consented....so how's it rape?

Whereas your situation, no....it is rape b/c she did not consent, so you'd be sent to prison where non-consenual anal sex would ensure.

Different situations.



It's still not rape.

Sure, we'll get an arguement ala IDENTITY CRISIS, but.....she obviously KNEW she had slept with Superman. This has been confirmed, no?



But the stupidty of what your saying is 10x worse. Rape is NON-CONSENUAL SEX. It's when a Man penertrates a woman with her NO WANTING it. That is rape.

Go read a dicitionary or something, man.

I've already said its not rape, skippy. Doesn't change the fact that it is highly unethical and downright cruel.

Feel free to try and pry your lips from Singer's butt in the near future, by the way.

 

[EXCELSIOR]

In S2, Superman goes into the crystal chamber as Lois watches and is stripped of his powers, he exits as a powerless Clark…

Later Lois “consents” to slip into something more comfortable, and a POWERLESS Clark & Lois “consent” to do the deed, at which time we assume she got preggers… Later Clark gets his butt kicked in the bus stop bar, Zod & CO take over the White House… Clark heads back to the FOS as Lois goes to Metropolis.

Clark, gets his super-powers back using the green crystal that Lois was looking at, Superman kicks Zod’s butt after tricking him into thinking he had again lost his powers…

Later in the Daily Planet offices, Lois is having trouble with the Clark is Superman thing, she loves Superman and is having trouble coping with knowing the secret, she is freaking out, starts smoking again… Clark gives Lois the super-memory-kiss in an attempt to ease her pain… and she forgets everything… it seems the events of the entire film are lost to her.

Is it ‘rape’ is it a ‘roofie’ – NO

Singer has said that he used the events of Superman 1&2 as loose reference, as a sort of a vague history.
Singer used the fact that a powerless Clark & Lois slept together… yet seems to have chosen to ignore that Clark was powerless at the time of the ‘deed’ and that Superman used the memory kiss on Lois. It would seem that this ‘vague history’ is just that. Superman in S2 tells the President that he was sorry he was not there and that it will never happen again… Yet in SR Supes was gone for 5 years… Singer chose to use some parts and completely ignore others.

In reality if the events of Superman2 we indeed fact in SR, then Lois should remember nothing at all… she should only know that she loves Superman, that Clark is the doofus she works with, that she NEVER slept with Clark/Superman… Lois is pissed at Supes that he left without saying good-bye not because they slept together… To Lois the events of Superman2 NEVER happened!

But the Singer ‘vague history’ thing seems to cloud the whole issue.
In SR, knowing the events in S2, we are led to believe that Lois possibly knows she & Superman slept together and did the deed, she doesn’t know that Clark lost his powers before sleeping with her… but she doesn’t know Clark is Superman… we are also led the believe that MAYBE she thinks the kid IS Superman’s? It can all get very confusing!

Now with the soon to be released SUPERMAN 2: THE DONNER CUT coming out soon, there will be all NEW questions to answer, as the events in Lester’s reworking of Donner’s vision of S2 changed many things and ended up being the Superman2 as we know it… Singer knows what happened in the Donner version of S2, so maybe a lot of what Singer & CO did will make more sense… but I’m guessing it will only cloud it further..

Personally, I’ve always had a problem with using the Donner films as a vague history, I would have preferred Singer do a Batman Begins and reboot the whole thing, but the fact is we are left with a lot of questions and a vague history!

Hey, maybe the sequel to SR will use the events of Returns as a ‘vague history’ and the KID will have never happened… HEH

Nuff said!

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I've already said its not rape, skippy. Doesn't change the fact that it is highly unethical and downright cruel.

Hey, just responded to what you posted, carlos.

Feel free to try and pry your lips from Singer's butt in the near future, by the way.

Where is the **** in my goddamn posts have I hinted anything like that you psycho?

All I've said was that it wasn't rape. I'm providing facts. Your just being a troll on this.

Man, pucker up and kiss mine you troll.

 

[Red Mask]

Lois got as much respect as a hard working woman in the Soviet Union. Although she didn't have an abortion, she was denied all information concerning her pregnancy. Also her opinion wasn't fully valued by her male employers.

 

[The Kid]

In S2, Superman goes into the crystal chamber as Lois watches and is stripped of his powers, he exits as a powerless Clark…

Later Lois “consents” to slip into something more comfortable, and a POWERLESS Clark & Lois “consent” to do the deed, at which time we assume she got preggers… Later Clark gets his butt kicked in the bus stop bar, Zod & CO take over the White House… Clark heads back to the FOS as Lois goes to Metropolis.

Clark, gets his super-powers back using the green crystal that Lois was looking at, Superman kicks Zod’s butt after tricking him into thinking he had again lost his powers…

Later in the Daily Planet offices, Lois is having trouble with the Clark is Superman thing, she loves Superman and is having trouble coping with knowing the secret, she is freaking out, starts smoking again… Clark gives Lois the super-memory-kiss in an attempt to ease her pain… and she forgets everything… it seems the events of the entire film are lost to her.

Is it ‘rape’ is it a ‘roofie’ – NO

Singer has said that he used the events of Superman 1&2 as loose reference, as a sort of a vague history.
Singer used the fact that a powerless Clark & Lois slept together… yet seems to have chosen to ignore that Clark was powerless at the time of the ‘deed’ and that Superman used the memory kiss on Lois. It would seem that this ‘vague history’ is just that. Superman in S2 tells the President that he was sorry he was not there and that it will never happen again… Yet in SR Supes was gone for 5 years… Singer chose to use some parts and completely ignore others.

In reality if the events of Superman2 we indeed fact in SR, then Lois should remember nothing at all… she should only know that she loves Superman, that Clark is the doofus she works with, that she NEVER slept with Clark/Superman… Lois is pissed at Supes that he left without saying good-bye not because they slept together… To Lois the events of Superman2 NEVER happened!

But the Singer ‘vague history’ thing seems to cloud the whole issue.
In SR, knowing the events in S2, we are led to believe that Lois possibly knows she & Superman slept together and did the deed, she doesn’t know that Clark lost his powers before sleeping with her… but she doesn’t know Clark is Superman… we are also led the believe that MAYBE she thinks the kid IS Superman’s? It can all get very confusing!

Now with the soon to be released SUPERMAN 2: THE DONNER CUT coming out soon, there will be all NEW questions to answer, as the events in Lester’s reworking of Donner’s vision of S2 changed many things and ended up being the Superman2 as we know it… Singer knows what happened in the Donner version of S2, so maybe a lot of what Singer & CO did will make more sense… but I’m guessing it will only cloud it further..

Personally, I’ve always had a problem with using the Donner films as a vague history, I would have preferred Singer do a Batman Begins and reboot the whole thing, but the fact is we are left with a lot of questions and a vague history!

Hey, maybe the sequel to SR will use the events of Returns as a ‘vague history’ and the KID will have never happened… HEH

Nuff said!

*explodes*

 

[DarkSuperman]

Wow. Sounds like someone is jealous. A disgruntled screenwriter, perhaps?

He may not be, but I am and the atrocious job done on the SR script pisses me off to no end.

 

[I Am The Knight]

*explodes*

I use that all the time on my job when Im'ing.

 

[The Kid]

aww I guess I pulled a singer there then, though I didn't know you used it too...

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Uh......wow......this thread continues to get better and better.

 

[bosef982]

Try actually studying the law before you try to use it..

The intent happened when Clark knowingly, of sound mind and mental sanity had sex with Lois. He also had the intent to wipe her memory. That is all the intent a district attorney would need. He wouldn't need proof that Clark thought 'HMMM! I'M GONNA RAPE LOIS!'

Try studying the law before you use it...?

Okay, so then. Date Rape, or rape in general, is the forceable violation of another individual sexually without or against one's expressed consent, be it vaginally, orally, or anally.

Superman erasing Lois's memory AFTER sleeping with her is not date rape by any definition, Mr. Study The Law. Rape can only come into play if Lois protested.

No where is it illegal, criminally, to "wipe someone's memory" and thus intent to wipe her memory or not would be irrelevant to the case. Perhaps, on a stretch, you could get Superman on an Obstruction of Justice charge. However, he'd have to be obstructing the investigation of a crime, and since we've established that Lois A) consented to having sex and B) wiping someone's mind is not illegal, there is no crime to hide.

This also speaks to how many morons does it take to apply human based reality law to a ficitional character who hails from another planet? According to some....not enough.

 

[bosef982]

The details of their hookup is never truly covered in SR. That's where the "vague" history part comes in. Singer just used the old films like a salad bar...taking what he wanted, while disregarding what he didn't. Times, places, people, looks all changed. The only things that really stayed the same during the carryover were the sets of the Kent Farm and the Fortress (and even that was enhanced using todays FX tech). Even the suit changed.

No different than what the Bond franchise has done for the past sixty-four years. Yet there, no one seems to be whining incessantly.

 

[bosef982]

Just the notion that people think he raped her.....Goddamn, wow....****ing wow.

It's called idiocy. It's also patently offensive to those who have been, or may know of people, who have been raped. It's extremely belittling to the topic as a whole and I'm appalled, as always, at SHH's timid response to these incessant, tasteless comments.

It also shows a unique perspective on how some people on her degrade women to objects that apparently do not make choices about their sexuality, and instead are at the mercy of the Big Bad S Alpha Male with a GDP kiss.

 

[bosef982]

Lois consented to intercourse, correct. She did not however consent to having her memory erased. It may not be raped, but it is certainly unethical. Especially being as an unplanned pregnancy was a result of it.

Wow, you should oil your chains, I can hear them squeaking really loud as you're backpeddling.

You sound so convinced and assured -- lauding how to think about the law before you speak -- in your previous post.

It's unethical. Hardly. Our ethics don't apply to superhuman beings. It's a whole different ballgame. The amount of emotional stress Lois was under is enormous. Plus, if you have gripes with Superman doing that --- TALK TO LESTER, not Singer.

 

[bosef982]

He may not be, but I am and the atrocious job done on the SR script pisses me off to no end.

You know I hear this all the time, but yet no one has put forth how Superman Returns is a atrocious job. They just say it, becaues it differs from their vision of what they wanted, NOT because it's a bad script.