To want a film I don't feel comfortable with, turned off?

[Knightly]

DH and I were just casually sitting, flicking through channels. He stopped on one film, no idea what it's called, but it had already started in full swing.

I didn't have a clue to the story line and neither did DH so not able to fill me in. He said he knew roughly he thought and her identity was different and she was in hospital.

Next thing I know a woman has woken up in a hospital gown screaming and looking at her hands.

Then some nurse brings in this bloke who has paid to have sex (rape), with her. Nurse was under impression she was still knocked out. Nurse leaves and when rapist gets to it, she bites his tongue off.

I said "DH, I don't feel comfortable with this. Can you turn it off?"

"No, ffs"

I said "Well I am leaving the room then because I feel uncomfortable".

"Fuck sake. Fine! I'll turn it off"

I said "Don't worry, I'm going anyway due to the way you're speaking to me".

He said "Well no, it's just always about what you want".

Was I being unreasonable here? It didn't help that I didn't know the story line, so essentially film was just graphic scenes with no plot to me.

Also, anyone know what film it is? Is on now.

I very much like Kill Bill, and think the scenes are acceptable in the wider context of the film.

But the film wasn't in any kind of context for you, OP. It was just switched on in a rape scene, which you were uncomfortable with, and your DH had no concern about that.

My ex frequently used to play the song 'Down by the river... I shot my baby, along with some other songs about violence towards women when the kids and I were in his car. Now, the songs in themselves were not that bad (to most people), but someone singing along about killing their partner while their partner is in the car is kind of awful, and I never said anything because I knew I'd get the response you did.

Your partner just randomly expecting you to sit through a rape scene, that's kind of awful, isn't it?!

Do women generally find the idea of violent revenge satisfying after a sexual assault?

I do, but only in theory.
Don't want to see graphic violence.
Also, I prefer that there be no sexual assault in the first place, so there's nothing that would require revenge.

And when the male viewer enjoys the rape scene, and then enjoys the violent revenge, no revenge actually takes place. The male viewer participated as voyeur in the rape, and is never punished for that.

Maleficent is a movie that is symbolically about rape and revenge, and it is suitable for children from the age of six. Proving you can have that kind of plot without graphic violence.

Maleficent is a movie that is symbolically about rape and revenge, and it is suitable for children from the age of six. Proving you can have that kind of plot without graphic violence.

Absolutely.

And yes to only in theory to violent revenge against rape even though Kill Bill is much more than just rape revenge.

Whether implied rape is the same as a rape scene or not is neither here nor there, the point is the OP was uncomfortable and her DP was horrible about it. That's not on.

Absolutely gobsmacked by the reach of some posters on here trying to say because there's no actual rape scene in it there's nothing to be disturbed by. If you've not been sexually assaulted and don't find any sort of applied assault triggering, then bully for you.

OP- is DP normally like this? Is he aware of your past? (Sorry I couldn't see if you'd answered this already).

*implied, not applied!

Revenge on a rapist could be a great film

Like I spit on your grave? 1&2 were fabulous examples of rape revenge.

Kill bill isn't about rape revenge. There was no rape scene in it. Talk about hand wringing!

Is what the movie is really about more important than the husband's reaction?

There was no rape scene in it. Talk about hand wringing!

The scene described in the OP is rape. The paralysed woman could never consent, it was also implied that because of no consent, vaseline would be useful. The two men knew it was rape. Of course it was rape!

Jesus

Your DH was being a shit. Mine can be like this, a film came on and it involved a child abduction and murder, it was sensitively handled but it upsets me and I can't switch it off when I go to bed, I keep thinking about it so choose not to watch films with that subject matter. I don't judge DH for wanting to watch it but he judges me, huffing and rolling his eyes. So I put on One Born Every Minute the next evening, I never put it on as he's so squeamish but he needed a taste of his own medicine to realise he WBU. He said (bit sheepishly) please turn this over, can't stand it!

"The scene described in the OP is rape. The paralysed woman could never consent, it was also implied that because of no consent, vaseline would be useful. The two men knew it was rape. Of course it was rape!"

People aren't saying it's not a rape scene because there's a question over consent.
They're saying it's not a rape scene because the man who is there to rape her is unsuccessful in his attempted rape as he is stopped by UT's character.

Whether you agree that this makes it a rape scene or not is up for debate.
But nobody is claiming that it's not because there could be a question over consent or that the men didn't think what they were attempting to do was rape.

lets... is your TV in your bedroom? If not, why do you inflict this on yourself when your husband watches stuff that you find disturbing - and choose to inflict programmes your husband hates, on him? Why impose on each other?

Both of you could go and do something else separately whilst the other one is watching, couldn't you?

This is why we don't have a tv in the bedroom - on purpose. It's not relaxing, my husband would watch Ice Road Truckers endlessly through the night if we did - he can go downstairs and do that.

Yanbu.

I quite liked the movie myself fwiw, but I watched it a very long time ago. I never got why people loved it though, it wasn't that brilliant or remotely clever to me .

Anyway, you asked him to turn it off like a grown up. He should have turned it over, especially since you'd missed the first half.

I have a relative an acquaintance who makes silly, girly squeaks and hides behind cushions when anything violent comes on tv. She then gets annoyed if someone turns it over because they can't stand the squeaking to spare her feelings. Ironically, she is one of the most aggressive and unpleasant people I've ever met irl. The mind boggles.

Quimby You have obviously not watched the film. It's rape. She has been subjected to this numerous times before - it's not a one off. The fact this man is unsuccessful doesn't make it not rape. The clear intention was there to rape.

I understand why someone would find this movie upsetting and want it turned off. Your partner should respect that without question.
I don't however believe that rape should never be covered in a fictional setting whether it's a movie or any other medium.
In this film and other Tarantino films there is a lot of gratuitous violence so don't watch if it's not your bag but it doesn't make people who like his films rape apologists

I've seen it a few times.

I have no problem with it being described as a rape scene.
I'm responding to the points which are highlighting a consent issue as being proof that it's definitively a rape scene when at that stage nobody who was arguing that it was not a rape scene had based any of their arguments around consent.

Their argument that it's not a rape scene is pretty straightforward and to paraphrase are "it's not a rape scene because no rape occurs. Previous rapes are alluded to and it would more accurately be described as an attempted rape scene."

As you say yourself he intended to rape and was unsuccessful. So others think describing it as "a rape scene" are inaccurate. For example if someone tried to kill the lead character in a film and were unsuccessful you probably wouldn't describe it as "the scene were the main character gets murdered"

On the flip side I'm sure most people wouldn't have any issue with someone describing a bank heist scene as such even if the robbers stormed a bank with guns but were unsuccessful or captured at the end.

As I've said I don't see any issue of describing it as a rape scene, just that issues of consent were never the reason to argue against that characterisation of the scene, the arguments were based on the fact that in that scene no rape occurs or is depicted.

Going back to the thread title: "AIBU To want a film I don't feel comfortable with, turned off?"

Yes YABU. If you don't want to see a film your DH is watching for whatever reason, go do something else. (Unless if you were already in bed, in which case he should go to the sitting room to watch it)

I am a survivor of an earthquake most people have heard of, where thousands of people died. I get anxiety symptoms (palpitations, sweating, etc) when I see earthquake scenes on TV, including the devastation afterwards, even in news or documentaries. It has never occurred to me to prevent others from watching those films & programs. I just get up and leave without a fuss.

Other people are triggered by fire or car crash scenes because of past trauma. Or won't want to watch films about child abduction after becoming a parent. These are all valid feelings but don't mean we have the right to prevent others from watching what they want.

It's a good point lying and the honest answer is we both like to spend the evening together so compromise is necessary. He would be equally unhappy with me leaving him to it as he enjoys us watching things together, the discussion and banter etc. So the compromise is that we watch things we both enjoy (of which there are many) He doesn't try and "make" me watch things I don't like but I put one born every minute on to show him he wbu to judge me on what I can't stomach, as most people have a line when watching tv, including him

Tarantino = Emperor's New Clothes.

Jesus - ok so it's an "attempted rape scene" bloody hell, is the hat better. Can't believe the nit picking over calling a scene about rape and multiple passed rape a "rape scene"

So he didn't get to rape her (this time) but when you're watching a movie and a scene like that is unfolding you have no idea where that scene will end - or how bad it could be. Like in Alien 3 when Ripley is nearly gang raped. I leve the Alien nivied but i found watching that scene unfold really upsetting - it still upsets me watching it even though i know the rape gets stopped - it shoukd be fucking upsetting.

That's what we do too, lets, mostly 'Pie In The Sky' or 'Death in Paradise', something like that. If I want to watch 'Ultimate Force' (my favourite!), he puts his headphones on to watch some deathly boring fly-fishing thing and we just smile at each other in the adverts (if they synch).

I hate chatter during programmes I'm watching so there's no banter, just silent companionship (until the adverts).

Like I said I have no issue with it being described either way, but if it's nitpicking by the people arguing it's not a rape scene then surely it's equally nitpicking from the people insisting it is a rape scene.

Maybe we should have more violent humiliating scenes of men being raped in movies - like the really disturbing Deliverance rape scene mentioned earlier. Equality and all that jazz.

bambambini... Getting 'caught' once I understand if you've not seen the film but to repeat watch a film which you know has scenes that you find 'fucking upsetting' is craziness.

Pulp Fiction has a male rape scene..