It's been a while since I saw this movie so I'm gonna watch it later today after picking it up from the library, but from what I remember, Doug 3 tried not to have sex with Laura after Doug 1 specifically told the others not to sleep with his wife, but she ended up getting him to do it anyway.
"There is no escape, John!"
physcially, it seems unlikely for a male to have sex with a female "unwillingly".
***
Go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
So you, bulldog, are saying rape is not rape? I'm not talking about that scene the poster referred to, but your comment how it's impossible to not willingly have sex with a woman. So not true.
shareNo.
He was resisting not because he wanted to but because he knew that Doug would be furious if he found out (Rule #1).
"Do you even remember what you came here to find?"
So you mean she was being pushy? That still sounds sorta like pseudo-rape.
shareI'd say she was no more pushy than a wife who really wanted to be with her husband. If any of the clones were raped, it'd be 4. He doesn't seem to have the mental capacity to consent.
Another argument could be made that the clones raped Laura. She thought she was with her husband, but those men weren't the real Doug.
A good example is Ms. Jupiter feeling disgusted when Dr. Manhattan duplicates himself to be with her in Watchmen.
Can't stop the signal.
He said "No" in a "I'm not really in the mood but I'd do it otherwise" way, not in a "I'm not attracted to you, so get away from me" way. That's why she kept pushing: She knew she could convince him. Men do it to their wives too. It's not rape.
shareThat being said, she still raped 4.
shareI disagree, because Laura still thought 4) was Doug. She thought all of them were Doug because she knew nothing about the clonings. And she did not seem to notice 4) (Doug's) mental handicap.
shareI disagree because of standing consent laws. In California, there are specific laws that protect the mentally disabled. A reasonable person could conclude that 4 did not have the mental competency to consent to this action.
shareI agree completely with that, the same laws apply in Kansas. But Laura did not know he had any mental handicap and she still 100% thought it was her husband. Now if a woman has sex with someone for the first time and they seem handicapped but she isn't sure if they are or not, that's a whole different story. Then she can get in trouble. But in this film's case, Laura 100% believed that she was having sex with her husband, the same man she had already had two kids with. She knew absolutely nothing about the clonings. If she did know, it would've been different. Also, if 4) tried to resist like 3) did, that also would've been wrong. But , like I said, a) Laura knew nothing about the clonings and 100% thought it was her husband, b) he didn't resist, he just stood there with a goofy grin, c) there was no way to tell at that point yet he had a handicap, even if it was a situation where Laura knew nothing about the clonings but something may've happened to damage his brain and make him handicapped now. He was just standing around with a goofy grin, she probably just thought he was in a goofy mood. Now if she'd spent a couple minutes more with 4) like the other Doug's did, then she would've noticed something was wrong. Then, it would've been wrong for her to initiate sex. Laura seduced him the first couple seconds she'd ever seen 4) and could tell nothing was different from her husband. She thought it was her husband.
shareYou brought up a few key points that would have made a case against her. Firstly, a reasonable person would have question at some point whether or not he could have in fact, had the competency of her husband. She cannot claim ignorance in this matter if 4 clearly is displaying a gross deviation from her own husband's established judgement. Secondly, his voice pattern and tone both possessed a NOTICEABLE difference from that of her husband. In conclusion, there were enough red flags in this situation that would indicate to a reasonable person that this was a person who was mentally incapable of making an informed decision regardless. Hence, she can still be prosecuted.
shareYou're right. I just thought that she really did not notice that gross deviation from the real Doug's established judgement at the time she seduced him because it was in the first few seconds she ever saw 4). If Laura had even spent even thirty more seconds than she did before seducing him, then it would've been obvious to her he was incapable, then it would've been wrong to seduce her. As for any of the moments after she started seducing him, then she would just be assuming he's just laying back and letting her make all the moves, which I've known real husbands to do with their wives sometimes. Cause I seriously doubted that he spoke much after she got started, so she wouldn't be noticing all the differences in his talking and so forth from the real Doug. Most guys dont talk much during sex. But I totally understand what you're saying too.
share[deleted]
I just watched Multiplicity again and I now completely agree with 100% of what you were saying Dightbrdf. I'd only watched that movie once before several years ago and I didn't remember the details clearly enough while posting my other comments the other day and I forgot how handicapped no. 4 really was (there's a lot of films that I post comments on that haven't seen in years and I'm writing stuff just based on memory). I was remembering no. 4 before as like a goofy man child, you know like Will Ferrall in "Old school". Now that I saw " Multiplicity again today, no. 4 really did seem handicapped, rather than just a goofy adult. Now I agree with you totally, Laura was 100% in the wrong.
Yep, that a pretty rape-y scene that's always been uncomfortable viewing.
share