Backlash on rape subplot

I thought the scene was thought-provoking and exceptionally well done. It did a very good job of presenting many aspects of the situation, including the issue of institutional indifference in prosecuting rape, and the life-changing consequences of being a victim of rape, the dangers of allowing anyone to anonymously accuse someone else of rape in a public forum. The people who were offended by it were, for the most part, looking to be offended and seized on something that they thought served that purpose for them. Anyone who brings up the subject of rape will get someone mad at them regardless of what approach they take.

I think the episode offered a very sympathetic portrayal of the rape victim and used the discussion with Don as a way to shine a light on questions and issues from multiple angles, which is something that most of the people critical of the episode in the vulture.com piece seemed to miss.

It's interesting that many of the posts in the comments section are far more favorable to the episode.

it seemed very well done to me

"the day I tried to live, I learned that I was alive"

I had totally expected this.


I haven't read all the posts. someone might have already covered this.


There is also a story about one of the female writers in his writer's room pulling off a "Hallie" on him. Apparently, she tweeted about her reluctance to add the rape plot line and how she got "thrown out" of the room for voicing her opinions.

Is it a coincidence that he is heavily focusing on the effects of internet in this season? Hallie's betrayal, Kundu story, the Rape case and the stalker App.

The criticism is right on.

"But at the center of the episode's problems was one terrible idea: Aaron Sorkin isn't sure rape victims should be naming their rapists, because somebody somewhere might miss out on a medical school scholarship."

It's just so laughably stupid.

If you're looking for evidence of the professional click-hungry trolls theory, just look at the 100+ comments on the buzzfeed article:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/arianelange/the-newsroom-and-our-moral-obligation-to-believe-an-alleged

If this is any indication, at least 95% of the comments defended Sorkin and the episode. I left a long comment myself, and then thought...whoops. Totally fell for it.

The author even cites the prison scene of Will's "father" complaining about the 9 women on the jury as a scene that made the episode anti-woman. As Sorkin pointed out (it truly is astounding that he feels that he has to point this out) not every single line from every single character represents what he thinks. I don't think that anyone who can write as competantly as buzzfeed's staff has the poor critical thinking ability to see that Don is not blaming the rape survivor (somehow this extremely long article fails to grasp a basic plot point: that Don's considering doing a piece on her specifically because of her website) and that Will's father's comment is not actually suggesting that wife beaters get a bum rap because chicks sit on the jury. The amount of hate for the journalists who created this faux outcry probably far outweighs the ouctry itself.

Do people actually think a website like that would be possible? Seems pretty obvious it would never work. The moment it becomes popular or picks up heat, it would immediately get flooded with false accusations as a joke. People would just do it because they can. Any actual rapists would be inclined to send false accusations to the site to damage the reputation and credibility of the site as a whole. It would just never work.

I like Emily's argument that yes, dedicating a public site to naming rape victims would be disastrous.

I was once falsely accused of a sex crime and it nearly destroyed my life.

That said, it was insensitive, but Sorkin's always insensitive. He is incapable of seeing outside himself and tries to tackle a lot of minority groups' issues and people from all different walks of life to disastrous results.




sophomorecritic.blogspot.com
Twitter @okonh0wp