Eastwick: How *Not* To Act

[marcmagus]

Trigger warning: dubious consent/potential sexual assault

I've been watching Eastwick since it started and quite enjoying it, and I believe I'll continue to watch it and enjoy it. However, I noticed something last night when watching last week's episode which had me yelling at the screen to the point that shield_toad111 had to pause the show and let me finish ranting so we wouldn't miss anything.

See, the show contains a perfect demonstration of exactly how not to act with a [potential] lover if you aren't a raging asshole. Displayed, as best I can tell given what follows, as a man being "romantic" [he's not portrayed as perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn't seem like the moment I'm about to call out is intended to be part of that].

Someone has conveniently put up some of the relevant scenes on YouTube [sorry, embedding disabled]. I don't know how long it will remain up, but for now, it gives what we need. I call your attention to the kissing which begins around 4:25, particularly the second kiss.

Here's the backstory: Morgan [note also the creepy shoulder-grab in the first scene] is Joanna's ex, who bailed on their wedding day and informed her via text message. Yeah, what a charming chap. By astounding coincidence, he has shown up in Eastwick [to marry his bubbly new fiancée]. For some stupid reason, Joanna agrees to have Morgan over for dinner, standing up a date she's worked pretty hard to schedule in order to do so. They get together, they have some wine, they talk about old times, he talks about how stupid he was to leave her and how he never stopped loving her.

He kisses her. She is stiff and wooden for a moment, then rolls away, tear obviously streaming from her eyes. He responds to this by going in for another kiss. She responds enthusiastically and they have great sex, etc.

What. The. Fuck?!

Just no. The fact that it turns out you actually were a mind-reader and she wanted you to kiss her again doesn't excuse what you just did. You kiss someone, and she's obviously unenthusiastic and crying, you do not go in for another kiss. You stop and ask her if she's ok.

She's fucking crying. Now is the time when you tread lightly and make absolutely certain that she's ok and that these are happy tears first. Are you so caught up in your own libido that you didn't even notice the tears? Or are you actually such an insensitive dickwad that you think this is appropriate behavior?

Think. In the simplest terms, two obvious possibilities: she's crying tears of joy from the rush of emotion that you've finally come back to her and still love her, or she's crying because she's uncomfortable with this situation and doesn't know how to deal with it. You err on the side of caution and it turns out she was happy, she'll presumably tell you so and kiss you/ask you to kiss her again. You decide you know it's all ok and you're wrong, and you've sexually assaulted the woman you claim to still love. And you chose Option B?

I guess, if your goal is to get laid as frequently and with as much variety as possible, and that's how you measure your success, Morgan and creeps like him probably offer a winning formula, at least in part because we see so much of this shit portrayed as appropriate and even encouraged behavior that I'm sure a lot of people buy into it. But if your goal is to be a decent human being, don't do shit like that.

[Gender pronouns used to match those in the scene, but obviously this rant applies regardless of the specific genders of the persons involved.]

Comments

[mosephine]

"Displayed, as best I can tell given what follows, as a man being "romantic" [he's not portrayed as perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn't seem like the moment I'm about to call out is intended to be part of that]."

I have to disagree. I don't think even that scene is meant to be him being "romantic" - I think we are meant to see from the begin to the end what a complete asshole this guys is. We're meant to understand that he only ever had his own interests in mind. At least, that was my take upon watching the whole clip.

[marcmagus]

I certainly took home the same opinion of him you did, and it's pretty consistent with the rather bleak view the show seems to have regarding men. But while that moment reads to me as yet one more example of his complete self-absorbed asshattery, it didn't read as intended to convey that.

I'm talking authorial intent here, though; I'm certainly bringing my own crap to the table, and I could well be wrong. The plot didn't get enough time to be certain, and I'm dubious it will be returned to in a helpful way for resolving that.

[mosephine]

I didn't just mean that upon watching the whole clip, that was the opinion I formed *of him*... I meant that was what I felt we were *intended* to believe of him.

Obviously there's no way to know for sure (aside from the writers telling us what they intended), so we will have to agree to disagree on how that scene was meant to be read. ;)

[marcmagus]

Yes, I recognize where you're disagreeing with me. I'm sorry if my response didn't come across as acknowledging and responding to that. I'd intended to acknowledge your disagreement with me regarding the intent and the legitimacy of your reading of it, state that I still disagree, and point out, as you have, that we can't really know without asking. How did I come across?

And, yes, I agree that ultimately we can't know. There's still room for productive discussion, in that we could each offer the elements which lead us to our separate conclusions, but I'm dubious there's enough original footage to make that really interesting, and I suspect my argument might well end up as "that's just my gut feeling about it" in the end anyway.

I hope the message of my rant [In this moment, this guy is being a dick; don't emulate him If you perceive what he's doing as not being dickish, think again.] works regardless of the reader's perception of the authorial intent in that moment.