From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan R. Hagan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps
Subject: Re: DOOL: Comments (offensive and full of bitching)
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:58:59 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

sally@remarque.berkeley.edu (S. A. Wilson) writes:

>Well Sue I am offended by your posts since in mine I flamed a
>character and an actress, you flamed we folks who felt a certain
>way about the scene. 

Sally - if you would like to be offended, yet again, be my guest.
I was not flaming you.  I was, and am still, trying to gain
a *rational* understanding of your feelings and present a *rational*
explaination of my own.  

Also, even if I was flaming you, why is okay for you to flame an
actress for her creative expression, and it isn't okay for me to flame
you for your opinion?

>Secondly, if J&J did the scene I would be
>VERY upset since I would have found it tackey, in fact more so

Just so I can get a better idea of what was so terrible about
that scene, why don't you tell me about what other sex scenes
on DOOL you found offensive, because I really don't understand
what was is so terribly offensive about this.

>what with Jack's background. I would take offense that Matt
>and Missy dared to do a scene like that. That Jack would *uck his
>wife while she was drunk, in a public place, considering he once 
>raped his lst wife. I would lose respect for the acters to even

When does making love turn into ***king, in your definition?  When
it is done while intoxicated?  Do people who are in love, fall out
of love when intoxicated?  Or when it is done in a non-traditional
environment?  And what does raping his first wife have to do with
anything?  He did that at home, in private, on the couch.  So,
by your standards, J&J should never have sex on a couch because
that is where he committed rape and that would be terribly offensive.

[an explanation of Jack's reformation process deleted for brevity]

>finally has come to realize this, and if Jack had done what Bo
>did on the table I would be offended that all this evolution and
>growth would have been distroyed.

But it wouldn't be destroyed.  It would be a triumph because
Jack could finally have a healthy, fun, sexual relationship with
his wife.  

>I am pissed off that the pool table scene which I view as crap
>was used for airtime when so many other characters/acters were
>treated like shit. That TPTB used the Bull Shit excuse that 
>there is no time for the older characters for non-white characters,
>but instead use airtime for a scene like this. That Richard Biggs
>had NO storyline even though he is an attractive man, a much more
>talented actor than Crystal or RKK, that he has more seniority on
>the show and should have a more primary role on the show, yet instead
>airtime which could have been used on him, Susan Hays, favorites

Finally, I a reason I understand.  But by those standards, you should
be equally offended anytime Bo and Carly are on since they are always
taking airtime away from those that you would rather see.

>like Mary Beth, etc. was used for a crappy scene which served no
>storyline purpose. It did not portray Bo & Carly's mutual love for
>one another so I felt is was unnecessary. If it were meant to

It didn't?  Did it have to?  Can't sex be fun?  I think its a wonderful
sign of mutual love when two people trust each other enough to let 
down their inhibitions and go a little crazy.

>show two characters who just lusted after one another I would not
>have taken offense. But it was just another vehicle, a stupid,
>offensive one at that, to shove these two no talents yet again in

Yes you would, because it happened on a pool table.  Remember - that
reminds you of rape.  Anyway, let me see if I have this straight.
People who are in lust can screw in bars on pooltables, but people
who are in love cannot?  What are the rules for sex between people
in love?

>our faces. Time which could have better been spent developing Marcus'
>character, setting up a storyline for him--or god forbid a romance
>since on DOCL black people don't have love lives.

Fine.  You think Carly and Bo get too much airtime and that much of
their airtime is wasted on nonsense.  I agree with that.  I don't
think its worth getting offended over.  If you do, go for it.  I just
hope you are not operating under the impression that your opinion is
generally accepted to be rational and open-minded.  From what I have
been able to tell from your posts and from your failure to provide any
explanation for you opinions, I would have to say it is an
emotionally-charged, narrow-minded, irrational, overreaction.

AND before you get yourself all worked up again, I AM NOT FLAMING YOU!
I am trying to have a discussion.  You prefer to rant.  I guess
its a little easier for me to remain calm since I'm not offended
and you are.  

[description of who has been passed over in favor of Carly deleted]

>That is what pisses me off, that is what offends me, that is what
>I view as injustice. And for these reasons I am really offended
>by the pool table scene. 

I agree that the show is going down the toilet because everything is
revolving around Carly.  But this has nothing to do with the pool
table scene.  Yes, the other characters are getting a raw deal, but
to say that this is why the pool table scene offends you makes no 
sense.  

The pool table scene offended you on its own.  We've already
determined that by your description of it.  You called it all kinds of
names.  You are also angry that DOOL would waste airtime on a scene so
horrible instead of using it for more worthy characters.  

>Sally--I am no fuckin' prude. I take offense that I am being labeled
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Again?  Really.  I think you've taken your fair share of offenses
for one day.  Save some for the rest of us.  :)

>as one with out fully knowing, but labelling my because of what I
>have posted

If you didn't constantly take offense for such silly things, maybe
I wouldn't think you were a prude.  Also, we only know you by what
you post.  If you make a prudish statement and then say ", but I'm
not a prude", that does little to change the impression that you
are one.


-- 
Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services