Legalities in Thelma and Louise

Those of you who know me know that I’m taking FTV 111 again, which is the beginning module of the FTV stream in college. Recently, we watched this film entitled Thelma and Louise which is a feature starring the ever popular Geena Davis and veteran beauty Susan Sarandon. To quote one website they were “vigilante vaginas all dressed up but nowhere to go.” Which, if you take into context of the film and what it’s trying to say, makes a lot of sense.

The thing that struck me the most was the scene with Harlan raping Thelma. He takes pleasure in punishing her for refusing to sleep with him, insisting that he’s not going to hurt her, when the othr happens. This scene was particularly painful for me to watch. If you work with a lot of kids who have been molested, you know what I mean.

That said, another thing that Thelma said after her rape was to tell the police that she had been raped, and that Louise replied that about a thousand people had seen her (Thelma) dancing cheek to cheek with Harlan. That seemed to imply that women cannot say that they’ve been raped, that they do not have the right to say no at any time, that they cannot say that they don’t want to have sex. Once they have been seen being intimate with a man, they cannot stop it. Men, on the other hand, can ‘choose’ to honour them with their ‘penis.’

Now, this is not to say that I hate men, but it just oulines the case in Malaysia. A woman CANNOT say no at any time, and she cannot say that she’s been raped. A man needs no witnesses, but a woman must have five to prove she was raped.

See what I mean?

3 Responses

  1. yiliang April 6, 2005 / 12:16 PM

    “A man needs no witnesses, but a woman must have five to prove she was raped.”

    And what ae these five “honourable men” doing standing around and not trying to pull the bloody rapist off the woman and beating him into a messy,bloody pulp?

    GRRRR.

  2. Anonymous April 7, 2005 / 3:38 PM

    I was referring that according to MUslim law, women need FOU witnesses, but in Mohd. time, it meant that these witnesses had to show that this was a pious woman who had been raped.

    PAS’ version is that the guys had to be standing there

  3. yiliang April 7, 2005 / 6:18 PM

    I know! Was just ridiculing PAS’s horrible,horrible lack of sense

Comments are closed.