Is the use of the Communication Stones in SGU rape?

[Tropicana]

Well, one doesn't have to be completely nude to engage in said activity.

 

[Graybrew1]

I think it was a double standard, this was there way of insinuating the act....but because it was two women and they did not want to go THERE they portrayed it as such. :icon_e_wink:
If it had been another hetero couple they would have showed more and you have had no doubt of it.

 

[Tropicana]

Was this where Wray was in a body that was quadriplegic? Or when she was in a military personnel?

 

[YoshiKart64]

Was this where Wray was in a body that was quadriplegia?

I think it was a previous visit (I think...). Either way I don't think sex was implied and that leaves it as a lone event that happened with Young. Silly but I got past it - kind of like when O' Neill had sex and condemned himself to a 100 year lifespan. You think "as if that would happen" but you move past it as it doesn't become a 'thing'.

EDIT: Double standard? They showed a proper relationship between two women, a normal and natural one. Arguably it was the most believable relationship on the show as it didn''t feel forced or contrived; it was just there. Yes that made it a little uninteresting but still, it was commendable in its intentions.

 

[SciphonicStranger]

Cuddling on a bed isn't an implication that they had sex, especially since they were both fully clothed.

Agreed - now if they were also smoking cigarettes...

 

[Graybrew1]

I think it was a previous visit (I think...). Either way I don't think sex was implied and that leaves it as a lone event that happened with Young. Silly but I got past it - kind of like when O' Neill had sex and condemned himself to a 100 year lifespan. You think "as if that would happen" but you move past it as it doesn't become a 'thing'.

EDIT: Double standard? They showed a proper relationship between two women, a normal and natural one. Arguably it was the most believable relationship on the show as it didn''t feel forced or contrived; it was just there. Yes that made it a little uninteresting but still, it was commendable in its intentions.

It it started because SGU abused the living crap out of those stones. It irritated fans and non fans alike. The sexstones aspect of it was just too much and GROSS. I jumped into the conversation at Gateworld because they thought it would be fun to discuss whether or not " it was rape to use the communications stones for sex" . I debunked their "proof" of the kino ep and then then they turned it into a moral and ethical issue.

The whole idea of the sexstones is an insult to the sanctity of the SG franchise. What spouse/sig other is gonna want to go bang bang with somebody else's body. And since BTW there was no consent it is tantamount to Rape for the person who owned that body. Which just makes it all the more worse.


Yeah, the double standard is not the relationship, it was there portrayal of the bedroom scene. If they wanted to be fair and show it, both women should have been "wearing sheets" like they do with the hetero couples.

I know you feel a need to defend everything about this show. But this one is just WRONG. In sooooooooooo many levels and sooooooooooooooo many ways.
And it is probably one of the biggest reasons why so many casual viewers stopped watching the show.

 

[Overmind One]

Well only the first one on that list happened using the stones. The second was the same incident right? The last one was never shown and, other than cuddling, nothing else was implied.

And yes the clubing scene was silly but again this all happened early in Season 1.0 after which they moved away from issues like that. I find it stupid that the writers didn't use it as an opportunity to lay out the boundaries for what must be the first extensive use of the stones in such a situation; but they moved away from it so it wasn't too bad.

As for the divorce papers, I don't really see an issue. It's him signing them, seems a bit unfair to leave his wife unable to move on.

We saw Young in Telford's body having sex with his wife. Then we had Telford as himself (the communication with the stone was interrupted). Wray and Sharon are LOVERS, and if they are in the bed and not clothed at the dinner table, then they were having or going to have sex. The stones were used for many non-critical things, and then after the incidents where the stones had issues with connecting, and after the encounter with the blue fish people because of the stones they continued using them? Why would you try to be a devil's advocate for those stones? I can see you liking the drama and perhaps even the characters, but to say that those magical rocks were good on any level is....curious .

 

[Joelist]

The ironic part if the "sexstones" is really just a prelude to the bigger problem is the degrading manner in which women were portrayed in the show.

Basically, all of the women in the show were "sexually" defined. Chloe was basically defined as Scott's bedmate and really had no personality of her own. The same was true of James. Ginn was basically there to be a short term love interest for Eli and had no real character of her own. TJ was also badly underdeveloped but when they did turn to her it again was defining her in terms of her tryst with Young. And Wray was the worst of all - her character was bland and also defined by her sexuality. Even the choice of Wray for that plot role was degrading - Google up the hot and trendy ethnicity for same sex female realtionships in the "adult entertainment" arena and it becomes clearer.

So all the stones did was enable this degradation to a further degree by introducing body swapping to the equation. It's really a sad come down from Sg-1 and SGA which both had very strong women characters (Carter, Weir, Fraser, even Vala).

 

[YoshiKart64]

We saw Young in Telford's body having sex with his wife. Then we had Telford as himself (the communication with the stone was interrupted). Wray and Sharon are LOVERS, and if they are in the bed and not clothed at the dinner table, then they were having or going to have sex. The stones were used for many non-critical things, and then after the incidents where the stones had issues with connecting, and after the encounter with the blue fish people because of the stones they continued using them? Why would you try to be a devil's advocate for those stones? I can see you liking the drama and perhaps even the characters, but to say that those magical rocks were good on any level is....curious .

I don't think they were good - quite the opposite. I just think the writers did learn a bit as time went on, that's all I'm saying.

Personally I think including them at all was a silly idea. I think they were just afraid to 'copy' Lost by having flashbacks; unfortunately I think that would have made the show a lot better had they gone down that route.
In fact if they had slowly explained how something bad had happened in our galaxy and how that led into the Destiny mission, it could have been a really compelling aspect of the show. Alas not to be .

 

[Rac80]

The ironic part if the "sexstones" is really just a prelude to the bigger problem is the degrading manner in which women were portrayed in the show.

Basically, all of the women in the show were "sexually" defined. Chloe was basically defined as Scott's bedmate and really had no personality of her own. The same was true of James. Ginn was basically there to be a short term love interest for Eli and had no real character of her own. TJ was also badly underdeveloped but when they did turn to her it again was defining her in terms of her tryst with Young. And Wray was the worst of all - her character was bland and also defined by her sexuality. Even the choice of Wray for that plot role was degrading - Google up the hot and trendy ethnicity for same sex female realtionships in the "adult entertainment" arena and it becomes clearer.

So all the stones did was enable this degradation to a further degree by introducing body swapping to the equation. It's really a sad come down from Sg-1 and SGA which both had very strong women characters (Carter, Weir, Fraser, even Vala).

the lack of character development for the females of sgu was just one of the many reasons the show "failed" so badly for me! I had enjoyed female characters that defined themselves through their jobs not their relationships. I saw the beginning of this on the final seasons of sga where teyla was wall-papered once she became a "mom" and Keller who was there as mckay's "reward" (how demeaning! ) - the writing was on the wall for me since then.

 

[Overmind One]

the lack of character development for the females of sgu was just one of the many reasons the show "failed" so badly for me! I had enjoyed female characters that defined themselves through their jobs not their relationships. I saw the beginning of this on the final seasons of sga where teyla was wall-papered once she became a "mom" and Keller who was there as mckay's "reward" (how demeaning! ) - the writing was on the wall for me since then.

When you have a chauvinistic man like JM writing for the female parts, what do you expect? This man is used to having his feet massaged, and having freshly baked cookies made in the likeness of his dogs for lunch. That servile woman he is shacking up with has spoiled his objectivity.



His girlfriend takes the time to bake this stuff? She gives new meaning to the words "dog biscuit". The women of Stargate were nothing more than an extension of his idea of what women should be like.

 

[Joelist]

When you have a chauvinistic man like JM writing for the female parts, what do you expect? This man is used to having his feet massaged, and having freshly baked cookies made in the likeness of his dogs for lunch. That servile woman he is shacking up with has spoiled his objectivity.

View attachment 4470

His girlfriend takes the time to bake this stuff? She gives new meaning to the words "dog biscuit". The women of Stargate were nothing more than an extension of his idea of what women should be like.

It actually goes beyond this. I wasn't kidding when I said the portrayal of women was degrading. In real life, a woman can be a professional person or also a stay at home Mom (amongst many different roles in life). All of these can be fulfilling without any need to be defined sexually (like all of the SGU women were). Characters like Carter and Weir worked because they were defined first as competent professionals and shown to possess integrity and courage. Only after that did relationships enter the picture, and even then the relationships were not defined sexually (although they might include sex it was not the way it was defined).

Wray is a particularly good example. I noted earlier why choosing her as the same sex romance was especially degrading - it was pandering to hot trends in adult entertainment which is sleazy. If they really wanted to be "daring" why not choose two characters both on Destiny? For example Scott and Young?

 

[Lilith]

I think it was a double standard, this was there way of insinuating the act....but because it was two women and they did not want to go THERE they portrayed it as such. :icon_e_wink:
If it had been another hetero couple they would have showed more and you have had no doubt of it.

gotta give you some green for that one. They had shown o'neill in bed with carri from the CIA but on the dvd's and the reruns it's editted out. The scene was of him waking up and answering the telephone , innocent enough but it's gone. No Carri under the covers anymore.

 

[Overmind One]

It actually goes beyond this. I wasn't kidding when I said the portrayal of women was degrading. In real life, a woman can be a professional person or also a stay at home Mom (amongst many different roles in life). All of these can be fulfilling without any need to be defined sexually (like all of the SGU women were). Characters like Carter and Weir worked because they were defined first as competent professionals and shown to possess integrity and courage. Only after that did relationships enter the picture, and even then the relationships were not defined sexually (although they might include sex it was not the way it was defined).

Wray is a particularly good example. I noted earlier why choosing her as the same sex romance was especially degrading - it was pandering to hot trends in adult entertainment which is sleazy. If they really wanted to be "daring" why not choose two characters both on Destiny? For example Scott and Young?

Hotter yet would have been up-playing the (obvious) relationship between Greer and Park. It should have been Greer and Park in that broom closet, not Scott and James. And yes, I do know what the current trend is with the hot lesbian couple in that particular configuration. :icon_e_wink:. Scott and Young? Well, no. Perhaps Chloe busts Scott and some redshirt (male) in a compromising position? LMAO!

 

[shavedape]

Hotter yet would have been up-playing the (obvious) relationship between Greer and Park. It should have been Greer and Park in that broom closet, not Scott and James. And yes, I do know what the current trend is with the hot lesbian couple in that particular configuration. :icon_e_wink:. Scott and Young? Well, no. Perhaps Chloe busts Scott and some redshirt (male) in a compromising position? LMAO!

I don't think any highly sexual and intense romantic relationship would have worked on a Stargate based show. We had two series that didn't have any of that and the romantic relationships they did show were handled way more modestly. I don't think any Stargate fan was prepared for gratuitous broom closet sex as it simply wasn't "Stargate" in nature.

I don't think the gay/lesbian aspect of a relationship would be problematic on Stargate if it was treated as a non-issue. But SGU was a melodramatic soap so it's something of a moot point to even argue how cynically lame the whole lesbian sexploitation thing was.

 

[Mr. A]

I don't think any highly sexual and intense romantic relationship would have worked on a Stargate based show. We had two series that didn't have any of that and the romantic relationships they did show were handled way more modestly. I don't think any Stargate fan was prepared for gratuitous broom closet sex as it simply wasn't "Stargate" in nature.

I don't think the gay/lesbian aspect of a relationship would be problematic on Stargate if it was treated as a non-issue. But SGU was a melodramatic soap so it's something of a moot point to even argue how cynically lame the whole lesbian sexploitation thing was.

Exactly. That's not what I want to see when I tune in to a show like Stargate, or any scifi for that matter. It is actually a distraction taking away valuable air time for me that could have been spent on much more relevant issues to the series. In SGU it took the place of stuff like plot development or the science the writers pushed "off-camera" or just chose to ignore.

 

[Overmind One]

SGU was never Stargate.

I don't think any highly sexual and intense romantic relationship would have worked on a Stargate based show. We had two series that didn't have any of that and the romantic relationships they did show were handled way more modestly. I don't think any Stargate fan was prepared for gratuitous broom closet sex as it simply wasn't "Stargate" in nature.

I totally agree with the bolded. But EVERYBODY knows that Stargate Universe wasnt based in Stargate. It was based in The Young and The Restless . My brain does not associate SGU with Stargate. The engrams that are tagged with "stargate" and snippets and episodes from SG-1 and SGA, fading images of Teyla and Daniel Jackson do not include anything from SGU. To me, they arent related at all, except by (arranged) marriage.

I don't think the gay/lesbian aspect of a relationship would be problematic on Stargate if it was treated as a non-issue. But SGU was a melodramatic soap so it's something of a moot point to even argue how cynically lame the whole lesbian sexploitation thing was.

 

[shavedape]

I totally agree with the bolded. But EVERYBODY knows that Stargate Universe wasnt based in Stargate. It was based in The Young and The Restless . My brain does not associate SGU with Stargate. The engrams that are tagged with "stargate" and snippets and episodes from SG-1 and SGA, fading images of Teyla and Daniel Jackson do not include anything from SGU. To me, they arent related at all, except by (arranged) marriage.



View attachment 4471
View attachment 4472

I don't know why but that top picture has me laughing so hard it hurts!
That picture alone sums up SGU totally.

 

[Overmind One]

I don't know why but that top picture has me laughing so hard it hurts!
That picture alone sums up SGU totally.

Doesnt it though? You have to be hearing the tinkling sad piano with that picture too. What was that anyways, that BSG-ish tinkling piano. Did they just get a kitten and put it on the piano and let it walk on the keys? That top picture could have been the cover of the SGU Season 1.0 DVD set.

 

[Gatefan1976]

I don't think they were good - quite the opposite. I just think the writers did learn a bit as time went on, that's all I'm saying.

Umm, Irrisistable (the ep) Yoshi..........
There was a mighty "hue and cry" after what happened then, and it was far milder than the Stone sex, so are you sure they learned anything?