Gone with the Wind (1939), the sweeping Civil War epic based on the Margaret Mitchell novel, is considered one of the best movies of all time for many reasons. Not only did it have a top notch cast and many iconic scenes, its costume design, sets and cinematography were second to none. However, it’s not a film without its controversies. Two of them, which you’re probably well aware of, are its romanticism of the antebellum South and its depiction of slavery.
On top of these issues, there is another less talked about yet no less controversial problem that has dogged the film all these years–the infamous grand staircase scene. In case you don’t know which one I’m talking about, it’s the scene in which Rhett Butler, drunk as a skunk, belligerently confronts Scarlett O’Hara about her undying love for Ashley Wilkes, then carries her up the iconic red-carpeted staircase to their bedroom.
This scene is one of the most powerful and memorable ones in Gone with the Wind and sets the tone of the conflict that will define Scarlett and Rhett’s marriage for the rest of the movie. In spite of how good it is, it’s gotten a lot of flack, and for good reason; it’s the scene right before Rhett rapes Scarlett.
A lot of people have tried to argue that this scene isn’t marital rape, that it was just rough sex or hate sex. To them, the smoking gun is the scene that plays right after this one, in which Scarlett can be seen waking up and smiling. Clearly, she couldn’t have been raped because what woman would react this way if she had been?
Okay, so let’s address that second scene. Yes, it’s true–after the grand staircase scene, Scarlett isn’t crying her eyes out or filled with burning hatred for Rhett. She smiles like the cat who just swallowed the canary. But if you’re at all familiar with romantic fiction, you will recognize that the scene of Scarlett smiling was Gone with the Wind trying to confuse audiences about what had happened the night before, by referencing an old trope that thankfully no longer exists.
What was this trope? The “ravishing” love scene. This trope usually plays out when the two love interests, who have explosive sexual chemistry right from the get go, keep putting off sex because they initially can’t stand each other, or the woman plays hard to get (either because she doesn’t want to come across as desperate, or she is acting demure). After putting off sex for so long, sexual tensions between the two finally boil over, and the male love interest finally makes the first move, but in an aggressive manner. He might do it by suddenly grabbing and kissing the woman while her guard is down, causing her to resist before finally caving in and reciprocating with a passionate kiss. (Some famous examples: Rocky and Adrian in Rocky; Deckard and Rachael in Blade Runner; Terry and Edie in On the Waterfront.)
On the surface, the ravishing trope looks like the man is forcing himself on the woman, but it’s always made clear that the desire for sex between the two characters is mutual; it’s just that they’re both play acting a sex fantasy in which the man “passionately” takes the initiative while the woman initially resists. Gone with the Wind tried to be slick and downplay Scarlett’s rape by throwing in the morning after scene to confuse the audiences into thinking that she wasn’t really raped but “ravished.” (In other words, she was only pretending to not want sex so Rhett could take her in a fit of passion.)
But watch the grand staircase scene in its entirety without the morning after scene and there’s absolutely nothing about it that would suggest that what happened was innocent. First of all, there was never any real love or attraction between the two, not even in an “opposites attract” vein. In fact, the entire reason why the scene happens in the first place is that Rhett discovers, much to his rage, that Scarlett loves Ashley. So, the argument doesn’t wash that what happens in this scene is hate or rough sex between a feuding couple who secretly have the hots for each other.
Secondly, Scarlett isn’t fighting off Rhett because she’s playing hard to get, acting demure or covering up her feelings of sexual attraction by pretending to hate him. Sex is not even in the equation. She is trying to escape Rhett because he’s stinking drunk and he keeps threatening her physically. Not only does he rant about wanting to tear her to pieces, he puts his hands on her head as if he’s ready to wring her neck. You can see in the screenshot below how frightened she is and why later she keeps wanting to leave; he is two seconds away from slamming her head to the table, punching her or worse.
Even if you could say for the sake of argument that sex was in the picture, Scarlett wouldn’t have been holding out because she really wanted to have sex with Rhett but was only pretending not to. She would’ve been holding out because of her love of Ashley Wilkes. Again, that is a huge part of why this incident happens is in the first place. Rhett is not only enraged that Scarlett is madly in love with Ashley, he is irate that she is deliberately withholding sex from him because of her love for another man.
On top of all of these indicators that Scarlett was raped, the movie itself indirectly explains Rhett’s motivations for raping her. First, he does it because it frustrates him that he can’t physically crush the thought of Ashley Wilkes out of Scarlett’s mind. Since he can’t do that, the next best thing is to screw it out of her. The logic is that he’ll be so good in bed, she’ll instantly forget about Ashley.
Secondly, Rhett rapes Scarlett to punish her. He sees her holding a torch for Ashley as a form of cheating and cuckolding, so he feels betrayed and humiliated. To make matters worse, it’s her love for Ashley that is the reason why she’s holding out on him. Scarlett is an extremely prideful woman who’s always held the cards in any relationship, and nothing would be more humiliating–and punitive–than to force someone like her to finally submit to a man, not just emotionally but sexually.
The third reason Rhett rapes Scarlett is to reestablish who really owns her. Because Ashley has such a hold on Scarlett mentally and emotionally, Rhett sees him as encroaching on his possession of Scarlett, as in, “Ashley not only has her heart, he has her mind, too; he as good as owns her.” Rhett’s raping of Scarlett is a reminder that Ashley can occupy her mentally and emotionally all he wants, but as her husband, only he and he alone can take her, body and soul, even against her will.
The last reason Rhett rapes Scarlett is to heal his male ego, which was bruised when it learned that this entire time, she had never wanted him but another man–and a genteel, quiet man at that. The logic behind the rape is, “Well, maybe Ashley has won her over with his personality, but that’s because she is forgetting what a real man is like. A real man isn’t all fee-fees and intellect; he is a man with a dick who knows how to use it. I am a real man compared to Ashley, and I will show her what a real man can do.”
In the face of everything I said, I am sure there are bound to be people to argue, “You’re wrong. This is all interpretation, spin. You’re simply reading into the scene too much. It was rough sex no matter what you say.”
Fair enough. So how about this then? The grand staircase scene was directly inspired by Margaret Mitchell’s own attempted rape at the hands of her husband, Red Upshaw, who was the inspiration for Rhett Butler. The attack was so brutal that she spent every year up until his death sleeping with a loaded pistol on her nightstand.
Why the Morning After Scene?
Taking everything that I’ve said so far, there’s no question that the grand staircase is what it is, a prelude to the marital rape of Scarlett O’Hara. But now this raises another question. If Gone with the Wind had no qualms showing this event, why downplay it in the next scene? You might think it was because of the Hays Code or the morality of the times. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that either the screenwriters or the studio decided to downplay the rape for reasons having nothing to do with morality or offending 1930s sensibilities.
Because the movie spent so much time building Scarlett up as a narcissistic schemer and gold digger, there’s this perception that her ill-fated marriage to Rhett was one-sided. Scarlett is seen as this scheming, gold digging, cock teasing bitch and Rhett the stand up guy who was lured into her snare. But the reality is that they were both pretty much a couple of scheming, opportunistic dirt bags who had contributed to the toxicity of their marriage in equal amounts, especially after the death of their daughter. It’s their similarities in personality that is the reason why the marriage became a disaster in the first place. They were too much alike.
In spite of both Rhett and Scarlett being equally to blame for their marriage, it seems as if the screenwriters or someone at the studio decided to be Team Rhett and prop him up as the better of the two. The first reason, I suspect, is that they needed him to be the hero of the movie who finally tells Scarlett off and puts her in her place. Another reason is that Clark Gable was one of Hollywood’s biggest romantic leads, and the studios recognized that female audiences would be flocking in droves to the movie to claim Rhett Butler as the man of their dreams.
Had the rape played out the next morning with Scarlett emotionally distraught, this would’ve confirmed in no uncertain terms that she had been raped. That would’ve been bad from both a storytelling and commercial standpoint. Not only would Rhett have become completely irredeemable, this act would’ve alienated female audience members and made his walking out on Scarlett far less satisfying.
There was an additional bonus to showing Scarlett happy the morning after. It was to further capitalize on Gable’s sex appeal by propping up Rhett as stud. This is one of the reasons why Scarlett is smiling coyly. The smile isn’t just saying, “Ooh wee! I had a great time last night!” It was also a coy telegraphing of Rhett’s virility, to let the female audiences know that not only was he tall, dark and handsome but a beast in bed.
The Bottom Line
People can make a case that we shouldn’t condemn Gone with the Wind for its obvious flaws when it comes to social issues like slavery and its romanticism of the antebellum South. They cannot, for the love of Mike, argue that the grand staircase scene wasn’t marital rape and that everyone should shut up about it. Scarlett was indeed raped. Since she was raped, people have the right to complain about the movie’s social irresponsible message that a woman can be raped and enjoy it.
I don’t agree in the least no one knows what went on behind that closed door and assuming that it was rape is a bit far fetched and indicates it has an agenda –
Rape is Horrendous this was make believe it was a movie
He probably passed out. He was drunk.
Wayne Edwin Vaughan
It was wrong for Scarlett to marry a man she didn’t love, even in 1930!
Assuming rape actually happened, or even that Scarlett was “ravished”, in real life a drunk man cannot leave a woman smiling that way. Drunks are lousy at sex. So, although the whole premise is ridiculous; still it was classic Hollywood. As for us, we didn’t go to the movies because they were good for our little psyches.
No rape, just a night of penetrative orgasms probably the first in her life.
“Deckard and Rachael in Blade Runner”…?
Rachael is a robot. Deckard might be a robot. Surely since the “ravishing love scene” is so common as to be a “trope”, you could find more examples involving two actual confirmed *humans*.
Your comment makes absolutely no sense. So because the characters aren’t technically human, it’s not a valid example of the trope I’m talking about? What does that even mean? Did you just post this comment because you’re bored and needed something to write to pass the time?
On rereading the original comment the line “people have a right to complain…” strikes me as odd. Who’s stopping them? I complain, but one in Hollywood ever listens to me.
On rereading the original comment the line “people have a right to complain…” strikes me as odd. Who’s stopping them? I complain, but they never listen to me.
A lot of people have taken offense to the complaints about this scene, calling it “political correctness run amok” and “feminazism gone crazy.” It’s gotten to the point where anyone who calls it out is immediately shut down as “a crazy SJW trying to ruin a classic movie.” Because of this issue, I wrote that line in their defense.
T. K. Marnell
Who are these people claiming it wasn’t marital rape all of a sudden? “Crazy SJWs,” really? People have been writing about this since the ’90s. It’s so obvious, there’s a section on the Gone with the Wind Wikipedia page about it. (And that section has been there since the article was published in October 2016. It’s not some new thing the “feminazis” sneaked in).
These must be the same people who choose to believe Sixteen Candles isn’t racist and Wedding Crashers isn’t homophobic. Anything unpleasant to acknowledge must not be true.
There is a huge anti-SJW contingent from millennials/GenY who view any type of criticism as a “recent” phenomenon and an expression of how “modern day SJWs” are ruining the enjoyment of classic entertainment. This they argue in spite of what you correctly stated, that people have been complaining about these things for decades. These kids are very scary when it comes to this kind of stuff; they almost sound like brainwashed cult members. For example, they will argue that the only reason that there are blacks and female heroines in Star Wars is “SJW/woke culture” (even though the original trilogy and the prequels had Lando, Leia. Padme and Mace Windu). They will rant that having black, female and gay characters in Star Trek is a sign of “SJWs ruining the franchise,” even though it’s had 40 years of diversity, going back to the 1960s.
This insanity among young people is a large part of the reason why I write this blog. A large portion of youth are being brainwashed on YouTube and social media by vile misogynists, racists and other types trying to convince them that if people are addressing troublesome issues in entertainment, it’s not that these issues have always been there and complained about. It’s a “new phenomenon” being cooked up by “crazy SJWs.”
Here is an example of a comment being posted by one of them at YouTube about this scene: “SJW liberal feminists are up in arms about this scene. They call it “The Rape Scene” which is bullshit because the next morning, Scarlett woke up smiling and singing and happy. The lunatics are never happy and want everything banned. Maybe they need some in there lives to carry them upstairs lol but then again, did you ever see a pretty SJW female or a beautiful feminist? lol”
This analysis is missing a lot of the context and nuance from the book on which the movie was faithfully based. But I agree, the insinuation of the scene in isolation is rape.
I read the passage last night of this scene. In the novel, it was rape. As the scene played out even had to put the book down as I was enraged by Butler. (Yes, I get emotionally involved in fiction sometimes.) As I confused to read I was confused by Scarlett’s thoughts though. To her she didn’t seemed enraged but turned on. I don’t understand why? I would not have behaved or thought as she did.
In the book, the following morning plays out as you’ve written here (I’ve not seen the movie.) She is amazed at what transpired. She is delighted even. She thinks about the sex for sure – could she have gone this long without a proper orgasm during intercourse. Maybe that’s what the fuss is about and Mitchell cannot write that. Scarlett is especially happy that Rhett said the words “I love you”. Now she believes she has gained the upper hand in the power dynamics of the relationship.
Side note, the embrace between Ashley and Scarlett, in the movie is there any indication that she discovers her feelings for him have changed? I can’t wait to wait to see that scene. In the book she finally figures out being friends with Ashley is where it is at.
In the novel there’s no question that it was marital rape. In the film it’s more ambiguous. When I saw it I didn’t get the impression that he took her by force. When he apologized in the morning I thought he was apologizing for being drunk and loutish, not for raping her. But certainly many viewers will have a different impression.
@Aaron Carine: “Side note, the embrace between Ashley and Scarlett, in the movie is there any indication that she discovers her feelings for him have changed?”
I don’t know if I can explain what happens without spoiling the film (because I don’t know how faithful it is the book). Let’s just say that Scarlett’s feelings do change for Ashley, but…without getting too much into it, she doesn’t really have a choice in the matter.
Rape fantasies are actually a lot more common among women than our society would be comfortable believing. Human sexuality can be pretty damn dark, and not just in the minds of men, but in the minds of women too.
Are you a woman?
I’m not a woman, but I’ve heard enough testimonies from women themselves on this matter. As with all things, the desire women have to be “taken” is evolutionary, a primal instinct embedded deep in the hindbrain.
I don’t think you’ve heard any “testimonies” at all from any woman. Furthermore, I think you’re a troll farmer using this and other comments sections on the web to spread pro-rape apologia across multiple platforms. Normally, when I come across comments like yours, I delete them. However, in this case, I’ve chosen to keep yours up so everyone learns to recognize troll farming when they see it.
I’m afraid I have no idea what troll farming is. Rape, and I mean real rape, is violent and traumatic. For example, what many thousands of white girls have been through here in the UK at the hands of middle-eastern grooming gangs. But this is of course verboten to mention among liberal progressive, for whom non-whites are sacred. Needless to say, I do not share their value system.
I think you do know what troll farming is. For example, in a post that has to do about a classic American movie about the Civil War, you dropped an irrelevant comment about white girls being raped by Middle Eastern rape gangs in the UK. This has nothing to do with this movie, my post or anything else.
Like I said earlier, I could’ve just deleted your comments but I’m leaving them up so readers can get a very clear view of how troll farmers work. What you do is find any open comments section that is only tangentially related to whatever it is you want to spew on the web and then post. I bet you mine is not the first section you’ve posted these types of comments; you probably post them any place you can when convenient.
Now, you are free to comment on what I’ve said about this controversial scene in Gone with the Wind but do not continue posting irrelevant comments or I will delete them and block you from posting further.
Honestly as a woman I’ve had these fantasies when I was a teenager. I remember watching documentaries about child rape crime cases to stop and realize how fucked up it really is. I don’t think that there’s much for you to be mad about. Anyway, I didn’t say this to argue 🙂 This post was actually pretty good, it did change my opinion on the whole movie, now I get to enjoy it even more knowing that Rhett wasn’t that bad after all.
In the novel it wasn’t a rape. Yes, it did promote the ugly trope that “women want to be overpowered”, but Scarlett cooperates enthusiastically after resisting for a few seconds. I don’t think we should assume that the meaning was different in the cinematic version
Cooperates after “resisting”? After resisting what?
Resists-briefly-being carried up the stairs.
Scarlett understand the” thrill of the chase” concept. It can make the outcome all the sweeter.
Your comments make patently clear that you never read this entry.
Why complain about this movie specifically? Because it’s the victim of the month movie? Why not write and complain about 50 Shades of Gray? To me, that is more of the brainwashing aspect that you are seeming to want to promote here.
The reason why I’m complaining about this movie is that for decades, everyone understood this scene for what it was–a marital rape scene.
But over the years, various elements on the internet–who I suspect are part of troll farms–started reinventing history.
One of their beloved go-to disinfo talking points is that the controversy about the staircase scene is something completely new to our time and shows how we’re living in some SJW dystopian nightmare where “woke” assholes are “ruining” the past. In other words, according to them, everyone saw this scene as the most romantic scene ever; it’s only evil Feminist bitches, cucks and the woke brigade that are putting some new and twisted spin on it.
But anyone who’s been around long enough knows that the staircase scene was always regarded as marital rape and that complaints about it go back decades. For example:
Chicago Tribune, 1985–“A Sexual Battleground”
License to Rape, 1987 (book that mentions Gone with the Wind)
On the Issues Magazine, 1997–“Tara And Other Lies Margaret Mitchell And The Real Rhett Butler”
Because so many trolls are playing this game today of, “It was always a romantic scene; it’s just these cucks, soyboys and SJWs putting a twist on it,” I HAD to write this entry to explain, point blank, why this isn’t true.
You’re playing this game yourself with your accusatory question suggesting that I just wrote about this issue recently as part of some “victim of the month” trend when–if you had bothered looking at the calendar in the sidebar–you would’ve seen that I wrote about this two years ago. Not today.
In any event,, I’ve answered your question as to why I’m complaining about this movie.
You’re wrong about the movie glossing over the staircase scene with a “morning after” rapture scene. That morning-after scene is in the book and it’s how Scarlett got pregnant with the child she loses on the very same staircase several months later. But, I do agree with you on the idea that it was marital rape by today’s standards. That being said, it was probably not considered as such by the standards of Margaret Mitchell’s time.
I didn’t say the movie glossed over anything. I said that it completely downplayed what happened after that scene. The morning after scene plays as if Scarlett and Rhett had sensual, passionate, romantic sex without any of the brutality that comes with rape. It pretends as if he just gently scooped her up in her arms, gently laid her down on the bed and then made sweet, passionate love to her. But that’s not what happened. He raped and brutalized her.
Before you cite the book, the novel is unequivocal about Scarlett being raped:
“The man who had carried her up the dark stairs was a stranger of whose existence she had not dreamed. And now, though she tried to make herself hate him, tried to be indignant, she could not. He had humbled her, hurt her, used her brutally through a wild mad night and she had gloried in it. Oh, she should be ashamed, should shrink from the very memory of the hot swirling darkness! A lady, a real lady, could never hold up her head after such a night. But, stronger than shame, was the memory of rapture, of the ecstasy of surrender.”
I repeat: Scarlett was brutalized. She even experienced the natural feelings of hatred and shame that comes with rape. But according to Mitchell, Scarlett overcame those feelings. The reason she did is that she wasn’t a “real lady”. In other words, she was the type of classless and immoral vamp /tramp/woman of ill repute who would enjoy being raped, whereas “real ladies”–women of upstanding morals–would be ashamed and filled with hatred for having their virtue taken from them.
Mitchell also implies that the rape felt so good that it superseded the natural feelings of hatred, shame and humiliation that comes with rape.
Now, what am I getting “wrong” in the movie’s downplaying of Scarlett being raped? The book says she was physically brutalized and that she her herself knew it but rose above the natural feelings of hatred and shame to enjoy it.
The movie says she wasn’t raped at all, that Scarlett had the kind of tender, sweet loving that comes with loving sex.
When I first read the passage I thought it wasn’t a rape. Re-reading it, I think it’s somewhat ambivalent, but the balance points to rape. When they are going up the stairs Scarlett embraces him and kisses him, which suggests that there MIGHT be consent. But the next morning, she is thinking about how she was “humbled”, “hurt”, how she had been “at his mercy”, and “the ecstasy of surrender”. Doesn’t sound consensual. And if it was consensual, why would she feel such shame at having sex with her own husband?
Or during the Victorian era — when the story is based — when women were not supposed to enjoy sex.
In the novel it was definitely a rape; in the film there’s ambiguity. That may because in the novel it’s Scarlett’s inner monologue that indicates that she was raped, and the monologue wasn’t in the film.
You got it all wrong. You took one frame of her looking scared for a second as he has his hands on her head. She quickly shifts from that to an angry, strong and confident “Take your hands off me, you drunken fool.” She has shot someone in the face at this point in the story; she’s lost her parents, two husbands, and everything she’s ever owned, and fought to get it all back. She’s not afraid of him. Secondly, your idea that there’s no mutual attraction between them is wrong.
Read the book. She’s a metaphor for the city of Atlanta. Rhett represents the new south that she’s going to have to adapt to. She didn’t love either husband before Rhett but she loves him because he’s her perfect foil. Ashley represents the old south that she has to let go of. Ashley and Melanie are victims; she refuses to be a victim. When she finally grows up and “gets it” she realizes that her feelings for Ashley were based in little girl fantasies, but she and Rhett have a grown up relationship. Also it’s the Victorian era — women are not supposed to have sex for pleasure — and that night Rhett “gives her pleasure” (read orgasm) for the first time.
You know, I read novels for entertainment. The same reason for which I watch movies. I’m not looking for historical accuracy, guidelines by which to live my life, or inspirational moral truths.
I find it doubtful that many (or any) women have watched this movie and thought to themselves, “well, next time a man is roughly pressuring me to have sex, I guess I’d better just give in and learn to like it!”
If there are women like that, then I submit that misogynistic films are the very least of the culprits who have brainwashed them into warped thinking.
Lighten up, and pick your viewing entertainment with more discretion. You’re having arguments here with people who are not present. Go to where these hoards of anti-SJW neanderthal post, and take them on there. The last place they’ll be is reading blogs like this.
“You know, I read novels for entertainment. The same reason for which I watch movies. I’m not looking for historical accuracy, guidelines by which to live my life, or inspirational moral truths. I find it doubtful that many (or any) women have watched this movie and thought to themselves, “well, next time a man is roughly pressuring me to have sex, I guess I’d better just give in and learn to like it!”
You find it doubtful? Even though many women have been so thoroughly brainwashed by scenarios like the one in this movie that they talk about how they indulge in “rape fantasies”? And will even include such scenarios in their erotica?
“Lighten up, and pick your viewing entertainment with more discretion. You’re having arguments here with people who are not present. Go to where these hoards of anti-SJW neanderthal post, and take them on there. The last place they’ll be is reading blogs like this.”
First of all, you’re probably talking to someone twice your age, who started watching this movie before you were born. So, I’m going to ignore your condescending “advice,” as someone my age should. Remember, not everyone on the internet is your peer (or younger than you), to be talked down to and blessed with your “superior” insight, as much as you would like to think that.
Secondly, understand how the internet ecosystem works. When an idea gains currency on the internet, it can gain so much traction that it somehow winds up becoming part of the public sphere. One of the ways to prevent that from happening is to counter the idea online before it is able to spread further and take permanent hold.
Case in point: this entry is the most visited out of all the ones on “Films, Deconstructed” precisely because this idea that “SJWs are falsely accusing GWTW of marital rape” was picking up so much steam that people began looking up any articles that could shed light on what the MRAs and anti-SJWs were talking about. Before I posted this entry, the anti-SJW/MRA brigade were able to have their nonsense read on the internet by countless people–and accepted wholesale–because theirs was the dominant voice on the internet.
Now, whenever someone Googles the whole GTWW marital rape issue, this and other entries come up to counter them. You may want to keep arguing that posting anything at all as a counter is a useless exercise because the anti-SJW/MRA/Incel brigade were never our audience (or if they were, would never change their minds). But that would be missing the point of why I or anyone would write a post like this. Whether the anti-SJW/MRA/Incel brigade have their minds changed or not is not half as important as countering their opinions online, so that theirs isn’t the dominant voice on the web and their ramblings–by virtue of going unchallenged–don’t enter the public sphere as unassailable truth.
Jo Ann Jeffries
Would just like to point out something ——the reason WHY Scarlett closed the door on sex. It was after Mammie had measured her waist after having Bonnie, and Scarlett was not down to her pre-pregnancy size, that Scarlett announced that there would not be any more children. Is this because of what Rhett said on the honeymoon, as Scarlett indulged every culinary whim: “If you don’t stop being a glutton, you will get as fat as Mammie, and i will divorce you!”
Minababe- wow. Just wow. You are so wrong on so many points here. First and foremost, the notion that Rhett and Scarlett aren’t attracted to one another is utterly wrong. Rhett absolutely loves Scarlett, he has for years, but he is too emotionally fragile/cowardly/stubborn to profess his love to her for fear that she will break his heart…so he hides behind a mask of indifference and ultimately punished her for not falling for him. Scarlett is definitely attracted to him, and does love him, but doesn’t realize it yet at this point in both novel/film.
Furthermore, the novel states that she feels she *should* feel ashamed, but she doesn’t. In fact, she feels guilty that she doesn’t- b/c as she says, real ladies shouldn’t enjoy sex like that. Was he acting cruel and overpowering to her I’m the dining room- yes, but Scarlett was not intimidated by him. She initially resisted on the stairs case, then became sn active participant.
Bottom line: not marital rape in the novel OR movie. Stop trying to turn this into something it’s not. Get a life.
It wasn’t “marital rape” in the novel or movie? Even though it was called “the husbandly rape” scene by the Production Code Administration and was almost taken out by Joseph Breen (who headed the Hays Office) for this very reason?
Do you understand what I said above? Before movies were allowed to be shot and released back then, the scripts and the scenes had to be greenlighted by Hollywood’s censorship office, called The Production Code Administration. That scene almost didn’t make it into the movie, precisely because it was known and referred to as the “husbandly rape” scene. That is what Joseph Breen called it, that is what everyone else back before the movie was even shot called it–husbandly rape.
Normally, when a troll like you starts insulting me over a movie, I delete the post. But I’m going to let yours stand as proof of why I started this blog. You didn’t understand this movie. You didn’t understand this scene. But because of the nature of the internet, people like myself have been taught to tolerate the opinions of people like you, to where we have to keep our opinions to ourselves while letting buffoons have the run of cyberspace and ultimately call the shots in how things are to be viewed and understood.
This “tolerance” ends now. A functional, healthy society shouldn’t allow itself to be overrun by intellectual inferiors for the sake of “tolerance,” especially not when it comes to socially irresponsible scenes like this one in Gone with the Wind that–if not called–can do a lot of damage to society in the long run. This issue is why I will refer to it as a marital rape scene no matter how strongly people like you feel that it wasn’t, no matter how much of a childish, petulant ass you’re all willing to make of yourselves online to argue that it wasn’t.
Sorry but you’re wrong. It wasn’t rape, and it wasn’t against her will. The whole point of GWTW (that you seem to be missing) is that Scarlett really loved Rhett all along and never loved Ashley. If she hated Rhett so bad, why did she come downstairs in the first place? Why not stay in her room and let Rhett drink himself silly? No, she felt bad about that night (getting caught with Ashley, Melanie’s party, etc) and she came down to see what her hunky husband was up to. The next morning, Ashley was the furthest thing from her mind, She was relishing in her feelings for Rhett (probably thinking what a stud he is and how right he was when he said “you should kissed often, and by somebody who knows how”). But unfortunately another theme of the movie gets in the way — that Scarlett and Rhett always reach out for each other at the wrong time. So instead of telling each other “woah, that was awesome last night”, Rhett come in all sarcastic and the chance for a sweet reconciliation is gone (with the wind).
It WAS rape. The Production Code Agency aka Breen Office almost censored this entire scene for that very reason. It was called “the husbandly rape scene”.
You are so hung up on this😭. Question- have you ever even read the novel? I have twice. I’ve seen the movie more times than I can count. You truly don’t understand these characters AT ALL. I think I’m speaking for the majority of married women here by saying that if my husband were to ever rape me, I sure as hell wouldn’t be gleefully singing (the only time in the entire film that Scarlett does this, btw) and grinning the next morning. Call me crazy, but I don’t think the aftermath of rape looks like that. Mic drop. I’m out.
The scene was referred to as the “husbandly rape” scene before the movie was even shot and struggled to get approval for this very reason. No amount of you or anyone else repeating the same denials over and over again is going to change that.
You conveniently dodged the question about whether or not you’ve read the novel, so I’ll assume that’s a “no”. Who “referred” to it as a husbandly rape scene. There is no way Margarett Mitchell agreed with that description. And I’ll ask again, does anyone, male OR female, happily sing and smile after they’ve been raped???