Talk:40 Days and 40 Nights

Eastwood

Who is Morgan Eastwood? What is his significance?Jarfingle 07:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Poster

the poster shows the title and related text in a verital shaft, very much insinuating an erect penis, i think this should be noted Qrc2006 23:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure that needs verification? They make it pretty obvious. --KittyCollier 19:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with KittyCollier. Jarfingle 21:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The screenshot needs a fair use rationale or may be deleted later. --Nehrams2020 05:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Trivialization of Rape

This seems to be a pretty clear-cut POV statement, so I'm removing it. Anyone disagree? Twin Bird 13:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC) I disagree. Since thats what they did.. He got raped then punished for it and nothing happened to the woman. How can anyone see a movie with a man doing the same and not having it criticized.

Disagree, the film is controversial in that the sex was not consensual, and it's fair to point out that attitudes would have been different if the victim had been female or the attacker had been another male. Gomez2002 09:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

You have to prove that it was controversial. Find reliable sources complaining about it. While you're right it would have been different if the roles were reversed, you still need to prove it was controversial. DurinsBane87 03:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the way it is written here ("but rather makes the victim appear to be the one at fault") sounds a bit confusing. Not the viewer but Erica thinks Matt is the one to blame. "makes the victim appear..." means to me "makes the victim appear to the viewer".

Besides; is it even possible to "rape" a man in the traditional way? I mean he is the one whose tool only works if he wants it to, so there has to be a certain agreement coming from his side. But I've never been in such a situation so probably I'm talking bullsh*t. (Of course in this case, he was sleeping, so this doesn't apply here anyways)

Yes it is. Erections can be involuntary. (Most men have morning wood, an involuntary erection each morning) A man could get an erection by being drugged. A man could be coerced into sex. There is also the possibility of something else arousing the man and then the man gets raped. It is also possible to be aroused but not consent to sex. Just because you are horny doesn't mean you want sex with any person. Just because someone is hot and arouses you doesn't mean you want to have sex with that person. There are other factors that matter besides the question of whether you have an erection or not.Leprecon (talk) 22:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Um, so you're a girl right? and obviously one who's never been with a guy, or spoken to one. Yes you are talking bullshit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.194.83.124 (talk) 12:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)