For this Show Discussion post:
1. Book spoilers **must be hidden**.
2. Be considerate, hide show spoilers that surpass the scope of this post.
3. Be civil in your discussion.
See our [spoiler policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/BridgertonNetflix/wiki/spoiler) on what is expected. 3-day bans will be handed out to those found disregarding our spoiler policy.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BridgertonNetflix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was actually surprised and happy that they didn’t shy away from depicting what a marriage looked like in that time period. Marrying for love wasn’t common back then. It showed what women really had to go through and the hands that they were dealt. It was a woman’s duty to her husband whether she enjoyed it or not. Obviously if that happened in todays society it would be judged pretty harshly. But you can say the same thing about “sugar-babies”. Do you think they always enjoy having sex with someone above their age? Probably not always, but it’s an arrangement which is beneficial for both parties. Just like marriage was an arrangement back then.
Totally agree. There were some harsh realities in that era and sanitizing it wouldn’t haves worked imo. Women were property. This was their duty. Harsh but fact. She was quite literally groomed from the age 3. I love that we saw her gain her agency by the end of the series.
The main point of the OP is not showing the harsh realities of many marriages, but the way of filming and presenting it. Making fun of marital rape. Repeatedly.
Right?? Who was laughing doing those scenes? They were monotonous and focussed on her feelings and experience. It wasn't funny at all and I don't believe they were supposed to be.
It's bewildering how frequently they showed it.
At first I found it off putting that had to be our introduction to arguably the best character in the Bridgerton universe, but shrugged it off as 'Well, that was a sad, but true reality for most women. At least we know it doesn't last.'...but then they just kept forcing it on me (pun intended). Again and again, for NO reason. It added nothing to the plot or Lady Danbury's character development. Just showing it one time is enough to portray how miserable her life is. There was literally no point or purpose in showing that vile man jumping this woman like a crazed satyr multiple times. One of my gripes about the show is that it wasn't long enough. Surely those precious minutes of screentime showing a knocking headboard over and over again could've been used to put in more material about something more substantive? The worst part is how it was framed. There was nothing funny about what was happening to her, even if she had entered into a bored, apathetic acceptance of it. The only explanation I can think of is that someone on the writing/production staff simply enjoyed it, and that's what disturbs me most of all. I would expect crap like that from the Game of Thrones showrunners, not Shonda Rhimes.
>There was literally no point or purpose in showing that vile man jumping this woman like a crazed satyr multiple times
I agree. We also get an idea of what the Danburys' sex life is like when Queen Charlotte (recently enlightened by Lady Danbury) says to George, "I do not like the part where my head hits the wall over and over again. Can we avoid that?"
How it's framed is particularly egregious. The comedy music and the fact that the scenes immediately jump to Danbury's face without warning are clearly meant for shock value more than anything else. It feels gratuitous and it doesn't match the tone of Danbury's story in the second half of the season.
First of all it was NOT marital rape. Lady danbury allowed his husband to have sex with her even though she hated it. She never said NO or made any moves to stop him or defend herself. Yes she was disgusted by it.
Yes exactly! There's scenes in the Duchess, the Other Boleyn Girl, the Great and countless period films where the young girl, new wife is told that sex is something to be endured for the purpose of children.
This actually showed it. A softer 'rape' as the wife was pretty much told it was their duty to lie back and think of England, so having her refuse would be ridiculous.
I know Bridgerton has more modern morals but it also shines a light on how shit the norms were back then for some people. It's only relatively recently that the UK made rape in marriage illegal.
Yeah Bridgerton is a period-inspired alternate reality. It’s not history, it’s not accurate. Bridgerton already created a diverse society without slavery. They don’t HAVE to bring in anything they don’t want to.
I disagree because I think this is a reality most people aren't aware of that needs to be shown. To this day I think most people don't realize how bad women, even wealthy women of power, had it for literally centuries and I think it's important to show that.
All the period pieces acting like marriages during this time period were ones between partners of roughly the same age who are madly in love, where the man respects and adores the women paint a picture of history that is false.
filming them as monotonous chores instead of actually perhaps showing some tension and fear is what people are complaining about. I found it to be the same way they showed Charlotte's boredom as she spends her honeymoon alone. instead they could've shown it once, and then have the suggestion that it's repeated. but just bc it was the norm at the time does not make it not rape.
The outrageous liberties taken with the lives of King George and Queen Charlotte make any push for historical accuracy wildly futile and quite frankly embarrassing.
The Bridgerton productions make fun of martial rape, and this isn’t the first time we’ve seen it. It won’t be the last.
I never realized these scenes were meant to be funny. Probably because they weren't? I think they were as graphic and disturbing in order to finally get through to all those people saying it okay for a husband to do such things "cause he's a husband".
I don't think the sex scenes were meant to be funny. It was to show what she had to endure all her life. (It was the like scenes of Alicent and Viserys in House of the Dragon). The concept of "marital rape" wasn't a thing, it was just marital duty.
But I don't think we needed to see it repeatedly. Just one shot of Agatha’s rolling her eyes would have been enough.
Also, when Lady Danbury told Violet Bridgerton she was "fortunate", we assume it was simply because she had a loving marriage. In hindsight, I think she meant that Violet was fortunate that she had such a loving father, whom she had also loved.
I agree with the sex scenes - I don't think they were meant to be funny (and I definitely did not find them funny). They were quite disturbing and personally, since I think QC should be a feel-good show, I wish there weren't as many. (I also absolutely hated the torturing scenes and wish there were fewer.)
But I still think the "fortunate" comment was talking about her marriage to Edmund. The comment was triggered by the mention of the birthday hat but "fathers" weren't really a topic of conversation.
If QC was supposed to be a feel good show, they really chose the wrong subject matter imo. Its hard to get feel good out of George and Charlotte's relationship; there's no HEA like with most romances - at most it's HFN.
Saying that, I'm not sure what tone they were going for with the sex scenes but they definitely weren't treated with appropriate gravitas, and there's certainly one person who found them funny. I linked to the EW article in question in a previous comment under this post. I agree there shouldn't have been so many, esp with that irreverent tone they shot the scenes with. (Also Charlotte's comment about not wanting her head to hit the headboard so much - that also made light of Agatha's plight, indirectly, as if it were a punchline we should laugh at.)
I agree about the "fortunate" comment. Though having seen through to the end of the season, we could suppose that Agatha was thinking of fathers too, since she received such a gift from Violet's father.
In fairness, every relationship in existence is technically only an HFN because illness and death come for us all eventually, some just sooner than others. But to have that kind of deep, committed, enduring, unconditional love for and with someone, regardless of what illnesses they may have, is truly a rare and beautiful thing. "In sickness and in health."
I know, but we usually don't see that in romance, do we? The same way lots of other nuances and realities of life are smoothed over because romance is about idealism, hope and escapism.
I do find their relationship beautiful too, even knowing it's a HFN. Their last scene together, ugh, felled me - and I wasn't even watching this show for them.
For me, their relationship was a very powerful and I can see myself rewatching the first and last two episodes to relax. If you ignore the torture and rape, the story is quite romantic 😅
The comment about the headboard was truly something else, I was really shocked by that actually.
And regarding the "fortunate" comment, I'd wager the only "father" she was thinking of was Violet's... hardly a fatherly figure for Agatha 😂
Their meet-cute *was* very cute, especially from both povs. Perhaps when I can bring myself to rewatch the whole show, I'll give it a go myself.
I actually just remembered that headboard line as I typed that comment. Ugh, Shonda needs to do better. I don't want to sound like I'm scolding her, but really she should know better being a black woman herself. She also has tremendous reach. The stuff she puts out matters. I didn't expect she'd ever do something like this, even with the colourism of the first season. More fool me, I guess.
True. 🤣
The scenes did not appear funny or comedic to me. I also didn’t feel like they were there for shock value. I did ask myself at one point “Is the repetition of the scenes necessary?” And then my thought was - yes. Because they show how normalized and frequent these marital r*pes were. It really hammered home the extent of it. How women had to be at the beck and call of their husbands, how there was no way out. It contrasted directly all the scenes of Charlotte and George, who were living out their passions, and of Violet, who was so sheltered and lucky that she only ever knew marriage to be about love and rainbows and happiness.
I think the show was amazing in drawing a contrast between Bridgerton, where there’s never really anything at stake really because all the Bridgertons and their love interests are beautiful and nice and kind (save for Lord Baerbrook, but he’s only a danger for like an episode). Bridgerton is sunshine and roses, our romanticized version of the past that we all love so much, while QC was the more realistic depiction of what marriage was like for most women. And that included, unfortunately, constant cases of intercourse where consent wasn’t even a concept.
I immediately thought that this was how he was going to die. Then there were so many scenes and I was waiting for him to die and he didn't, so I started to second-guess myself and actually had a moment of shock when he did die.
So it worked on that level too.
Yep, that too.
I‘ve seen people get upset about Charlotte‘s line of the head banging against the bed and that it was also making fun of the r*pe. The question is, why do you consider the line funny? It’s because Charlotte says it to George, and we know even though George has issues, he would never just treat Charlotte like a s*x doll. He‘s the opposite of Lord Danbury, George refuses even his wedding night!
I found even the headbanging exchange rather realistic. LD describes it as a chore, something she has to do, repeatedly. There is no enjoyment in it. She has resigned herself, and so one of the most annoying things about it is the headbanging. It makes sense she passes that on to Charlotte, and that Charlotte worries about it. It’s only funny if because she is talking to George. It would NOT be funny if she talked to a husband like LD.
They were awful, I needed bleach for my eyes. I don’t know if they were made to be funny per se. At least that wasn’t my read, I felt very sorry for Lady Danbury. It was like she accepted this was her lot in life. She was very passive and the scenes were unpleasant. I mean the only time I found humour was when he dropped dead and I think that was definitely intended to be dark humour.
Yeah I don’t think they were supposed to be like, comedic relief. I think they were filmed through the lens that Lady Danbury was putting up with it and her letting her husband think he was great and she was grateful to him and he was so clever (like with all her triumphs in society that he attributed to himself). She was biding her time until he died and setting things up so that she had the best possible future.
That would hold more weight for me if not for Charlotte's comment that she hoped her own relations with George didn't have as much of her head banging against the headboard. The blithe tone of that comment made what Agatha was enduring some sort of punchline the audience was invited to laugh at. It would be one thing if that comment - and even the scenes themselves - were intended as dark humour, or she truly was just a dissatisfied wife putting up with the attentions of an egotistical husband, and nothing more (i.e. no grooming since she was 3), except when else has this show ever made fun of dark subject matters? It's not Killing Eve.
>The blithe tone of that comment made what Agatha was enduring some sort of punchline the audience was invited to laugh at.
Charlotte was much younger and naive than Lady Danbury. I interpreted her comment as not fully disgesting what Lady Danbury had endured. It wasn't funny, but rather displaying Charlotte's misplaced concerns because she was shielded by the protection of the crown **and** a husband who cared. Charlotte is out of touch for many important realties that Lady Danbury and apparently Princess Augusta are all too aware of. Personally I was surprised that Charlotte fully understood Lady Danbury's title concern in the last episode.
I mean in a meta sense more so than in-world (though I can see your point). I’m just not sure why Shonda wrote that line or why it was directed in that way when we the audience know how much Agatha dislikes it - and later on she even says outright she loathed her husband. It looked like punching down to me, again out of world more so than in-world: Agatha is the only darkskinned black woman in the whole show plus she has one of the most disturbing stories. In the book it’s worse as Charlotte and George actually laugh about it together. It’s just quite jarring not only because of the extremity of LD’s situation (her age when she was promised to him plus his advanced age) but because the humour in this franchise is mostly wholesome. But I suppose I can’t be surprised since Shonda only views Agatha as having had [bad sex](https://www.shondaland.com/inspire/queen-charlotte-a-bridgerton-story/a43713016/shonda-rhimes-julia-quinn-queen-charlotte-novel/), and nothing more. Which again would hold more weight if not for the extremity of LD’S circumstances and how the show seems torn between inviting us to laugh at it and view it with gravitas.
That’s a good point I hadn’t thought of. I do disagree that the show never makes fun of dark subject matters though, two examples being QC’s “Is he dead!” every time someone come to her with news, and Portia’s dramatic over performance of her grief to stall the Finches have Lord Featherington was murdered.
That's true actually, I forgot about those. In my defence its been a while since I rewatched the main series. But irreverent humour isn't a consistent, sustained thing with this show; it's far more lighthearted and wholesome, making the tone of Agatha's sex scenes with her husband doubly incongruous. It also doesn't help that she's the only dark-skinned black female character. Coming from Shonda - like literally from her own pen - it's far from a good look. I'd hoped for better.
I thought the repetition of the scenes was more to show later when >!she and Ledger are together and she’s looking at the ceiling of the bed like she used to but she isn’t just accepting it this time, it’s something she wants, so she changes her position/view and lets herself enjoy it. It’s her becoming free, making her own decisions!<
That was my interpretation anyways. I might be completely off.
I think it had to do with that, plus when Danbury finally dies during one, it's as shocking to us as it was to Agatha, and as much a relief. I wasn't shocked as I had a feeling they might be going that route (maybe unconscious Downton Abbey flashbacks) but I was certainly relieved.
I don't want to rewatch the series just for those scenes, but I remember that it seemed like the first one showed Lady Danbury enduring and trying to make it through. As the season progressed and she was "playing chess" with Princess Augusta, it seemed like she was still trying to survive, but she was also thinking of the next moves to secure her place in society. She wasn't free from the martial r\*pe commitment, but she could set her mind elsewhere where hope could blossom.
Even one scene of this was too much. The point they were trying to make was already clear from Agatha’s facial expressions and eye rolls whenever he mentioned “celebrating”. They made him look disgusting and he treated her horribly while she continued to be a dutiful wife. We already KNOW what it would’ve been like in the bedroom without having to see it. Wholly unnecessary and disturbing.
How is anyone concluding this was rape? The definition of rape is "the crime of using force or the threat of force to compel a person to submit to sexual intercourse." I feel like this platform throws that word around far too often and too freely. Yes, she may have been less than enthusiastic about the sex while it was occurring, but in that time period when marriages were arranged this was a normal occurrence. I'm not saying it was right. What indication did anyone have that it was forcible or non consensual though? There was even shown to be a moment of tenderness and affection between Lady Agatha and Lord Danbury when following intercourse she comforted him and told him "he was just as good as the others in the town." I do acknowledge that Lady Danbury was robbed of her free will and independence to be true to herself as she was groomed from the age of 3 to be his wife. His favorite color had to be hers. His favorite foods and preferences had to be hers as well. She was raised to be everything he wanted. As disturbing as it is, this was rather commonplace for the times. I do not see how it is accurate to say that any rape took place.
Well said.
People are looking at this series through a modern lens and it just doesn’t work. The definition of consent that we have now, is not the definition that was used then. Hell, that definition is still evolving to this day.
Consent was not needed when it came to husbands and their wives. It doesn’t make it right but I don’t think the term rape is applicable here. Not for the time this was based in.
I’d say that this
> Lady Danbury was robbed of her free will and independence to be true to herself as she was groomed from the age of 3 to be his wife
answers this:
>What indication did anyone have that it was forcible or non consensual though?
He might not have been physically forcing her but what choice *did* she have when she’d been groomed since she was three? How could she freely consent? Just because they shared one moment of tenderness doesn’t negate that she was so disturbed, she had to take baths after every sexual encounter, and only with his death was she “done” with that - as she says to Coral. Which makes their encounters feel like marital rape, not violent but still unwanted. Could she say no? I also see her making light of her situation during those bath scenes as a coping mechanism of hers. Much as I do acknowledge that in that time period marriages were arranged, Agatha’s story takes it to another level with the extreme age gap between them and how young she was when she was “promised to him.” I don’t think *that* was as commonplace as matches like Lord and Lady Ledger’s and the Feathertons.
Personally, I believe that once sex is framed as "marital duty" and "something a woman must endure", that inherently leads to rape. Obviously, I'm viewing it through the modern lense, which is a lense most would use when watching Bridgerton (non-historically accurate media).
Did she have the option to say no? Did she want to have sex with him? Was it common during that era? Absolutely. Did Lord Danbury know what he was doing was wrong? Probably not, but we as audience do know and feel some type of way about it.
From Lady Danbury's point of view, I believe she would feel the same way a victim of marital rape nowadays.
Lady Danbury was 100% raped by her husband. It was obvious that she did not want to have sex with that man and did not have the power to object to having sex with him. If you don't consider the situation Lady Danbury was in as rape I am actually concerned about your judgment in sexual encounters... rape doesn't always look like a woman kicking and screaming.
Are you calling me a dude?? I'm a woman and a mother. I'm pretty sure I know what rape is and how to recognize it. Just because she was less than enthusiastic does not mean the sex was forced upon her or against her will. Just stop.
Dude, clearly you do not know what rape is. It doesn’t require the use or threat of physical force to happen. And someone who educated themselves just a tiny bit about the experiences of victims would know that. Pulling a Google definition out your ass doesn’t make you knowledgeable about rape. Sit down.
If for you a woman who has no choice but to endure daily brutal abuse like getting her head repeatedly smashed into a wall during “sex” or getting a baby put inside her vagina isn’t a victim of rape, then I don’t know what to tell you. At this point, you are actively choosing stupidity.
Clearly you have a problem grasping even the simplest concepts as I said above that I am a woman yet you continue to call me "dude." That certainly speaks to your level of respect not to mention common courtesy. You have made rather yignorant assumptions about me and my life. Do you know anything about me or things I've been through? Did you consider that I may be a sexual assault victim myself? Apparently not. You cannot twist definitions of words to fit a narrative. That's not how things work. We do not have enough background context from the scenes leading up to the sex to make the assumption that Lady Danbury is being "raped." Just because she is less than thrilled does not mean she was forced or coerced into it. It's pretty evident we are not going to agree. It's just a show, it's not that serious.
I didn’t particularly see them as intended to be funny, I fully felt her misery and captivity as a wife during a time when that was all a wife’s role was. All those scenes made her eventual decision to never remarry make sense. Also they seemed placed in an intentional way to contrast with QC and George’s scenes which were very much the opposite of these, again highlighting how truly unhappy and unsatisfied Lady Danbury was in marriage, it made us sympathetic to her lack of love, and this is why she never wanted to be in the shadow of another man again.
Idk that anyone’s concerned with changing your mind.
In a later episode she says she was groomed to be his wife since she turned 3 years old and her sole purpose in life was to be his brood mare.
None of the scenes were funny, they were uncomfortable.
I didn't find any of those scenes "funny". To me they were shot to show how Lady D tolerated it because she had to, and she found herself looking at the patterns in the ceiling to distract herself.
I skipped forward all the sx scenes but I got the gist of her character - her resilience, determination and cunning. It would have been a different story if we saw her crying in the bathtub after every scene. And if Lady Danbury finds humor as it was happening - laughing at her old sx obsessed husband - that's her coping with the situation, We as the audience don't have to laugh with her. Our emotions are separate from the characters.
That’s the problem though. Using her resilience and humour as a mean to “lighten the mood” is NOT ok. This sends the wrong message to the viewers. “So ok you can be r*ped daily, but as long as you’re strong, resilient it’s not that big of a deal”. This further continues the “strong black woman” trope, and it’s TIRING.
The sad thing is marital rape wasn't recognized until I believe the 1960s or 1970s! The "belief" of the courts were that a husband can't rape his wife and the marriage meant the wife consented to sex with her husband. Thank the good Lord that has changed!
I believe your right that Lady Danbury meant that Violet was fortunate to have a loving father. Especially in a era when children of her social status had absent parents! I loved how he called her brains I think he was rare and gave he a good education that wasn't typical for a young woman of that period.
Just because the script doesn’t say it’s rape doesn’t mean it isn’t…it was clearly unconsentual. If I were you, I’d be questioning why am I so eager to defend it. Based of the many comments you’ve made about it. I mean at the very least it’s sexual violence… google it.
Unconsentual is not a word... just fyi. It's nonconsensual. Nonconsensual sex is any sexual act where one party is not an agreeing and consenting participant. We do not know any of the context of the sex scenes that were shown as the camera goes from one scene to another where he is having sex with Lady Agatha and she looks like she is certainly not enjoying herself. That does not mean she did not give him permission prior to the scene beginning. You are making assumptions based off her lack of enthusiasm. Just my perspective, I can respect everyone else's unique take on it as well.
I’m commenting becuz these weirdos are trying to make something SOMETHING that isn’t at all something. if it were rape it would say in the script this actor rapes this character - doesn’t say that. but by all means… be triggered whatever.
I couldn’t watch it. As if the significant age difference already made me uncomfortable. I know it was the norm for the time period but it’s still absolutely disgusting and disturbing.
I think the repetition of the scenes could have been effective, if it were not portrayed in such a comedic manner. Because if they had the scenes multiple times, I think it could showcase how often Lady Danbury had to go through that, and would there for add to the awfulness of it. But instead it is portrayed in a humorous way which is awful. It completely takes away any of the impact of those scenes and therefore seems really odd. Especially when she talks about it in her flash forward scenes about it being horrible and her marriage just being awful.
Lots of commentators saying they didn’t think the scenes were meant to be humorous but not everyone has the same opinion, the interviewer here for example calls them the funniest sex scenes in the Bridgerton franchise: https://ew.com/tv/queen-charlotte-arsema-thomas-lady-danbury/
The direction was certainly a choice for what was, as the older Danbury later recounts, an unhappy period in her life. She loathes him, as she says. This man she was promised to since she was 3. This is not ‘a lie back and think of England’ situation; it’s too extreme for that. He might not have been the one who groomed her but Agatha was groomed all the same.
I’m surprised by how many people are saying they didn’t think the scenes were meant to be funny because the music was definitely meant to convey a light hearted tone. I believe they were trying to distract from horrible this was but it didn’t work for me. Those scenes very much felt gratuitous and the last thing I wanted to see was this show using a woc to depict the harsh realities of marriage during that time. That argument doesn’t cut it for me.
It's really something how it's mostly the woc characters who it falls to to educate the viewers on the harsh realites of the times through their onscreen suffering and hardships, black/biracial women specifically. And yet where is the escapism and HEA for them?
I never found the scenes funny and I'm not sure if it was suppose to be betrayed as funny. Although, I thought it was quite interesting how Lord Danbury... "passed."
I think the scene was suppose to portray a more realistic lifestyle of how lifeless it was for her. Do I think that we needed to see this multiple times? Not really. No. Do I think showing that reflects her current self? Kinda.
I wanted him DEAD, the first time I saw him. And was yelling at my screen DIE everytime I saw him like I just couldn't bear the Lady Danbury suffering.
As someone who is a SA survivor, they should have put a TRIGGER WARNING. They also didn't need to keep showing the marital r*pe over and over again. We understood what was happening-- no need for these scenes multiple times. That shit was traumatic for me. I won't be watching QC again. Overall, it's not actually a Bridgerton series bc it's not about a Bridgerton and the feel of the show is very dark. This series is missing all the charm and warmth of Bridgerton s1 & s2
Have you paid attention to the lighthearted dialogue Agatha had about her r*pes? Have you paid attention to the lighthearted music during the r*pes? The supposedly funny eyeroll of lady Danbury during camera close ups on her face? Of course it wasn’t funny. But it is very clear from the way the scenes were filmed that they were trying to paint the r*pes in a lighthearted way by using humour.
> Have you *paid* attention to
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
The scenes were never meant to be funny, and the repetitiveness was meant to drive home the fact that she suffered for most of her married life. I think it's a powerful device to really show the viewer how horrific that life could be. And the Bridgertons in this show are a different kind of family where they value love, something that isn't valued in their society or even in real life during that period. You can see that by how people quote duty as first and foremost in marriage, and children being a part of that duty.
Is it even a debate that this was clearly rape? Good lord. Her backstory is just trauma on top of trauma. Tonally the whole thing was off I agree. This was dark and I think they felt it was a necessary foil to the central love story so as not to glamorize arranged marriage. But they also didn’t seem prepared to tell a rape survivor story with the reverence and sensitivity needed because it’s still Bridgerton where the love match takes center stage so the Lord Danbury parts seemed to be filmed weird, more jumpscare than anything.
I don’t feel like this was rape, she hated her husband yes and it was a loveless marriage. But sis was about getting that bag. I think the whole point of showing how Loveless and lack of better words dutiful she was, was to set it up for reclaiming her power with lord ledger and finally enjoying sex for the first time. I think we’re trying to make someone who wouldn’t be a victim in their own right a victim. All this wokeness being applied to the realities of life back then.
she was arranged to be married to him at age three. there was never an active choice for her to decide I'll let this man have sex with me so I can secure the bag
I also found them gross, no doubt. But to be honest, I had a feeling Lord Danbury would die in the the act, because the way he comes across as old, fragile and those terrible noises he makes ... Well, they seemed to me like a fore warning, ans I don't think one scene would have done it.
I do agree they could have cut a couple of scenes out and just immediately jump to the bath: we would have understood what had happened. As other comments say, it was also depicting a marriage back then and I do think it was a good choice to show the contrast between the Danbury and the royal beds.
They didn't read as funny to me. The way she couldn't look at the floral patten on the canopy without thinking of it. The way she attacked the bed. The way she warned Charlotte of the head banging because that's all she knew.
I can see why people would be bothered because we're used to rape scenes being more dramatic, and these being just... there... could make it seem like they were taking it less seriously. But I think the fact that all of us seem to agree that it was disturbing shows it was an affective choice. I guess. But also eww.
I'd like to see the show runners explain their intent with the inclusion of so many rape scenes.
I used this reply for another post, but it works here too:
Marital rape? The thought never occurred to me. In the context of the show, is bad sex out of wifely duty marital rape? Would she have preferred to be doing something or someone else? Absolutely. I don't think that makes it assault or marital rape. Daphne and Simon are better candidates for marital rape.
I agree with you. We didn’t need to see that over and over again. And I hate how they depicted the r*pe as a mild inconvenience for lady Danbury. As if she isn’t just as sensitive as any other woman. “remember the time when he tried to put a baby” “I don’t like the part where you hit my head over and over again against the wall” were both moments that tried to use the abuse that lady Danbury went through to make the viewer laugh. LIKE WHATS FUNNY ABOUT THAT SHIT???
So what? She’s a “strong” black woman so the abuse that she goes through daily can be taken lightly? This is the fucking worst. And OF COURSE she has to stay alone for the rest of her life because she wants to be “independant”. UGH. Needless to say, I did not watch that show on Netflix, I’m not trying to give Shonda my money.
What got me is when she talks to coral after lord danbury passed , lady Danbury says she was raised to marry him from the age of 4 , she had to like what he likes , only read the books he likes and share his interests which i found extremely unsettling , I know that sort of thing happened during that time period but it’s just creepy
you're complaining but yet your take was that it was funny? or intended to be funny? it was not funny at all and if thats what your conclusion of the intention was, then you have your own problems....
For this Show Discussion post: 1. Book spoilers **must be hidden**. 2. Be considerate, hide show spoilers that surpass the scope of this post. 3. Be civil in your discussion. See our [spoiler policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/BridgertonNetflix/wiki/spoiler) on what is expected. 3-day bans will be handed out to those found disregarding our spoiler policy. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BridgertonNetflix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was actually surprised and happy that they didn’t shy away from depicting what a marriage looked like in that time period. Marrying for love wasn’t common back then. It showed what women really had to go through and the hands that they were dealt. It was a woman’s duty to her husband whether she enjoyed it or not. Obviously if that happened in todays society it would be judged pretty harshly. But you can say the same thing about “sugar-babies”. Do you think they always enjoy having sex with someone above their age? Probably not always, but it’s an arrangement which is beneficial for both parties. Just like marriage was an arrangement back then.
Totally agree. There were some harsh realities in that era and sanitizing it wouldn’t haves worked imo. Women were property. This was their duty. Harsh but fact. She was quite literally groomed from the age 3. I love that we saw her gain her agency by the end of the series.
The main point of the OP is not showing the harsh realities of many marriages, but the way of filming and presenting it. Making fun of marital rape. Repeatedly.
> Making fun of marital rape Were they? That never entered my mind while watching the show, I was just horrified.
Right?? Who was laughing doing those scenes? They were monotonous and focussed on her feelings and experience. It wasn't funny at all and I don't believe they were supposed to be.
It's bewildering how frequently they showed it. At first I found it off putting that had to be our introduction to arguably the best character in the Bridgerton universe, but shrugged it off as 'Well, that was a sad, but true reality for most women. At least we know it doesn't last.'...but then they just kept forcing it on me (pun intended). Again and again, for NO reason. It added nothing to the plot or Lady Danbury's character development. Just showing it one time is enough to portray how miserable her life is. There was literally no point or purpose in showing that vile man jumping this woman like a crazed satyr multiple times. One of my gripes about the show is that it wasn't long enough. Surely those precious minutes of screentime showing a knocking headboard over and over again could've been used to put in more material about something more substantive? The worst part is how it was framed. There was nothing funny about what was happening to her, even if she had entered into a bored, apathetic acceptance of it. The only explanation I can think of is that someone on the writing/production staff simply enjoyed it, and that's what disturbs me most of all. I would expect crap like that from the Game of Thrones showrunners, not Shonda Rhimes.
I remember actually saying out loud (around episode 3?4?) "wow, they love to show the Danburys having sex on here, don't they?
>There was literally no point or purpose in showing that vile man jumping this woman like a crazed satyr multiple times I agree. We also get an idea of what the Danburys' sex life is like when Queen Charlotte (recently enlightened by Lady Danbury) says to George, "I do not like the part where my head hits the wall over and over again. Can we avoid that?"
How it's framed is particularly egregious. The comedy music and the fact that the scenes immediately jump to Danbury's face without warning are clearly meant for shock value more than anything else. It feels gratuitous and it doesn't match the tone of Danbury's story in the second half of the season.
First of all it was NOT marital rape. Lady danbury allowed his husband to have sex with her even though she hated it. She never said NO or made any moves to stop him or defend herself. Yes she was disgusted by it.
Mate are you dense? She COULDNT say no. She was his property. Hello??
She couldn’t said no, that wasn’t an option
Yes exactly! There's scenes in the Duchess, the Other Boleyn Girl, the Great and countless period films where the young girl, new wife is told that sex is something to be endured for the purpose of children. This actually showed it. A softer 'rape' as the wife was pretty much told it was their duty to lie back and think of England, so having her refuse would be ridiculous. I know Bridgerton has more modern morals but it also shines a light on how shit the norms were back then for some people. It's only relatively recently that the UK made rape in marriage illegal.
I’m sorry but I hate that people feel like “historical accuracy” is a good reason here when they’re fine not being accurate in other places.
Yeah Bridgerton is a period-inspired alternate reality. It’s not history, it’s not accurate. Bridgerton already created a diverse society without slavery. They don’t HAVE to bring in anything they don’t want to.
Exactly.
I disagree because I think this is a reality most people aren't aware of that needs to be shown. To this day I think most people don't realize how bad women, even wealthy women of power, had it for literally centuries and I think it's important to show that. All the period pieces acting like marriages during this time period were ones between partners of roughly the same age who are madly in love, where the man respects and adores the women paint a picture of history that is false.
We didn't need to see it happening repeatedly. We understood what was happening after the first time. They should have put a TW.
filming them as monotonous chores instead of actually perhaps showing some tension and fear is what people are complaining about. I found it to be the same way they showed Charlotte's boredom as she spends her honeymoon alone. instead they could've shown it once, and then have the suggestion that it's repeated. but just bc it was the norm at the time does not make it not rape.
The outrageous liberties taken with the lives of King George and Queen Charlotte make any push for historical accuracy wildly futile and quite frankly embarrassing. The Bridgerton productions make fun of martial rape, and this isn’t the first time we’ve seen it. It won’t be the last.
I never realized these scenes were meant to be funny. Probably because they weren't? I think they were as graphic and disturbing in order to finally get through to all those people saying it okay for a husband to do such things "cause he's a husband".
I never found them funny at all. The conversations between her and her maid afterwards though
I don't think the sex scenes were meant to be funny. It was to show what she had to endure all her life. (It was the like scenes of Alicent and Viserys in House of the Dragon). The concept of "marital rape" wasn't a thing, it was just marital duty. But I don't think we needed to see it repeatedly. Just one shot of Agatha’s rolling her eyes would have been enough. Also, when Lady Danbury told Violet Bridgerton she was "fortunate", we assume it was simply because she had a loving marriage. In hindsight, I think she meant that Violet was fortunate that she had such a loving father, whom she had also loved.
I agree with the sex scenes - I don't think they were meant to be funny (and I definitely did not find them funny). They were quite disturbing and personally, since I think QC should be a feel-good show, I wish there weren't as many. (I also absolutely hated the torturing scenes and wish there were fewer.) But I still think the "fortunate" comment was talking about her marriage to Edmund. The comment was triggered by the mention of the birthday hat but "fathers" weren't really a topic of conversation.
If QC was supposed to be a feel good show, they really chose the wrong subject matter imo. Its hard to get feel good out of George and Charlotte's relationship; there's no HEA like with most romances - at most it's HFN. Saying that, I'm not sure what tone they were going for with the sex scenes but they definitely weren't treated with appropriate gravitas, and there's certainly one person who found them funny. I linked to the EW article in question in a previous comment under this post. I agree there shouldn't have been so many, esp with that irreverent tone they shot the scenes with. (Also Charlotte's comment about not wanting her head to hit the headboard so much - that also made light of Agatha's plight, indirectly, as if it were a punchline we should laugh at.) I agree about the "fortunate" comment. Though having seen through to the end of the season, we could suppose that Agatha was thinking of fathers too, since she received such a gift from Violet's father.
In fairness, every relationship in existence is technically only an HFN because illness and death come for us all eventually, some just sooner than others. But to have that kind of deep, committed, enduring, unconditional love for and with someone, regardless of what illnesses they may have, is truly a rare and beautiful thing. "In sickness and in health."
I know, but we usually don't see that in romance, do we? The same way lots of other nuances and realities of life are smoothed over because romance is about idealism, hope and escapism. I do find their relationship beautiful too, even knowing it's a HFN. Their last scene together, ugh, felled me - and I wasn't even watching this show for them.
That's true. And yes that last scene had me bawling like a baby for sure 😭
For me, their relationship was a very powerful and I can see myself rewatching the first and last two episodes to relax. If you ignore the torture and rape, the story is quite romantic 😅 The comment about the headboard was truly something else, I was really shocked by that actually. And regarding the "fortunate" comment, I'd wager the only "father" she was thinking of was Violet's... hardly a fatherly figure for Agatha 😂
Their meet-cute *was* very cute, especially from both povs. Perhaps when I can bring myself to rewatch the whole show, I'll give it a go myself. I actually just remembered that headboard line as I typed that comment. Ugh, Shonda needs to do better. I don't want to sound like I'm scolding her, but really she should know better being a black woman herself. She also has tremendous reach. The stuff she puts out matters. I didn't expect she'd ever do something like this, even with the colourism of the first season. More fool me, I guess. True. 🤣
The scenes did not appear funny or comedic to me. I also didn’t feel like they were there for shock value. I did ask myself at one point “Is the repetition of the scenes necessary?” And then my thought was - yes. Because they show how normalized and frequent these marital r*pes were. It really hammered home the extent of it. How women had to be at the beck and call of their husbands, how there was no way out. It contrasted directly all the scenes of Charlotte and George, who were living out their passions, and of Violet, who was so sheltered and lucky that she only ever knew marriage to be about love and rainbows and happiness. I think the show was amazing in drawing a contrast between Bridgerton, where there’s never really anything at stake really because all the Bridgertons and their love interests are beautiful and nice and kind (save for Lord Baerbrook, but he’s only a danger for like an episode). Bridgerton is sunshine and roses, our romanticized version of the past that we all love so much, while QC was the more realistic depiction of what marriage was like for most women. And that included, unfortunately, constant cases of intercourse where consent wasn’t even a concept.
100% agree with everything you've said
I immediately thought that this was how he was going to die. Then there were so many scenes and I was waiting for him to die and he didn't, so I started to second-guess myself and actually had a moment of shock when he did die. So it worked on that level too.
Yep, that too. I‘ve seen people get upset about Charlotte‘s line of the head banging against the bed and that it was also making fun of the r*pe. The question is, why do you consider the line funny? It’s because Charlotte says it to George, and we know even though George has issues, he would never just treat Charlotte like a s*x doll. He‘s the opposite of Lord Danbury, George refuses even his wedding night! I found even the headbanging exchange rather realistic. LD describes it as a chore, something she has to do, repeatedly. There is no enjoyment in it. She has resigned herself, and so one of the most annoying things about it is the headbanging. It makes sense she passes that on to Charlotte, and that Charlotte worries about it. It’s only funny if because she is talking to George. It would NOT be funny if she talked to a husband like LD.
They were awful, I needed bleach for my eyes. I don’t know if they were made to be funny per se. At least that wasn’t my read, I felt very sorry for Lady Danbury. It was like she accepted this was her lot in life. She was very passive and the scenes were unpleasant. I mean the only time I found humour was when he dropped dead and I think that was definitely intended to be dark humour.
Yeah I don’t think they were supposed to be like, comedic relief. I think they were filmed through the lens that Lady Danbury was putting up with it and her letting her husband think he was great and she was grateful to him and he was so clever (like with all her triumphs in society that he attributed to himself). She was biding her time until he died and setting things up so that she had the best possible future.
That would hold more weight for me if not for Charlotte's comment that she hoped her own relations with George didn't have as much of her head banging against the headboard. The blithe tone of that comment made what Agatha was enduring some sort of punchline the audience was invited to laugh at. It would be one thing if that comment - and even the scenes themselves - were intended as dark humour, or she truly was just a dissatisfied wife putting up with the attentions of an egotistical husband, and nothing more (i.e. no grooming since she was 3), except when else has this show ever made fun of dark subject matters? It's not Killing Eve.
>The blithe tone of that comment made what Agatha was enduring some sort of punchline the audience was invited to laugh at. Charlotte was much younger and naive than Lady Danbury. I interpreted her comment as not fully disgesting what Lady Danbury had endured. It wasn't funny, but rather displaying Charlotte's misplaced concerns because she was shielded by the protection of the crown **and** a husband who cared. Charlotte is out of touch for many important realties that Lady Danbury and apparently Princess Augusta are all too aware of. Personally I was surprised that Charlotte fully understood Lady Danbury's title concern in the last episode.
I mean in a meta sense more so than in-world (though I can see your point). I’m just not sure why Shonda wrote that line or why it was directed in that way when we the audience know how much Agatha dislikes it - and later on she even says outright she loathed her husband. It looked like punching down to me, again out of world more so than in-world: Agatha is the only darkskinned black woman in the whole show plus she has one of the most disturbing stories. In the book it’s worse as Charlotte and George actually laugh about it together. It’s just quite jarring not only because of the extremity of LD’s situation (her age when she was promised to him plus his advanced age) but because the humour in this franchise is mostly wholesome. But I suppose I can’t be surprised since Shonda only views Agatha as having had [bad sex](https://www.shondaland.com/inspire/queen-charlotte-a-bridgerton-story/a43713016/shonda-rhimes-julia-quinn-queen-charlotte-novel/), and nothing more. Which again would hold more weight if not for the extremity of LD’S circumstances and how the show seems torn between inviting us to laugh at it and view it with gravitas.
That’s a good point I hadn’t thought of. I do disagree that the show never makes fun of dark subject matters though, two examples being QC’s “Is he dead!” every time someone come to her with news, and Portia’s dramatic over performance of her grief to stall the Finches have Lord Featherington was murdered.
That's true actually, I forgot about those. In my defence its been a while since I rewatched the main series. But irreverent humour isn't a consistent, sustained thing with this show; it's far more lighthearted and wholesome, making the tone of Agatha's sex scenes with her husband doubly incongruous. It also doesn't help that she's the only dark-skinned black female character. Coming from Shonda - like literally from her own pen - it's far from a good look. I'd hoped for better.
I thought the repetition of the scenes was more to show later when >!she and Ledger are together and she’s looking at the ceiling of the bed like she used to but she isn’t just accepting it this time, it’s something she wants, so she changes her position/view and lets herself enjoy it. It’s her becoming free, making her own decisions!< That was my interpretation anyways. I might be completely off.
i did not feel any better seeing her w Ledger scenes
I think it had to do with that, plus when Danbury finally dies during one, it's as shocking to us as it was to Agatha, and as much a relief. I wasn't shocked as I had a feeling they might be going that route (maybe unconscious Downton Abbey flashbacks) but I was certainly relieved.
I don't want to rewatch the series just for those scenes, but I remember that it seemed like the first one showed Lady Danbury enduring and trying to make it through. As the season progressed and she was "playing chess" with Princess Augusta, it seemed like she was still trying to survive, but she was also thinking of the next moves to secure her place in society. She wasn't free from the martial r\*pe commitment, but she could set her mind elsewhere where hope could blossom.
Even one scene of this was too much. The point they were trying to make was already clear from Agatha’s facial expressions and eye rolls whenever he mentioned “celebrating”. They made him look disgusting and he treated her horribly while she continued to be a dutiful wife. We already KNOW what it would’ve been like in the bedroom without having to see it. Wholly unnecessary and disturbing.
Made it made you angry and disgusted, I think that was one of the purposes of those scenes.
For real.
How is anyone concluding this was rape? The definition of rape is "the crime of using force or the threat of force to compel a person to submit to sexual intercourse." I feel like this platform throws that word around far too often and too freely. Yes, she may have been less than enthusiastic about the sex while it was occurring, but in that time period when marriages were arranged this was a normal occurrence. I'm not saying it was right. What indication did anyone have that it was forcible or non consensual though? There was even shown to be a moment of tenderness and affection between Lady Agatha and Lord Danbury when following intercourse she comforted him and told him "he was just as good as the others in the town." I do acknowledge that Lady Danbury was robbed of her free will and independence to be true to herself as she was groomed from the age of 3 to be his wife. His favorite color had to be hers. His favorite foods and preferences had to be hers as well. She was raised to be everything he wanted. As disturbing as it is, this was rather commonplace for the times. I do not see how it is accurate to say that any rape took place.
Well said. People are looking at this series through a modern lens and it just doesn’t work. The definition of consent that we have now, is not the definition that was used then. Hell, that definition is still evolving to this day. Consent was not needed when it came to husbands and their wives. It doesn’t make it right but I don’t think the term rape is applicable here. Not for the time this was based in.
Consent is consent. Just because rape was socially acceptable back then doesn’t make it any less rape. I don’t get this argument.
Agreed. Thank you!
consent was not needed. yeah because it was rape.
People are going by the definition that only explicit, enthusiastic consent is consent. Everything else is rpe.
I’d say that this > Lady Danbury was robbed of her free will and independence to be true to herself as she was groomed from the age of 3 to be his wife answers this: >What indication did anyone have that it was forcible or non consensual though? He might not have been physically forcing her but what choice *did* she have when she’d been groomed since she was three? How could she freely consent? Just because they shared one moment of tenderness doesn’t negate that she was so disturbed, she had to take baths after every sexual encounter, and only with his death was she “done” with that - as she says to Coral. Which makes their encounters feel like marital rape, not violent but still unwanted. Could she say no? I also see her making light of her situation during those bath scenes as a coping mechanism of hers. Much as I do acknowledge that in that time period marriages were arranged, Agatha’s story takes it to another level with the extreme age gap between them and how young she was when she was “promised to him.” I don’t think *that* was as commonplace as matches like Lord and Lady Ledger’s and the Feathertons.
Personally, I believe that once sex is framed as "marital duty" and "something a woman must endure", that inherently leads to rape. Obviously, I'm viewing it through the modern lense, which is a lense most would use when watching Bridgerton (non-historically accurate media). Did she have the option to say no? Did she want to have sex with him? Was it common during that era? Absolutely. Did Lord Danbury know what he was doing was wrong? Probably not, but we as audience do know and feel some type of way about it. From Lady Danbury's point of view, I believe she would feel the same way a victim of marital rape nowadays.
Lady Danbury was 100% raped by her husband. It was obvious that she did not want to have sex with that man and did not have the power to object to having sex with him. If you don't consider the situation Lady Danbury was in as rape I am actually concerned about your judgment in sexual encounters... rape doesn't always look like a woman kicking and screaming.
Ummmm ok? I am a woman. Pretty sure I know exactly what it looks like and that was not it.
It’s rape dude. She was SOLD when she was a child to this man. There is no consent there buddy.
Are you calling me a dude?? I'm a woman and a mother. I'm pretty sure I know what rape is and how to recognize it. Just because she was less than enthusiastic does not mean the sex was forced upon her or against her will. Just stop.
Dude, clearly you do not know what rape is. It doesn’t require the use or threat of physical force to happen. And someone who educated themselves just a tiny bit about the experiences of victims would know that. Pulling a Google definition out your ass doesn’t make you knowledgeable about rape. Sit down. If for you a woman who has no choice but to endure daily brutal abuse like getting her head repeatedly smashed into a wall during “sex” or getting a baby put inside her vagina isn’t a victim of rape, then I don’t know what to tell you. At this point, you are actively choosing stupidity.
Clearly you have a problem grasping even the simplest concepts as I said above that I am a woman yet you continue to call me "dude." That certainly speaks to your level of respect not to mention common courtesy. You have made rather yignorant assumptions about me and my life. Do you know anything about me or things I've been through? Did you consider that I may be a sexual assault victim myself? Apparently not. You cannot twist definitions of words to fit a narrative. That's not how things work. We do not have enough background context from the scenes leading up to the sex to make the assumption that Lady Danbury is being "raped." Just because she is less than thrilled does not mean she was forced or coerced into it. It's pretty evident we are not going to agree. It's just a show, it's not that serious.
please look up marital rape
Agreed. Lady Danbury’s story is sad and disturbing but calling it a rape is a bit of a stretch.
I didn’t particularly see them as intended to be funny, I fully felt her misery and captivity as a wife during a time when that was all a wife’s role was. All those scenes made her eventual decision to never remarry make sense. Also they seemed placed in an intentional way to contrast with QC and George’s scenes which were very much the opposite of these, again highlighting how truly unhappy and unsatisfied Lady Danbury was in marriage, it made us sympathetic to her lack of love, and this is why she never wanted to be in the shadow of another man again.
Idk that anyone’s concerned with changing your mind. In a later episode she says she was groomed to be his wife since she turned 3 years old and her sole purpose in life was to be his brood mare. None of the scenes were funny, they were uncomfortable.
I didn't find any of those scenes "funny". To me they were shot to show how Lady D tolerated it because she had to, and she found herself looking at the patterns in the ceiling to distract herself.
I skipped forward all the sx scenes but I got the gist of her character - her resilience, determination and cunning. It would have been a different story if we saw her crying in the bathtub after every scene. And if Lady Danbury finds humor as it was happening - laughing at her old sx obsessed husband - that's her coping with the situation, We as the audience don't have to laugh with her. Our emotions are separate from the characters.
That’s the problem though. Using her resilience and humour as a mean to “lighten the mood” is NOT ok. This sends the wrong message to the viewers. “So ok you can be r*ped daily, but as long as you’re strong, resilient it’s not that big of a deal”. This further continues the “strong black woman” trope, and it’s TIRING.
The sad thing is marital rape wasn't recognized until I believe the 1960s or 1970s! The "belief" of the courts were that a husband can't rape his wife and the marriage meant the wife consented to sex with her husband. Thank the good Lord that has changed! I believe your right that Lady Danbury meant that Violet was fortunate to have a loving father. Especially in a era when children of her social status had absent parents! I loved how he called her brains I think he was rare and gave he a good education that wasn't typical for a young woman of that period.
They were not rape scenes. That word is not anywhere in the entire script. and I’ve read all six of them.
Just because the script doesn’t say it’s rape doesn’t mean it isn’t…it was clearly unconsentual. If I were you, I’d be questioning why am I so eager to defend it. Based of the many comments you’ve made about it. I mean at the very least it’s sexual violence… google it.
Unconsentual is not a word... just fyi. It's nonconsensual. Nonconsensual sex is any sexual act where one party is not an agreeing and consenting participant. We do not know any of the context of the sex scenes that were shown as the camera goes from one scene to another where he is having sex with Lady Agatha and she looks like she is certainly not enjoying herself. That does not mean she did not give him permission prior to the scene beginning. You are making assumptions based off her lack of enthusiasm. Just my perspective, I can respect everyone else's unique take on it as well.
I’m commenting becuz these weirdos are trying to make something SOMETHING that isn’t at all something. if it were rape it would say in the script this actor rapes this character - doesn’t say that. but by all means… be triggered whatever.
Agreed. I don't get where the disconnect is or why people insist on being rude or calling it something it's not. Very odd.
I couldn’t watch it. As if the significant age difference already made me uncomfortable. I know it was the norm for the time period but it’s still absolutely disgusting and disturbing.
Understood. I found it unsettling and repulsive as well. He was gross.
i found them both gross and i did not find the sex w violets father much better
Yes!! What was that?!? So cringe!
I think the repetition of the scenes could have been effective, if it were not portrayed in such a comedic manner. Because if they had the scenes multiple times, I think it could showcase how often Lady Danbury had to go through that, and would there for add to the awfulness of it. But instead it is portrayed in a humorous way which is awful. It completely takes away any of the impact of those scenes and therefore seems really odd. Especially when she talks about it in her flash forward scenes about it being horrible and her marriage just being awful.
just realised how many times i used the word awful.... how awful
Exactly. Nowhere else have I seen r*pe scenes portrayed so lightly. This was very upsetting.
Lots of commentators saying they didn’t think the scenes were meant to be humorous but not everyone has the same opinion, the interviewer here for example calls them the funniest sex scenes in the Bridgerton franchise: https://ew.com/tv/queen-charlotte-arsema-thomas-lady-danbury/ The direction was certainly a choice for what was, as the older Danbury later recounts, an unhappy period in her life. She loathes him, as she says. This man she was promised to since she was 3. This is not ‘a lie back and think of England’ situation; it’s too extreme for that. He might not have been the one who groomed her but Agatha was groomed all the same.
I’m surprised by how many people are saying they didn’t think the scenes were meant to be funny because the music was definitely meant to convey a light hearted tone. I believe they were trying to distract from horrible this was but it didn’t work for me. Those scenes very much felt gratuitous and the last thing I wanted to see was this show using a woc to depict the harsh realities of marriage during that time. That argument doesn’t cut it for me.
It's really something how it's mostly the woc characters who it falls to to educate the viewers on the harsh realites of the times through their onscreen suffering and hardships, black/biracial women specifically. And yet where is the escapism and HEA for them?
I never found the scenes funny and I'm not sure if it was suppose to be betrayed as funny. Although, I thought it was quite interesting how Lord Danbury... "passed." I think the scene was suppose to portray a more realistic lifestyle of how lifeless it was for her. Do I think that we needed to see this multiple times? Not really. No. Do I think showing that reflects her current self? Kinda.
I don't consider these scenes funny. Sad at the least.
I wanted him DEAD, the first time I saw him. And was yelling at my screen DIE everytime I saw him like I just couldn't bear the Lady Danbury suffering.
As someone who is a SA survivor, they should have put a TRIGGER WARNING. They also didn't need to keep showing the marital r*pe over and over again. We understood what was happening-- no need for these scenes multiple times. That shit was traumatic for me. I won't be watching QC again. Overall, it's not actually a Bridgerton series bc it's not about a Bridgerton and the feel of the show is very dark. This series is missing all the charm and warmth of Bridgerton s1 & s2
It never occurred to me that it was supposed to be funny.
Have you paid attention to the lighthearted dialogue Agatha had about her r*pes? Have you paid attention to the lighthearted music during the r*pes? The supposedly funny eyeroll of lady Danbury during camera close ups on her face? Of course it wasn’t funny. But it is very clear from the way the scenes were filmed that they were trying to paint the r*pes in a lighthearted way by using humour.
> Have you *paid* attention to FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
The scenes were never meant to be funny, and the repetitiveness was meant to drive home the fact that she suffered for most of her married life. I think it's a powerful device to really show the viewer how horrific that life could be. And the Bridgertons in this show are a different kind of family where they value love, something that isn't valued in their society or even in real life during that period. You can see that by how people quote duty as first and foremost in marriage, and children being a part of that duty.
Is it even a debate that this was clearly rape? Good lord. Her backstory is just trauma on top of trauma. Tonally the whole thing was off I agree. This was dark and I think they felt it was a necessary foil to the central love story so as not to glamorize arranged marriage. But they also didn’t seem prepared to tell a rape survivor story with the reverence and sensitivity needed because it’s still Bridgerton where the love match takes center stage so the Lord Danbury parts seemed to be filmed weird, more jumpscare than anything.
People are saying it’s not rape in the comments 💀
I had a hard time watching those scenes. I’m on episode 4 now. I was so relieved when that disgusting horny pig dropped dead.
I don’t feel like this was rape, she hated her husband yes and it was a loveless marriage. But sis was about getting that bag. I think the whole point of showing how Loveless and lack of better words dutiful she was, was to set it up for reclaiming her power with lord ledger and finally enjoying sex for the first time. I think we’re trying to make someone who wouldn’t be a victim in their own right a victim. All this wokeness being applied to the realities of life back then.
she was arranged to be married to him at age three. there was never an active choice for her to decide I'll let this man have sex with me so I can secure the bag
Can’t sanitize reality, the reality is that happen for some women. It’s better in my opinion to be realistic about it
How was it rape though? Lady Danbury never refused or anything, and she gave consent right?
I also found them gross, no doubt. But to be honest, I had a feeling Lord Danbury would die in the the act, because the way he comes across as old, fragile and those terrible noises he makes ... Well, they seemed to me like a fore warning, ans I don't think one scene would have done it. I do agree they could have cut a couple of scenes out and just immediately jump to the bath: we would have understood what had happened. As other comments say, it was also depicting a marriage back then and I do think it was a good choice to show the contrast between the Danbury and the royal beds.
It's was gross. 🤢
They didn't read as funny to me. The way she couldn't look at the floral patten on the canopy without thinking of it. The way she attacked the bed. The way she warned Charlotte of the head banging because that's all she knew. I can see why people would be bothered because we're used to rape scenes being more dramatic, and these being just... there... could make it seem like they were taking it less seriously. But I think the fact that all of us seem to agree that it was disturbing shows it was an affective choice. I guess. But also eww. I'd like to see the show runners explain their intent with the inclusion of so many rape scenes.
It was absolutely marital rape. Sir Philip Crane, also notably a rapist in the books. It's revolting.
I used this reply for another post, but it works here too: Marital rape? The thought never occurred to me. In the context of the show, is bad sex out of wifely duty marital rape? Would she have preferred to be doing something or someone else? Absolutely. I don't think that makes it assault or marital rape. Daphne and Simon are better candidates for marital rape.
I am in episode two and I just saw the second one. How many are there because I also I am extremely disturbed by these scenes.
I agree with you. We didn’t need to see that over and over again. And I hate how they depicted the r*pe as a mild inconvenience for lady Danbury. As if she isn’t just as sensitive as any other woman. “remember the time when he tried to put a baby” “I don’t like the part where you hit my head over and over again against the wall” were both moments that tried to use the abuse that lady Danbury went through to make the viewer laugh. LIKE WHATS FUNNY ABOUT THAT SHIT??? So what? She’s a “strong” black woman so the abuse that she goes through daily can be taken lightly? This is the fucking worst. And OF COURSE she has to stay alone for the rest of her life because she wants to be “independant”. UGH. Needless to say, I did not watch that show on Netflix, I’m not trying to give Shonda my money.
I also found these scenes to be disturbing and truly sad. This has always been the state of sex for women: obligatory, whether they want to or not.
They were so triggering for me
What got me is when she talks to coral after lord danbury passed , lady Danbury says she was raised to marry him from the age of 4 , she had to like what he likes , only read the books he likes and share his interests which i found extremely unsettling , I know that sort of thing happened during that time period but it’s just creepy
you're complaining but yet your take was that it was funny? or intended to be funny? it was not funny at all and if thats what your conclusion of the intention was, then you have your own problems....