S05.E05: Episode Five

[txhorns79]

You are making a huge assumption that Cora was inviting Bricker back into their home "under the guise of it being all about the painting and art talk". She herself said that being included in Bricker's book could increase the value of their painting tremendously.

I think we are all making our own assumptions here, aren't we?

 

 

Why not take Cora at her word? If she wanted to be surreptitious, she could have easily not even told Robert that Bricker was coming. Robert was to be away and would have been none the wiser.

 

The family was there, along with all the servants.  I'm not sure how Cora would have gotten away with never saying anything to Robert about Bricker visiting.  

 

For the record and so there are no hard feelings later, I don't want to have an affair with any of you. I just think you're nice

 

  Then you really need to stop inviting us for overnight stays when your husband is out of town. 

[Llywela]

The Crawleys entertain house guests on a regular basis. The invitation to Bricker was no different to the invitations extended to Blake, Gillingham, Napier, et al. An invitation to spend a night in the house is in no way an invitation into Cora's bed and she shouldn't have to 'firmly' discourage him. Simply discouraging him, as she did, should be enough. A married couple inviting an art historian to their house for the night so he can take a closer look at a valuable painting they own is not a 'guise' for anything, and does not equal mixed signals sent by the wife!

[millennium]

It amazed me that Bricker stuck around until morning.   If the rules of etiquette ordain that a man who very nearly assaulted your wife under the cover of night should be comfortably accommodated until the next day, then there is something seriously wrong with those rules.  I imagine Bricker didn't even trouble himself to sleep with one eye open.

 

Donk ought to spend more time in the gym.   To be nearly incapacitated after a minor scuffle with a scoundrel in a bathrobe is a red flag. 

 

Golly, what a night!

[Llywela]

Edith became a stalker because Mrs. Drewe was turning her away.

No, Mrs Drewe turned her away because she was becoming a stalker, that sequence of events was laid out from the start. We were plainly shown that she was calling in not occasionally, as would be normal of a rich person taking an interest in a child, but on a daily basis. While there she fawned over the child while ignoring everyone else. She stayed for hours, preventing the family going about their business. She refused to stay away even when told it wasn't convenient. None of that is normal behaviour for anyone, least of all a grand lady who is merely taking an interest in a promising child.

[ShadowFacts]

 

I wouldn't even characterize what she did as flirting with him; it seems to me that he flirted and she allowed it, but she didn't really reciprocate.

 

I agree.  She did not come off as flirtatious to me, it was Bricker who was trying to start something up, and he was persistent, hoping to get lucky.  Maybe that was his modus operandi and he had been successful before in other houses.  Cora wasn't initiating anything that wasn't above-board and art-related and I don't get the impression that the painting was a pretext.  He misunderstood and acted on that misunderstanding and she said no, leave. 

[glasscaseofemotion]

Isn't it crazy? LOL! Cora was only responsible for her own actions, and she didn't do anything improper. She enjoyed Bricker's company and the compliments he paid to her, but she never told him that there was anything more to their relationship than a friendship forged from their mutual love of art. She never caressed him, never kissed him, and never asked him to come to her bedroom. Cora told him to leave, and that's when he revealed himself to be a real jerk.

 

In my personal experience, men will sometimes "go for it," without any encouragement other than a kind word or smile, on the off chance that they might be successful. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't.  Lucky for Bricker in that situation, he lived to go for it another day.

 

Been there. Done that. I used to tend bar/cocktail waitress and many times would strike up what I thought was a friendly conversation with the opposite sex ordering drinks from the other side. We'd banter, have conversations and rib each other in what I thought was a good natured, friendly and decidedly non-sexual way. Occasionally, one of the male patrons would say "has anyone ever told you how pretty you are?" and I would brush it off as liquor being the elixir and say something silly like "no, you are the first guy to ever tell me that". I was lucky that when I would find one of these guys waiting for me at my car after the bar closed, I had the bouncer to call upon. But, yeah, I guess my friendliness was just me being a big old tease! Who knew!  Was it nice to hear that I was pretty? Yes. Did it mean that the guy who said it should be waiting for me by my car after hours? No. Did them waiting for me at my car at 2 a.m. freak me out? Yes.

 

Okay, back to Downton. Can we all agree that we are not sad to see Bunting go?

[ZoloftBlob]

7 minutes ago

 

For the record and so there are no hard feelings later, I don't want to have an affair with any of you. I just think you're nice.

 

Sorry, you did nothing but laugh at my jokes and invite me to your house! How could you not want an affair with me???? D:

[txhorns79]

A married couple inviting an art historian to their house for the night so he can take a closer look at a valuable painting they own is not a 'guise' for anything, and does not equal mixed signals sent by the wife!

 

It wasn't a "married couple" inviting Bricker.  It was Cora.  I don't think Bricker is stupid.  He knew that he wasn't coming over because Robert was fascinated by art history, and/or loved having him there.  He was there at Cora's invitation, not a joint request from the couple.   

[glasscaseofemotion]

For the record and so there are no hard feelings later, I don't want to have an affair with any of you. I just think you're nice.

Damn it, fishcakes. You are such a tease!

[Andorra]

Well, I agree with everyone who sees no responsibility on Cora's side. I think the word "tease" is dangerous territory and I also think that Cora is allowed to be friendly and even flirty with as many men as she likes without them being allowed to assume she invited them to her bed.

[glasscaseofemotion]

The Crawleys entertain house guests on a regular basis. The invitation to Bricker was no different to the invitations extended to Blake, Gillingham, Napier, et al. An invitation to spend a night in the house is in no way an invitation into Cora's bed and she shouldn't have to 'firmly' discourage him. Simply discouraging him, as she did, should be enough. A married couple inviting an art historian to their house for the night so he can take a closer look at a valuable painting they own is not a 'guise' for anything, and does not equal mixed signals sent by the wife!

 

You are absolutely correct but they are the Granthams, not the Crawleys. Everyone knows that Isobel is a big tease who refuses to state "I do not want an affair" before she invites a man into her home. Everyone knows that she supposedly shows an interest in medicine but yeah, when she invited Lord Morton into her home, unannounced no less, everyone in the village knew that meant she was "easy".

[SusanSunflower]

Hadn't Robert made it quite clear to both Bricker and Cora that he disliked Bricker and/or the attention Bricker paid Cora intensely??? I thought I remember some high-level unmistakable rudeness on Robert's part maybe 2 episodes back toward both Cora and Bricker ... Making her invitation for Bricker to come and stay over (with or without  Robert present) and Robert's greeting at Bricker's arrival more mixed. Wasn't a photograph for the book supposed to be being taken??? anyone? 

Was Cora showing Robert her independence in inviting Bricker despite his distaste of the man or was she showing Bricker just how little she minded Robert's objections? 

FWIW, I think these ambiguities were intentional ... as were the parallels to Violet and the Prince (and Violet's concern about Isobel's happiness if she marries Merton)

 

ETA:  Funny to remember that Pamuk needed to bribe/blackmail Thomas to show him the way to and identify Mary's room and provide a key to unlock the door ... I remember being rather surprised that Mary locked her bedroom door, but then it made sense enough in a big house with lots of valuable, lots of staff and many wings. Pamuk as a guest had no way of knowing which was Mary's room. 

Edited February 3, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[txhorns79]

Hadn't Robert made it quite clear to both Bricker and Cora that he disliked Bricker and/or the attention Bricker paid Cora intensely??? I thought I remember some high-level unmistakable rudeness on Robert's part maybe 2 episodes back toward both Cora and Bricker ... Making her invitation for Bricker to come and stay over (with or without  Robert present) and Robert's greeting at Bricker's arrival more mixed. Wasn't a photograph for the book supposed to be being taken??? anyone?  Was Cora showing Robert her independence in inviting Bricker despite his distaste of the man or was she showing Bricker just how little she minded Robert's objections?

 

I think Robert made it quite clear to Cora he did not like Bricker.  I think he has been indifferent or generally hostile to Bricker, sometimes to his face, ever since Cora had dinner with him.  I would agree with you that the situation in this episode was ambiguous.  I can see why Bricker would think he was over for a romantic visit, and I could see why Cora would act surprised when Bricker acted on the idea that sex night was upon them.     

[helenamonster]

After seeing the scene where Bates is hinting around to having lots of little Bates children with Anna I wondered why they hadn't had children yet. Seems like they've been married long enough. Maybe Anna is using Mary's contraption.

 

Doubtful. She's seemed nothing but horrified at every mention of it. The day Anna uses birth control is the day Donk makes a good investment.

 

I'm really rooting for Mary or Anna to be revealed as Green's murderer. That would be all kinds of awesome. If the latter were true, Anna might be afraid of passing on her own murderous tendencies to the children.

 

I've been rooting for Anna to do it even before Green's death, and so far there isn't anything that has been presented that would contradict the possibility. My only caveat would be that it not happen on purpose...Anna is not the type to "stalk her prey" or anything like that. I could see her maybe doing some errands for Mary in Piccadilly and happening to run into Green. A struggle ensues, and she accidentally pushes him into the road just as the BoJ is coming down. I think it would be a good ending to the whole story for a variety of reasons: Anna finally gets some agency in her own plotline, and it would be a nice twist after so many episodes of people worrying about what Bates might do/might have done. Plus, if it was an accident, it doesn't leave too dark of a mark on Anna's character. Green was a piece of shit, no one watching was rooting for him to get away with the rape, and if it was just an unfortunate set of circumstances, it would be hard to put too much blame on Anna for it. It could be argued that she should have stuck around and talked to the police immediately after the accident, but it's also understandable why she wouldn't want to do that.

 

Someone also asked when Bricker was supposed to have taken the photograph, and I think it was supposed to be the following day. At first I was confused about why a picture was so much of a to-do, but then I remembered that they couldn't simply whip out an iPhone and call it a day lol.

[SoSueMe]

Okay, back to Downton. Can we all agree that we are not sad to see Bunting go?

I am glad to see her go for sure but I'm not totally confident that she is gone for good. What with the comments about lazy writing (I agree in some cases) what is to stop JF from bringing her back if he gets stumped for a story line.

[persey]

No, Mrs Drewe turned her away because she was becoming a stalker, that sequence of events was laid out from the start. We were plainly shown that she was calling in not occasionally, as would be normal of a rich person taking an interest in a child, but on a daily basis. While there she fawned over the child while ignoring everyone else. She stayed for hours, preventing the family going about their business. She refused to stay away even when told it wasn't convenient. None of that is normal behaviour for anyone, least of all a grand lady who is merely taking an interest in a promising child.

And the way Edith would show up at tea time and the whole family had to leap to their feet!  Mrs. Drewe may be one of those, shocking I know, who resent the bowing and scraping and kowtowing to their betters.  One of those whom Daisy called the future.

 

So, here's a scenario:  Mrs. Drewe divorces Mr. Drewe for his infidelity with Lady Edith and marries Tom.* Then Marigold and Sybbie get raised together as stepsisters. 

 

*Hmm, won't work unless she also gets an annulment in the Catholic Church.  Oh,, well.   .

[Kohola3]

Geez, good think Bricker wasn't flirting with Isis.  Imagine the fall out if he'd visited her after hours!  That Isis can be quite a tease with that flirty tail and all.

[SusanSunflower]

Since Anna's rape is still unknown by most people (even if there is suspicion of something having happened), I think it's a mistake for her to fail to mention that both Bates and Carson disliked Green for encouraging rambuntious and high-spirited behavior downstairs -- card games and wildness.  I'm not even sure I'm remembering it correctly, but my memory is that Green raped Anna as revenge on Bates, something I'm not at all sure that Anna realizes. The idea that Bates or anyone would murder Green over his bad downstairs behavior is less intriguing / interesting than the idea that there's secret "bad blood" -- since that would be in the wrong direction -- hostility on Green's part towards Bates /Carson. 

Edited February 3, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[txhorns79]

Geez, good think Bricker wasn't flirting with Isis.  Imagine the fall out if he'd visited her after hours!  That Isis can be quite a tease with that flirty tail and all.

 

There are times when I think Robert would care a lot more about Isis' opinion than he does Cora's. 

[helenamonster]

I never got the feeling that Green raping Anna had anything to do with Bates. At least not directly. Many people, myself included, assume Green was a serial rapist. Anna was probably something of a challenge for him: a (happily) married woman, rare among servants, most likely more resistant to being overpowered. He probably got just as much thrill from "having" another man's wife as he did from the power trip that comes with rape in any instance. So while Bates may have been part of it tangentially, I never saw it as a personal attack on Bates. YMMV.

[Tippi]

This has probably already been mentioned somewhere on the Downton threads, but regarding the name Marigold:  I was amusing myself on Wikipedia and looked up Winston Churchill.  He and his wife had a daughter named Marigold sometime around 1919-1923.  The little girl died of tonsillitis when she was very young.  Maybe Fellowes picked it up from there.  I really think it strains belief to think that Edith would name her daughter something so close to Mary's name.  Maybe Cora or Violet's middle name is Mary?

Edited February 3, 2015 by Tippi

[mojito]

 

Edith decides to bring the baby home with her so the baby is not sent to an orphanage.

I think the problem with this is that this would condemn Edith to spinsterhood (spinsterdom?). Yeah, maybe she's on her way there anyway, but no point throwing in the towel so soon.

 

We'd banter, have conversations and rib each other in what I thought was a good natured, friendly and decidedly non-sexual way.

Also been there and done that and realized later that I was flirting with someone of the same sex. I thought we were just joking around (the topic was totally non-sexual). Well, shit, my gaydar was down for repairs. Sometimes we are not on the same wavelength and misunderstandings happen.

[morakot]

Didn't Edith's old suitor jilt her because he didn't think he would be able to give her children? If she really wanted to keep the baby, she could have thrown herself on his mercy, they could have had a quick wedding and everyone would be congratulating him on being the dog who got his wife pregnant so fast. Then Edith could have hired her nanny, nursemaids and governess and have fun times with a clean and happy daughter for an hour every day.

 

As for going to school -- none of the Crawley girls went to school, though Sybil wanted to. They were taught at home by at least one governess.

[glasscaseofemotion]

I think the problem with this is that this would condemn Edith to spinsterhood (spinsterdom?). Yeah, maybe she's on her way there anyway, but no point throwing in the towel so soon.

Also been there and done that and realized later that I was flirting with someone of the same sex. I thought we were just joking around (the topic was totally non-sexual). Well, shit, my gaydar was down for repairs. Sometimes we are not on the same wavelength and misunderstandings happen.

 

But, if it were non-sexual, were you really flirting? And even if you were flirting, does that imply that you were being a tease and that the other person should have presumed to be waiting by your car (my situation) for an encounter or, in Cora's situation, in your bedroom? Misunderstandings definitely do happen . But, it's on the individual with the misunderstanding to bow down and step away, not the person who was just behaving as a socialized, normal individual.

 

"I do not want an affair!", I guess, is the alternative.

 

I think once you realize you have made the other person feel uncomfortable (like I believe Cora was displaying when she kept telling Bricker to leave), the onus is on you to remove yourself from the situation.

[Ohwell]

If a guy tells you he doesn't want to be friends and has a romantic interest in you (which Bricker specifically told Cora an episode or two ago), maybe stop flirting with and/or hanging out with him if you don't share that interest?  I didn't think this was a controversial suggestion.

Yes, and especially if you're a married woman.   Cora welcomed the attention and she knew full well that Bricker was after her.  She just couldn't imagine that he would be so bold and crude and crazy as he turned out to be.  I do think she really was lucky that he didn't try to rape her.  If she wants to get Robert's attention in the future, I'd suggest that she try something else.

 

The invitation to Bricker was no different to the invitations extended to Blake, Gillingham, Napier, et al.

Except that in the case of Bricker, Cora knew that he was romantically interested in her.

Edited February 3, 2015 by Ohwell

[millennium]

I would like to absolve Cora of all responsibility with regard to the Bricker scandal, but one line of dialogue nags at me -- when Cora tells Bricker, "You are welcome to stay, as long as you behave."

 

I'm sure she didn't mean it as "please misbehave," but I can see where Bricker could have easily interpreted it that way.   With those words, Cora validated Bricker's infatuation with her.   She also acknowledged that he might be planning to "make his move."   Technically she drew a line in the sand, but her tone blurred it somewhat.   It was playful.  Coquettish.   Yes, Bricker was a cad.  But was he entirely to blame for reading it the way he did?

 

I'm sure Cora didn't foresee that confrontation in her bedroom, nor did she encourage it or deserve it.  But by lightly intoning "as long as you behave," Cora identified herself as a subscriber to the longheld notion that it's acceptable for a woman to dabble with a man's emotions, but it is up to the man to keep those emotions in check.   And that, at heart, is a sexist view.   

 

In retrospect, Cora should have been polite but stern with the fellow, leaving no room for ambiguity.  

Edited February 3, 2015 by millennium

[blackwing]

I don't see anything ambiguous about "You are welcome to stay, as long as you behave."  To me that says "I like having you here because I like talking with you about art.  But I also know that you are romantically interested in me, and I am telling you right now, that isn't going to happen.  So behave yourself otherwise you won't be allowed to stay."

 

I can't see how that could be interpreted as "I enjoy making you think that I'm going to sleep with you and if you keep asking enough times, I will".

[dramachick]

Technically she drew a line in the sand, but her tone blurred it somewhat.   It was playful.  Coquettish.   Yes, Bricker was a cad.  But was he entirely to blame for reading it the way he did?

 

No woman (or girl) is responsible for how a man interprets easily understood language, regardless of the tone.

 

I'm sure Cora didn't foresee that confrontation in her bedroom, nor did she encourage it or deserve it.  But by lightly intoning "as long as you behave," Cora identified herself as a subscriber to the longheld notion that it's acceptable for a woman to dabble with a man's emotions, but it is up to the man to keep those emotions in check.   And that, at heart, is a sexist view.

 

A man doesn't have to keep his emotions in check, but he does have to control his actions. Nothing sexist about that at all.

[txhorns79]

I don't see anything ambiguous about "You are welcome to stay, as long as you behave."  To me that says "I like having you here because I like talking with you about art.  But I also know that you are romantically interested in me, and I am telling you right now, that isn't going to happen.  So behave yourself otherwise you won't be allowed to stay."

 

I think Cora's tone and manner suggested otherwise.  It's pretty easy to say what you actually mean in that situation, rather than turn it into a cute turn of phrase.

 

 

No woman (or girl) is responsible for how a man interprets easily understood language, regardless of the tone.

 

If they mean something to be a warning, then heck yes, they are responsible if they say it in a playful tone that muddles their message.  Honestly, both men and women are responsible for how they act.  If I flirt with someone who I know has a romantic interest in me, then yes, I am responsible if they come away from that conversation thinking I am into them.  This does not later justify them stepping beyond acceptable boundaries, but it doesn't entirely let me off the hook either.     

Edited February 4, 2015 by txhorns79

[millennium]

I don't see anything ambiguous about "You are welcome to stay, as long as you behave."  To me that says "I like having you here because I like talking with you about art.  But I also know that you are romantically interested in me, and I am telling you right now, that isn't going to happen.  So behave yourself otherwise you won't be allowed to stay."

 

 

 

I think the "that isn't going to happen" part was not as clear as it could have been.   Cora could have said, "I had some reservations about your visit, given the tone of our last conversation.   I am happy to facilitate your work and welcome you as a guest in my home, however sir let us be clear that I am a happily married woman, so if you have any designs on me, they should be laid to rest right now."

 

Instead, she playfully warned "as long as you behave," as though he were an amusingly mischievous boy.

Edited February 4, 2015 by millennium

[millennium]

No woman (or girl) is responsible for how a man interprets easily understood language, regardless of the tone.

 

 

 

I respectfully disagree.    We have a phrase in our language called "sending a mixed message," which usually refers to a conflict between content and tone. 

 

When anyone, male or female, sends a mixed message, he or she is at least partially responsible for how it is received.

Edited February 4, 2015 by millennium

[dramachick]

If they mean something to be a warning, then heck yes, they are responsible if they say it in a playful tone that muddles their message.

 

What is a playful tone? Who decides if a tone is playful?

 

When in doubt, one should always go with what is actually stated. No means no in any tone.

 

There was no ambiguity in Cora's words when she told Bricker he could stay as long as he behaved. He didn't. She told him to leave.

[morakot]

It's not as if Cory invited him to stay in an adjoining room in a hotel in Liverpool, and then said she wasn't interested in more.

 

She is clearly a married woman, inviting a gentleman to her house to dine with her husband, children and a million lurking staff. She previously reminded him she was married and would probably not dine with him privately again. When they were walking through the house and she asked him to behave, her tone was light because he was not being a threat. It was not appropriate to bring out the shouting, big threats, and a rape whistle at that time.

 

Was it not established earlier (in Pamuk's time) that there was a bachelor guest wing? Bricker would have been half a house away from the rest of the family.

[SusanSunflower]

 

Bricker would have been half a house away from the rest of the family.

I wonder if he also bribed Thomas .... and if there will be sequelae. 

Edited February 4, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[mojito]

 

But, if it were non-sexual, were you really flirting?

No, I'm saying that it was interpreted as that. I think Cora was misunderstood, too, despite telling the guy when she invited him that he should behave himself. She meant it, but said it kind of jokingly, I think, as a nice way of telling him not to read anything into the invitation). The guy misunderstood.

Edited February 4, 2015 by mojito

[Aethera]

I don't think Cora is responsible for him coming to her bedroom, in any way.  Nothing she said could be interpreted as inviting that, as Bricker clearly seemed to think it was. It was obviously completely inappropriate and a bit nutty for him to do that. 

 

I think Cora was using him a bit - his attention to her, in both his flattery of her mind and his professed attraction, made her feel good, and so she was glad to have him around. I was glad she turned him down completely in her room, and I'm sure she never thought it would get that far.  What she said and did was not justification for his behavior, but it doesn't sit well with me. 

 

I think overall, Cora is being mistreated by the entire family exactly as stated by others, and I hope she does assert herself more in her marriage and her house.  I wonder that she hasn't been actively jealous of Mary for kind of supplanting her.  Robert definitely used to talk to her more in previous seasons.

[txhorns79]

What is a playful tone? Who decides if a tone is playful?

 

Its when something is said in a light, cheerful tone.  It signifies to the listener that the subject is not a serious one.  I would think it would be kind of obvious when someone is speaking in that kind of tone.  I suppose if you are not sure, you could always ask.   

 

Can't it just be possible that Cora actually did give Bricker the wrong idea here?  Maybe she didn't mean it, or maybe she did and just never expected Bricker would show up at her bedroom.  It certainly doesn't justify Bricker's action, but I don't understand the attitude that presents Cora as entirely blameless either.  It isn't a zero sum game.  Two people can act badly, but you can still have one person acting worse.   

Edited February 4, 2015 by txhorns79

[HoodlumSheep]

Finally watched the episode!

Atticus is a cutie and he and Rose are cute together. Is him being a banker a step down from Rose's position? I know her family is pretty much broke, but would her marrying a banker be considered a good match? And I suppose him being Jewish will be a problem. :(

Looks like Edith is finally taking matters into her own hands.

I was surprised that there was no Tony this episode due to what happened last time.

Mabeline seems spunky.

Charles is quite devious, but he seems to be moving into the friend/bestie category and away from being a suitor.

Cheered when Ms. Bunting left! We were screaming when it looked like Tom was changing his mind about her. Good thing he was just saying goodbye.

Don't care about the Bates story. Thomas is an idiot if he wants to get caught up in that mess.

Bricker went from cutie pie to creeper really fast.

:(

I loved how everybody (okay, at least Violet and Mary) seemed to catch on that something was amiss with Robert and Cora.

[helenamonster]

My two cents on the whole Bricker thing...I think it's best to use an example from the show. Last season, we had Jimmy and Ivy. Ivy was clearly very interested in Jimmy; she said so out loud multiple times. Jimmy never seemed as invested in Ivy, at least not in a long-term way. They went out on a couple of "dates," and after one they stopped and sat on a bench and kissed a little bit. Jimmy began to take things too far, and Ivy put a stop to it. Jimmy put on the whole "I've been nice to you, I've taken you to the theater" bullshit, but Ivy's thing was "That is not something you should be asking for before marriage." I think the point there, as well as with Cora and Bricker, is that this is a society that is dominated by standards of propriety. A nice country girl like Ivy, or a countess like Cora, would be expected to adhere to these standards and risk a befouled reputation if they didn't (men were held to standards as well, but not as strictly). Neither Jimmy nor Bricker should have assumed that Ivy or Cora would want to engage in any sort of activity that went against those standards unless it was explicitly expressed otherwise by the two women.

 

A similar argument could be made with Anna and Green, and one of the reasons she refused to go to the police. Green was definitely overly friendly and flirtatious, and Anna didn't put a stop to it. Presumably because he'd only be there a few days and what was the point of making everything tense, but never in her wildest dreams did she think he'd do what he did. It's a stark contrast to how she dealt with Molesley, who tried to move in on that once it seemed like Bates would be gone for good. Anna knew she'd be seeing a lot of Molesley over the years to come, and (nicely) told him that it wasn't going to happen. But with Green, if she had reported the rape, she'd be questioned about her attitude towards him and how she didn't discourage his flirtation and that for all he knew, she could have wanted to have sex with him. Never mind that she had cuts and bruises to prove otherwise.

 

I just think it's getting into dangerous territory to imply that any woman who does not outright discourage unwanted romantic advances from a man is "a tease" or "asking for it." This is the kind of mindset that makes rape and other sexually-motivated crimes under-reported, even today. Women blame themselves for how they acted (I should have been more forceful with my no's, I didn't discourage his flirting, etc.) and it perpetuates a culture where sexual violence is still a gray area. I don't mean to over-exaggerate with regards to Cora's situation...I'm not sure Bricker would have gone so far as to rape her. But it's the principle of the thing. Women should be allowed to go about their business and try to get along as cordially as possible without a man assuming that she wants him to show up in her bedroom uninvited.

[SusanSunflower]

Bricker did not touch Cora. He did not touch her. She did not appear alarmed TO ME, surprised, but not alarmed. They were both fully clothed and remained so. I think he would have left after a few more protestations of his love ... Truly, much ado about very little, IMHO. She did not need to be "rescued" by the ridiculous (once again) Robert -- sucker-punching a man half his weight.  Poor them, they won't have their painting vastly increase in value because Bricker put it in his book ... 

(Lucky Bricker didn't open Edith's door by mistake) 

 

ETA: Most men do not attack women they claim to want a relationship with, that they declare they love. Most men are not rapists. Most men accept that no means no, at least in my experience. 

Edited February 4, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[txhorns79]

I just think it's getting into dangerous territory to imply that any woman who does not outright discourage unwanted romantic advances from a man is "a tease" or "asking for it."  This is the kind of mindset that makes rape and other sexually-motivated crimes under-reported, even today. Women blame themselves for how they acted (I should have been more forceful with my no's, I didn't discourage his flirting, etc.) and it perpetuates a culture where sexual violence is still a gray area.

 

I may have missed a stray comment, but as far as I can see, no one has suggested Cora was "asking for it."  Rather, I've seen multiple comments noting that Bricker's actions were not justified, even if Cora did lead him on. 

[jschoolgirl]

I was very, very disappointed that Tom kissed That Bunting Creature. (Cows are nice animals!)

That is not fair to her heretofore unseen unrequited feelings. (I don't want to be fair to her, but in principle, I disapprove of pity kisses.) Also the kiss and that long glimpes of him through the car window might be an anvil. It also gives Tom a poignant memory that I dislike and that is not justified by what we have seen.

He should have bowed over her hand, only. I might have been OK with him kissing her hand in farewell.

On another note, I am surprised that she dressed for dinner the time(s) she was invited. (Was it just that once for dinner?)

Edited February 4, 2015 by jschoolgirl

[helenamonster]

Bricker did not touch Cora. He did not touch her. She did not appear alarmed TO ME, surprised, but not alarmed. They were both fully clothed and remained so. I think he would have left after a few more protestations of his love ... Truly, much ado about very little, IMHO. She did not need to be "rescued" by the ridiculous (once again) Robert -- sucker-punching a man half his weight.  Poor them, they won't have their painting vastly increase in value because Bricker put it in his book ... 

(Lucky Bricker didn't open Edith's door by mistake) 

 

ETA: Most men do not attack women they claim to want a relationship with, that they declare they love. Most men are not rapists. Most men accept that no means no, at least in my experience. 

 

Actually, most instances of rape/sexual violence are perpetrated by someone the victim knows. And one in six American women have been the victim of rape or attempted rape, so while it's very true that not all men are rapists, they're not exactly a rare find, especially because the parameters of what constitutes rape have expanded (spousal rape is now recognized as a crime, etc.). Again, I didn't think the show was even so much as flirting with Bricker raping Cora. Mostly because they already did their big rape story with Anna, but also because it's not the point the show was trying to get across. This storyline is about Cora feeling (rightfully) under-appreciated by her family, especially Donk. But, because Donk always has to be right, they turned Simon from a flirty-but-polite gentleman into the kind of man that pushes all the wrong boundaries where propriety is concerned.

[madam magpie]

Boy, it's not possible to watch a historical drama without applying modern PC attitudes to it, is it? On this show, it's 1924. The way men and women interacted and the social rules for each were completely different than they are now. Women had no agency. They belonged to their fathers or husbands. If they were lucky, they had fathers/husbands who treated them like human beings. Bricker broke the social rules by going to Cora's bedroom uninvited, but Cora also broke them by carrying on a chatty friendship with him. No one was right or wrong by 2015 standards back then, but both failed to hold up their side of the 1920s social contract. Bricker isn't going to react to Cora with some enlightened modern male perspective, neither is Robert, and yeah, in 1924, Cora likely would have been considered to have behaved like a tease. So what?

It's the same with Edith. It's 1924! I was born an illegitimate child in the 1970s, and even in hippie Hawaii where I lived, there was still a social stigma. Even today, I get a gasp and "Oh, really" from most people in the middle and upper classes. An upper-class, unmarried woman in 1924 Britain had no real options if she wanted to keep her baby, not to mention that her child would have been scorned by society. Yeah, Edith's behavior is over the top, but this is a soap opera; they don't do subtle, but hiding her kid in plain sight was the best she could do at the time. Yes, people will get hurt. The old-timey, conservative, patriarchal rules sucked. But Edith's decisions have to be considered in her time. Reputation, for both her and Marigold, would have been huge and, in some ways, all they had.

Edited February 4, 2015 by madam magpie

[ZoloftBlob]

I was born an illegitimate child in the 1970s, and even in hippie Hawaii where I lived, there was still a social stigma.

 

I am sorry to agree with this but yes. I distinctly remember my mom explaining to me in 1982, why I was not to ask my friend Amy H why her mom was Mom W and her younger brother was Wayne W while she was Amy H because Amy was *illegitmite* and her mom didn't need an 11 year old asking about it.

 

I also know I twinge a bit at my sister slapping her ex boyfriend's name on her kid because really, why does the sperm donor who didn't put a ring on it for ten years get the honors, but its a different time.

[SusanSunflower]

Edith's best bet might be to find some artsy feminist collective where her bravery will be appreciated ... along with her writing and wit (yeah, I know) ..... and of course her money most of all (because Fellowes will make sure we all know what sort of phoneys those artsy fartsy folks really are!!! doncha know). ... Hey, I like that idea.

I'm sorry to realize that we have seen the last of both Bunting and Bricker ... which means I guess that Cora goes back to being a battery run-down half-wit (better than a suffering in silence Cora or animatronic Cora, I think, ymmv) and Tom goes looking for love somewhere else ... maybe he could ... I guess not.... I think the priesthood didn't take widowers with small children in those days.... historians?  

Edited February 4, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[statsgirl]

There was a great bit of social science research done by Adams in the 80s where a man and a woman were having a conversation and male and female students had to rate if they were flirting or just talking.  The female students tended to rank them as just friends while male students were "yeah, she totally wants him".  So even then, men were mistaking what women wanted. It's something we teach our daughters young.

 

Cora may have considered it a friendship but the moment Bricker expressed a romantic interest in her, she should have shut it down flat.  Who can blame her for not doing it, with Robert as a husband, but still she should have.

 

I'm so glad Bunting is gone.  (I was shouting "Stop, Daisy, leave it alone.")  Having Socialist beliefs is no excuse for a lack of manners.  Just ask George Bernard Shaw.  Also, her mind was as closed as a steel trap and she annoys me.

 

JF, why can't Edith have one single moment of happiness?  Now that Mrs. Drewe is against her, Rosamund and Granny want to send Marigold to an orphanage.  I could tolerate Mary's narcissism better if Edith were allowed just a bit of happiness.  Rose is a twit but she gets to be happy.

[Andorra]

Frankly, I'm getting very uncomfortable with the Cora discussion here. "Mixed signals", "tease", "leading on", "ambiguos behaviour".

I've been "misunderstood", too in my past and it wasn't a nice experience. I'm a polite person and wanted to rebuff the man gently.We were both a bit drunk and joking around. I I knew he thought I was pretty and that he liked me. But he was a friend, he was married to a good friend of mine and he knew I was in a relationship, too. So was I sending "mixed signals"? Was it my fault?I felt completely safe and it turned out I wasn't. I wasn't raped, but touched and groped in a way that has me still thinking about it after more than 20 years and it certainly destroyed my friendship to his wife (and him of course).

Edited February 4, 2015 by photo fox

[millennium]

Frankly, I'm getting very uncomfortable with the Cora discussion here. "Mixed signals", "tease", "leading on", "ambiguos behaviour". You realize that that is all typical rape victim blaming vocabulary?

 

Words serve all kinds of purposes.   The fact that certain words may apply to one set of circumstances doesn't preclude them from being used to discuss others.  Or make them less germane.

Edited February 4, 2015 by photo fox

[Ina123]

I think Tony killed Green for some reason we don't yet know. I think that's why a detective was staking out his place. Just my thoughts. It sure would allow Mary an out if he would be arrested. He's shown a little bit of stalking and his refusal to take no for an answer was a tad aggressive, I thought. And where's Evelyn Napier?

Edited February 4, 2015 by Ina123