MovieChat Forums > La piel que habito (2011) Discussion > How are some arguing that Vicente didn't...

How are some arguing that Vicente didn't rape Norma?

posted 10 years ago by Aborawatabinost
52 replies | jump to latest

(Let it be known that I do not wish to start fights, or claim that my interpretation of a scene in a film is the only true one, as I have lurked in these forums for some time and I know that type of behavior is rampant here.)

So let's break down the scene. (Also, allow me to mention that I watched the film with subtitles and I'm sure some things were lost in translation.)

Norma and Vicente walk out of the house holding hands and retreat down a path in the garden.

Vicente asks "Are you stoned?" Norma responds, "Stoned?" Vincent then asks "Have you taken any pills?" To which she replies yes, then going on to list all of the prescription drugs and doses of said drugs she takes. Vincent replies *beep* I'm high as hell, too." Vicente is too out of it to even understand the situation, but this alone does not condemn or absolve him.

They continue talking and walking until Norma's high heel breaks. She throws both her heels to the ground and takes off her jacket, saying she'd rather go naked all the time. Vicente interprets this as a sexual advance, and reacts as such, saying "I will leave you naked", embracing her and kissing her neck. Norma's eyes go wide and look away anxiously. They fall under a tree with Vicente over Norma, with Norma's arms in a seemingly defensive pose between the two, and with eyes like a deer in the headlights.

At this point, aside from her body language (which Vicente is clearly too *beep* up to read), Norma hasn't indicated she doesn't want to have sex. Eventually, Vicente lowers his pants, almost exactly when the song starts, and begins having sex with Norma. She begins pushing against him, squirming, and saying no repeatedly. When he doesn't stop, she yells loudly, and Vicente puts his hand over her mouth and tells her to shut up. She bites down on his hand, hard enough for him to scream, and he strikes her, knocking her unconscious. He stands as if to quickly leave, but then goes back to pull her panties and bra up and fix her dress.

How is this not rape? I'm not saying the character of Vicente intended to go to the wedding and rape someone, but that's what happened when she resisted and said no, and he continued *beep* her and put his hand over her mouth.

According to dictionary.com, rape is defined as "the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse". I saw him use force in covering her mouth, and she clearly seemed to be under duress when pushing against him and struggling. If you claim that what happened in the scene was not rape, please explain to me how.

[–] written_in_the_stars 10 years ago

Your words are relevant and quite interesting. Like you, I do think Vicente raped Norma. But... I don't think that is a plain and simple fact and that no other elements related to the context of that event need to be heard. But I think you know that, since you offer an interesting analysis of the scene.

Remember the Tiger scene? When he gets into Vera's room and violently gets on her - THAT is a plain and simple rape. He's agressive, he never asks about Vera's advice, he just takes her, violently, and he's perfectly aware of what he's doing. Yes, he thinks she's someone else, that she's a woman he used to bang in the past, but that's no excuse. He still forces her, he's intentionnaly violent towards her and doesn't give a *beep* about it.

In Vicente's case... although he did rape Norma, I think the situation is still a little more complex. It doesn't excuse his actions, but it explains them. As you perfectly said yourself, did Vicente had consciously decided to go to the wedding and rape someone? Did he see Norma and told to himself: "I'm gonna hurt her"? No he didn't, because he wasn't that evil, and because he was completely high. He didn't even seem to realize that Norma was fragile and unstable psychologically. If he would've known, I guess he would've never go and talk to her in the first place. At first, he was a simple guy who wanted sex and didn't want to waste time. He saw her, thought she was cute, and went for a walk with her, hoping he could score with her, while she had no idea about his desires.

Then, as you also said yourself, he interprets her words as sexual advances, since it's all his high mind can think of. When he starts making love to her, he isn't even aware of what she feels. He's so high and horny that, since he's considering she gave him sexual advances (which she didn't), he just assumes she wants this as well as him.

But then, she hears the song in the background - the one that was playing when her mother killed herself in front of her eyes. She panicks. When she starts protesting and screaming, of course he should've stopped. But in his state, he couldn't understand at all why she was acting this way. To him, she was willing since the beginning and there was no reason she could change her mind. And her screams made him unconfortable, made him in danger of being caught in a situation where he'd be accused for rape (in his mind he wasn't raping her, cause he just assumed everything was ok), so the best he found to do was to make her shut up. From then, the actions and reactions just went on, without him (nor her) being able to understand them completely. Her, because of her fragile state; him, because of drugs.

Of course, he was responsible for the situation degenerating: he stuffed himself with drugs and he couldn't think properly or act with care for people around, and was just able to have in mind his libido to be contented. Then he chose a sick girl to have sex with and didn't show a lot of consideration for her. He misunderstood her words and didn't think any further. Then he abandoned her so he wouldn't get any problems.

He did raped her and he was very irresponsible.
But did he rape her intentionnally?
Did he meant it, as the Tiger meant it when he raped Vera?
I believe not.

So that is why, I think, maybe some people would consider Vicente didn't rape Norma. But from my point of view, he did, unintentionnally - although that's no excuse.

[–] prosodic 10 years ago

When Norma said no he stopped once he realised she was saying no. The reason he covered her mouth was not to continue having sex with her but because he feared what someone would think if they found them i.e. that he had raped her. He hadn't. He was having sex with her and when she said no and he heard it he stopped having sex with her. How that could be interpreted as rape is beyond me.

[–] written_in_the_stars 10 years ago

I consider the scene as a rape because Vicente was the only responsible for the situation degenerating.
As I said in my previous post, he stuffed himself with drugs and he couldn't think properly or act with care for people around, and just wanted his libido to be contented. Then he chose a sick girl to have sex with and didn't show a lot of consideration for her. He misunderstood her words and didn't think any further. Then he abandoned her in the woods so he wouldn't get any problems.

I agree this is not a rape in the same way of the Tiger scene, because the Tiger wanted to hurt Vera while Vicente didn't mean to hurt Norma.

But it is still a rape because Vicente used Norma in his interest only and he acted completely irresponsible with her. He didn't mean it, ok. But that's no excuse.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ecuelles 10 years ago

Actually both "rapes" where confused. Even Vera let Zeca get his way, she even tells him she likes it, why? Probably some survival instinct, maybe she knew it might help her escape. In Nora's case, she was an innocent but again she did things that might convince a stupid, hormone crazy boy, that she consented.
In both cases the men where ignorant non sensitive being, one because he was a violent psycho and the other because he was on drugs. Vera knew what she was doing, Norma didn't.
The rapes are actually alike in a way, they are rapes but it could also be discussed that they where not. That is what makes this an interesting story.
It makes you wonder if Zeca and Vicente deserved what they got, Zeca probably yes....Vicente....quite sure no...

By the way all males in this movie are sexually insensitive. I mean even the docter in the end....they are making love....it still hurts for Vera and then he proposes to do it from behind.....I think that remark pushed Vera over the edge in a way. It shows the doctor is not interested in her personally but only in body.

Very interesting movie but I actually didn't connect that much to the characters....and I found Zeca scary as hell and extremely disgusting...probably because of the tiger suit. He brought mayhem and brutal behaviour into the organised and "civilized" world of El Cigaral.

[–] x1nd0lent 10 years ago

So that is why, I think, maybe some people would consider Vicente didn't rape Norma. But from my point of view, he did, unintentionnally - although that's no excuse.

But it is still a rape because Vicente used Norma in his interest only and he acted completely irresponsible with her. He didn't mean it, ok. But that's no excuse.

Vincente's insensitivity is not excused, but there is no such thing as "unintentional rape". What separates consensual sex from rape is intention. When one intends to force an unwilling person to participate in sex, this is what makes it rape.

Of course, in reality, it is not always so simple. Most people do not directly "agree" to sex in an explicit way, there is often some degree of spontaniety and the communications are frequently nonverbal. This has the potential to create ambiguity. In this case, not only Vincente but Norma also was heavily drugged. What Vincente was not clear about was the she was drugged as treatment for mental illness - and there is no particular reason why he should have been aware of this. Once he realized his mistake, Vincente appeared to react with fear and some sensitivity to Norma.

Why this scene was powerful is that it was a tragedy which I thought elicited sympathy for both characters. Neither thought they were doing wrong, but both suffered as a result. The inhumane revenge fantasy of Dr. Ledgard was based upon an erroneous understanding. And to compound the squick factor, all of the male characters depicted were bastards, hardly even aware of their insensitivity to women. Dr. Ledgard even kept his own mother as a servant, which has got to rank pretty highly as childish narcissistic fantasies for men go. Only Vincent seems to have been absolved of his character flaws, by literally being castrated and becoming a woman.

[–] SugarGhost 9 years ago

He didnt try to rouse her.. her didn't go get water to splash on her face and make sure she was okay.. and that she wasnt upset at him.. that she wouldn't tell on him.. he paid NO MIND to what happened to her after the party/rape... He could of asked one of his friends to check on her to make sure if she was okay if he was scared she'd freak out on him or something and scream rape... He did nothing. *beep* and split. While it might not seem like a rape to you, it does to me. She was inhibited in some way.. he thought drunkenness, but knowing her medication list as she listed (who does that?) and that she explained she was under therapy.. I dont know if she went into the fact that she was in an actual psych hospital, but there were some signs.. don't get involved with this girl. He shouldnt of slapped her, and when she said no.. he should of pulled out and started talking to her.. .. why? whats up? did I hurt you? are you okay? can I do anything for you?

Again.. he did nothing. She was nothing to him.

"Why are you wearing the stupid man suit?"

[–] Korios 10 years ago

Apparently you missed the part when after Norma freaked out he continued thrusting onto her for one or two seconds, at most. So that would make it "a couple of seconds rape". Rewatch the scene more carefully, he did not continue having sex with her (no more than a couple of seconds at most) while she was screaming, as you claimed, he just tried to make her be quiet so that we was not accused of raping her.

Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

[–] Bklyn4ever 10 years ago

It was rape because she did not know what he was about to do and he didn't ask her if she wanted to do it. He just went ahead and penetrated her. This probably constituted her first sexual experience, so she had no idea what was about to happen. If a woman is not in a condition to give informed consent to have sex, and a man goes ahead and penetrates her, that is rape.

[–] Giskdan 9 years ago

This probably constituted her first sexual experience, so she had no idea what was about to happen. If a woman is not in a condition to give informed consent to have sex

He didn't know that. YOU know it because you have been watching the film, lol. She had a mental illness, but he DIDN'T KNOW THAT. If a woman start undressing in front of me, and when I kiss her she didn't stop me and laugh as I "escalate"- like Norma did- I would seeing it as she giving me consent. People don't ask each other "Sorry, can I fu**k you?" before sex in real life, you know.

[–] Bklyn4ever 9 years ago

He didn't know that. YOU know it because you have been watching the film, lol. She had a mental illness, but he DIDN'T KNOW THAT. If a woman start undressing in front of me, and when I kiss her she didn't stop me and laugh as I "escalate"- like Norma did- I would seeing it as she giving me consent. People don't ask each other "Sorry, can I fu**k you?" before sex in real life, you know.

Ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law. If she were underage and he did not know it, but rather had sex with her unaware of her age, he would still be breaking the law and committing statutory rape. In the film, likewise, he was responsible for his action of having sex with a woman who could not and did not consent to it.

In "real life," many men have been prosecuted for this, which is why men should ask a woman if they should go ahead and have intercourse if she is a virtual stranger and has not verbally given consent. If she is intoxicated or disoriented, he should not go ahead under any circumstances. Otherwise, there is always a risk, however minimal, that it is rape.

[–] Giskdan 9 years ago

The legal principle you are quoting, says this:

"Ignorance OF THE LAW is not an excuse for breaking the law."

Here we are talking about ignorance of a mental condition. Norma wasn't underage, she had a mental disorder. Age is usually evident, mental problems don't. You can't expect people must ask for a psychiatric report before having sex with a woman.

[–] Bklyn4ever 9 years ago

Here we are talking about ignorance of a mental condition. Norma wasn't underage, she had a mental disorder. Age is usually evident, mental problems don't. You can't expect people must ask for a psychiatric report before having sex with a woman.

If a woman is not aware of what a man is about to do to her, she has not given consent, and the man may be prosecuted for rape.

That goes for any number of mental conditions a woman might have that would prevent her from knowing what was about to happen.

It is always risky to have intimate relations with a person whom one does not know intimately.

[–] Giskdan 9 years ago

I'm not a lawyer, but I heard about something called "criminal intent".

[–] Bklyn4ever 9 years ago

Criminal intent is not necessary for a conviction in rape cases.

One only has to prove that the crime was committed voluntarily.

It is a general-intent crime, which means that the specific intention or mental state of the perpetrator is not relevant.

[–] Giskdan 9 years ago

So, basically, is a crime you are forced to commit, whether you like it or not.
You have absolutely no defense, other than celibacy. Or being psychic and learn to read minds.

[–] Bklyn4ever 9 years ago

You can get to know someone before you embark on a sexual relationship.

If you are having a one-nighter or a recreational fling, you are assuming many kinds of risk, not just the risk of being prosecuted for rape if you fail to communicate with the person first about whether or not he or she wants to do that with you.

So, no, you aren't limited to celibacy. You probably need to develop your interpersonal skills.

[–] Giskdan 9 years ago

You can get to know someone before you embark on a sexual relationship.

No. Knowing the person wouldn't protect me, because a mental disorder can be undiagnosed. Even "the victim" can be ignorant about her own condition. If the law really is like you are describing, I could even be married with the girl, and five years later, a psychiatrist decide she is a nymphomaniac, and her "yes" doesn't really mean "yes", and I have become a five-year-long rapist overnight.

[–] parbon84 8 years ago

She really doesn't understand rape.

Sadly the definition now includes reluctant sex.

Its pretty obvious what real rape is and what isn't.

[–] svellis-96785 8 years ago

If one got to know someone who isn't able to consent to sex and they weren't able to tell that then that person really shouldn't be having sex at all. clearly they themselves are not mentally aware enough to be engaging in such acts.
Try talking to someone, asking them if they want sex, getting actual verbal consent. Vincente raping Norma was rare. He didn't do his due diligence to find out her age or her opinion on sex, and he didn't care that she was so drugged up she couldn't consent.

[–] v-81037 8 years ago

You obviously don't know how to watch a movie, let alone discuss it.
We are not in court, and these are fictional characters. The scene is made this exact way for a reason. Had the writer intended to make it a simple clear cut rape, he would have.
It wasn't exactly rape. It was a situation that went wrong. it is not a clear cut rape, and that's how the writers wanted it to be. He didn't really rape her, he misunderstood the whole thing, thinking she was also high, and taking off her clothes because she's seducing him, or being sexually aroused and willing. She lays there silent, she doesn't ask him to stop, even if she wasn't really enjoying it, but still letting it happen, until the song plays. She is not exactly against him touching her or being intimate with her, it is simply a change of state of her mind, due to the song, which brought her back to her childhood incident/tragedy. He doesn't get it at first, and his mind is also foggy. But then he gets scared, having a screaming half naked woman underneath him, he tries to shut her mouth, not to have his way with her, but not to get into trouble, that he didn't actually seek, then slaps her, and then leaves. A rapist would take advantage of an unconscious prey and take what he wants. Here he finds out that something is wrong, and leaves. He only wanted to make love to her because SHE WANTED IT TOO (due to his impression at least), and since she is not mentally okay, it is easy for him to get the wrong impression.
A rapist is someone who intends to take what he wants ANYWAY, and without waiting for consent. Here, he (for obvious reasons) assume she wants it too (they exchange glances, hold hands, and she starts taking off her clothes) and so he acts accordingly. He stops once he realizes she is not as willing as he thought. The fact that it took him a minute more to realize that doesn't make it rape.

It seems that some people find such arguments or scenes in movies as a chance to show their support for women, or how they sympathize with women, while this is not the place, nor the way to discuss a movie, or what the intentions of the filmmaker were.

[–] drtrance2003 8 years ago

@ v-81037 : OR...... some people on this board are trolling just to illicit an argument for arguments sake...?

[–] kcdee 8 years ago

People don't ask each other "Sorry, can I fu**k you?" before sex in real life, you know.

Maybe they should.

[–] gothic_a666 10 years ago

I agree that it was rape. I can understand Vicente misreading the signs up to the moment Norma says 'No' and tries to push him away. She then bites his hand hard enough to break the skin which goes to show she was must have been absolutely terrified.

[–] billso 9 years ago

The disagreement in these comments stems from the scene's ambiguity, which is exactly what Almodovar sought. He succeeded.

[–] Bklyn4ever 9 years ago

The disagreement in these comments stems from the scene's ambiguity, which is exactly what Almodovar sought. He succeeded.

I agree. There are several scenes that play on this ambiguity concerning rape, instances where traditionally people thought it wasn't rape, but in modern legal terms, it is considered to be so.

This is the case, to a lesser degree, when the boyfriend returns in a tiger suit and starts taking Elena Anaya's character by force. Since he believes she is his lover, why would she deny him? Traditionally, it was thought that rape was impossible between a husband and wife or two lovers who had been having consensual sex before. A woman did not need to be willing for each subsequent sexual encounter.

Then we have Dr. Ledgard and his treatment of the Elena Anaya character as his sex slave. She does not protest when he has sex with her, but she is not in a situation in which she could say no. She is being held captive.

So in all three situations, a more traditional mindset might say it is not rape, but a more modern one would say that it is.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Alice-Morgan 9 years ago

This, I can't believe people don't think it's rape when it clearly was

Like the view? It's the only thing you'll be catching tonight 

[–] Boni-The-Sock 9 years ago

It wasn't rape.

Vicente misunderstood her words. He started to lick her and touch her, and she didn't do anything. He thought it was okay and she was enjoying too. Had she said NO right there, he wouldn't have gone any further, even drugged.

Then he started to shag her. YET she didn't say a word - which means she wasn't virgin, otherwise the screamings would start right there.

Finally, out of nowhere, she freaks out, he also freaks out because this will atract people and upon seeing a screaming girl under a drugged guy, you perfectly know what will happen. So he tries to shut her mouth, she bits him, he slaps her and runs away.

Unlike Zeca, Vicente wasn't an a$$hole If he was a rapist, he would have fuc|<ed her even when she was unconscious.

Of course it was wrong to have sex with a girl with mental disorder, but he couldn't possibly know her condition.

Roberto didn't kidnap him for what he did to his daughter, to avenger her and get justice, he did it because like his mother said, he was crazy. It is a twisted tale, and to interpret this as a simple, easy and basic story it's wrong. Not everything is black and white.

English is not my primary language, but at least I speak more than you.

[–] d5ive 9 years ago

I don't think it was a rape either. Even though it was insensitive and a prickmove to strike her, cover his tracks, etc., I can understand why he did what he did after the scream. Talk about a set up from Mr. Darkfate.

He might get slapped with a guilt-trip for the rest of his life, but if this went to court, I don't think the rape charge would hold up. Assault/battery, I can see, but rape? It was just a series of unfortunate misunderstandings.

[–] v-81037 8 years ago

I agree totally with your post, except for the last bit. I think he did all of this to Vincent, initially, because of what happened... and of course it takes only a *beep* up man to do this. But I think he made it clear to Vincent that he's here because he raped the daughter he no longer has.
Although I wonder how much did he actually care for his daughter, as the movie doesn't try to show us there is any strong connection between him and the girl, and his focus and interests are elsewhere. But definitely, he started the whole thing to avenge. He insisted to operate Vincent the day (moment) he buried his daughter. Which is a sign of both, a messed up mind, and a desire to avenge too.

[–] svellis-96785 8 years ago

He didn't get consent, he didn't get her age, he did know she was highly drugged up, yet he forced himself on her. That's rape.
And your assumption that she couldn't have been a Virginia is ridiculous.