Don't know much about the story only what I've seen so far. Looks to me like Ethel should take some blame for what happened.
shareShe's gonna get worse than blame
shareGiven he murdered her it is supposition as to what she knew and didn't know.
shareMy suspicion is that Ethel believed her husband was a backstreet abortionist, as opposed to a man who hunted woman purely to rape and kill them. As others say, she paid for whatever she may have known or suspected with her own life.
shareShe was too loyal to her husband for her own good and everyone else. And I can't understand why the man who took her back to Reg didn't say anything.
shareI think it wasn´t loyalty, but fear of loosing her security. Living with her husband, flawed as he was, was in her eyes better than being on her own. Kind of ´don´t ask, don´t tell´ attitude. If she doesn´t bother him, she hopes he won´t bother her.
shareShe knew he went with other women, she said as much. She knew he had an eye for the ladies and yet stayed with him. She knew something was going on in the bedroom, she saw the mattress and smelled the perfume and yet put up with it.It came across as a loveless, sexless marriage. He bigged himself up as a doctor to that girl in his house when he wasn't. The girl has now gone missing and Ethel has claimed that the coat on the peg in the house is hers but it belongs to the missing girl.Ethel shouldn't have covered up for her husband like that,it's more or less saying that his behaviour is ok.
shareI think the choices she had were few to none. She had no other place to go other than staying with relatives. As per the ending of episode 1, she became complicit in her husband's activities, and that's no excuse, even with no other choice but to stay with him. Certain she was scared, and maybe even brainwashed. Notice how when she would challenge him on his behavior, he turned it back on her, as "embarrassing" herself. Typical narcissistic, sociopathic behavior. Such people attract vulnerable naive caregivers.
shareCompleteley different times, she simply wouldnt have had anything like the options of today, the late 40s and early 50's in many ways truly are a different country to misquote the quote (slightly)
shareHow much I wish this were true, but the cardinal difference today is a more correct diagnosis, not a change in human behavior.
The question repeatedly arises, why victims of abuse stay with their abuser, or even protect them. PTSD has in general 2 polar opposite reactions: either a victim dares to speak up and put issues to rest after the responsible has been caught, or they become abusers themselves.
Her remaining with him wasn't just for status, Christie wasn't well off, the so called stepping stone became permanent, rather there are times, when people with deep seated psychological issues wish to mask them.
A more demanding or more caring man would have seen her problems, not just simply manipulate it as the sociopath Christie did. Had this been a completely fictional story, my guess would her being raped at a very early age made her not bother that her husband was impotent.
Options are more today, but such couples will remain in existence, since women and men like Ethel will rather engage in a codependent relationship with a monster where he or she doesn't have to take responsibility, than to be their own person, where choices have consequences. Help can only be given when help is wanted, and she wanted none. If, again, this had been fiction, her family neglecting her being raped, it wouldn't wonder a soul that she trusted a creep more, than her own family who swept the issue under the rug.
I live in the Gordius Apartment Complex, my interior designer was M.C. Esher.
[deleted]
So did she lie out of ignorance at court or did she actually believe the lies and cover up what she thought was a abortion going wrong
share