Okay, here's another one for my psych class (and 5 EC points for me:P)

A husband and wife live on an island where they must take the ferry to get to the "mainland".  The husband works nights.  The wife, feeling neglected, waits for the husband to leave every night and takes a later ferry into "town", where she meets her lover.  Now, not wanting more than physical affection, when her lovers become serious, she picks a fight and breaks it off, only to find another.  One night, she takes the ferry into town and meets Lover #1.  When he tells her he loves her, she does her "usual" and picks a fight.  He kicks her out of his apartment and she proceeds to the ferry to go home.  On the way to the ferry, she realizes that she has no money for the ferry so she decides to go back to Lover #1 and ask him if she can borrow the fare.  He slams the door in her face and tells her to leave.  She then goes to a previous lover's house (lover #2) and asks him for the fare.  He also tells her to leave and gives her no money.  So, she proceeds to the ferry (as it's getting close to time for her husband to be returning home from work) and asks the ferry Captain if she can pay the following night.  He tells her that, although she is a regular, the rules are the rules and he can't let her on without paying.  At this time, she remembers that there is a "free bridge" about a mile down the road, but the road is dangerous--it's where the highwaymen "work".  Not wanting her husband to find out that she's been going out at night, she decides to take her chances and starts walking the road.  About half-way down the road, a highwayman jumps out and demands her money.  When she tells him she has none, he kills her.  Who is to blame for her death and why?


I'll post the results on Friday, after my class ;)

Okay, here's another one for my psych class (and 5 EC points for me:P)

A husband and wife live on an island where they must take the ferry to get to the "mainland".  The husband works nights.  The wife, feeling neglected, waits for the husband to leave every night and takes a later ferry into "town", where she meets her lover.  Now, not wanting more than physical affection, when her lovers become serious, she picks a fight and breaks it off, only to find another.  One night, she takes the ferry into town and meets Lover #1.  When he tells her he loves her, she does her "usual" and picks a fight.  He kicks her out of his apartment and she proceeds to the ferry to go home.  On the way to the ferry, she realizes that she has no money for the ferry so she decides to go back to Lover #1 and ask him if she can borrow the fare.  He slams the door in her face and tells her to leave.  She then goes to a previous lover's house (lover #2) and asks him for the fare.  He also tells her to leave and gives her no money.  So, she proceeds to the ferry (as it's getting close to time for her husband to be returning home from work) and asks the ferry Captain if she can pay the following night.  He tells her that, although she is a regular, the rules are the rules and he can't let her on without paying.  At this time, she remembers that there is a "free bridge" about a mile down the road, but the road is dangerous--it's where the highwaymen "work".  Not wanting her husband to find out that she's been going out at night, she decides to take her chances and starts walking the road.  About half-way down the road, a highwayman jumps out and demands her money.  When she tells him she has none, he kills her.  Who is to blame for her death and why?


I'll post the results on Friday, after my class ;)


This is straight out of The Pigman.

I'll go with the highwayman, the one who killed her.  He is the only logical answer.

I could be all technical and say the highwayman because he technically killed her. End of story.

However, it strikes me that if she wouldn't have been deceitful in the first place that she would have never had reason to travel that path which got her killed. So, I'll risk being judged by blaming the wife.

I would have to go with the wife. If she could have perhaps talked to her husband about her problems, then maybe she wouldn't have had to take the ferry to trampsville. In which case there would have been no need to take the free bridge back to the island and run into the highwaymen.

OR...

She could have waited at the ferry for her hubby and told him she wanted to surprise him and meet him after work to go out to dinner :P

OR...

She could have waited at the ferry for her hubby and told him she wanted to surprise him and meet him after work to go out to dinner :P


LOL! ;D


Oops, sorry.


;D

Well, I could say the husband because he wasn't giving the wife what she needed and she had to look for it elsewhere. But, I went with the simpliest answer-the highwayman. Now, if the highwayman was an animal-then he can't be blaimed because he was just doing what an animal would do. But, since he is human (or so we assume), humans are supposed to be a bit more civil. But, knowing that the highwayman was that way in the first place, the wife could be at fault for putting herself in harms way-knowingly.




Cat

If it were a choice, I'd say "all of them":The husband for neglecting his wife, the wife for being such a skank, the lovers because they didn't give her fare, the captain for not letting her ride for free, and the highwayman for doing the actual deed of killing her...since that isn't a possible answer, I chose the highwayman. ;D

I chose the wife too. The Captain warned her of both the road and the highwaymen, and she didn't listen to him. I'm not saying the highwayman there was a saint, but since The Captain works there, she should have heeded his warning.

From what I remember of 'The Pigman,' each choice represents something.  Example: Choosing X means your highest something-or-other is magic.  It has been such a long time, but I know this is from 'The Pigman.'  Is that correct, 80's?

From what I remember of 'The Pigman,' each choice represents something.  Example: Choosing X means your highest something-or-other is magic.  It has been such a long time, but I know this is from 'The Pigman.'  Is that correct, 80's?



I kind of remember that. It has been many years since I read The Pigman. Excellent book. I think I have of a copy of it. I should reread again.



Cat

The Captain warned her of both the road and the highwaymen, and she didn't listen to him. I'm not saying the highwayman there was a saint, but since The Captain works there, she should have heeded his warning.


Right. Common sense. In that one single aspect alone, right there, she took a serious risk. She made the decision to go down that path knowing full-well the danger. Had she not gone down that path, she would not have been killed by the highwayman.

Another thing -

JoeDeertae made a good point about her inability to think her decisions through and/or her lack of imagination in coming-up with a more reasonable solution to her dilemma, even if it meant a lie or the actual truth. Either way, she would have lived.

The Highwayman murdered her, so he's to blame. However, for argument's sake, she should've kept her self away from such circumstances that would lead to her death. Oh well.

Tanya

The highwayman is to blame.  

1.  Regardless of what led her to the road, the road was dangerous ONLY because the highwaymen chose to make it dangerous.
2.  He, alone, met her on the road, chose to kill her and followed through on his decision.
        A.  Had he chosen to abide by the law, she would still be alive.
             1.  Despite her deceit, infidelity & foolishness.
             2.  Despite her husband's long hours away from home
             3.  Despite her former lovers' unwillingness to lend her cash
             4.  Despite the ferryman's strict adherance to the rules of his job.
             5.  Despite her choice to take a road she knew could be dangerous.


                       

Like GWB (Oh my GOD!!!) I chose the highwayman.  As a feminist, I believe that women, and men, should be able to walk safely in public places any time, day or night without fear.  In the past I have participated in "take back the night" marches with women and other men at my college to help make that point.

The Highwayman, I am big on personal responsibility.  If a woman gets drunk is it her fault that she
was raped because someone decided to take advantage of her vulnerability?  You don't blame the victim.

I went with the wife.  The Highwayman was a veeery close second.  You can't blame the husband for her murder, he didn't do it.  I don't think it is right to run to someone else because your hubby is ignoring you.  You need to deal with the marriage, either end it or fix it.  I think blaming the lovers or the captain is ridiculous.  She is the one who made the decision to go down that road after being told it was dangerous.

What was your take on this, Cheer?

This has nothing to do with rape, Danoota. This is about a woman that made a foolish decision instead of saving her life. There was nothing in the story that prove that she was vunerable. If she was, she would have made the right decision. But because she made bad decisions, she is not totally a victim. But the highwayman should get prison time, anyway, for the murder. So her death was not in vain.
Don Carlos: Don't take this personally, but need to get back to reality. There is no totally safe place at night other than home or a church. In a lot of neighborhoods (including mine), if any man or woman is anywhere else at night, then they "deserve" anything they get. That is not my view, just the reality of my surroundings. I hope you will understand that any worshipped god does not guarantee that a person will be saved in body, just in spirit. 
The Highwayman, I am big on personal responsibility.  If a woman gets drunk is it her fault that she
was raped because someone decided to take advantage of her vulnerability?  You don't blame the victim.

This has nothing to do with rape, Danoota. This is about a woman that made a foolish decision instead of saving her life. There was nothing in the story that prove that she was vunerable. If she was, she would have made the right decision. But because she made bad decisions, she is not totally a victim. But the highwayman should get prison time, anyway, for the murder. So her death was not in vain.
Don Carlos: Don't take this personally, but need to get back to reality. There is no totally safe place at night other than home or a church. In a lot of neighborhoods (including mine), if any man or woman is anywhere else at night, then they "deserve" anything they get. That is not my view, just the reality of my surroundings. I hope you will understand that any worshipped god does not guarantee that a person will be saved in body, just in spirit. 



I was using the drunken rape as a metaphor.  Getting drunk puts a woman in a dangerous situation.
Does her action excuse the actions of the rapist?  Regardless of the situation that brought the woman
to the bridge, does that in anyway justify the actions of the highwayman?  I say no.  What if there was
a different circumstance, a woman with a very sick child, she has to get home right away with the
medicine she is carrying, she is on the bridge fully aware that there has been a highwayman, and
she is killed.  The scenario is the same, a woman making a choice to enter into a dangerous
situation.  The highwayman doesn't care what her situation is, he never asked if she was cheating
on her husband, he didn't care.  Also, one of the most dangerous places for a woman is the home.
More violent crimes are committed against women by husbands, fathers, brothers, and others, in their own homes.  Using this logic every woman in her own home is "asking for it"

Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. Like you said before, the situation with this woman is different from the woman with the sick child. (If the latter was a life or death situation, her doctor should have kept the child in a hospital, but I digress). They're is nothing to suggest that this woman was a victim of abuse by any of the men in the story. If that were the case, there are plenty of abuse shelters and womens' clinics that she could have gone to. She didn't have to risk her life.
Second of all, if any home has good security, it will at least be safer than walking the streets at night. It's not like women are "asking for it", but every law abiding citizen need to be smart enough to avoid situations like this wife.
Still, there is no reason to beat up or kill a woman.


I was using the drunken rape as a metaphor.  Getting drunk puts a woman in a dangerous situation.
Does her action excuse the actions of the rapist?  Regardless of the situation that brought the woman
to the bridge, does that in anyway justify the actions of the highwayman?  I say no.  What if there was
a different circumstance, a woman with a very sick child, she has to get home right away with the
medicine she is carrying, she is on the bridge fully aware that there has been a highwayman, and
she is killed.  The scenario is the same, a woman making a choice to enter into a dangerous
situation.  The highwayman doesn't care what her situation is, he never asked if she was cheating
on her husband, he didn't care.  Also, one of the most dangerous places for a woman is the home.
More violent crimes are committed against women by husbands, fathers, brothers, and others, in their own homes.  Using this logic every woman in her own home is "asking for it"

but I digress


::)  Yes....

I had to take five on that.  To say it was her own fault that she was murdered is to blame the
victim, and offer an excuse for the perpertrator. He murdered her, but it was her fault for being
there.  That is what it boils down to.

So, Indy, if a child gets kidnapped and murdered b/c she played in front of her house despite being grounded, it's the child's fault, right? If you apply your theory of the wife and the highway man, then it would be.

Tanya