PT Jedi and sex in the PT

You know, it's discussions like this that make me wish AOTC went for a PG-13 rating. I think the whole love story would have worked much better if Lucas didn't have to skirt around certain issues.

 

I am certainly not going to feel bad for "name-calling" a fictional character. And BTW, Anakin in AOTC is a punk, disrespectful, a mass murderer and a psychopath so my description was accurate.

but my point is that these traits lend to the utter implausibility of the love, romance and marriage of Padme and Anakin after 3 days. It's just more of the lack of logic in the story of AOTC.

 

1. Punk -- He questions Obi Wan and contradicts him in front of others. He talks behind Obi Wan's back dissing him repeatedly.

2. Disrespectful -- See No. 1.

3. Murderer -- He slaughtered the Sand People.

4. Psychopath -- Definition: "a personality disorder characterized by the inability to form human attachment[3] and an abnormal lack of empathy, masked by an ability to appear outwardly normal." Anakin relishes that fact that he killed women and children. A clear overreaction of pure revenge and bloodlust. So he meets the definition.

All facts.

but again, the purpose of me bringing this up was to highlight how implausible the romance is. Not to "close discussion." Having made thousands and thousands of posts in this forum, I believe it well established that I enjoy discussion and debate. Instead of presuming to know my motives, why not actually address the points I'm making and defend these poorly made films?

 

Do you need a definition of "punk" or "disrespect"? I thought those were self-explanatory. Why don't you define them. I'm sure whatever definition you look up, Anakin's behavior will meet it. That is not "opinion." We know what Anakin did in the films. It's not subjective as to whether he killed innoncents or interruped and was rude to Obi Wan. Or talked behind Obi Wan's back. Those are facts from the film. And how the Sand People acted is irrelevant to his reaction to slaughter an entire village. And then relish in it.

See, but I'm not saying, "it's implausible" and leaving it at that. I am giving reasons, from the film, for why it's implausible. That IS a discussion. That is an actual argument.

This is all very interesting, considering YOU are the one who responded to my posts (in multiple threads). Can't you accept my stance? I'm not sure why this last part was directed at me. Lol.

 

If you feel Anakin is a "worthless person" (a punk) that is your prerogative. Not all of us agree. I agree that he's disrespectful, however, it's a two way street. Those he disrespects, such as Obi-Wan, can engage in similar behavior at times (telling Anakin he will "learn his place" and talking about him behind his back). I would venture to say, though, that Anakin and Obi-Wan aren't trying to be disrespectful -- they just don't know how to communicate. Their first scene with Padme is a prime example. Here, Anakin's just trying to impress Padme, but he crosses his Master and tries to placate him while keeping his pride intact. Obi-Wan takes it as disrespect, but I've always seen it as Anakin just trying to save face after having been caught in a mistake. Not that surprising, considering he's sitting across from a girl he's crushing on.

As to #3, by ROTS, definitely. But in AOTC, the issue is more obscure. Because Anakin's crime fits the definition of voluntary manslaughter far better than murder. He's certainly a killer, if that's what you were getting at, but his status as a murderer (legally) is foggy.

I don't really understand how you can believe #4, though. Right there in your definition it states that psychopaths cannot form attachments to others. Yet that's exactly Anakin's greatest weakness -- he's almost pathologically attached to people he loves, like Padme and his mother. And it's perplexing that you say that he relished killing women and children. When Padme asks him, "what's wrong," he doesn't say that his mother died. What's wrong is that he killed the entire tribe and he's disappointed, angry, guilty, and ashamed. He even breaks down crying. There's little evidence that Anakin took pride in his actions.

 

GL did say the Jedi are not celibate.

 

Well #3 and 4 feed into each other. To really qualify for voluntary manslaughter you'd have to be classified as insane so again, it makes Ani into a psycho. But all of this is not about what specfic crime Ani committed -- it's about the implausbility of Amidala not only breaking her vow not to date anyone, but actually agreeing to

 

No, voluntary manslaughter is simply defined as: the killing of a human being in which the offender had no prior intent to kill and acted during "the heat of passion", under circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed.

There's little evidence that Anakin entered the Tusken camp with the intent to kill. Considering he sneaks around instead of directly confronting the Tuskens, I'd say he was primarily motivated by a desire to rescue his mother. And his act certainly occurred in the "heat of passion" when anyone could become "emotionally or mentally disturbed." Finding your mother tortured to death (to say nothing of a ten year separation, a month of horrifying visions, and a description of her abductors as "monsters") would disturb anyone, I think you'd agree.

Provocation is considered sufficient if it would cause a reasonable person to lose self-control. I think finding a loved on tortured to death meets that criteria. One example that is commonly given is if a man/woman comes home and sees their spouse in bed with a stranger. If they kill their spouse and the lover in the heat of the moment, then it is voluntary manslaughter. Considering what happened to Anakin was considerably worse, he definitely falls into the realm of suitable provocation.

Being charged with this, instead of murder, does not depend upon a past history of mental instability. You don't necessarily have to have a psychological problem or a mental disability to qualify for voluntary manslaughter instead of murder. You just have to be a normal person pushed beyond your emotional limits.

A psychopath does not need any impetus to commit crimes. They simply do not understand morality and thus would not break down crying, as Anakin does, after contemplating their actions. The clinical term you're looking for is "sociopath." Sociopaths/psychopaths cannot form human attachment and do not have empathy. Anakin certainly does have deep attachments and he likewise feels guilt over his actions (his tears on Mustafar are another example of this). So he doesn't meet the definition in the slightest.

As for Amidala, remember that she only saw the aftermath of the attack -- of Anakin in pain, ashamed, and guilty of what he had done. She has also been steadily falling in love with him (after the fireplace scene, note that she is the one to initiate all the contact). There's also an element to her character that parallels Luke's: she believes in people and hopes in the best for them. Even after what the Trade Federation did to her planet, she is still willing to negotiate with the Separatists to end the war. I don't find it difficult to believe that she would want to "heal" Anakin (as she tries to fix the Republic) considering that he, as a little boy, saved her planet and saved her own life not too long ago. And having fallen in love with him, I can see her convincing herself that standing by him as his wife, especially in a time of war, would be the best thing to help.

 

The no attachment rule is just a poor plot device and it gets completely undercut by the fact that Jedi can bang whomever they want.

 

It's just Lucas' way of "having his cake and eating it too", when it comes to the Jedi and their 'personal lives'.

 

Yeah, I know.

But it just irks me how irrelevant it is to the story, even if the Jedi knew about his relationship with Padme the advice would still be the same from Yoda. Yes, he could tell Obi-Wan...but really how much help would he be?

 

While the above statement is absolutely awesome and hilarious on it's own, the "bang whomever they want" thing is something you are personally reading into the story as presented in the films. It's not implied, and if that's what you read into it, that's your take on it, fair enough, but...really? I'll give you the poor plot device, sure, but it's better than trade blockades and auto-piloted starfighters.

 

It is not me reading into the story, this is coming straight from GL's mouth.

He has said Jedi aren't celibate.

 

That makes it EU at best. I stand by what I said.

 

No, it doesn't.

If it comes from Lucas mouth, it is G-Canon.

 

When they cause a person to go like this: .....then, yeah.

 

All I'm saying is that there's a distinct difference between the information that can be construed from the six films on their own, and "G-canon" references/addendums/commentary/etc that require the audience to seek information from ANY source other than the actual films themselves. EU, canon of any type or not, don't remember the part in the films where George Lucas, all flannel and silver-bearded, shows up to give the Jedi council a sexual ethics seminar.

Now...the EU, G-canon stuff is all well and good, I'm no EU-basher, PT-hater or anything. Just trying to make my point clear - Jedi sex is a non-issue IN THE FILMS. The importance of Anakin and Padme's relationship AS PORTRAYED IN THE FILMS is based purely on attachment. Emotional attachment - not physical. Sex is implied, but never once mentioned - that is technically how you get Skywalker babies after all (unless you're Shmi, allegedly, but that's...that's a whole other discussion). IF GL had felt like going down that slippery slope (ah, the puns...) he would have done so. I think it would have maybe gone simething like this...

There would have been an awkward Ani/Padme sex scene with quick cuts, strategically placed robot hands, bad lighting, soft focus, and maybe even a Bith smooth jazz slowjam for effect. Okay, DEFINITELY a Bith slowjam. Obi-Wan would try to call Anakin on his comlink just as the camera ALMOST gets a glimpse of some senatorial side-boob, and Ani would half-heartedly click it off (but accidentally put it on speaker mode instead), mumbling something inane and poorly scripted, like "Master Obi-Wan is like that sand I was whining about..." and get back to work, and then we'd cut to Obi-Wan listening to disturbing zoo noises for 2 more seconds before ending the transmission, the look on his face a combination of disgust, pride, and jealousy.

Holy crap, did I just write slash fiction??? I feel weird now.

 

That's fine, I totally agree with you there, but this...

is the statement I've been talking about. A plot device in the films cannot be undercut, embellished, or negated by things that don't occur in the films. That's all.