She made plans with Seth's character & she sleeping with his roommate. Then she gets mad at him for being pissed.
He was trying to start a relationship & you do something like that.
Hell yes she was wrong!!! What kind of girl accepts a date and then bangs your friend while your wating for the date day to arrive??? What a total B---h she was!!!
And to get mad at him casue he is pissed??? What a piece of garbage (not the actress - just the character!!) she was!!
The only good thing was that at least Seth's character was better off knowing what a skank she was before dating her!!
Yeah, I would say she was. The problem with a lot of people today (and I mean both men and women, not just women), is the loss of basic respect for one another. People get caught up in being "independant", but really that's just a way to be selfish while justifying it. If you say you're going to go on a date with someone, it's simply just respectful not to date/sleep with anyone else. And by not doing so it's not like you're commiting to that one person either. If it doesn't work out with them, then date someone else next week.
shareAgree. Calling herself an "independent woman" as a defense was repulsive.
I am no man. I am BEDDINI!
The truth.
shareThe truth. There are unwritten rules for those that aren't totally self-involved (which she clearly was). You don't make a date (and a date's a date, no matter how casual, rules still apply) with someone and then bang someone else, but especially not someone close to them (friend, sister/brother, room-mate, etc) before the date.
shareHell yes she was wrong. He seems to have forgiven her quickly though...there was a lot of forgiveness in the movie.
"Being human in a world full of vampires is about as safe as barebackin' a five dollar whore."
There's no doubt it's wrong. To me, it couldn't be more clear, but I thought the movie dealt with it in a very murky way. What do you folks think?
The Seth Rogen character is very apologetic about his initial reaction and states that he had no place getting mad when they weren't even going out yet (alas, the decline of men). But obviously, he was showing interest in her and it showed extremely poor judgement/taste on her part. How shallow! He's a sucker for taking her out anyway.
The analogy she gives about a sexy woman showing up naked out of nowhere is completely flawed too. The better analogy is: if a guy plans a first date with a woman, is it wrong for that guy to sleep with the woman's roommate after these plans have been set?
[deleted]
Yes. She isn't too sharp.
Yes. It was a dumb subplot. They could have just wrote in the initial relationship, not this little melodrama. It made her look like a slutty fool and him like an even bigger fool for still wanting to date a groupie.
-
You did just fine, Clarence. Now go git yo'self some hot cornbread!
How was she wrong? The movie showed them interact a grand total of two times prior to her sleeping with the roomate. The roomate in fact was the first one to meet her and invite her over. They had spoken maybe a handful of words to each other. Did she lead him on? No not at all she never really showed any interest in him he just asked her out. If she didn't like him should she have said no? Well not exactly, she might just like the band, I've gone out to concerts with girls as just friends, it's like going to a movie with a girl you're just friends with. In this day and age she did nothing wrong and she was right on the money when she said "you don't even know me, this is the longest conversation we've had together".
shareI'm inclined to agree with hnatt on this one. Just because he asked her out doesn't mean she is his possession or something.
However, she had to have known that Ira was interested in her romantically, she'd have to be blind not to notice it. And it was mean of her to sleep with the roommate when there's a chance that Ira will see her come out of his room. I'm not saying she was wrong to sleep with someone else, but she really shouldn't have broadcasted it the way she did.
Meow.
[deleted]
I agree. Ira was a complete loser in the movie and he deserved to be bullied by everyone because of his pathetic-ness. Ira was completely fake and that is why he was still a virgin. No woman would ever want to go out with him and the only way he would ever get laid is if he was in prison because prisonmates feed on the weak and Ira is weaker than a 5 year old kid. If I knew a guy like Ira, I certainly would beat the living hell out of him until he grows a pair.
sharethe difference is, it's his roommate. Its a violation on both the roommate and the girl's part. Thats just my personal opinion on it. If I schedule a date with a chick, I dont think Id go out the next night and bang another girl she knows.
share[deleted]
Thats just my personality. If I schedule a date with somebody, Im interested. Why would I go and sleep with her friend before we have our date. Im not that desperate for sex. That basically tells the other person, I like you and all, but I got urges I have to fulfill and cant control myself. So better not leave your friends around me
share[deleted]
I think it would have been better if they didn't have a scene together at the end. I think it's good that he realized that he overreacted a bit in the heat of the moment, but that doesn't mean he should have asked her out again. Honestly, it is gross to date a girl who's had sex with one of your lifelong best friend's.
-
You did just fine, Clarence. Now go git yo'self some hot cornbread!
[deleted]
Just because he asked her out doesn't mean she is his possession or something.
Was she wrong? Yes. If someone asks you out it certainly doesn't mean you're committed to them but I think it's reasonable to feel that sleeping with their roommate would be pretty lame.
shareWell, causal sex is really for those who are more animalistic and irresponsible/irrational/immature/amoral than those of us who are more developed and moral human beings, so there's that to begin with. (Don't get me wrong, sex is great--and I'm not a religious moron prude; I'm an atheist--but I firmly believe sex should take place within a meaningful relationship of some duration...I've refused offers for casual sex before from desirable partners; yes I am a young male lol).
And second, yes, of course. Even if you are immature/of lesser character (and amoral) enough to have no problem with casual sex, you still don't engage in it on the verge of a relationship with another. In terms of promises/trust, an impending relationship that you consented to (by accepting a date) imparts a burden on you to not betray your potential partner. You have implied a romantic interest in that person (and if you are just using him/her for entertainment purposes and have no interest in him/her as a person or potential partner, well, then you're below moral worth and dignity) and that should not be betrayed. If it doesn't work out, if you go on just one date with him/her and end it, it is one thing to engage in casual sex the next day after said ending of nascent relationship, but before a first date, and during the duration of the beginning of the relationship (even if it is to go nowhere) one should not betray the trust of a potential serious partner. I know that even if I was merely interested in a girl who I hadn't asked out yet I wouldn't have casual sex with another (if I believed in casual sex); that means that I'm not actually romantically interested in the other person.
Out before all the rationalizations and anecdotes from lesser mortals about how casual sex is a good thing that the best of us engage in and how promises/trust don't apply until one is well into a serious relationship or an agreement to be faithful to one another (go steady) is explicitly stated and agreed upon between the two partners. All less than reasonable tactics to justify less than moral and mature actions by those of us who are, well, less than moral/mature. (And no, I'm not a lawyer, but have studied philosophical ethics/value theory in some depth).