MovieChat Forums > Switched at Birth (2011) Discussion > The whole Bay date rape storyline was di...

The whole Bay date rape storyline was disgusting


So the only way Bay could have sex with Tank is if he raped her?

There's abuse on both ends when people go overboard with the word rape. It's very powerful to be thrown around when a girl has a fight with her boyfriend and then gets drunk and has sex.

I thought it was a horrible way to look at the issue.

I have been with a girl and she kissed me and I said no because I have a girlfriend and she still kissed me and we had sex. Was I raped because I said no?

The point is, it's a very serious issue and I think it could have been handled in a better and more serious way.


reply

I think it was more complex than that. I do think it could've been handled differently too, but if anything, the storyline was a good reminder of the dangers of getting ridiculously drunk. Especially when you're already in a terrible mood.

reply

That's my point. It was about the dangers of sex not a rape or assault. An accusation of rape is very powerful and it shouldn't just be thrown around like that.

Tank didn't rape or assault Bay. They were two drunks who had sex and Bay woke up and regretted it. I was in College and that happens a lot.

I remember my Frat brother slept with his girlfriends sister when they both got drunk at a party. They both regretted it the next day.

It's drunken sex and too expand that to rape and assault is too broad of a message for such a powerful accusation.

reply

I too was greatly troubled by this entire storyline. Bothe Bay & Tank were drunk. Bay awakens the next morning to discover they had sex, AND that she does not remember any of the events. While these are unfortunate circumstances, this is not , and was NOT rape. Bay had many emotions stemming from this - regret, sadness, anger - all to be understood and expected. Tank ... had basically none of these. He evidently remembers the whole event, and was initially happy to have finally had sex with Bay. But now look what resulted when the Pc Brain Police get involved: Tank lost his scholarship, got kicked off the football team, and out of school, his father/family isn't talking to him, and he is now working as a wait person at some local KC restaurant. And why? All because he didn't get it in writing that Bay Kennish consented to having sex with him? Please, let's get real here. Bay in this instance is at much at fault as Tank. No one forced drink down her throat, or roofied her, or anything like that. She acted poorly, as well as Tank. But is the lesson to be taken from here that if your girl-friend gets drunk/wasted, no person should ever consider having sex with her? Have we descended that far as a society and culture that we must fear making any mistakes??

reply

Have we descended that far as a society and culture that we must fear making any mistakes??


Unfortunately, in certain places in the US, we have.

"Switched at Birth" does quite a bit of their filming at Occidental College in California, and while they were filming Season 3, a similar Title IX case was the "talk of the town" at the college. The writers basically lifted the story from real life and put it into their scripts.

A quick Google search reveals dozens of universities where this is happening, all in the last few years, since a letter from the White House dated April 4, 2011. If schools do not comply to the new guidelines, then they lose their federal funding. Hence, young men are being thrown to the wolves.

I'm grateful to "Switched at Birth" for calling attention to it, so I can make my voice heard by legislators.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2015/jul/13/ticker-judge-says-regret-root-rape-case/#

http://www.businessinsider.com/occidental-sexual-assault-2014-9

https://www.thefire.org/cases/occidental-college-student-found-guilty-of-sexual-assault-after-incapacitation-standard-is-misapplied/

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a33751/occidental-justice-case/

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/07/23/suit-against-u-california-san-diego-could-provide-framework-other-students-accused

reply

Very good post!

It wasn't rape!

People need to stop throwing that word around. The accusation of rape is very powerful and what happened with Bay wasn't rape.

reply

It was rape.

Last year the exact same thing happened to a girl at a freshman camp and the guy was sentenced to 7 years of prison. It was quite a big deal here.
I live in Europe so I don't know about laws in the US, and obviously the whole thing's really shady, but I'm pretty sure Tank would have had sex with Bay even if she said no. He was an impulsive guy who was very into Bay, he hated Emmett and alcohol didn't help. Even when they were dating he was very pushy and then he was sober.

By the way, this issue was also discussed in Veronica Mars and they handled it as rape, too. While the girls in VM were drugged, alcohol and drugs kind of fall into the same category as they both affect one's ability to consent.

reply

Are you kidding me?

You can't prosecute someone because you think he would have had sex with her even if Bay said no. Do you think this is Nazi Germany and you can prosecute someone for what they might have done?

Secondly, Tank was into Bay and Bay was dating Tank. Bay's family loved Tank and Tank lost his Frat and his relationship with his Father for Bay and even after that they stayed friends and he listened when she complained about Emmett.

When John confronted Tank because he thought Tank and Bay had sex and that's why she took the morning after pill, Tank knew it wasn't him but he still took the blame.

I was in Vegas and I think I had sex with a girl I met but I barely remember it. We woke up in bed the next day naked and I remember bits and pieces. I was smashed. Did she rape me because I don't remember saying yes?

To me, that's just BS. Rape is a VERY SERIOUS ISSUE. My Sister was raped and I hate to see something like rape belittled by a TV show. Sometimes people get drunk and do stupid things like have sex with someone they will regret having sex with in the morning. If this is rape half the men and women in America should be in jail.

reply

I dont believe tank would have had sex with her if she had said no. I just dont see him doing that to her. Hell even John believed him. And we know John was going after him. If John didnt believe him even for a second, Tank would have been in much worse trouble. I felt so bad for him. It was Regina who planted it in her head. Because Bay just initially thought it was a drunken mistake too.

reply

It was just drunken sex. Bay wasn´t drugged or passed out, she was willing participant. Just forgetting at morning don´t mean she couldn´t concent at time.

reply

The show really could have left it at "just drunken sex" but i guess they wanted to raise awareness for sexual assault so that's why they kinda forced the "rape" side story more. Which pissed me off because it was super out of character for Tank to even do that to Bay--idk the writers pissed me off with this story line. And it hurts my head still lol

reply

I think it just illustrates the fact that merely an accusation can ruin a man's life. Even when she (Bay) says that she cannot remember anything and wasn't certain WHAT happened, everyone around her started crying rape. Soon enough, she started to believe it too. It wasn't until things spun out of control that she had accepted the fact that she had contributed to it. It LOOKS as if it weren't handled well, but I think this sort of thing happens every single day in real life.

reply

[deleted]

i completely agree
i just finished watching the episode where it's first brought up
they were both drunk, it is ridiculous that he has to take sole accountability for something they both decided to do
the only reason "rape" became probable to bay was because it alleviated her guilt about having cheated on emmett
people make stupid decisions when they're drunk, but it doesn't void them

and of course it had to be the queen of making stupid decisions, regina, that planted the idea of rape inside of bay's head
disgusting

reply

and of course it had to be the queen of making stupid decisions, regina, that planted the idea of rape inside of bay's head
disgusting


And what bothers me even more is that Bay's guilt is getting the best of her, and in a recent episode, she told Regina she wanted to help Tank, and Regina told her that sometimes things are broken and cannot be fixed.

That's true, but NOT in this case. Bay can fix this. She should fix this.

I do not support any law that takes away a woman's legal right to consent to sex while under the influence. For Regina to say, "If she was that drunk, she couldn't consent," is outrageous. Of course, she could consent. Just like Tank could consent.

reply

[deleted]

Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about the laws that drunk people are not competent to enter contracts and can therefore void them?


If someone drugs a person, without his or her knowledge, then, yes, it is only fair that the person who drugged a person is arrested, and the contract should be deemed null and void. But if a person knowingly and willingly drinks or takes drugs to the point of inebriation, then he or she should be responsible for whatever agreements are made, in my opinion.

I am aware that laws exist to protect people who knowingly and willingly imbibe. They are well-meaning, but ill-advised.

When it comes to a comparison, the only difference that I can discern is that no one ever says, "I'm going to get high (or drunk) so I can enjoy signing these business contracts more fully." Whereas people DO say, "I'm going to get high (or drunk) so I can enjoy sex more fully."

In general, people do not want to be uninhibited while signing contracts, but many people DO want to be uninhibited while having sex.

For that reason, I can accept the laws that protect people from themselves in business matters, but I believe they are unnecessary. People should be held accountable for their choices.

I cannot accept the laws that protect people from themselves in sexual matters, especially when the manner in which they are enforced so blatantly discriminates against males. I will lobby to fight those laws.

A person should take responsibility for his or her decisions when willingly choosing to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

Out of curiosity, do you feel society should not hold people responsible for the possible negative outcomes of choosing to drink and drive?

reply

[deleted]

A person should take responsibility for his or her decisions when willingly choosing to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

Out of curiosity, do you feel society should not hold people responsible for the possible negative outcomes of choosing to drink and drive?


Okay, but then why wasn't Bay also punished?

reply

Nobody should have been punished in this situation. It was all so messed up, they were both drunk and neither was really thinking but acting in a moment. Bay just regretted it afterwards.

It was same as Emmett/Simone earlier. And no-one says anything about that, because they didn´t lost memories and Simone was the one using Emmett.

reply

I'm not saying I think they both should have been punished. The point is that if one party is going to be punished for making the mistake of having sex while drunk, then both should suffer the same punishment since they were both intoxicated.

reply

Posted by super-staff

Okay, but then why wasn't Bay also punished?


That's the million dollar question. Why is society only punishing males?

In Bay's case, she wasn't a student at the college until the next semester, so there wasn't much the college could have done to her. I suppose the campus police could have arrested her, if they had seen her drinking at the party, but no one did.

I still cannot believe Bay chose to drink alcohol, when she is nowhere near 21 years old. Plus, Bay was on probation at the time and even the smallest of infractions (like underage drinking) could have easily revoked her parole.

Did Bay want to spend the next three years in prison?

We know that Tank is not a vindictive character, but what if he had been? What if Tank was still pissed that Bay had cheated on him with Emmett?

What if, when Tank woke up the next morning, he went straight to the police? What if he accused Bay of raping him at the party, because he was too drunk to consent to sex?

Whether Bay could remember their sex or not, would she have been considered guilty of rape and labeled a sex offender for the rest of her life?

It's highly unlikely, yet, I can imagine a scenario where a random man has been cheated on by a random woman, and then, months later, she returns to his college to get him drunk and take advantage of him sexually. That's not what happened to Tank, of course, but if it did happen to a male student, would anyone take action? Would anyone even care?

Tank was crushed when Bay cheated on him. I could see him being devastated that they had sex, especially while she is in a relationship with Emmett and has no intention of breaking up with Emmett.

I could definitely see Tank feeling used by Bay and telling the police that he never would have slept with her, if she had not taken advantage of him while he was drunk.

Would society ever consider that rape? Should society ever consider that rape?

My vote is for society to hold both men and women responsible for what they do, as long as they are conscious and willingly chose to consume the alcohol.

Posted by coldnight_99
Nobody should have been punished in this situation. It was all so messed up, they were both drunk and neither was really thinking but acting in a moment. Bay just regretted it afterwards.

It was same as Emmett/Simone earlier. And no-one says anything about that, because they didn´t lost memories and Simone was the one using Emmett.


I agree 100%.

posted by super-staff
I'm not saying I think they both should have been punished. The point is that if one party is going to be punished for making the mistake of having sex while drunk, then both should suffer the same punishment since they were both intoxicated.


I agree 100%.

reply

Why are you so certain Tank didn't rape her? As the viewers, the very last thing we saw between them regarding the topic of consent was Bay refusing Tank's attempt to make a move on her. Shortly after that, we see them in bed naked the next morning. Given that the last thing we saw on the subject of "yes" or "no" was a pretty obvious no, why is it that so many people assume Tank is innocent? Why assume Bay changed her mind when we've never seen evidence of her being sexually attracted to Tank, even when they were dating? Remember, when Bay rejected him while sober, he became explosively angry. That's evidence that he's sexually entitled. He really didn't think it was ok for Bay to say no to sex. The morning after the incident, the first thing Tank said to Bay was that he knew she thought it was a mistake while boasting that he wanted it to happen. Beyond that, it all comes down to the stars. The producers of the show wanted us to know Bay was far, far more incapacitated than Tank. We saw both Bay and Tank gaze at the stars on the ceiling. When Bay saw them, they were blurry as hell. When Tank looked at them, they were crystal clear. Blurry vision is one of the first symptoms of intoxication and Tanks vision was clear. He may have been buzzed, but he most definitely wasn't drunk.

My take on this is that the last thing we saw was Bay pulling away from Tank's advances, we know Tank wasn't that drunk, but clearly wanted Bay to think he was, and the morning after, he admitted that he knew Bay did not want it while bragging that he did. Given his history of sexual entitlement and intense jealousy over Bay sleeping with Emmett, but not him, I see far more evidence that Tank crossed the line.

However, the biggest mistake here is the way the whole thing played out. It's great to get people talking, but they needed to make things a little more clear one way or the other. This stopped being a discussion a long time ago. People were/are spewing venom at those who disagree. Unfortunately, that shuts down the possibility of those with different opinions from sharing their thoughts and that is never a good thing.

There is one other thing that bothered me. It's Bay's age. While she wasn't a minor, she was barely 18. The whole thing wouldn't have bothered me as much if she were 28. I still wouldn't have liked it, but if the victim were legally old enough to drink, she would have at least had more experience and would have known how to handle herself better. Tank knew she was naive, inexperienced with alcohol, and in a bad mental place. At best, he took crazy advantage of that. At worst, he raped her. Since nobody saw what happened, the truth is, none of us knows for sure. I just don't understand why so many have jumped to the "Poor Tank" conclusion when the last thing we saw on the topic of consent was "no." Surely there must be some possibility that Tank crossed the line. Yet most of you wont even entertain the possibility.

reply

Because it was said in interview Bay was participating in it and not passed out. Plus she was into Tank whole evening.

reply

Why are you so certain Tank didn't rape her? As the viewers, the very last thing we saw between them regarding the topic of consent was Bay refusing Tank's attempt to make a move on her. Shortly after that, we see them in bed naked the next morning. Given that the last thing we saw on the subject of "yes" or "no" was a pretty obvious no, why is it that so many people assume Tank is innocent?


We saw two versions of that scene. In Tank's version, Bay kisses him. In Bay's version, which comes after she tells Tank she does not remember what happened, Tank says, "I never got over you. You know that?"

Bay responds, "Tank...." and she chuckles.

Then, Tank says, "You're so beautiful."

And Bay says, "Thanks," at which point Tank kisses her. Bay continues, "I'm really drunk."

Tank says, "Me, too," and they continue their kissing in bed.

That's what we saw for Bay's version of events.

To me, there is no obvious "no" from Bay.

I never liked the character of Tank. Some people do, but he has never appealed to me. But I do not think he raped Bay.

One year before Tank and Bay have sex, on the first day Tank ever met Bay, the two of them have this discussion, at his fraternity party:

TANK: "What are you doing?"

BAY: "He has beer in his room."

TANK: "Yeah, we all have beer in our rooms. Do you even know his name?"

BAY: "It's Ledge. It's bluff. It's the thing when you, like, fall."

TANK: "Cliff."

BAY: "Whatever. It's not like he knows my name."

TANK: "If you're drunk enough to think that's a positive, you probably shouldn't be heading back to his room."

BAY: "Okay, well, maybe I want to hook up with Ledge Cliff. And have it not mean anything."

TANK: "Trust me, you're gonna have a million more chances to do that in the next four years, - but right now...." (Bay starts gagging.)


Back then, Bay was brokenhearted over Ty, and she wanted to comfort herself by having sex with Cliff. One year later, Bay is brokenhearted over Emmett, and she wants to comfort herself by having sex with Tank. It's not a big leap to make.

Bay knows that Tank has feelings for her and has never gotten over her, after she cheated on him. In Tank's mind, they are friends. Bay comforting herself by having sex with a friend is a whole lot better than comforting herself by having sex with a stranger. Bay flirts with Tank the entire evening. She looks at him and bats her big brown eyes, giving him her biggest smile. She sits on his lap and allows him to put his hands all over her inner thighs. The other couple participating in the chair races do not do that. That guy keeps his hands on the armrests, and the girl is probably his girlfriend. Bay invites Tank to lie in the bed with her and look at ceiling stars. Bay was literally basking in Tank's comfort of her that evening, as surely as if it was the sun. Bay was drunk enough that it is not a big leap to imagine all of her previous inhibitions about having sex with Tank were gone.

Tank tells Bay, "You did not push me away. You were into it."

Bay asks, "How do you know?"

And Tank says, "Because I didn't black out."

I believe him. Tank wanted to have sex on a previous occasion when he and Bay were dating, and she told him, "No," so he stopped. I have no reason to believe that he would not have stopped this time, too.'

Tank even says to Bay, "Bay If you had said, 'no' at any point, I would have stopped....You woke up today all freaked out because you cheated on your boyfriend, but do not turn around and try to make what happened something that it wasn't. We had sex, Bay. It was not assault."

Some people might say that Tank knows Bay would never cheat on her boyfriend, but how could Tank know that? Bay cheated on Tank, when he was her boyfriend. Everything in Tank's experience from the first moment he met Bay reinforces the idea that having sex with him is exactly how Bay would choose to mend her broken heart over her breakup with Emmett.

Why assume Bay changed her mind when we've never seen evidence of her being sexually attracted to Tank, even when they were dating?


I saw plenty of evidence Bay was sexually attracted to Tank. She flirts with him from the moment she meets him. After Tank rescues Bay, when she cuts her hand open, she is completely enamored of him. She kisses him passionately in her bedroom during her parents' murder mystery party and tells him, "I know. I told you I wasn't interested and now I'm attacking you."

Tank says, "No no, I love the attacking thing."

And Bay says, "Good, because I'm interested. Wanna go back to kissing?"

Tank says, "Yeah. Wow."

Bay says, "We get better with practice," as she continues to play tonsil hockey with Tank, in her bedroom.

Remember, when Bay rejected him while sober, he became explosively angry. That's evidence that he's sexually entitled. He really didn't think it was ok for Bay to say no to sex.


I didn't see explosive anger. I saw some frustration. I didn't like how entitled Tank felt. It's one of the many reasons I have always hated his character, but I don't see how that makes him a rapist.

I do think Tank thought it was okay for Bay to say "no" to sex. I just think that he's immature and self-centered, too.

To me, the fact that Tank stopped is additional evidence that he is not a rapist. Rape is an act of power and control. It has little to do with sex. I do not see Tank as trying to exert his power and control over Bay.

The morning after the incident, the first thing Tank said to Bay was that he knew she thought it was a mistake while boasting that he wanted it to happen.


Yes, he did. Sober, Tank realized that Bay may have regretted what they had done together. That doesn't mean that Tank did not believe Bay wanted to have sex while they were doing it.

Beyond that, it all comes down to the stars. The producers of the show wanted us to know Bay was far, far more incapacitated than Tank. We saw both Bay and Tank gaze at the stars on the ceiling. When Bay saw them, they were blurry as hell. When Tank looked at them, they were crystal clear. Blurry vision is one of the first symptoms of intoxication and Tanks vision was clear. He may have been buzzed, but he most definitely wasn't drunk.


I watched that scene many times, and I felt the producers and writers were saying that both of them were drunk off of their gourds. Bay may have been the least bit more drunk than Tank, but to me, the difference was negligible. Tank's vision was not clear. It was just slightly better than Bay's vision.

My take on this is that the last thing we saw was Bay pulling away from Tank's advances, we know Tank wasn't that drunk, but clearly wanted Bay to think he was, and the morning after, he admitted that he knew Bay did not want it while bragging that he did. Given his history of sexual entitlement and intense jealousy over Bay sleeping with Emmett, but not him, I see far more evidence that Tank crossed the line.


Tank did not admit that he knew Bay didn't want it. He said that he knew she may feel it was a mistake, but that is not the same as saying she didn't want it in the moment. Tank was adamant that Bay DID want it in the moment. He never wavered on that point.

I see it completely different from how you describe it in the above paragraph.

However, the biggest mistake here is the way the whole thing played out. It's great to get people talking, but they needed to make things a little more clear one way or the other. This stopped being a discussion a long time ago. People were/are spewing venom at those who disagree. Unfortunately, that shuts down the possibility of those with different opinions from sharing their thoughts and that is never a good thing.


I don't feel that way.

There is one other thing that bothered me. It's Bay's age. While she wasn't a minor, she was barely 18. The whole thing wouldn't have bothered me as much if she were 28. I still wouldn't have liked it, but if the victim were legally old enough to drink, she would have at least had more experience and would have known how to handle herself better. Tank knew she was naive, inexperienced with alcohol, and in a bad mental place. At best, he took crazy advantage of that. At worst, he raped her. Since nobody saw what happened, the truth is, none of us knows for sure. I just don't understand why so many have jumped to the "Poor Tank" conclusion when the last thing we saw on the topic of consent was "no." Surely there must be some possibility that Tank crossed the line. Yet most of you wont even entertain the possibility.


Bay is an October baby. She was 19 when this happened, and Tank is probably 21. I don't see Bay's age as playing into this at all. Young people have sex.

I could look at this situation as Bay took crazy advantage of Tank. She knows he has carried a torch for her since the moment Daphne told her, well BEFORE she injured her hand. She enjoyed everything Tank had to offer: his friendly advice and comfort over her sadness about both Ty and Emmett; his cheering her on at field hockey games; his praise of her art and support with Professor Ledarsky; his help with her desire to bomb Buckner; his help with her desire to find out about Mandy. Bay took and took and took from Tank. I didn't see her giving a whole lot. Now, NONE Of that means that Bay owes Tank sex. It doesn't.

But here's the thing:

If Bay was going to take so much from Tank and STILL decide she wanted a relationship with Emmett, and if she crushed Tank's soul by cheating on him, after their discussions about how much cheating had hurt her, and after Tank's promises that he would never cheat on Bay, did Bay really have to insist on a friendship with Tank, after she broke his heart?

Imagine this:

What if Emmett had chosen Simone over Bay, when he cheated? Would you have felt it was fair of Emmett to insist that Bay stay friends with him, after he ripped her heart out at prom?

It's one thing for Emmett to beg for Bay's friendship when he DIDN'T choose Simone. But if Emmett had chosen Simone OVER Bay, and if he had still demanded Bay be his friend, people would have thought Emmett was the biggest jackass on the face of the earth.

So why does Bay get to beg Tank for friendship, after she trampled all over him? Why does she get to accompany him to dinner with his dad and pretend that she is STILL Tank's girlfriend, while she is dating Emmett?

How is that fair to either man?

Why does Bay get to tell Tank all about her potential to develop aneurysms, but she never tells Emmett about them, when Emmett is her boyfriend?

Doesn't Bay realize what MIXED SIGNALS she is sending Tank? Here she is telling Tank everything that is wrong in her relationship with Emmett (that's a big breach of trust) AND she is telling Tank about her deepest, most intimate fears over her physical health, when she is leaving her boyfriend in the dark, and she thinks Tank is supposed to understand what all of that means?

I understand why Tank might have thought Bay was sexually attracted to him that night at the dorm party. With as hard as Tank has always crushed on Bay, everything Bay said and did for the last year sent Tank mixed signals.

It was so unfair of Bay to do that to him.

It's not that much of a stretch for me to imagine that a heartbroken Bay would enjoy kissing Tank at that dorm party and want to do much, much more with him.

Plus, the person who responded an hour before me is right. Lizzy Weiss the showrunner and writer of the episodes has said in multiple interviews that BOTH Bay and Tank were completely smashed from the alcohol. She has said that Tank is 100% honest with everything he says in every episode. She has said that Tank never once lies about anything.

And that makes sense to me. If Tank wanted to lie, he could get himself out of the whole situation. All he would have needed to say was this:

"Bay, I know I said we had sex that night. But the truth is I was so drunk that I couldn't get an erection when you wanted it. I didn't want to admit that truth because I was embarrassed. We never had sex that night."

Bay has no memory. The condom was long gone. There were no witnesses. If Tank wanted to lie, then that's all he needed to say to Bay, and all of his troubles would have been gone.

So in my mind, Tank has to be telling the truth. Otherwise, he would get himself out of this mess.

reply

thanks for this post.

for this episode was so important.

i did have a similar situation many years ago and it was so healing to see the support Bay received.

So many people think that rape has to be violent and viscious. but it can sneek up on you.

in this case the icky factor for me was that Bay had NO recollection of what happened. There is a fine line between giving consent and regretting it afterwards or waking up and knowing something happened that you don't even remember nor wanted to happen.


in one scene Tank was asked if on some level he knew he did something wrong and he hesitated for a few seconds too long. that was proof enough for me that he'd known that he'd crossed a line.
this issue was dealt with in Veronica Mars (as mentioned before) and also in Felicity. I did like this episode the best though. It did show different opinions and points of views very nicely imo.

reply

I did like this episode the best though. It did show different opinions and points of views very nicely imo.


I agree with that. The writers of Switched at Birth did a GREAT job of showcasing different opinions and points of view.

i did have a similar situation many years ago and it was so healing to see the support Bay received.

So many people think that rape has to be violent and viscious. but it can sneek up on you.


While I don't think what happened to Bay should be categorized by society as a rape, I do believe, like you, that it was healing to see the support Bay received for what was certainly a traumatic event in her life.

It must be scary for Bay to look back and realize that she drank so much she did things that she regrets. It must be scary for Bay to wonder if Tank purposefully took advantage of her, while she was that drunk.

in this case the icky factor for me was that Bay had NO recollection of what happened. There is a fine line between giving consent and regretting it afterwards or waking up and knowing something happened that you don't even remember nor wanted to happen.


For me, Bay's lack of memory has no bearing on the ick-factor. Bay blacked out. There's a huge difference between blacking out and passing out, no fine line involved.

Having sex with someone who is passed out is rape, as it should be.

Having sex with someone who is actively participating in the sexual intercourse, but who will happen to black out the memory of it the next day, is impossible to predict. For some people, it happens after one drink. For other people, it only happens after multiple drinks. For still other people, it never happens at all.

How can society outlaw something that is impossible to predict, unless society prohibits any and all sex under the influence of alcohol? It can't. We can't.

Society cannot outlaw sex under the influence of alcohol. The idea of it is insane.

Instead, people need to learn how to protect themselves better. We need to educate, not outlaw.

in one scene Tank was asked if on some level he knew he did something wrong and he hesitated for a few seconds too long. that was proof enough for me that he'd known that he'd crossed a line.


That moment wasn't proof to me. Tank was adamant for several days that he had done nothing wrong, and Bay kept questioning him and needling him about it.

For me, it would have raised more red flags if Tank had NOT doubted himself at that moment, because I would have seen it as Tank not taking the time to process and respond to Bay's sincere question.

The fact that Bay's incessant doubt in Tank eventually caused him to question himself seemed very sincere to me. Who wouldn't begin to doubt himself if constantly questioned about the veracity of his statement? Even the strongest of us would eventually begin to question what we know to be true.

Bottom line, if Tank had known he did something wrong, all he had to do was tell Bay that it never happened. She had no way of knowing the truth.

The fact that Tank was upfront about what they did together tells me that he did not believe he had done anything wrong.

reply

If someone is to drunk to say no, they are also to drunk to say yes.
While I didn't like what they did to the character Tank, because I like that character, it is not hard to know if someone is to drunk to consent to sex, if she is to drunk to actively participate(or just lie there) in kissing, fondling and so on, it is hands(penis) off.
So yes, Tank did rape Bay, while I didn't like it.
It's the same thing if he had roofied Bay, no consent, because of impaired faculties.

And with your little story, while you said no first, because you had a girlfriend, the difference between you being raped or being a cheater is simple, did you engage in the act, or even consent?

reply

If someone is to drunk to say no, they are also to drunk to say yes.
While I didn't like what they did to the character Tank, because I like that character, it is not hard to know if someone is to drunk to consent to sex, if she is to drunk to actively participate(or just lie there) in kissing, fondling and so on, it is hands(penis) off.
So yes, Tank did rape Bay, while I didn't like it.
It's the same thing if he had roofied Bay, no consent, because of impaired faculties.


No, Tank did not rape Bay, and no, it was not the same thing as if he had roofied her.

If people believe Bay was too drunk to consent to sex, based on what we saw on our TV screens, if THAT is where people draw the line, then yes, it IS hard for a man to know if someone is too drunk to consent to sex.

Because Bay was NOT just lying there in the bed with Tank. Bay was an active participant in the kissing and the fondling.

Now, if people draw the line where you suggest, then yes, you are correct, it IS easy to know if someone is too drunk. If someone is lying in bed, like an inanimate object, and not participating in the sex, then of course, it is easy to know they are too drunk.

But back to Bay, she wasn't doing that. Bay was an active participant in the sex with Tank.

According to the Switched at Birth writers, their story arc was inspired by a real-life situation that occurred in September 2013 at Occidental College where Switched at Birth films. In that real-life scenario, the young woman is also an active participant. Two housemates enter the dorm room during the couple's sexual intercourse and witness her on top. They ask if she is okay, and she says "yes" three times. Text messages show her leaving to go retrieve a condom and to bring it back to the guy's dorm room. She even texts her friends to tell them she is going to have sex. Now, the next morning, she cannot remember anything that happened, just like Bay. But she was an active participant, while it was happening.

Tank clearly states that Bay was into it. The writers have said in multiple interviews that Tank is telling the truth. Plus, if Tank wanted to lie, he could have told Bay that they did not have sex. She cannot remember. He would have been off the hook, if he wanted to lie.

So obviously Tank is telling the truth. Bay was into it at the time. From the pictures and the comments made by fellow college students, it is evident. Those two Deaf students said that everyone knew Bay wanted to hook up with Tank that night. We saw Bay flirt with Tank all evening. Bay is the one who invited Tank to lie in the bed next to her. Tank clearly said he would not have proceeded if Bay had not been into it. He told that to Bay, Toby, John.

Bay even tells Daphne that she may have said "yes" when she first explains what happened. Bay was not too drunk to say "no" (both the character Bay and the showrunner Lizzy Weiss have indicated that).

Bay may have actually verbalized that "yes" to Tank, and whether she verbalized it or not, her actions gave Tank a resounding yes.

reply

Well the show does show both their recollections in two separate flashbacks, one where Bay says no and one where she is more active, so you have to draw your own conclusions.
If your conclusion is she was actively engaging, she wasn't raped and Tank should not have been punished.
If you like me would not see a show where one of the main would do something like that to a person like Tank, you would believe in Bays version.

If a person engages in sex and can't remember it afterwards it can't be rape, because than you take away the responsibility every drunk person has for what they do, like drunk driving and so on.

If the real-life situation that inspired the story-ark, was like you write it can't be seen as rape.

____________________________________
- Everyone keeps saying i'm paranoid, it must be a conspiracy.

reply

I try to ignore that story line was even a thing on the show. Push it out of my mind lol. Just something to cause more drama. Just kind of unnecessary IMO. I could learn more about this serious topic from just watching an episode of Law & Order SVU :O

reply

I was frustrated with this plot line as well and I hate that it's been swept under the rug now as if Tank's future wasn't severely damaged by this.

She's not responsible for her actions because she was drunk, yet he is responsible for his actions despite also being drunk. This makes no sense to me.

Please don't feed the trolls.

reply

She's not responsible for her actions because she was drunk, yet he is responsible for his actions despite also being drunk. This makes no sense to me.


Welcome to the real world. I hate to sound so negative and pessimistic, but unfortunately this is what happens from time to time. Is it fair or right? Absolutely not. Is it the real world? Sadly, yes.

reply

They could have at least made Bay sleep with some random guy, and not the very sweet and likeable Tank. I feel so bad for him. His future is done :(

reply

The whole storyline was ridiculous and probably the reason the show barely got 1/2 of a season 5. It jumped shark.

reply

I agree!

Tank was a very likable character. The writers must have something against guys in Frats. They ruined a good character for no reason.

Like I said, rape is a very serious issue and so is the accusation of rape.

reply

[deleted]

You sound like a nut.

That isn't rape. Bay wasn't a victim. She chose to drink and Tank didn't force himself on her. I could see if he slipped something in her drink but he didn't.

If we arrested everybody that hooked up when they were drunk on College Campuses and regretted it the next day, the Campuses would be empty.

I went to College and I have hooked up with Girls when I was drunk that I wouldn't hook up with when I was sober. Did the girls rape me? Is this just another silly double standard from so called feminist?

Rape is a serious issue and you're scaring someone for life with the label of sex offender for a drunk College hook up. That's insane.

reply

Who are you to call someone a nut simply b/c they don't agree with you?

Their are clearly different levels of drunk. If a girl or guy for that matter is so drunk they don't remember anything, or they are unable to form sentences well, or passed out for that matter, then if a person had sex with them without them yes it is rape. Now as you said if someone is tipsy but for the most part in control of their actions then you're right its not rape.

With Bay its still a tricky situation b/c in her mind she felt that she was so drunk that she wasn't able to say no. I know what that feels like, you are so drunk that you know people are talking to you and you hear them but you cant respond to them, this is maybe how she felt.

No one said that bay didn't chose to drink but just b/c you chose to drink and get drunk it doesn't mean that person deserved to be rape. That's like saying a woman deserved to be raped b/c of the clothes she wore!!

reply

This makes ZERO sense!!!

You're calling someone a rapist because Bay got so drunk she couldn't remember it. She still participated in the act. She wasn't unconscious.

If you're drunk and making out with a girl, many times questions aren't even asked.

You can't turn drunken sex into rape. That's simply disguisting. This is because it all depends on how Bay feels after it has happened. You can't turn someone into a sex offender because Bay feels bad the next day.

She wasn't lying there unconscious and passed out. She had sex.


reply

Actually it does make sense. You dont have to be passed out for it to be rape. If someone is unable to consent to sex or not consent then technically its rape.

You are trying to hard to say that anyone that gets drunk can never say its rape b/c well they were drunk and they chose get to get drunk so well its their fault. What you dont seem to grasp is no matter if a person is drunk or if they are drugged, if someone is unable to say YES or NO, then it's technically rape.

Rape: unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim

With that being said, i will say I dont know how I feel about Bay and Tank. Do I think Tank is a bad guy, no. Do I think Tank would have stopped had he known that Bay felt she wasn't consenting, yes. Do I think Tank would purposely ever rape a girl, no. Do I think he should be branded for life, no. But the fact is they were drunk and Bay did not consent. Someone doesnt have to be passed out or unconscious for it to be rape. Being intoxicated reduces a person’s ability to understand and to consciously agree. Think about how many people drink and drive, I doubt most people would do that, but when you drink your not thinking correctly.

Anyways we could go and on about this and never will agree. So I'm done with this, b/c I won't ever change your mind and you won't change my mind.

reply

Again, this makes no sense.

99% of the time when two people have sex when they're drunk there isn't verbal consent. The two people just have sex. You can't say, well Tank knew Daphne would have said no therefore he raped her.

That's just nonsense.

Like I said, there's plenty of women who take advantage of guys when they know they're drunk.

I remember a friend of mine came by the House and said I'm never drinking again. I slept with that crazy girl and she wouldn't leave me alone because she knew I was drunk.

So according to you, my friend should file rape charges. A girl took advantage of him when she knew he wouldn't consent if he was sober.

Rape is a serious charge and to ruin someones life where they become a sex offender and have to check in with the Police when they move into certain areas over drunk sex because Bay feels bad the next day is ASININE!!

reply

No one ever said that every drunk person cant give consent, you are the one trying to imply that, but there are times when someone is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo drunk that they can't consent and personally if you don't know the difference in the difference levels of drunkness, then i don't know what to tell you.

For you to act like its never rape is ASININE. I'm sorry that you can't even begin to keep an open mind on this, you have such blinders on that its clouding your judgement and logic. As I've said, not every drunk person that has sex can say its rape, but there are times that it is and can be considered rape.

No *beep* rape is a serious charge, I had no clue, thank you for again pointing that out, without you doing so i would have never known!! Please don't bother to respond back as I'm done with this conversation with you. Agree to disagree. Goodbye!

reply

kem7696 said:

No one ever said that every drunk person cant give consent, you are the one trying to imply that, but there are times when someone is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo drunk that they can't consent and personally if you don't know the difference in the difference levels of drunkness, then i don't know what to tell you.

For you to act like its never rape is ASININE. I'm sorry that you can't even begin to keep an open mind on this, you have such blinders on that its clouding your judgement and logic. As I've said, not every drunk person that has sex can say its rape, but there are times that it is and can be considered rape.

No *beep* rape is a serious charge, I had no clue, thank you for again pointing that out, without you doing so i would have never known!! Please don't bother to respond back as I'm done with this conversation with you. Agree to disagree. Goodbye!


Yes, you are correct. There ARE times when a person is so drunk that he or she cannot give consent. Hopefully, that person will show some sign to his or her partner to indicate that.

If he or she loses consciousness, then that's an obvious sign. If he or she is unable to speak in complete sentences, then that's an obvious sign. If he or she is vomiting or otherwise loses control of bodily functions, then that's an obvious sign. In all of those instances, society can agree that a person cannot give consent and for the other person to proceed with sexual intercourse should be considered rape.

But sometimes, unfortunately, it's not that easy to tell. For instance, in Bay's case, she appeared to be able to consent.

So society has a choice. We can either outlaw sex for everyone under the influence, or we can say that those few people who appear able to consent, even though they are under the influence of alcohol, will just have to be responsible for themselves.

Because we can all agree (I hope!) that it is not fair to tell people it is legal to have sex with someone who appears able to consent after drinking, but if he or she wakes up the next morning and regrets the sex, then you will be going to prison for rape.

Society cannot consider it rape in those situations, even if the other person feels violated the next morning, because that really would be asinine. Either sex under the influence of alcohol is legal for all those who can communicate in complete sentences, or society needs to make it illegal for everyone.

It's not fair to tell people it's legal for some, and then say, "Oops, too bad. Your partner regrets it."

emiliegoltsman said:

i literally signed up for this just to say this to you.

If a person is drunk they CANNOT consent to sex. Bay shouldn't change her behaviour, Tank shouldn't have raped her. He took advantage of Bay when she couldn't say no and OBVIOUSLY she would have considering she was still dating Emmett? Clearly, this situation is messy and uncomfortable and I did like Tank as a character until he did this and unfortunately thats the way the writers decided to take his character. I cannot believe in 2016 people are still putting the blame on the victim (in this case Bay) saying 'she shouldn't have gotten so drunk', like shut the hell up, she can go get as trashed as she wants but that gives no one the right to take advantage of her body and to 'assume' that because she came back to his room that meant 'yes'. The only thing that means yes is a fully coherent and solid YES.


Imperfect, fallible people (who may mean well, but are definitely very misguided) are the ones who are saying that a drunk person cannot consent to sex.

It's a stupid, stupid law that has been put into effect in a handful of places, and this law will not be able to stand up to normal human behavior. Unless we want our society to become some sort of sick police state, these consent laws will all be overturned shortly.

Bay is NOT a victim in this scenario. You are correct that it is fine for Bay to get as trashed as she wants, but that does not free Bay from responsibility for herself and her vagina.

Tank didn't take advantage of Bay's body. That statement is insulting to Bay and it is insulting to Tank. Bay wasn't unconscious. Bay wasn't unable to speak. Bay was buzzed.

It wasn't Tank's dorm room. It was the room of some poor guy who was out of town for the weekend. But I agree with you that even Bay's decision to ask Tank to lie in the bed with her and look at the ceiling stars is not necessarily a consent to sex.

But I disagree with you that a person must utter a fully coherent and solid "yes" in order to consent to sex. That's morally wrong. You are putting people into straight jackets. You are taking away MY rights by dictating what I must say in the bedroom and by not allowing me to get a buzz before sex.

Who are you to tell me that I cannot have sex with someone unless I utter the word "yes"?

Take your consent laws and get out of my bedroom, please.

Who are you to tell me that I cannot get a buzz before sex?


I know you want to protect Bay (and people in her situation), and I appreciate that. But unless Bay is unconscious, or so drunk that she is unable to formulate sentences, then it is important that the law requires Bay to stay responsible for herself. Otherwise, we all lose our rights.

It wasn't Tank's responsibility to walk away from Bay that night. As long as Bay could speak in complete sentences, it was Bay's responsibility to look out for herself.

I know that consent is sexy. And if I did not know it, I had the writers to remind me with that scene between Regina and Eric. Yes, consent is sexy. And yes, it is a great thing to get and to give.

But it is sick, and I mean, really sick, for the government to create laws that allow it to come into our bedrooms and dictate that we all utter the word "yes" before every act of sex. I cannot imagine a police state where any one person (male or female) who forgets to listen for that word "yes," before proceeding with sex, might be convicted of rape the next day.

And unless society wants to outlaw alcohol altogether, it is wrong and impractical for society to say people who have a buzz cannot consent to sex.

These stupid consent laws will take the spontaneity out of sex. I don't want my partner to insist I say "yes" every time, before he proceeds with sex. Does EVERYTHING have to be micromanaged in our lives? Why should the law dictate my speech in the bedroom, just to protect people like Bay, who choose to drink.

Bay should be responsible for herself. Don't put me in a straight-jacket, when I am having sex, in a misguided attempt to protect her.

With these stupid consent laws, any sane person won't choose to have sex with someone who has been drinking, because sex with someone who has a buzz will be like playing Russian roulette. That's ridiculous. People need to take responsibility instead of blaming their sexual partners. Don't take away the rights of everyone else in society, because a handful of people exercise bad judgment under the influence of alcohol. That's an inherent risk of getting drunk, and it shouldn't fall on the rest of us to sacrifice our freedom, in order to protect people who knowingly take that risk.

reply

Holy crap you wrote a damn book, but the only reason I'm replying to you is to say that you realize the second quote you had was not posted by me, not once did I ever say that a person has to give a yes. Please repost that part of your reply to the correct poster!

reply

kem7696 said:

Holy crap you wrote a damn book, but the only reason I'm replying to you is to say that you realize the second quote you had was not posted by me, not once did I ever say that a person has to give a yes. Please repost that part of your reply to the correct poster!


I reposted my reply to the correct poster. Thanks for letting me know!

I do write a lot about this topic. The injustice of it bothers me, and I feel passionate about that.

The good side of my passion is that it allows me to understand when people with the opposite point of view are equally passionate. I can understand someone wanting to protect Bay and anyone else in her situation. That's important, too.

I support educating people about affirmative consent and making it the expectation in society. Societal expectations are powerful. Also, I'm all for communication between partners.

I don't think Bay made a false accusation. She was honest about her feelings. False accusations are rare, and my concerns about affirmative consent laws have little to do with false accusations.

My concern is that the law doesn't over-reach its bounds. Society should strive for a balance between protecting the individual and protecting the individual's freedom.

reply

you replied to my post but you also quoted another posters post in the reply. Why you did this I have no clue since I didn't write it and did not say it, so I never said I agreed to everything they said. Never less have a great day!

reply

kem7696 said:

you replied to my post but you also quoted another posters post in the reply. Why you did this I have no clue since I didn't write it and did not say it, so I never said I agreed to everything they said. Never less have a great day!


I included both replies in my reply to you, because after I spent that much time writing the reply, it was frustrating to discover I could not post it, because the first person had deleted her post.

I meant to include your name with your post and her name with her post, and then, I forgot to add her name above her quote.

Once you called my attention to it, I fixed it.

It appears the original poster has already deleted the account she created earlier tonight, but at least I was able to add her name to my post, so it doesn't appear you wrote that quote. Sorry about the confusion, and thank you for calling my attention to the situation.

Hope you have a great day, too.

reply