This happened during a challenge when both tribes were present. Kathy was standing the closest to the “incident.” She has every right to offer up an opinion as to whether Sue’s reaction was justified.
Please. The kids that Rupert counsels undoubtedly suffered through some real problems in their short lives – like abuse and drug addiction. When you compare real problems to Sue’s “traumatic event” it’s no wonder he has no sympathy.
I didn’t see Colby as the leader of the Ogakors. As I recall, it was Tina and Jerri who each led a faction and tried to lead. Colby apparently had a secret alliance with Tina (which helped her ultimately defeat Jerri) but on the surface Colby acted as an independant. Colby may have led the pep talks but he was never the one saying “this week we’re going to vote out this person.” This time around however, he is saying that.
Regarding Sue and it taking 24 hours for the trauma of the event to process, I was wondering about something.
Wouldn’t an assault victim, once she started feeling that way, try to cover up her “shame” and “humiliation?” Literally I mean. They had blankets there. Wouldn’t Sue have covered herself up, wrapped herself in a sort of protective, cloth “cocoon?”
I remember the scene where she was splayed out on the beach looking like Christ on the cross but wearing that tiny little bikini - with all those men around. Would an assault victim do that?
I listened to a radio interview posted on survivornews.com(think that was it) where Richard claimed there was no physical contact between them. He also pointed out that Susan stopped there and waited for him to pass. Instead of going on as she should have, she saw Richard coming and decided to stand in his way. The path was very narrow and he has no choice but to come into close proximity with her to pass. Not having been there and not being able to see through the CBS blur, I can’t say who is telling the truth about the rub but Richard had good points.
I asked this on the first page, but no one ever got around to responding…
Can someone give me a rundown of how Sue talked herself into such a frenzy of emotion at camp? I was able to watch the video clip of the actual meltdown at the RC, but I missed the transition of her not caring about it to her thinking her life was ruined.
Also, can someone tell me what Kathy had to say about the incident afterwards, particularly what people thought was inappropriate?
Well, it’s kind of a mystery how she got herself worked up about it - she just, well, got worked up about it, lying around, sobbing, being real quiet, going off on her own, etc. She didn’t turn to anyone, really, for any kind of comfort, didn’t make any kind of statement to the camera except that she got upset about it (personally, I think she was worried that her husband would think something weird about it) and then at the challenge, Jeff Probst, being Jeff :rolleyes: , tried to minimize her anger, and of course, she blew up at him, and rightfully so. If she felt she had been “sexually violated,” then she WAS sexually violated, IMO. Richard Hatch was a jerk about it, and that’s that.
That said, I do feel that if I had been her, I would have tried to work through it, laugh it off, whatever, but she’s who she is, so, hey…
I don’t know what Kathy said, nor even who she is. I’ll have to visit the website to jog my memory…
Oh, Kathy. The older blonde chick.
Well, she resented being “pulled into” Sue’s hatred game, or Sue’s “negativity”. :rolleyes: I mean, what a stupid thing to say. This woman, Sue, has been violated, is unable to confront her attacker/the violator, and you are such a cold, heartless bitch that all you can say is, “how dare she get emotional on us.” Fuck you, Kathy.
However, I like Kathy. 
But I really thought that was a really cold thing to say.
I’ll second that … 
Oh. Dear. God.
So, if I FEEL like you owe us all an apology for saying something that stupid, then you DO owe us an apology. If I FEEL like you are taking your PC attitudes to an extreme then your ARE taking your PC attitudes to an extreme. Is that how it works?
No, bnorton, that’s not quite how it works; because something actually happened (at least, let’s assume it did – and no one is denying that something did.) Sue can either laugh it off (one extreme) or seek criminal and/or civil action (the other extreme). Where she falls on that spectrum – in other words, how she FEELs – is up to Sue, not Kathy. If she FEELs violated enough to seek penalties, that’s her right.
First of all, you can sue anyone for anything. But that’s not the issue that nisosbar brought up. nisosbar claimed that Sue Hawk’s feelings about a particular incident defined what that incident was. I realize that that attitude is popular in todays’ pop psychology, as is the condemnation of anyone who might question someone’s reaction to an incident.
Now, before you comment, remember that I am just expressing my FEELINGS about this, and according to nisosbar if I FEEL that this is a stupid attitude then it IS a stupid attitude.
Or better yet, Hatch was approached by Sue on his beam, and she touched him on his hips knowing he is a gay man. His own sexuality was impugned by these actions of hers. He should sue!
Oh, I don’t know… bnorton, I would like to offer you an apology if I offended your feelings. I am very sorry.
C’mon, it’s just a friggin’ TV show.
Do I ALWAYS feel if someone feels violated, that they WERE violated, as though facts are unimportant?
No, of course not. That would be really ignorant.
But as the other poster said, something DID happen. It appeared to me as though she touched him first, but how do you know he didn’t do something nasty, like grab her crotch or rub his hard-on on her body (as a matter of fact, I think he DID touch her body with her genitals, though I don’t think he was excited; go figure).
I mean, I don’t want to make a federal case out of this, and I saw her on CBS This Morning, and she basically conceded that she had made too big a deal about it, so that’s that. If it got to court, and I was on the jury, I would want to hear what facts we know, I would want to see an unedited version of the tape, I would want to talk with Jeff and the other Survivors, etc. Happy now?
Back to the game…
It’s not like Sue just made this up out of the blue. Richard did intentionally strip naked and stand in a spot where he knew she’d have to walk by him. It also appears he probably rubbed his dick up against her. Now I don’t know the norm for your social circles, but in mine, this would be considered to go beyond mere suggestiveness. In fact, I’d have to ask, if you don’t consider this sexual harassment, can you give an example of something that does cross the line in your opinion?
Granted, I don’t think it was Richard’s intent. I’d guess that what he intended was that Sue would be so grossed out by his nudity that she would back off and concede the game to him rather than walk past him. When he saw she wasn’t backing off, he pressed the issue as it were. But when you start waving your penis at people, you have to expect some of them might take it the wrong way.
I think that’s a revision of the facts. It was Sue who stood. Sue who waited. Sue who held up the people behind her so that she could confront Rich’s naked body on the beam he would have to cross. Had she moved on, she would not have been there when Rich arrived. She calculated the event. The event occurred. Sometimes, people demand to get what they want and they have failed to consider the baggage that might come with it.
Heck, as long as the take it…
With respect to nisobar’s comment concerning a victim’s perception establishing “violation,” I suggest she(?) is not too far off base. I am reminded of workplace sexual harrassment law, in which a “victim’s” subjective perception plays a predominant role in establishing whether harrassment occurred. Reasonable people differ as to whether they consider this good or bad…
Let’s not discount the fact that Survivor is a very heavily-edited game, and the contestants all know that.
Here’s my theory about what happened.
Sue probably thought the initial contact was no big deal. There was indication of camaraderie and joking about it afterward during the Chapera walk back to camp. However, Sue had a lot of time between the walk home and the next challenge to think about the incident – and also how it would be edited for television. Would they make her look like an idiot? Would it be made to look like she and Rich have a (for lack of a better term) “gay man/fag hag” relationship? Would they somehow edit the scene to make it look like she wanted Rich’s penis to touch her?
Let’s not forget, Mark Burnett & Co. and his trusty cohorts in the editing bay can make any small incident seem very, VERY large. Sue probably focused on that during her time alone…and then wondered how her husband and family would react.
That was likely the straw that broke the camel’s back. The tribes were already miserable, and (thanks to Jenna M.) the precedent of quitting was not unheard of. Sue probably didn’t think she was going to quit at the Reward Challenge – only when Jeff brought up the possibility that she might did she jump.
However, these are only cosmetic fixes to a larger problem – Sue was a giant pain in the ass, and if Chapera had competed and lost Reward, she probably would have been voted out anyway. Especially after her isolationist ways alienated the rest of her tribe.
It’s called a hostile work environment. . . and that’s exactly what I was referring to in a previous post. It’s grounds for a lawsuit under the rules of the EEOC. I think the producers paid Sue Hawk a settlement and that part of the settlement was the condition that she:
a) not reveal that she was paid a settlement
b) make nice with Hatch in a public forum
c) not sue.
No. Kathy had the least right of anyone to offer up an opinion… her back was to both Sue and Rich. She was almost knocked off the beam when Sue bumped into her, but she could not have seen the incident and therefore should keep her mouth shut. The whole thing took place in front of Chapera’ platform, so they all saw it, AND later commented on its inappropriateness. Some of Moga saw it- Colby admitted he did, though Shii Ann said she didn’t. Jeff didn’t because Rich’s back was to him.
And Kathy never actually offered up an opinion on whether or not Sue’s reaction was justified- she was too busy wahhh-wahhh-waahhhhhhhing how offended and inconvenienced she was. The exact quote is here:
Please, yourself. Someone is clearly affected by a situation, in Rupert’s own words “was distant, nonresponsive…”, and you want to play “whose trauma is worse”? A seasoned, competant counselor doesn’t give a shit about their own perceptions of a situation. They go from the patient’s. Rupert was a fuckwad of the highest order.
I stand by my assessment that Sue wound herself up over a relatively small incident, but in the end we have no right dictating to her how she should or shouldn’t respond. Look at what happened with Jenna M.- she thought everything would be okay when she signed up. She thought everything would be okay during the first few days. After all, her mom had had cancer for what, 20 years?? But when all you’re left to do is show up every now and then for a challenge, you do a lot of thinking. Jenna decided everything was not okay, that she was not doing the right thing. Where are the posts calling Jenna an attention whore, saying she was a drama queen, that she was “blowing her mom’s cancer out of proportion”?
And to all those saying Sue acted out to be able to sue the producers… go read David B.'s roundtable and followup articles on Realitynews.com. Sue wouldn’t have been able to sue, due to the non-disclosure agreements that the contestants sign. Sure, she may have gotten a chunk of money, but she would’ve given out even more of a chunk of money when the producers sued her for breech of contract.
I also recommend you read the recap on Television Without Pity. There are some excellent arguements in there.