Hi Guina –
I tried to add this comment last night but the site was having a hissy fit and souldn’t let me. So:

Alba wrote on Nov 17^th, 2010 at 8:17pm:

I think it can also be linked to behaviour of, say, parents after the loss of a child. One would think that sex wouldn't be an obvious response in that situation but it's a level of contact - and yes, affirmation of life - that some people seek as a release at that time of stress.

I'm not saying Alec Freeman would do this but I don't think it is out of the question. For me, him drinking his way down a bottle would be less likely because that could affect his functioning at a time of danger for SHADO - and at a time when he would be focussed at finding out what the hell happened - and I think his sense of responsibility would prevent him getting really drunk. I think Shepherd is set in the late 2000s? Louise? I would probably argue that casual sex for women would be more likely exploitative in 1980. But 30 years on... not so much. Would Freeman have got drunk in 1980? Yes, that fits. As written in 2006 / 7... for me, less likely.

But that's just my take on the character.

Guina, we differ in our interpretations of what might be in character and what would not. I see no aggression. It’s a discussion, a debate - there is nothing wrong with debate. And this is a debate about the possible actions of a character briefly written 40 years ago who was supposed to be living in a future that took place 30 years ago. His character is being expanded (in a writing sense) in the noughties. We are all going to have different takes on what feels right and what does not – and this may also be influenced by our age when we first watched the show and our own (and other people’s) real experiences over the years. This makes absolute agreement about character behaviour unlikely. But that’s part of the interest.

This morning, from the article -
Quote:

I have long believed that because I've witnessed it first-hand with friends over the years. I know it has led to a number of "I had an itch so I scratched it" encounters – and occasionally encounters where the men were interested in seeing the women after the "dates" but the women weren't interested. With the three women I'm thinking of one was single, one was long-term separated (Catholic husband) and one was bi-sexual and for long-term relationships preferred women.

Mostly, none of them ever said that their occasional one-nighter (or over-the-weekender) was anything but satisfactory and good fun. And on rare occasion, a total waste of a good nights sleep! However, the long-term separated did eventually settle down with someone she'd met on what was initially a 2-night stand, but only about a year later. They kept meeting at conferences and eventually...

All were successful career women with no particular hang-ups - about anything, really. They knew who they were and were happy and confident in their skin. Though, interestingly (I think!) the conference one-nighter was a doctor, an oncologist, and said that after a day of discussing how slowly progress was being made in her specialism – oesophageal and associated cancers – you needed more than a drink. She smoked too.

And the article you cited did say that 54% of women had overall positive feelings about the experience. That is a (small, admittedly) majority.

  Quote:

Sex is often not about sex. All sorts of emotions go into the mix. However, I'm imagining the plot might lead to someone Freeman knows and trusts providing the sex - not a "she was there so I took advantage" type of situation.

I’m not particularly arguing that Freeman would or should have a one-night-stand, merely that he might if the circumstances were right and that if it happened, it would not follow that it must be man exploiting woman. Many (most?) women are better than that; they don't set themselves up as victims. But that, of course, is all in the writing and plotting. 

Hi Normandie,

and here you are distracting me from writing a scene for Straker where he broaches the birds and the bees topic with Jolene. Can't say I mind, it is tacky going just now. *laughing heartily*

Quote:


For some parents yes, that would be a reaction. For others sex may cease to be of any relevance after the death of a child. Here both is possible, I think.

Quote:


I disagree with this. I know too many people who drink, on the job, off the job, anywhere.

Heck, Normandie, you should know! Just go into any sort of bistro at noon in France and watch what the French drink. For the vast majority it's not Perrier and that includes the Quai D'Orsay. 

To me it is far more likely he'd drink a couple of scotches, than go out and pick up a woman, whether today or in the 1980ies. He might hide it these days, though, as opposed to the open drinking in the past. Just as people do it nowadays.

Maybe he'd abuse other substances today? There are enough of those around, uppers, downers, little green helpers. A visit to the doc and you get your dose of Prozac. It's become so easy. I was shaking my head just a few days ago at a friend ceasing to smoke with the help of an anti-depressant. No problem for her doc. Duh.

At least 3 of 10 of my acquaintances lately use such drugs, a lot of them are high up in the social ranks (CEOs, bankers, etc.). And those who don't, well, as said, they often "socially drink" and have the bottle of orange juice laced with vodka on their desks as well.

Quote:


Hooray! I like discussions. I love them actually. I unfortunately but rarely meet with people who don't take them personally. So this comes as a great relief!

That said - part of what I wrote is not exactly particular to Alec. It's more particular to anyone who's not a total jerk and who responds half way normal  .

Quote:


In danger of shoving this to Nfanfic level - I wouldn't need a survey to know this. Most women not taking the pill know this upswing of - err  rabid - interest for sex during a certain phase of the month.

Quote:


I wasn't saying no women enjoy ONS. I was saying that I concur with what that report found out, that roughly half of them feel used the next day and end up disliking up to hating what happened. I have an equal number (liking : not liking) among my female friends, and noticed that those who liked the ONS mostly were women having a secure relationship. This of course may be incidental. We talk only a hundred or so females here, over at least 2 decades, not any significant number.

Quote:


I find it actually pretty heavy stuff that of 100 women having a ONS 46 end up disliking the fact, feeling used through it.

Now, my personal background is different than yours. I may place much more importance on that people end up liking sex and sexuality when they have it than someone else. I don't even expect others to think the same way. But to me that's 46 too many really.

And as among those female friends are some who really ended up hating what happened, usually because they realized that indeed they had been used in those cases, I personally still see a chasm between what we are led to believe is a modern outlook and what is reality.

*Chuckling here again*

I'm actually arguing the Devil's side currently here, as it is normally me who chaffs at too rigid morals. But as it is, when someone has the feeling of being (ab)used by sex I tend to listen very carefully...

Alba wrote on Nov 18^th, 2010 at 8:57am:

Sorry (sorta!) and can't wait to read it!  

Quote:

Sure. But they aren’t suddenly tasked with defending the world against alien invaders when their boss dies! Well, one assumes. 

The sticking point for me is simple: Straker’s judgement. Freeman as he was written in The Responsibility Seat (indecisive and borderline incompetent iirc) aside, Freeman is Straker’s deputy and long-time friend or not, Straker would not invest Freeman with so much trust if he… couldn’t be trusted.

I don’t see Straker blinding himself to faults in someone because they were mates. Perhaps Collins and Foster (Courtmartial) challenge that opinion – but then again, I don’t think so because Straker in those episodes wanted facts on which to base his decisions; he wasn’t blind to the possibility of a problem.

To summarise: I wouldn’t see having – as you said – a couple of scotches as out of character. Finding the bottom of an entire bottle of Scotch would jar. For me.

Also, as a brief digression, France is changing. Half a bottle of wine with lunch is no longer the norm – or not in northern France. The south is a different country.

Here, I see far more water being consumed – or 4% cider in this part of the world – than I did, say, 20 years ago. Even France evolves. Just at a more measured rate than the rest of Europe. <snicker>

Quote:

And, of course, it is what leads to a lot of girls looking at a positive pregnancy test and wailing “but I only did it the one time” and not realising that nature is subtle and cunning and will arrange for max hormones to equal loss of inhibitions at precisely the right time for sperm and egg to hi-five.

Quote:

Indeed, couldn’t agree more - but again, that’s a different (though potentially no less interesting) discussion.

Going back to the original question as posed:

Quote:


Yes, I still think it could be. Not definitely is, but could be depending on circumstances and the woman.

Do I see him going into a bar and picking up someone who batted her eyelashes at him? No. There are the security aspects apart from anything else.

Actress at the studios…? possibly but not very likely.

Do I see him meeting / even seeking out a woman he knows and for one-off sex to be the result? Yes, I can see no reason to say categorically that he would not do that.

Does it automatically have to leave the woman feeling exploited / used? Well, in 2008, 54% of women surveyed said no.

So could Freeman have casual sex that is in character and works on some level for both participants? IMO, yes.

Of course, Freeman could feel bad about it afterwards… he could feel he was used! Depends on how much angst is available to be spread around.  Woman takes advantage of Freeman when he’s vulnerable… not the normal route a UFO plot develops, je crois?!

And here, my thesis rests!

 

Hey Normandie, no need to zip!!

Yes. My thoughts on a 'one-night-stand' would possibly, having considered it, equate  more  to two close friends ending up in  bed together.. ( although I am actually discussing a topic that I really know very little about!! )


I couldn't actually see Straker having a 'quickie' with some unknown 'bit on the side' and as you pointed out, the security aspects would probably prevent that anyway.

Quote:


Oh lord yes.... there is some really .. errrrr.... grubby stuff out there. and it does influence people in the wrong way..
 
A 'teaspoon' here and there soon adds up to a lot! And then new writers read and think.. ah yes..Straker; cold/teetotaller.... Alec; bumbling inefficient drunk... Ford; incompetent fool.
My views on the characters are constantly being revised; as I watch the episodes with an 'adult' viewpoint and also as a writer ( well, 'pretend' writer!!) looking for details.

I am really enjoying this discussion!!  And I should be writing!!
 

Hi Louise,

Quote:


That's actually buddy-f**king (to turn your expression around  ), that's no ONS though.

Quote:


And there I thought we were talking about Freeman...  :

And Straker simply wouldn't have a ONS, I'd say he belongs to the 30% males who won't consider this normally. He's far too repressed. I could - of course, I am a writer!!!  - imagine situations in which he'd end up having one, but those situations would not include his purposeful participation - to put it politely.

Hi,

and as an afterthought - yes, I think some of the differing opinins here are caused by differing perceptions of what constitutes a ONS.

As said, I only see the "stranger/one night of sex" kind of thing as a real ONS. Usually accompanied/caused by "surplus alcohol" rather than "fireworks of sensual attraction".

What you described, Normandie, I would see as a change/expansion of relationship, btw often even worse in consequence than the classic ONS. I know quite a few formerly nice friendships which went entirely down the drain after a fling, usually because one of the parties was unable to put the devil back into the box and continue as a friendship.

The above regardless of what I said re Alec Freeman in Shepherd.