Nocturnal Animals : Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Does anyone else find it interesting that screenwriter Tom Ford decided to give Amy Adams' character some long, irrelevant soliloquy about her gay brother and her intolerant parents, but then added some story element not found in the novel about her character having an abortion as some justifiable reason for her ex-husband's revenge tale?

It's like Ford's waving his rainbow flag and equating (however indirectly) abortion in the mind of a man as tantamount to a brutal abduction and murder all in one fell swoop.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Why do you find gay references so deeply and personally disturbing?

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Try reading what I wrote again. Maybe a few times. And then scroll down.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

You're not that clever and deep. Got it on the first try.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


Why do you find gay references so deeply and personally disturbing?


If you got it on the first try, then why would you presume that I was somehow deeply and personally disturbed by gay references? After all, if you got it on the first try, then you'd know that I was more bemused by Ford's misogyny.

How do you know I'm not gay myself, and therefore find it deeply and personally disturbing that Ford's pro-gay agenda exists side-by-side with his selling out of women?

I may not be that clever or deep, but what I do find deeply and personally disturbing is people's tendency to presume and lash out against strangers on the internet based on their own sensitivities.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

i love seeing a good old fashioned verbal butt kicking

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

no, you clearly didnt, you *beep* dumb twat

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

I don't think I've ever read a more unreasonable riposte to a post before, such as the one you received from that bed wetting liberal harping on about sentivities.

Having just watched the film, I completely concur that Ford does seem to be dragging us through the liberal agenda, then suddenly reminding us of the deleterious emotional effects of abortion, thus seemingly compromising his whole political agenda. Remember, for liberals abortion is just a fun day out, not to be taken too seriously, just a free visit to a clinic to rectify the problem of liberal parenting.

You've been hit with the homophobia tag for daring to mention the director's agenda. I have no issue with homosexuals, bar the fact that they are terribles bores. Banging on about rights ad nauseam and castigating those that mention it just makes them slaves to their own insecuriity.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

This post is so confusing.

I understand and completely agree with most of what you wrote, especially the bit about Ford compromising his whole political agenda (and perhaps less with your hyperbole about liberals' attitudes towards abortion). However, my main point is that it's the hypocrisies of liberal tolerance that we both seem to be picking up on here--and in particular, in my case, that nauseating variety typified by wealthy gay men wearing their 'oppression' as some badge of honor.

But the sensitivities I was talking about were the (liberal) responder and her knee-jerk reaction to defend all gays, and her immediate interpretation of my observation as a sign of fear and hatred. If anything, the bed-wetting liberal is she, not I.

And I, not she, have been hit with the homophobia tag--a predictable attack lobbed by her.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

I was actually defending your position, not denigrating it. Hence I was talking about the unreasonable reply to your sensible post. We are, it seems, in complete agreement mate.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


Remember, for liberals abortion is just a fun day out, . .

This remark is beyond stupid, and identifies you as a buffoon and bed-wetting conservative bore. The film is a psychological mystery - not a political diatribe. Ford uses the abortion issue as plot point - it's only tedious dogmatists who see propaganda wherever they look.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

You Trumpers, you're so dumb it's hilarious. Your idiocy is the best thing about IMDb these days.

'Well I've got two words for you - STFU'

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

I don't see anything wrong with gay people and women having rights.

Hack The Planet! http://www.ExilesoftheUnderground.com

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

That's a non sequitor, because neither do I.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


It's like Ford's waving his rainbow flag and equating (however indirectly) abortion in the mind of a man as tantamount to a brutal abduction and murder all in one fell swoop.


These ideas never occurred to me in my two viewings. Would you describe yourself as politically conservative (perhaps passionately so)? You may well possess a point—that Ford was covertly pushing a liberal political agenda or at least offering some progressive political subtext—but one might have to be especially sensitive to such issues in order to come away with that interpretation.

For the record, I am not sure that the "soliloquy about her gay brother and her intolerant parents" is that "irrelevant," because it suggests that Susan is socially isolated and alienated on some level—a theme that continues through the end of the movie and that may explain why she got into the LA art scene rather than, say, moving back to Texas like Edward. And the abortion point creates (or at least tries to do so) some emotional depth and a plausible theory for motivation.

I never saw any of that as especially political. Yes, the whole "Republican, racist, sexist" spiel is superficially political, but I saw it primarily as a point of character illumination—to suggest Susan's disaffection—and one that Ford presents with humor and irony. Actually, even Susan is saying those lines with some humor and irony, as if to suggest that she is being somewhat hyperbolic while still reflecting a strong kernel of truth.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Susan's isolation and disaffection is compounded, first by rejecting the stifling, conservative existence of a Southern debutante, and second by eventually capitulating to her family's bourgeois way of thinking.

We don't really need Ford's treatise on anti-gay conservative Americans to bring this point home. It's beyond superficial; it's superfluous.

What's interesting to me, however, is that you seem to see this as somehow significant for character development (Really? We're talking about Columbia grad school students enjoying dinner at a place most of the student body couldn't afford), while giving Ford a pass for his abortion plot device as grounds for Edward's rape-revenge fantasy.

Does gay acceptance trump women's rights for you as it apparently does for Ford?

And no, I'm not politically conservative. Maybe I'm just attuned to these things after having studied film and political anthropology and even queer theory. Perhaps that you didn't see this as especially political means that it's so commonplace for you as (now it's my turn to presume) an urbane sophisticate in a wealthy liberal society as to escape your notice. But if you haven't seen Ford's previous film A Single Man, and hear echoes of the overtly political sentiments in that film here, then maybe it's not so much my 'conservative' sensibilities that were affronted as these pro-gay-yet-misogynistic ideologies being as natural as the air your breathe.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

DHfilmfan wrote:


'But if you haven't seen Ford's previous film A Single Man, and hear echoes of the overtly political sentiments in that film here, then maybe it's not so much my 'conservative' sensibilities that were affronted as these pro-gay-yet-misogynistic ideologies being as natural as the air your breathe.'




You are absolutely right.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

I noticed this as well, especially given that the abortion is used as a crude plot device. But for a film thoughtfully conceived by a proud homosexual it has quite a few bizarrely misogynist undertones.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Exactly. Thank you.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Agreed; the aesthetic of the movie was beautiful, but it did have some weirdly discordant misogyny that really stood out for me. Especially things like rape (suggested and then depicted, which was really unnecessary) as a plot device to motivate a male character to fulfil his revenge fantasy; and abortion where one of the first thoughts the woman has afterwards is that her ex won't forgive her for "killing his child", as opposed to the emotional ordeal she's just gone through herself and her own decision-making autonomy. The whole focus on how much of a victim Edward was from Susan's abortion (as if it was a malicious act of hers towards him) seemed pretty messed up.

OP, glad you brought this up. You're right to juxtapose this misogyny with Ford's liberal stance with gay men. It's great to see more gay men represented in cinema, but I get your point that the focus on the acceptance of gay men contrasts with the lack of acceptance of women's autonomy. Speaking from within the community, I do observe that many cis gay men can be quite casually misogynistic, often without really realising it.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Aborting her and her husband's child so that she can leave him for the man she is having an affair with is not malicious?

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

English is not my first language but I guess reading your post that all you wanted was to point out how the screenwriter has some sort of sympathy on the gay cause -- clearly putting the Republican parents on the spot while at the same time the abortion is compared to a rape/murder which means he is like justifying or at least giving some implied support to the husband's revenge, criminalizing abortion or making it "revenge-worthy".

Anyway, it is so weird how the internet has brought up the worse of some people. Not only to your post but thousands everyday. And some of them are unjustified angry comments like the person reads it dynamically and just start "punching the keyboard" like crazy. And usually, one gets so angry they refuse to read it again and the confusion snowballs quickly to a point of no return. I am not like "Gandhi" when it comes to writing but I tend to avoid arguing when the person is clearly too defensive or when the person is totally biased and avoids to analyze the text. I guess the same is valid to the "It doesn't matter" post here as well. I go a lot to the movies in Brazil and I also did when I lived in Texas in the USA. And one of the funniest thing is you go to the movies, you watch something you hate and something you loved. And you get to the office and sometimes before you even mention you have been to the movies you listen some colleagues saying they find movie "A" awesome and movie "B" terrible, and it is just the opposite of what you think. That's how we are. In a much broader way, Europeans movies were for a long time considered art, thought-provoking, long dialogues about existential issues and used nudity all the time while Hollywood would demonize nudity and focus on non-stop car-crashing and bullets ripping all over with almost no critical dialogue. And in the end there was market for both.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

English is not my first language but I guess reading your post that all you wanted was to point out how the screenwriter has some sort of sympathy on the gay cause -- clearly putting the Republican parents on the spot while at the same time the abortion is compared to a rape/murder which means he is like justifying or at least giving some implied support to the husband's revenge, criminalizing abortion or making it "revenge-worthy".

Anyway, it is so weird how the internet has brought up the worse of some people. Not only to your post but thousands everyday. And some of them are unjustified angry comments like the person reads it dynamically and just start "punching the keyboard" like crazy. And usually, one gets so angry they refuse to read it again and the confusion snowballs quickly to a point of no return. I am not like "Gandhi" when it comes to writing but I tend to avoid arguing when the person is clearly too defensive or when the person is totally biased and avoids to analyze the text. I guess the same is valid to the "It doesn't matter" post here as well. I go a lot to the movies in Brazil and I also did when I lived in Texas in the USA. And one of the funniest thing is you go to the movies, you watch something you hate and something you loved. And you get to the office and sometimes before you even mention you have been to the movies you listen some colleagues saying they find movie "A" awesome and movie "B" terrible, and it is just the opposite of what you think. That's how we are. In a much broader way, Europeans movies were for a long time considered art, thought-provoking, long dialogues about existential issues and used nudity all the time while Hollywood would demonize nudity and focus on non-stop car-crashing and bullets ripping all over with almost no critical dialogue. And in the end there was market for both.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Awwww booo hoooo cry more.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

You're being silly. No one's upset about anything. I'm not a Social Justice Warrior. I just enjoy making note of their [Ford's] follies.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

You seem to be saying that Ford is being inconsistent or hypocritical by getting preachy about gay issues in one scene but then portraying it as a bad thing that Amy Adams' character secretly aborted her and her husband's unborn child because she was planning on leaving him for the man she was having an affair with. That is not inconsistent and it is not misogynistic. Ford is not saying that women shouldn't have the right to abort their unborn children. He is saying that it's wrong to use that right do what Adams' character did to her husband. Does supporting women's rights mean that we can't criticize women who use those rights to do terrible things? Must we pretend that what she did was nothing more than a beautiful expression of her female autonomy and not a devastation to her husband? Whatever you think of women's rights, you must admit that what she did by leaving him and aborting his child does somewhat correspond to the fictional rapes and murders in that his family was taken away from him in a brutal way.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Andrew, you make excellent points - I completely agree!

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Susan 's decision is perfectly logical in today's narcissistic society where abortion is legal and divorce is common. She's leaving the marriage and starting a new relationship; she's the one who will carry the child for 9 months, not Edward; not aborting the child will lead to all kinds of complications and potential legal issues with her ex-husband. Abortion is the practical choice.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Yeah, pretty much. But even beyond the ramifications of having an abortion and why and so on, why does Ford use this to garner sympathy among audiences as to how we should understand Susan's ex?

Seems kinda lame...but maybe there are people out there who watch this and think, "Yeah, if my ex who didn't love me aborted our fetus which she didn't want to have with me, I'd totally have rape fantasies against her and also feel like my wife and child had been raped." Or something.

#gayrights

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


Seems kinda lame...but maybe there are people out there who watch this and think, "Yeah, if my ex who didn't love me aborted our fetus which she didn't want to have with me, I'd totally have rape fantasies against her and also feel like my wife and child had been raped." Or something.

It does seem there are countless people out there - and on this board - who believe that. However, I'm not one of them - and I don't believe Ford is either.
Personally I feel the abortion is a required plot element for belief in the Revenge red herring. A man still festering away over an infidelity after 20 years is kind of pathetic - the abortion adds some additional outrage.
OTOH I don't buy the novel's revenge motivation at all. The novel's abduction, rape and revenge elements are metaphors for Edward's grief and self-blame after his divorce. Administering frontier justice to the thugs represents Edward slaying his demons and becoming a man. If the story had merely been the author's rape and punishment fantasy, those events would have occurred on-screen - Tony would have been forced to watch.
If the revenge aspect is cast aside, the story becomes adult and interesting - and you can toss aside Ford's imagined misogyny as well.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Interesting points. I use "misogyny" loosely, as I don't really think Tom Ford hates women (any more than "homophobes" fear gays), but I do feel Ford 'resorted' to abortion as a plot device.

I mentioned this in the "It Doesn't Matter" post, which you commented on as well, and I think marketing is primarily to blame for our interpretation of this film as a "revenge" tale. But I don't quite see it as that either.

To return to your view that the contents of Edward's novel and the novel itself (how postmodern) were a way for him to exorcise and grow as a man, I can see that. But personally, I think there's something almost petty in his gesture of sending the manuscript to Susan, a gesture beneath someone who would indeed not only have moved on, but had become a better person through the experience. When I bring my own experience into watching and reading this film, I couldn't help but recall all the times people have hurt or damaged me in the past. Some may have said that I'd never amount to what I dreamed I could be, and so on. And sometimes when the desire strikes to, say, friend them on Facebook and regale them with photos of how well I'm doing now, I pause and think that this serves less to prove I am triumphant than to underscore how much I'm still under their thumbs.

So why not just tell a different story...one that ends, like many others, with Susan walking past a Barnes and Noble and seeing Edward's face plastered on the new bestseller in the window? Well, then we wouldn't have a film (or the novel it was based on)--or an even more boring film than the one we were subjected to. But also, Edward standing Susan up at the end serves as this moment in the film for us, as if to say...nothing: "Don't you get it, Susan? I have nothing else to say to you Susan."

...which to me means Edward's novel said it all. It may not be revenge per se, but it's nonetheless a demonstration that he still had something to say to her, to prove to her--if only that he could write something compelling (or so we'd led to believe) that was drawn from his life.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


I don't really think Tom Ford hates women (any more than "homophobes" fear gays),

Actually, I suspect many homophobes (like those infamous homophobic right wing pastors Craig and Haggard) do fear gays - because many of them are latently gay, and fear their own attraction to other men.

But personally, I think there's something almost petty in his gesture of sending the manuscript to Susan, a gesture beneath someone who would indeed not only have moved on, but had become a better person through the experience.

Perhaps it's worth considering the bald facts presented to us by the film. Like several other posters, I deduce Edward is dying of cancer from Bobby and Tony's fates. He knows Susan tried to contact him some years earlier, and he knows she provided him with the inspiration his novel. Maybe he simply wants to express his gratitude for the important role she played in his life before he dies. IMO that would make him a good person and a big man.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Eh, I'm not sure how you can deduce that Edward is dying of cancer from the bald facts of the film. The only time we ever see Edward is in flashback. Sounds more like speculation than deduction (or even inference) to me.

The only material presence we have of Edward is his manuscript. That's the central conceit of the film: what it represents, what it could mean (diegetically, and also symbolically, but also as a gift to Susan).

But it also seems that the explanation you're providing is more to suit the conclusion you want to see (regarding Edward), instead of derived as logical outcomes of unmistakable narrative clues.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Consider the bald fact that Ford has Jake Gyllenhaal play both Edward and Tony. So we as the audience are automatically prescribed to assume metaphorical (maybe even allegorical) continuity between these two characters. It could be possible that he has cancer, like Shannon's character, and that this is really the motivation for sending the novel to Susan--but again, in my mind, this is pure speculation.

Why is everyone forgetting that in Edward's novel, Tony dies an alone and broken man? That his vengeance against those who killed his wife and child never truly brought him peace and satisfaction? I think there's lots of important symbolic value there regarding how (or whether) we should understand his gesture of giving Susan his novel as "revenge" and whether he really walked away from this whole affair as a restored individual.

I read the end as Susan in some way getting the wrong message from Edward. Edward wanted Susan to understand his emotional turmoil, through the metaphor of the novel. And though she's seen this as a revelation regarding Edward's talent (so to speak), in the end she sees him as just another way out of the life she left him for. In some way, she still doesn't get it (much like all the others who see this film as having a non-ending). And whether she gets it or not while she's sitting alone at the restaurant is not Edward's concern.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


It could be possible that he has cancer, like Shannon's character, and that this is really the motivation for sending the novel to Susan--but again, in my mind, this is pure speculation.

Of course it's speculation - that's exactly what you're supposed to do when confronted by an allegory! You engage your brain and speculate about the meaning of the allegory in a rational manner. In a well-constructed, nested story which is clearly an allegory, every line, action and prop should do double duty - it should move the narrative along, and also reveal info about the source characters and their story.
When you discover both characters associated with Edward are facing death or die - your reasoning faculties should recognize those two events as a very gigantic, bright red flag. An allegorical bell should ring loudly in your allegorical ear! Only the dimmest dimwit would ignore such an enormous neon signpost when the template for those characters fails to show up for an appointment at the conclusion.
What kind of person are you? A deaf, dumb and blind dimwit, or somebody who possesses a few functioning brain cells?

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

More ad hominems please. I don't think you've convinced me or any other reader sufficiently enough of your cancer theory. Please also comb my posts thoroughly for grammatical and spelling errors to bolster your case as well.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

your correct in what you say

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Ford is definitely not saying that women shouldn't have the right to abort their fetuses (I prefer this to "unborn children".) No one is. He just threw it into the story as a plot device to "legitimize" further his vengeance. Again, it wasn't even in the original novel upon which this film was based.


He is saying that it's wrong to use that right do what Adams' character did to her husband.


Is Ford really saying that? Are you saying that Susan had an abortion...to do something to her husband? To wound him intentionally somehow? I'm pretty sure her husband followed her and her lover to the clinic and witnessed the aftermath of the procedure which she tried to hide from him.


Does supporting women's rights mean that we can't criticize women who use those rights to do terrible things?


What exactly was the terrible thing she did? Was exercising her right to have an abortion wrong because...she had an abortion?


Whatever you think of women's rights, you must admit that what she did by leaving him and aborting his child does somewhat correspond to the fictional rapes and murders in that his family was taken away from him in a brutal way.


Now the "unborn children" phrase makes sense.

She didn't want to have a child with a man whom she didn't love and didn't see a future with. Should her husband rape some sense into her?

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

I'll try this again.

No one is saying a woman doesn't have the right to get an abortion. We should get that out of the way. Seems quite a few people who bark out 'women's rights, women's rights' seemed to have stopped right there and said, 'well, she got an abortion, it's her body, oh well. the guy needs to deal with it and it's no biggy' without looking at the whole picture. There's more to it than that.

Here's what happened in the story.

His wife left him, and while processing that, he:

1: finds out she was pregnant
2: finds out she aborted the fetus without even telling him she was pregnant with their creation (yes, it takes two create a human)and without any conversation at all about other options before exercising her rights to have an abortion
3: finds out she had another man in her life already.

Those three things he finds out all at the same time while still processing the fact that she left him. It's not like she told him she was pregnant, they talked about options, she said she wanted an abortion, he was against it and she did it anyway. That's not how it went down.

There's a women's right to exercise control of her body and have the abortion, and then there's actual common human decency which Susan discarded thoroughly.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


Those three things he finds out all at the same time while still processing the fact that she left him.

You know, all of those three things are quite common, none of them are capital crimes, and only a juvenile mind would consider them grounds for a twenty-year campaign of revenge. In fact, many injured parties in a divorce would probably prefer to be fed Susan's anodyne version, especially since they have no say in the matter.
Therefore - as I've pointed out on numerous occasions, Edward's novel contains no revenge motivation. Try considering some other options.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Okay, no one said anything about capitol crimes. Jesus Christ some stupid strawman arguments fly around here. Since when does a capitol crime have to be committed for people to be hurt?

And it's quite common for someone to find out those things all at once? OOOOOkay...

I've never come across anyone, ever, that got slammed with all that stuff all at once. And, like many, I knows tons of divorced people.

But you go ahead and think men could/should just roll with finding out all those things all at once and have them think, 'Meh, whatever.' It's not realistic. Not all men are emotionless robots. Some actually have some feelings and I imagine anyone finding out that his wife/ex-wife/soon-to be ex-wife (who he still loved) was pregnant, aborted it, and had a boyfriend all at once would have some real hard emotions to deal with. Nothing juvenile about that. Anyone who minimizes the effect that would have doesn't have a grasp of reality.

I also think it's stupid that he would ponder on it for twenty years and have it consume his life. At some point, you'd think he'd finally come to the realization how horrible of a person she was and he was lucky to get out as quickly as he did.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


I've never come across anyone, ever, that got slammed with all that stuff all at once. And, like many, I knows tons of divorced people.

Well, you should be thankful you and your friends lead nice quiet sheltered lives. Long may it continue.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

Yes, my 23 year Air Force career was very quiet and sheltered. We all know how easy marriages are with people in the military. You know, with the constant deployments (sometimes very short notice deployment) and permanent changes of station (having to move the family often). Never a messy divorce scenario playing out, nor seedy things going on, when one of the people in the marriage is deployed.

I'll stick with the notion that somebody finding all that out all at once is incredibly rare.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


I'll stick with the notion that somebody finding all that out all at once is incredibly rare.

Except he didn't find out all at once - first she informed him she wanted out, and later he discovered the other elements - perhaps simultaneously, perhaps not.
Anyway, none of it justifies a bitter twenty-year grudge, and I doubt that's the underlying story.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

In the post you responded to, the three things I mentioned he found out all at once were: She was pregnant, had an abortion, had a boyfriend. Go back and look. Those are the things I'm saying he found out about all at once:

Here is what I wrote:

'Here's what happened in the story.

His wife left him, and while processing that, he:

1: finds out she was pregnant
2: finds out she aborted the fetus without even telling him she was pregnant with their creation (yes, it takes two create a human)and without any conversation at all about other options before exercising her rights to have an abortion
3: finds out she had another man in her life already.

Those three things he finds out all at the same time while still processing the fact that she left him'

So, I never said he found out she was breaking up with him while also, at the same time, finding out those three things. I made it clear (twice) he was still processing the breakup AND THEN found out the additional three things all at once.


While I think he'd still hate/strongly dislike her for all of that, I would hope most men would move on instead of spending 20 years mulling over it and having it consume their lives. No one, especially a woman like that, is worth ruining your life over. Then again, not everyone deals with things the same way.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights


Here is what I wrote:

I'm sorry - I didn't realize I was going to face cross-examination on these points. Anyway, there's still no evidence all this happened simultaneously - you assume it for some reason. Perhaps, as others have done, you want to present Susan as irredeemable.

Re: Gay Politics and Women's Rights

I watched the movie and, because of how it was presented, I came to the conclusion those three revelations did happen at once. I'd like to see some reasoning as to why it didn't.

Susan's conversation in the car after the abortion

Her: I just don't think I'm ever going to be able to look at Edward again after what I did to his child.

Him: He'll never find out.

Ok, so let's look at that.

They didn't know Edward was there when this conversation was happening. If Edward knew before that moment, how is it possible that he wouldn't ever find out about the abortion? How can her new man even believe Edward would never know about the abortion if Edward knew about the pregnancy? Was he going to give advice like, 'tell Edward you had the baby but he can't ever talk to her or see pictures or be involved at all in her life?'

He didn't know she was pregnant before that moment. The same moment he found out she aborted the baby.



And, Susan IS irredeemable. Even at the end, as this married woman is dressing sexy for her reunion/date with her ex-husband, she makes a point to slip off her wedding ring.
Top