Man the rape is convoluted on this show.

Did anyone else notice a similar gleam in Echo's & November's eyes when they were just about to kick some serious ass or am I reading too much into it?

I'm confused. Sierra's child abuse? Did I miss something? Or are we just talking about her rape as child abuse because of the way she couldn't consent?

And yeah, it's really weird the way the DH employees think it's rape if the active is in the house, but not rape if they're outside the house, even if in neither instance could they be considered to have legally consented.

It is kind of funny that they were concerned about lingering effects for Sierra when it's business as usual for them to wipe Echo's mind clean of traumatic experiences like being the Most Dangerous Game or having sex with Patton Oswalt.

I think Patton Oswalt is adorable & not only because he's my birthday twin.

Um, can't Alpha be logically the inside guy? I mean, he can do all the techie-wowie "Sweet crunchie geekery, it cann BE DONE!" stuff.

Echo said the inside person was not the same person who send Ballard the photographs. Why would Alpha lie about that?

Indeed, they made a point of emphasising the fact Alpha wasn't involved.

Worth noting they sent out screeners for this episode and then episode 8, so the next episode may be back to badness. Or it might be great and they just didn't want people to see it.

It being Paul's place also explains how they knew where to send Echo. They've got the camera.

I think, from Topher's perspective, that the difference is that the engagements are meant to be wiped, but that there's not really a procedure in place for wiping the neutral state.

Or are we just talking about her rape as child abuse because of the way she couldn't consent?

Yeah, I meant this. The scene really played that way for me, and I think it was intended to. The phrasing her abuser used was like what would be said to a child, referencing "the game" and said patronizingly.

And yeah, the neutral state is supposed to be just that. And the experiences they have in that state are not supposed to have any long term persistence. Like it was remarkable for Victor and Echo and Sierra to eat together repeatedly.

But if it's contiguous in some way, then that introduces complications for the company.

Um, can't Alpha be logically the inside guy?

I don't think so, but he could have imprinted somebody on the inside.

I want to know Adelle's backstory.

Patton Oswalt was wonderful.

Who is Patton Oswalt? Was he the creepy commemorating-his-dead-wife-by-paying-for-a-mindwiped-whore-every-year guy?

And should I know him from other stuff?

I wonder whether there really is someone on the inside trying to undermine the dollhouse or if it was part of Echo's programming to throw Ballard even further off the case.

I think there has to be someone on the inside, otherwise the show really has no place to go, plotwise, except repeating the same skeevy stuff over and over.

So angry about Sierra's child abuse, btw. Not letting that slide. Angry.

Glad to know you've made it all better for her. Except, oh yeah, you haven't.

I'm right there with you. The scene with her handler almost made me run into the bathroom. It was revolting.

Except, on the other hand, if I am to buy into the "it's rape" when the dolls have sex, then the whole thing is rape.

Well, YEAH.

t edit I truly don't see the hotness of Ballard (he falls in my category with Sean Bean, Nathan Fillion, etc., where I *so* don't get it even while scores of people around me drool), but I really REALLY love his "Bitch, PLEASE" face. As seen during the conversation with skeevy anniverary whore-buying guy.