Except that Caroline is 17 (possibly 18) and Ted is 14, therefore, if anyone was guilty of rape, it was she (statutory).

"So therefore Ted's actions would be considered felony sexual assault in most states."
i assume you have some examples of case law to back that up. if not, then it merely amounts to your opinion.
"we'll make our own tripods ours will have four legs" - Oliver, Scary Movie 4

so how do we know, if it did in fact happen, that it wasn't HER that raped HIM?
Exactly. I found the fact that Jake basically handed Caroline off as if she were a piece of meat disturbing when I first watched it as a young girl but the way it it turned out it was not played as a rape. If sex even did happen it seems to have been initiated by Caroline.
I think the OP is just taking this movie WAY too seriously. Why would are you arguing for realism from such a farce?

But Ted ended up just as drunk as Carolineor at least enough for him that he blacked out (because they had the six pack and w/e other alcohol in the car)since he couldn't remember if he cut her hair off or if they had sex or not either so how do we know, if it did in fact happen, that it wasn't HER that raped HIM?
everyone's so quick to jump to the conclusion it was a female rape, that they forget Ted had no idea what happened either and maybe he was the one taken advantage of being the younger, less-experienced of the two. but of course no one wants to mention male rape because how could a geeky freshman guy possibly say no or not want to have sex with a hot, blonde senior girl, right?? double-standards aren't cool, people!
"Dreams aren't perfect, Dawson. They come true, not free."

Yeah, I go back to the ridiculous premise of the whole situation in that Betty would't have immediately realized that it wasn't her boyfriend having sex with her. Again, I think the difference in those scenarios you site is that they deal with seduction/deception rather than a lack of consent by the female.
The difference with Louis is that he fraudulently disguised himself as Stan in order to have sex with Betty. Betty ONLY consents to sex because she's under the assumption that the man in the mask is her long time boyfriend.
State criminal codes vary but I would think all have subsections dealing with consent. I would imagine most have subsections dealing with fraud.
The closest real life example of this that I've ever heard about was a pair of identical twins that were friends with a former employer of mine. They told me that occasionally one of the brothers would bring a girl home to have sex with her. The girl was unaware that he was an identical twin. His brother would be hiding in the bathroom. After the first brother finished having sex with the girl, he would then go to the bathroom and essentially switch places with his brother. Then second brother would then go back to bed with the girl and then have sex with the girl.
Caroline's case in 16 candles is more the nature of a date rape in that she was completely inebriated and unable to consent to sex. I don't think it's as shocking in 16 candles because all the sexual events take place off camera. There's also this disturbing "trading off" of Caroline from the Jock to the Geek as if Caroline was just a piece of property being given away. Jake essentially trades the geek Samantha's panties for a sexual encounter with the inebriated Caroline with the only condition being that Caroline must get home.

There was a true story I saw on tv once about a guy who would try to pick up women by telling them he was a certain actual back-up catcher in baseball or a goalie in hockey. He chose those fake identities because the players were obscure and were often hidden behind masks. And it worked - the guy was nothing special in any sense of the word, but these women would believe him and bring him home to have sex. They truly believed they were hooking up with a professional athlete. He was arrested because he didn't stop there after the women fell asleep, he would rob them. Apart from the robbery, is this that much different than what Louis did?
Anyway, imo Louis certainly acted immorally - but not criminally.

Well I think the big difference in the scenario you present is that Louis was impersonating a specific man in order to have sex with the man's girlfriend. Presumedly there was no way Betty would have had sex with Louis had she known that it was he rather than Stan in the mask.
The other scenario really shows the shallowness of this particular woman in that she would only have sex with this man because he was a doctor from Harvard. I can't see this being analogous with the Revenge of the Nerds scenario.
The only thing I can think of that reminds me of your Harvard doctor scenario was the the film, "Catch Me if You Can." That scenario reminds me more of a seduction/deception rather than a sexual assault.
As far as 16 candles, what Jake is proposing to the geek is that he could sexually assault his girlfriend if he wanted to. He later gives his Again in retrospect, it's odd he's looked upon as romantic hero.

No, I wouldn't want this to be my daughter for a lot of reasons. But it also stikes me that many guys are notorious liars when trying to convince girls to have sex with them. The costume thing is a bit extreme, but what about the guy who says he's a rich doctor with a degree from Harvard, who's a very faithful guy who dates one girl at a time, and then turns out to be nothing of the kind? Can the girl claim sexual assault because she wasn't having sex with the guy she thought she was? You're right though about how ridiculous it was that Betty not only didn't know it wasn't Ted McGinley, but then fell in love with Louis (they even were married in a made for tv special about the "future generation").
Yeah - if, indeed, she's passed out, any type of sexual content would be highly improper and criminal. But right after the scene in the kitchen, they dragged her to his father's Rolls Royce and she wasn't out cold. Then again, this was just Jake bragging about something he COULD do - not that he DID do. And, judging from prom queen's behavior during the rest of the movie, I doubt she would have even minded much if he did do something with her passed out and she later found out about it.

Well, I think the problem is that Betty didn't consent to have sex with Louis, rather she consented to have sex with Stan. It's also kind of ridiculous that Betty would not immediately realize that the man having sex with her was not her buff football player boyfriend but rather a scrawny boy. It's also ridiculous that she would fall in love with Louis after he deceived her and had sex with her under deception. I tend to put these hypothetical questions in terms of, "Would you have a problem with the scenario if Betty was your daughter, sister or niece?" Would you have a problem with a man posing as your daughter's boyfriend tricking her into have sex? Wouldn't you consider that a sexual assault?
I have to disagree on the second part. Jake says, "I have Caroline passed out cold in my bedroom and I could violate 10 different ways if I wanted." If a woman is passed out cold she is by definition unable to consent to sexual intercourse. It doesn't matter if the woman is the girlfriend or wife of the man this action that Jake is proposing is a rape.
There's also a huge difference between an equally drunk married couple having sex and a sober husband/boyfriend having sex with his "passed out cold" girlfriend/wife.

Interesting you bring the Revenge of the Nerds scenario up - because when this movie came out, I was a law student and I actually discussed the scene with my Criminal Law professor. He told me that most definitions of rape were based solely on "consent" of the actual act. So since Betty consented to Louis (even while thinking he was someone else) it would not be considered "rape." Still, something about the scene disturbed me and a similar theme was made far more disturbing in "American Horror Story" with the male dressed up in a black latex suit.
Just to mention something else that's come up on this thread. Jake says he can "violate" his girlfriend because she's lying drunk in his room. The fact is that they had sex many times before (and still dating) and, although the girlfriend is drunk, it doesn't necessarily mean there's no consent, because he can reasonably expect that she's willing. Otherwise, anytime let's say a married couple got drunk and had sex, there's a potential claim of rape (obviously something that's not true).

Caroline was completely intoxicated and incapacitated and therefore unable to consent to have sex with Farmer Ted. So therefore Ted's actions would be considered felony sexual assault in most states.
Oddly enough, this was a somewhat common theme in many 70's-80's comedies which sometimes ended up in a weird "Rape is Love" film trope. Revenge of the nerds has a similar situation where Louis rapes the hot cheerleader by pretending to be the football player. Of coarse in these types of movies rather than outraged, the cheerleader actually falls in love with the geek after he rapes her.

Ted raped Caroline? i just finished watching the scene in the parking lot.
neither Ted nor Caroline could remember for sure they had sex. Ted asks "did i do that to your hair?" to which she didn't know. he then asks "did we uh ?" though she said she's "yeah, pretty sure we did."
so let's say they had sex, it doesn't mean anyone should automatically jump to conclusion is was rape. that's an extremely dangerous assumption to make and really doesn't seem accurate to what actually transpired in the film. think about it, if Caroline had thought she was raped she wouldn't have stayed in the car with Ted, and tell him what she liked best was waking up in his arms, then kissing him.
the rape assumption is dead wrong. it's a ridiculous point, so much so that the OP has lost any and all credibility he/she may have had and i feel no need to address the other flaws in the comment. No use anyway since it amount to anything nearly three decades later.
"we'll make our own tripods ours will have four legs" - Oliver, Scary Movie 4

I know this is a years late reply, but ^^^^this. Everything yellowgum900 explained. That is exactly how I took those scenes regarding Jake, Sam and Caroline.
The gong sound and the name jokes were stupid, but it seemed pretty harmless and more related to stupid humor, with a hardy-har sexual innuendo element to it more than anything else.
I'm cool, you're cool, we're cool, thank you, good night!-My Science Project

This message has been deleted.

You're welcome, lol. I didn't know what "Farmer Ted" meant either until years after! I was, oh, 14-15 years old when it came out. Didn't know a lot of stuff back then. 'Cept the Bohunk thing. Knew that. What I didn't know was why they were calling them "oily". All the Bohunks I knew were like American Bob and Doug McKenzies. I'm not even kidding. But, that probably had more to do with growing up in Northern Minnesota than them being Bohunks.

Actually, it's oily Bohunk, lol. It refers to someone of Bohemian (now called Czech) descent. So, you're correct that they weren't of Italian descent, but of Eastern European.
Thank you!! So THAT is what a 'bohunk' refers to, I'd wondered ever since I first saw this film in the '80s! No Internet then to look it up lol.
This film has a lot of somewhat obscure references, even the 'Farmer Ted' reference which was another one I just learned what it meant! I'd never seen "Animal House", as I disliked John Belushi, so I'd never knew why they called him that.
"I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus."
"Didn't he discover America?"
"Penfold, shush."

Actually, it's oily Bohunk, lol. It refers to someone of Bohemian (now called Czech) descent. So, you're correct that they weren't of Italian descent, but of Eastern European. I know this because I come from a town full of Bohunks and am one myself (minus the "oily" part). I don't know any that act like Italian stereotypes, however. Maybe it has more to do with what state the "Rice Chexs" live in.

Yeah, "Rizcheck" was a strange one but I guess they didn't want to be too overtly stereotypical and call them the Gambinis or Rosellinis or something like that. Anyway it was still a negative stereotype of an Italian family.
I read somewhere that "Long Duck Dong" is a Vietnamese name but basically the character is an amalgam of various Asian stereotypes from the 1930's-1950's. It's really shocking to see that type of character portrayed in a film from 1984.
I think the thing that most disturbs me now is the casual way they basically talk about raping the prom queen. And then the Geek actually rapes her and in 1980's type movies this was a weird "rape is love" trope.

4-Jake the romantic hero? Jake tells the geek referring to Caroline, "I could violate her 10 different ways if I wanted to" WTF?? Wow, what a romantic guy. He's the hero? He gives his inebriated girl-friend to a total stranger and implies that he can have sex with her as long as he gets her home?
Jake Ryan was a typical douche. I know girls used to swoon over him, but he really came across as a douche, plain and simple. That leads me to
15-Shallow Sam. Why does she love Jake? Because he's cute and rich? That seems rather shallow. And what if he gets "bored" with her as well? What happens if she gets drunk at a party? Will Jake "violate" 10 different ways?
Sadly enough, in reality, there are a lot of girls dazzled by sheer douchery. Really, this isn't limited to the 80s. What's popular now? Twilight? Idiot teenage girl becoming overly infatuated by a douchbag vampire? Almost similar in concept, and girls, nowadays, eat that crap up.
5-Long Duck Dong. This has to be one of the most racist characters in film during the last 50 odd years. His character is like some cartoon version of an Asian person from the 1940's. I guess he's supposed to Chinese but his name is Vietnamese and there's a point in the film when he's in a tree wearing a Japanese samurai outfit yelling Banzai?? Also not to mention they give him a name that's the sounds like a large duck's penis in English.
He was actually supposed to be Korean(Korean exchange student), but Gedde Watanabe is Japanese, so basically you had a Japanese American actor portraying what he thought a Korean would sound like(which still came off like Japanese stereotype, LOL).
7-The Rizchecks- The "Oily Beau-hunk" is Italian so of coarse in this film that means that his father is involved in organized crime/mafia.
Again, really strange stereotype portrayals. Rizcheck is not an Italian surname. Pretty Eastern European in origin.

This message has been deleted.

Don't forget how Jake picks up her note at the beginning and takes it rather than pointing out she dropped it. He is basically a creep. I think they picked a very good looking actor on purpose because the audience would not like Jake if he were played by an average looking guy.

I agree completely.
MAGA! FAFO! Schrodinger's Cat walks into a bar, and doesn't. Dumbocraps: evil people who celebrate murder.

I didn't think they had sex either. It seems like you would know that.

Ted and Caroline thought that something might have possibly happened but it's unlikely anything did. If you were too drunk to remember doing it, you were too drunk to do it.
There are 8.2 billion people in the world. 8.19 billion of them have never heard of and don't give a fuck about Charlie Kirk. Get over it.