[ SECRET POST #5138 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5138 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



























02. [SPOILERS for Queen's Gambit]



__________________________________________________


03. [WARNING for mention of animal death]

[Doug]


__________________________________________________



04. [WARNING for mention of rape]



__________________________________________________



05. [WARNING for discussion of sexual harassment/rape fantasies]



__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for mention of child grooming]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #735.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[meadowphoenix]

I mean, it may be hard to visualize in real world terms but I don't think defining how magic acts on a person, and how that works as a understanding of consent is actually hard. Bottom line is you don't think anything less than active consent violations within sexual encounters to the encounter are rape, and that's certainly a framing you can have on consent. I think active manipulation is a violation of consent if it removes the ability to make an informed decision on saying yes, and in sexual encounters, therefore rape (although difficult to make criminal). The magic is irrelevant except that you don't think it was relevant to the consent, and I do. I don't think that's actually a grey area, or an area of nuance, that's straight up we don't think the same about acting on other people's wills or circumstances and how that impacts their ability to say yes.