Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25926288-20150428200304/@comment-25701646-20150429204409

1) I'd definitly say it's rape. Having sex with someone who's unable to consent (or not consent) is rape. As far as Zelena and Robin, Robin was only consenting to Marian, not Zelena.

2) I think it's because they wanted an exciting storyline but then being inattentive to details and getting called out on mistakes/lack of morals, mixed with being clumsy. I think, at first, they just wanted a happy ending for Regina. So they brought Robin in because he's a fairy tale character and, why  not? Marian could have died, so lets go with that. Adds a bit of character deph to him, too. Then why not spice things up and have Emma bring Marian back? Only that made any romantic interaction between Regina and Robin adultery. But if Robin left his wife for her used-to-be murderer, that would have been wrong, too. So, when called out on it by fans, they figured, hey, everyone loves Zelena, why not bring her back?

Of course, I suppose they could have just planned it the way it is all along, but then they'd have to be very clumsy. After all, if Marian was always Zelena, then how did she recognize Roland? And how did she call Robin by name? and why is Robin just now noticing her personality change? And would Zelena not notice a magic ice cream cone that would freeze her heart and then eat it? It just seems like they originally planned it as Marian then, at the accusations of condoing adultery they decided to make her Zelena.

As for Snow and Charming...I wouldn't really classify it as adultery, as Regina forced Charming and Kathryn together. They were never married. They might have technically consented to sex, but only under diminished knowledge, therefore diminished consent.

3) As for morality, yeah, it's screwy. The way I think of it is that the morals they use are either sexist (men can't be raped. Notice it's always the woman who forces or decieves a man into having sex. Something tells me that the writers would have seen it as more evil had Rumplestiltskin taken Belle's heart to have sex with her. Could be wrong, but I don't think I am) or only okay if you don't think much about it. The whole message that Robin Hood presents is that stealing's okay if it's from a jerk. The whole thing with Cruella, we've seen in the past that killing in self-defense is, if not necessarily right, at lest excusable, but in the case of Cruella (Emma never knew Cruella couldn't kill anyone) it's supposed to set Emma on a dark path. Again, the writers give the message that it's okay for Cruella's mother to set dogs after her and lock her in the attic because a child is 'evil'. Now, obviously some kids can be evil, but honestly, doctors? Shrinks? Ms. Manners? Grounding? All better ways to teach a kid about morals than isolating and abusing them.

Also notice the theory that it's suddenly okay that Maleficent's a serial killer. She would have made a great mother anyway. Then there's the theory that it's okay that Neal seduced Emma, even though she was underage at the time and he was an adult (I know this is iffy because we don't have her birthdate, but the timeline that would make it possible for Emma to be an adult would have been very narrow) because she said it was okay. It's understandable that Regina wants to kill Snow because, when Snow was 10, she was tricked by an adult. The list goes on and on...