Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27079851-20171120082917/@comment-27295021-20171201124927

Aine1989 wrote: Okay, no. Yes rape by force is different to rape by deception. But both are equally damaging. To compare any form of rape to cutting your finger is gross. I feel like an apology are in order, since I apparently didn't make my meaning sufficently clear: Because to me, i t seems that you are under the impression I were voicing a general opinion, but I'd like for you to contextualize my the metaphor here for a moment. We're not talking real life here, but a   tv show about fairy tale characters depicting a type of rape without any such atrocitiy actually having taken palce in real life. I would  never  stand face to face to a real life victim of rape by deception and call it a cut in the finger, that'd just be insane.

Even so, I beg to differ:  You say both are equally damaging, I say;  who do you know who have gone through both scenarios and by merit of their experiences can look you in the eyes and tell you that's the case? How on Earth can it be equally damaging for someone to consent to having sex with another individual because you think they are someone else, and for example someone being drugged at a party and thrown into a room where someone violate you without having a chance to do anything about it? Or a woman walking to the bus after a night on the town with her friends and having some perverted brutish freakshow drag them into an ally, beat them sneseless and strip them off their clothes and forcibly engaging in sexual misconduct? How can you compare two such things? Especially in the case of Hook?

I did not mean for it to appear as if I regard real life rape of any kind to cutting your finger, I only meant to use that as a  a metaphor in which the sentence "cutting your fingers" was used to address the fact that one sort of rape necessarily will be more damaging to the victim than another. I was expressing the belief that people raging over this thing is silly, because

1) it's a tv show, thus it's not real life.

2) Even if we pretend it were, which is just stupid, they were consenting adults.

3) Hook did not know who Rapunzel is, nor who Gothel were, let alone how they looked like. In addition, both of those female actresses protraying them are attractive in their own way, a trait which more often than not influences a character's depiction. Now - Wish Hook realized Gothel was the witch he heard of only because she changed her appearances in front of his very eyes. Do you really think that the devil-may-care, womanizing James Hook from the Wishverse, pre-fatherhood, would have hesitated to jump into bed with Gothel had appeared to him like her true self, lied about being locked into the tower by an evil witch and offered to "show him how grateful she was" that he had come to rescue her and then showed her true colors? Almost definitively not. And in both cases, Hook would've have had sex with someone he just met, knew little no nothing about, and in both scenario's, he'd be left with Alice while Gothel escaped.

So... Yeah, I do have some trouble taking this rape claim and raging from fellow fans of OUAT seriously, because we're talking of fictional characters in a fictional universe, and a man who would in all likelihood have acted no differently even if he weren't decieved. It wasn't that she turned out to not be Rapunzel that was the issue, not for Hook anyway, it was that she used him to escape the tower and abandoned her newborn child. And therefore, I'd understand this reaction much better in regard to the thing between Zelena and Robin Hood, but even then I'd sort of shrug it off, because again, rape is a horrible thing, and utterly, utterly reprehensible, but as I've already said: W e're talking of fictional characters in a fictional universe.