FANDOM


  • Twitter people's rants are about Gothel raping Hook, and they are so angry, even to Emma Booth (Gothel). Thoughts?

      Preparing Editor Spell
    • People can dislike an storyline, that's ok. But being angry with the actress?!

      C'mon!

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote:
      People can dislike an storyline, that's ok. But being angry with the actress?!

      C'mon!

      It's on instagram. One person said something about Hook getting raped, then Emma liked the coment. Then people (probably CS shippers) got angry, then Emma said "If you don't like it, don't watch", them people got more angry.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • People need to learn how to distinguish actors from characters - I know that some people ship Jennfer Morrison and Colin O'donoghue in real life which is just weird

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ThisIsTaboada wrote:
      Twitter people's rants are about Gothel raping Hook, and they are so angry, even to Emma Booth (Gothel). Thoughts?

      Yep it has definatly began people.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver
      Eskaver removed this reply because:
      Inappropriate and Insensitive
      14:56, November 20, 2017
      This reply has been removed
    • I feel like there are still CS shippers who don’t want to see Hook with anyone else, and they’ve done a similar storyline to this before that received backlash.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Why did it become an issue? Same reason Robin and Zelena was an issue.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      Why did it become an issue? Same reason Robin and Zelena was an issue.

      Exactly.... it is the rape-by-deception plus baby storyline all over again.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote:
      People can dislike an storyline, that's ok. But being angry with the actress?!

      C'mon!

      Considering that Emma Booth is justifying the storyline by stating, that Gothel is insane/evil and Hook consented to sleeping with her, is what got viewers upset at her. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      8Rob wrote:
      People can dislike an storyline, that's ok. But being angry with the actress?!

      C'mon!

      Considering that Emma Booth is justifying the storyline by stating, that Gothel is insane/evil and Hook consented to sleeping with her, is what got viewers upset at her. 


      And why she had to justify anything at the first place? Cos fans attacked her for playing Gothel.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:

      And why she had to justify anything at the first place? Cos fans attacked her for playing Gothel.

      No one attached her..... Emma Booth misconstrued criticism of the storyline, as an attack on her. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • As I said on the other thread, I think the backlash is warranted, but not against the actors and actresses.

      In season 4, 2015, the Perp commited the crime against the Victim. Depending on the timeline and technicality, the Perp, or the Perp's sister killed the Victim's first wife.

      In season 5, 2015 to 2016, the Perp and Perp's sister bullied/pressured the Victim. The Perp got the kid. The Perp's boyfriend killed the Victim. The Victim's first child was left parentless.

      I think there is some fundamental misunderstanding by the showrunners as it's usually excused as being "magic", not "real-life". The only caveat is that after the first instance described here, I don't think it requires such a backlash towards the actors and actresses and not creating a dialogue or conversation.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      I think there is some fundamental misunderstanding by the showrunners as it's usually excused as being "magic", not "real-life". The only caveat is that after the first instance described here, I don't think it requires such a backlash towards the actors and actresses and not creating a dialogue or conversation.

      The problem is that Adam and Eddy do not care, and refuse to listen to critism. It is frustrating that after what Robin Hood was raped and bullied, the writers thought it was fine to repeat that storyline. What happened to Robin Hood portrays, why many victims are scared their rapist will get custody. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I think the issue with Emma Booth is that she is denying it was rape. She said it was "consensual". That is the problem people have.

      And the problem with the storyline itself is a) it was completely unnecessary b) there will be no resolution c) its rape and people are allowed to be bothered by rape in a show.

      And for me, the issue is they haven't learned their lesson by now. Its the exact same scenario as Robin/Zelena and that got such a negative reaction and they thought, hey lets have Gothel do the exact same thing.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:

      And why she had to justify anything at the first place? Cos fans attacked her for playing Gothel.

      No one attached her..... Emma Booth misconstrued criticism of the storyline, as an attack on her. 

      But fans shouldn't be complaining about the storyline to the actress, as she has no control over that. If fans don't like it, they should discuss it with Adam, Eddy, and the other writers.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • With the the stuff that's coming out in Hollywood, you would think ANY writer/production team would be more sensitive to anything in the rape/sexual assault category.

      But nope, apparently not.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:

      And why she had to justify anything at the first place? Cos fans attacked her for playing Gothel.

      No one attached her..... Emma Booth misconstrued criticism of the storyline, as an attack on her. 


      I seriously invite you to read her Instagram or Twitter comments if you think that no one attacked her.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      With the the stuff that's coming out in Hollywood, you would think ANY writer/production team would be more sensitive to anything in the rape/sexual assault category.

      But nope, apparently not.

      I completely agree.

      However, this insensitivity is part of the reason sexual abuse is so rampant, in Hollywood. Producers seem to view sex purely for entertainment purposes, since it nothing more than a handshake to them. They also refuse to acknowledge that victim-blaming is harassment. Remember, this is the same industry that celebrated Roman Polanski. Despite him being a convicted child-rapist, who feld the USA so as not to serve his sentence. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      I completely agree.

      However, this insensitivity is part of the reason sexual abuse is so rampant, in Hollywood. Producers seem to view sex purely for entertainment purposes, since it nothing more than a handshake to them. They also refuse to acknowledge that victim-blaming is harassment. Remember, this is the same industry that celebrated Roman Polanski. Despite him being a convicted child-rapist, who feld the USA so as not to serve his sentence. 

      ^^ So much this.

      And don't forget, rape/sexual assault/harassment against men is seen as a joke. It wasn't until very recently that rape definitions started getting changed to include male victims.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Whatever is happening/happened in Hollywood is not a reason to attack Emma Booth for what her character did. Just saying.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      And don't forget, rape/sexual assault/harassment against men is seen as a joke. It wasn't until very recently that rape definitions started getting changed to include male victims.

      As woman it sickens me, that any form of sexual abuse against a man, is considered a joke. It is a good, that many of the fans speaking out against this storyline, are women. Sexual abuse is not a laughing matter, nor is the gender of the victim.

      Honestly, ABC needs to cancel OUaT at the end of S7. Adam, Eddy, and the entire writing staff have proven to be horrible, tacky people who think romanticizing abuse is acceptable entertainment. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:
      Whatever is happening/happened in Hollywood is not a reason to attack Emma Booth for what her character did. Just saying.

      Yes, it is.... Emma Booth defended the storyline, as being a consensual one-night stand. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:
      Whatever is happening/happened in Hollywood is not a reason to attack Emma Booth for what her character did. Just saying.
      Yes, it is.... Emma Booth defended the storyline, as being a consensual one-night stand. 

      She was attacked before that, and that is NOT normal.

      Whatever she said afterwards. If you think treating people like shit for what they're playing is normal, then... That's a form of abuse too.

      The same happened to Bex after that storyline in S4B. Too many people can't seem to understand the difference between real people and characters. And that IS a real problem.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote: Whatever is happening/happened in Hollywood is not a reason to attack Emma Booth for what her character did. Just saying.

      Fans can be horrible regardless. I don't think many people really realize the implications of this kind of storyline, including the writers and Emma.

      And that's not okay, but neither is getting as nasty as some people do online.

      All I'm sayin is the we as a society (and I mean American society) treat sexual assault in some pretty terrible ways. Especially when the victim is male. We're only just now starting to make changes.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      All I'm sayin is the we as a society (and I mean American society) treat sexual assault in some pretty terrible ways. Especially when the victim is male. We're only just now starting to make changes.

      This is the sad truth. Though, it is good that fans are speaking out against it. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:

      And why she had to justify anything at the first place? Cos fans attacked her for playing Gothel.

      No one attached her..... Emma Booth misconstrued criticism of the storyline, as an attack on her. 
      But fans shouldn't be complaining about the storyline to the actress, as she has no control over that. If fans don't like it, they should discuss it with Adam, Eddy, and the other writers.

      Actors don't deserve hate for simply playing a part in a rape storyline. No sane person is going to think someone who plays a murderer condones murder. 

      However, if those actors do, for whatever reason, decide to comment on it, and then brush it off as something it isn't, then I think that's up for criticism. They definitely don't need to justify it or comment on it, so I think they shouldn't unless they're willing to speak out against it and are aware themselves of the issues. 

      The writers who responded to the criticism on Twitter wouldn't even acknowledge the word and told people it had to happen because "Gothel is evil, she does evil things." Well, then that's saying that they just decided to use rape as a plot point again with no real addressing of the issue. And if that's the writers' viewpoint, then the actors kinda have to choose between supporting them and saying it's not rape orrrr speaking out against it on their own. Its a tricky spot to be in.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Brigitte Hales did say it would be addressed. For now, we're judging without seeing or knowing how they'll treat it.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Yeah, I would wait to see how it will be handled. 

      Gothel might end up exploding before any issues are deal with and then the show is not renewed and all the wrtiers say "Thanks for watching! Bye-bye!"

      But so far, I don't think it's worse than literally everything they did to Robin/Marian/Roland. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Sure, Gothel tricked Hook into believing she was Rapunzel, but it was definitely not rape. Deception and kinda deceitful, yes, but certainly not rape. It was mutual, Hook wanted just as much as Gothel did. Deception or not, if they both wanted it, it isn't rape.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Andrewh7 wrote:
      Sure, Gothel tricked Hook into believing she was Rapunzel, but it was definitely not rape. Deception and kinda deceitful, yes, but certainly not rape. It was mutual, Hook wanted just as much as Gothel did. Deception or not, if they both wanted it, it isn't rape.

      It's called rape by deception. 

      Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:
      Brigitte Hales did say it would be addressed. For now, we're judging without seeing or knowing how they'll treat it.

      Okay so someone asked her if they would be addressing if Hook was raped and if Hook was going talk about it. Her reply was that Gothel being a villain would be addressed. That seems like a purposely-worded roundabout way to put the focus back on Evil Gothel, which would be repeating their S4-5 mistake. Zelena and Regina got more focus in the aftermath of Robin's rape than Robin did, which was the wrong way to treat it. 

      I just have a hard time having faith that they'll actually address it correctly this time when they still can't even admit to it on Twitter? Like that's really weird to me. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • JennaMae wrote:

      The writers who responded to the criticism on Twitter wouldn't even acknowledge the word and told people it had to happen because "Gothel is evil, she does evil things." Well, then that's saying that they just decided to use rape as a plot point again with no real addressing of the issue. 

      The writers' lack of tact, disgusts me to no end. There are plenty of things Gothel could have done, to portray just how evil she was. They did not have to repeat a storyline, which received an incredible amount of backlash. That, in and of itself, reeks of exploitation of sexual abuse and its victims. I do not throw around the word rape lightly, but what happened to Robin Hood and Wish Hook was rape. Brushing what happened aside, or considering it a one-night stand, is victim-blaming. This is exactly how the likes Harey Weinstein, and Kevin Spacey were able to get way with thei abusive behavior for so long. The industry turned their backs on the victims, and justified the abuse as normal business. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • The issue for me, and I assume many fans, is that there are no consequences for the rape by deception.

      Zelena should not have custody of her child. Yeah, it's a show, so I don't expect reality to reign, but she got pretty much no punishment for raping Robin Hood. THAT is the issue imo.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      The issue for me, and I assume many fans, is that there are no consequences for the rape by deception.

      Zelena should not have custody of her child. Yeah, it's a show, so I don't expect reality to reign, but she got pretty much no punishment for raping Robin Hood. THAT is the issue imo.

      Add on Zelena killing his wife (Regina in a certain timeline) and Regina pressuring Robin to trust Zelena and then Robin's death/swift departure after being offscreen for periods of time.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      Zelena should not have custody of her child. Yeah, it's a show, so I don't expect reality to reign, but she got pretty much no punishment for raping Robin Hood. THAT is the issue imo.

      Not only did Zelena get custody of the baby, she had the audacity to name the child after Robin Hood. Not only did she rape him and her boyfriend murder him, but she named a the baby she bullied him into allowing her to see after him.... it was sickening. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      Utter solitude wrote:
      The issue for me, and I assume many fans, is that there are no consequences for the rape by deception.

      Zelena should not have custody of her child. Yeah, it's a show, so I don't expect reality to reign, but she got pretty much no punishment for raping Robin Hood. THAT is the issue imo.

      Add on Zelena killing his wife (Regina in a certain timeline) and Regina pressuring Robin to trust Zelena and then Robin's death/swift departure after being offscreen for periods of time.

      Exactly. If the roles were reversed... the idea wouldn't have left the writers room. And even if it did, the male perp would have been thrown in jail forever or killed.

      That is what makes not okay. Any form of rape is not okay. It seems like the writers don't think past the "well he thought it was so and so so it's consensual" piece.

      This kind of story isn't new. Heracles (Hercules) was the product of rape by deception, too. I could find any number of examples. Or examples of modern shows where male characters are too drunk to say no to sex, and make a joke of it.

      I at least want a scene where Zelena explains to baby Robin how she was conceived. /endrant

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      Exactly. If the roles were reversed... the idea wouldn't have left the writers room. And even if it did, the male perp would have been thrown in jail forever or killed.

      That is what makes not okay. Any form of rape is not okay. It seems like the writers don't think past the "well he thought it was so and so so it's consensual" piece.

      This is an unfortuately common double-standard, in regards to sexual abuse/assualt/harrasment and rape. 

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_of_males#Female-on-male_rape

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ^^ yup. Remember #MeToo that went around facebook a few weeks ago? It was an eye opener for me because a number of my male friends did it too.

      I don't expect this show to be the flagship of changing Hollywood thinking on this subject, but to use the rapist storyline again? come on now.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • In the show's defense, the writers reuse a lot of stuff. If the show got a 10th season, I wouldn't put it past them reusing this or a similar storyline.

      But then again, I think Once has a lot of problematic areas in morality, criminal justice, romance, etc.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Andrewh7 wrote: Sure, Gothel tricked Hook into believing she was Rapunzel, but it was definitely not rape. Deception and kinda deceitful, yes, but certainly not rape. It was mutual, Hook wanted just as much as Gothel did. Deception or not, if they both wanted it, it isn't rape.

      Please explain to me how Hook wanting to have sex with Rapunzel, but not Gothel, is not rape.

      If I pretended to be your spouse (or boyfriend/girlfriend) is that not rape? And would you say this if it was, say, Rumple pretending to be Charming and raping Snow White?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      In the show's defense, the writers reuse a lot of stuff. If the show got a 10th season, I wouldn't put it past them reusing this or a similar storyline.

      How on earth is that a legitimate defense?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Eskaver wrote:
      In the show's defense, the writers reuse a lot of stuff. If the show got a 10th season, I wouldn't put it past them reusing this or a similar storyline.
      How on earth is that a legitimate defense?

      It isn't....I think I was thinking of something, but I've got nothing. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      ^^ yup. Remember #MeToo that went around facebook a few weeks ago? It was an eye opener for me because a number of my male friends did it too.

      The sad thing, is that most of the people I know, who were sexually abused are male. This was an eyeopener for me, long before the #MeToo campaign. I destinctly remember that years ago, Law & Order: SVU did an episode about female-on-male rape. The episode was basically all about the double-standards of sexual abuse, and how society views the subject. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver
      Eskaver removed this reply because:
      No need
      23:10, November 20, 2017
      This reply has been removed
    • Eskaver wrote:

      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Eskaver wrote:
      In the show's defense, the writers reuse a lot of stuff. If the show got a 10th season, I wouldn't put it past them reusing this or a similar storyline.
      How on earth is that a legitimate defense?

      It isn't....I think I was thinking of something, but I've got nothing. 

      Was your point along the lines of "well they did it once, so of course they feel comfortable doing it again?"

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      The sad thing, is that most of the people I know, who were sexually abused are male. This was an eyeopener for me, long before the #MeToo campaign. I destinctly remember that years ago, Law & Order: SVU did an episode about female-on-male rape. The episode was basically all about the double-standards of sexual abuse, and how society views the subject. 

      I appreciate that we as a society are starting to realize how crappy this double standard is (and how we treat victims in general), and starting to call out on it. But we still live in a world where male rape victims have to pay child support and martial rape is not illegal.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:


      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Eskaver wrote:
      In the show's defense, the writers reuse a lot of stuff. If the show got a 10th season, I wouldn't put it past them reusing this or a similar storyline.
      How on earth is that a legitimate defense?
      It isn't....I think I was thinking of something, but I've got nothing. 
      Was your point along the lines of "well they did it once, so of course they feel comfortable doing it again?"

      More of "I think they didn't think it through before and will likely do it again". I think that thinking is very problematic by the writers from Regina-Graham and onwards. Plus, I don't think that the showrunners give much thought into the publicity or fan backlash, sadly. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      No, more of "I think they didn't think it through before and will likely do it again". I think that thinking is very problematic by the writers from Regina-Graham and onwards.

      I think that's the point a lot of us are making.

      This storyline is like a thousand years old.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I hope this time they will consider doing some kernel of justice, but as I and others mentioned...the writers had an entire year to deal with Robin and Zelena, and at the end, Robin was killed off in a terrible way and brought back in part in an effort to placate.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      I appreciate that we as a society are starting to realize how crappy this double standard is (and how we treat victims in general), and starting to call out on it. But we still live in a world where male rape victims have to pay child support and martial rape is not illegal.

      I feel like society is more open about the problematic double-standards, than the government and Hollywood are. The government just cares about lobbists and money. While, Hollywood is a cesspool of perverts and hypocrites. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Well strictly talking, most of the crimes are never adressed on OUaT. The Zelena/Robin and the Gothel/Hook rape wouldn't be the first time this happens. It's like murders. They completely trivialize them.

      Regina is a mass murderer and she never paid for it. Same with Rumple and Zelena. Ursula tried to kill Snow and Hook in 4x15 and five minutes later they were kissing her good-bye in the docks. It's ridiculous. It's like they only need to show the Charmings a sad puppy face and then everyone gets a free pass

      This rape by the deception thing is mostly based on The Little Mermaid with Ursula/Vanessa subplot, but it does look really bad when taken to real life

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • See, I don't think Robin being brought back was an effort to placate. I don't think the writers consider fan reaction at all.

      Male rape is not a thing in their minds. So the struggle over the baby was about Zelena, not Robin Hood. And Roland disappeared, because he's male and this show's producers love the "Strong female" idea, and hide behind it. Pretty much every writer has confessed an attachment to Regina... so they bring back Robin Hood so that some form of Regina ends up with her TL. It's business as usual for them.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      See, I don't think Robin being brought back was an effort to placate. I don't think the writers consider fan reaction at all.

      Male rape is not a thing in their minds. So the struggle over the baby was about Zelena, not Robin Hood. And Roland disappeared, because he's male and this show's producers love the "Strong female" idea, and hide behind it. Pretty much every writer has confessed an attachment to Regina... so they bring back Robin Hood so that some form of Regina ends up with her TL. It's business as usual for them.

      This.... all of this!!!!

      Bridgette Hales' response to the critism on Twitter, proves this is exactly how the OUaT creative team thinks. Gothel raping Hook, was about her being evil. Not about him having been taken advantage of, or that his love for Alice shows a true strength of character. The problem viewers have is the focus being on the perp. Zelena's rape baby was used as a means to redeem her. Seriously, that was disgusting on so many levels.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I think the way that the situation was handled is the real issue. Instead of doing anything over the fact that he was taken advantage of, Hook ignores that. The writers seem tasteless in that decision. It isn’t addressed, and they just move forward with the storyline as if it was something commonplace.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • TheRose123 wrote:
      Instead of doing anything over the fact that he was taken advantage of, Hook ignores that. 

      Not only that, but Rogers is still being taken advange of in Hyperion Heights. He spend both those episodes being unwittlingly, manipulated by Ivy and Gothel. While, those two joked about him being a one-night stand. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      TheRose123 wrote:
      Instead of doing anything over the fact that he was taken advantage of, Hook ignores that. 

      Not only that, but Rogers is still being taken advange of in Hyperion Heights. He spend both those episodes being unwittlingly, manipulated by Ivy and Gothel. While, those two joked about him being a one-night stand. 

      The writers have to fix this.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      TheRose123 wrote:
      Instead of doing anything over the fact that he was taken advantage of, Hook ignores that. 
      Not only that, but Rogers is still being taken advange of in Hyperion Heights. He spend both those episodes being unwittlingly, manipulated by Ivy and Gothel. While, those two joked about him being a one-night stand. 

      Well, to Gothel and Driz, that's what it was. Gothel clearly doesn't see herself as a rapist, but I don't think most rapist do. They see the sex as something that both people wanted.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

      That's a bit obfuscating. Once has presented this issue. It should be dealt with. The discussion isn't "Pick which societal problem to focus on".

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

      Incorrect.... double-standards, of any kind, are a huge societal issue.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote: While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

      Honey, what is your point? The show has shown men getting raped since season one. "men rape women more!" makes it look like you're okay with this. The societal issue is RAPE, all rape. downplaying one type, like you're doing here, is disgusting.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • TheRose123 wrote:

      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      TheRose123 wrote:
      Instead of doing anything over the fact that he was taken advantage of, Hook ignores that. 
      Not only that, but Rogers is still being taken advange of in Hyperion Heights. He spend both those episodes being unwittlingly, manipulated by Ivy and Gothel. While, those two joked about him being a one-night stand. 
      The writers have to fix this.

      They won't

      At this point they haven't even addressed Graham being murdered

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.
      Incorrect.... double-standards, of any kind, are a huge societal issue.

      Right, but that's part of the point. Men almost always benefit from society's double standards. A man being raped not being taken seriously is about one of the only things where a woman has an advantage, but then the chance a woman will get raped is much higher than the chance a man will, so again the men come out on top, for not having to deal with the experience in the first place.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote:
      TheRose123 wrote:

      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:


      TheRose123 wrote:
      Instead of doing anything over the fact that he was taken advantage of, Hook ignores that. 
      Not only that, but Rogers is still being taken advange of in Hyperion Heights. He spend both those episodes being unwittlingly, manipulated by Ivy and Gothel. While, those two joked about him being a one-night stand. 
      The writers have to fix this.
      They won't

      At this point they haven't even addressed Graham being murdered

      They did, just in an unsatisfying and offscreen way.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

      This is part of the problem

      Assuming people do or don't things only because of their gender

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote: While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

      Honey, what is your point? The show has shown men getting raped since season one.

      My point is the writers aren't conserned with adult men getting raped, and I think that is because an adult man getting raped by a woman is a very small problem. Is it trivializing the actual issue a bit, sure, but the issue isn't that common to begin with.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • lol so since you think the problem is small (and it's not, btw) nobody should be upset about it?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Right, but that's part of the point. Men almost always benefit from society's double standards. A man being raped not being taken seriously is about one of the only things where a woman has an advantage, but then the chance a woman will get raped is much higher than the chance a man will, so again the men come out on top, for not having to deal with the experience in the first place.

      Dude, do you even hear yourself?

      My father had to fight tooth and nail, for custody of me as a minor, because women get preference in family court. Despite the fact, that my mother clearly was not interested in my well-being, at the time. Your old-fashioned mentality is grotesque, and part of the reason these double-standards still exist. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote: While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.

      Honey, what is your point? The show has shown men getting raped since season one. "men rape women more!" makes it look like you're okay with this. The societal issue is RAPE, all rape. downplaying one type, like you're doing here, is disgusting.

      I'm not downplaying it, I'm merely pointing out men are almost always in the position of power, and more likely to commit sexual assult. We can't solve the issue of rape, if we don't acknowlege the fact of who is most often the raper and who is the rapee. And as I said, the raper is almost always a man, and the rapee is almost always a woman (followed by children and then men).

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.
      This is part of the problem

      Assuming people do or don't things only because of their gender

      We need to recognize the parts genders play in society, whether people like it or not.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • (MOD): Although the conversation is one to be discussed, a full discussion on the societal issues should be on a separate thread. The thread is focused on Gothel, Hook, and the events in that episode and those alike within the show.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • The problem is RAPE. Claiming that men are the problem shifts the blame off them (since you're saying something about the gender makes them do it more). Female on make rape is grossly underreported and needs to stop. <making this statement doesn't take away from male on female rape.

      We need to change, as a society, how we view this stuff. We put victims through hell. We downplay some forms of rape. We act like we should care only about the "Big things" or that if something happened a long time ago, theres no point in bringing it to light.

      Screw all that. Rape in any form is wrong. hiding behind a show to act like it's okay needs to stop.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      lol so since you think the problem is small (and it's not, btw) nobody should be upset about it?

      I didn't say that. I did say it is an issue, but I'm pointing out that the issue isn't as large as people seem to be making it out to be, and honestly, it seems like people are trivilizing the larger problem, which is the amount and how often women get raped, by being so upset about a few fictional men.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      The problem is RAPE. Claiming that men are the problem shifts the blame off them (since you're saying something about the gender makes them do it more). Female on make rape is grossly underreported and needs to stop. <making this statement doesn't take away from male on female rape.

      We need to change, as a society, how we view this stuff. We put victims through hell. We downplay some forms of rape. We act like we should care only about the "Big things" or that if something happened a long time ago, theres no point in bringing it to light.

      Screw all that. Rape in any form is wrong. hiding behind a show to act like it's okay needs to stop.

      All rape is wrong, of course. I never said otherwise. And I'm not shifting the blame off men, I'm merely pointing out that sexual/gender difference between men and women, both actual biological ones, and ones that society has given to both sexes (even though they aren't really warrented most of the time), are things that add to this issue and the complexity of solving it. Are Adam and Eddy part of the problem? Maybe, but so are alot of other people, places, and things. Hell, you could even argue fairy tales, the basis of the show, are part of the problem, and yet, here we are all watching the show.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Right, because what fans are about is Robin and Hook and Graham, LITERALLY, and not what they represent, right?

      Esk, this thread is about fans being angry, is it not? discussing the societal issue alongside the show's callous handling of it is appropriate.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      Right, because what fans are about is Robin and Hook and Graham, LITERALLY, and not what they represent, right?

      Well, that's fair. I guess I tend to remove myself from issues a bit when it is fictional characters, because if I didn't, I wouldn't enjoy any show, as all shows tend to have the characters do terrible things at one point or another to advance plot.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      8Rob wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.
      This is part of the problem

      Assuming people do or don't things only because of their gender

      We need to recognize the parts genders play in society, whether people like it or not.

      And you need to recognize that diving issues into parts like you're trying to do is not appropriate. Nobody in this thread downplayed the fact that women are the major victims of sex crimes.

      But the victims on the show are males who are unable to truly consent for various reasons (mmmmmmagic) and that touches on the very real life issues that male rape victims face. Not only that, but the women face NO consequences.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      Right, because what fans are about is Robin and Hook and Graham, LITERALLY, and not what they represent, right?

      Esk, this thread is about fans being angry, is it not? discussing the societal issue alongside the show's callous handling of it is appropriate.

      Yes, to the latter. I just want everyone to be aware about the deceptive crime (in-show/Society) and how it was handled in the show, not additional societal issues as it dillutes the discussion. (Plus, it's fair to the OP to not venture too far from its premise.) Additional issues deserve their own separate thread.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Utter solitude wrote:
      Right, because what fans are about is Robin and Hook and Graham, LITERALLY, and not what they represent, right?

      Well, that's fair. I guess I tend to remove myself from issues a bit when it is fictional characters, because if I didn't, I wouldn't enjoy any show, as all shows tend to have the characters do terrible things at one point or another to advance plot.

      This is a good point. I don't think any of us expect the show to follow the rules of actual reality, but some things cross a line, you know? We expect better, I guess.

      I've hijacked this thread enough and will hush now XD

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      8Rob wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      While I agree that there are issues with men (and boys) being tricked into sex (with a woman or a man), or otherwise raped, I don't think adult men being raped by adult women is as big of a problem as many of you are making it out to be, which may be why the writers aren't worried about it being portrayed. Some of you even mention if the roles were reversed, they would never do that on the show. But that's the point, adult men are the most likely to rape someone (be it a woman, man, girl, or boy), and it has been that way in many cultures for a long time. Again, not saying an adult man can't be raped by a woman, but as far as rape and sexual assult go, I think that is the least of our problems regarding this stuff. We have to solve the bigger problem first, how to get men to stop raping everybody. So while I appreciate everyone wanting to come to the defense of Graham, Robin, and WHook, let's keep in mind that they are not representative of the bigger societal problem.
      This is part of the problem

      Assuming people do or don't things only because of their gender

      We need to recognize the parts genders play in society, whether people like it or not.
      And you need to recognize that diving issues into parts like you're trying to do is not appropriate. Nobody in this thread downplayed the fact that women are the major victims of sex crimes.

      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Utter solitude wrote:
      Right, because what fans are about is Robin and Hook and Graham, LITERALLY, and not what they represent, right?
      Well, that's fair. I guess I tend to remove myself from issues a bit when it is fictional characters, because if I didn't, I wouldn't enjoy any show, as all shows tend to have the characters do terrible things at one point or another to advance plot.
      This is a good point. I don't think any of us expect the show to follow the rules of actual reality, but some things cross a line, you know? We expect better, I guess.

      I've hijacked this thread enough and will hush now XD

      Yeah, I think I've given my piece now as well, so I'll try to be quiet. XD

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

      Do we need to talk about it when it's everywhere? (Does that make sense? lol) Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.

      I completely agree. 

      If it were not for this being a non-spoiler thread, I would also mention a potential storyline that is incredibly problematic. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • As well, both of the previous victims on this show have died, and the perpetrator has not had this held against them and were later considered “heroes”.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • TheRose123 wrote:
      As well, both of the previous victims on this show have died, and the perpetrator has not had this held against them and were later considered “heroes”.

      Yup.... which is probably, why some people are afraid OUaT will attempt, to pair up Hook and Gothel. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • There is no way Hookthel is happening

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I never considered it rape until recently, yes it's that thing, they should really stop doing this shit, I don't know why they keep doing it honestly. But yeah, it does show how evil Gothel is, so IF they keep her evil and don't redeem her, I could sorta accept this.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Chameleon-Guy wrote:
      I never considered it rape until recently, yes it's that thing, they should really stop doing this shit, I don't know why they keep doing it honestly. But yeah, it does show how evil Gothel is, so IF they keep her evil and don't redeem her, I could sorta accept this.

      The issue with that is less about Gothel being "evil", but actual acknowledgement and justice taking place.

      Ex. With Graham, the writers tried to give a convoluted reason to explain how despite Regina's having his heart, the relationship was voluntary and that despite Regina casting his cursed personality that he had free will. The egregious in-show part was that Graham was murdered and it was never discussed ever again.

      Another example could easily be that Regina chose to start a relationship with a guy whose wife she executed (as far as she knew)  and she never once told him that. Sure Zelena later said that she did it, but Regina never once during those several weeks told Robin. Let's not get into the Zelena-Robin thing.

      So, yeah, the issue is more of acknowledgement and justice. Plus, they shouldn't play around with issues if they don't do adequate nuance. 

      Ex. Briefly, Zelena and Robin.

      Regina acknowledged that it was a vile thing (though Robin ever gave Regina permission to speak on his behalf) and while it was fine to have Zelena partly sympathetic, Zelena soon got access to her child, through Regina pressuring Robin, and then Robin was killed (in an awful way as they actually annihilated him beyond hope of the afterlife). Just the optics alone seems in poor taste.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote: Another example could easily be that Regina chose to start a relationship with a guy whose wife she executed (as far as she knew)  and she never once told him that. Sure Zelena later said that she did it, but Regina never once during those several weeks told Robin.

      That's because Regina didn't know she was the one who killed Marian. "A Tale of Two Sisters" establishes that she didn't remember the incident where Marian was incarcerated and sentenced to death. Which is why she had Sidney look into the past and show these events to her.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Nightlily wrote:

      Eskaver wrote: Another example could easily be that Regina chose to start a relationship with a guy whose wife she executed (as far as she knew)  and she never once told him that. Sure Zelena later said that she did it, but Regina never once during those several weeks told Robin.

      That's because Regina didn't know she was the one who killed Marian. "A Tale of Two Sisters" establishes that she didn't remember the incident where Marian was incarcerated and sentenced to death. Which is why she had Sidney look into the past and show these events to her.

      I know that and I don't lean to hard on that, but Regina never brought it up or expressed some personal guilt/remorse to Robin. Sure, she did feel remorse which prompted her to save Marian, but they could hae had her express some of that remorse with Robin. Something like "Robin, I've done terrible to things to Marian. She has a point. I have to make this right." or something so at least there's implication that Robin knows.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • For me, this issue (same with Zelena/Robin) is just an oversensitiveness (if that's even a real word, you get it.) And it became more sensitive because of the sexual harrassment cases in Hollywood, and some (not all) CS shippers added fuel to the fire. Plus, Emma Booth's attitude towards the issue. It became a huge mess.

      I agree and salute Allison's response to this issue. 

      Part 1 - https://twitter.com/TVAlisonActress/status/932372291752570880

      Part 2 - https://twitter.com/TVAlisonActress/status/932375156063981569

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Chameleon-Guy wrote: I never considered it rape until recently, yes it's that thing, they should really stop doing this shit, I don't know why they keep doing it honestly. But yeah, it does show how evil Gothel is, so IF they keep her evil and don't redeem her, I could sorta accept this.

      The issue is focusing on the perpetrators, which is what got everyone upset. When Zelena raped Robin Hood, it was later used as a means to redeem her. She never should have been allowed to have custody of the baby, and Regina was wrong to bully Robin into it. Gothel not only raped Hook, but then abandoned the child. She intended to leave it in the tower to die. OUaT also hinted that Gothel may have feelings for Hook. This is a huge problem, in and of itself.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Had this been "13 reasons why", I'd get the reaction, since it romanticied the act of suicide and misrepresented the situation of having suicidal thoughts as one in which other people are powerless to help whoever. This, however, don't even come close to cause this much damage, so I think the real issue is that people watch, not only a TV show about bloody fairy tale and Disney characters, but a TV show about bloody fairy tale and Disney characters with notoriously lazy and inconsistent writing and are for some reason takes it seriously

      One thing is being personally invested in a show, I mean - I can watch Free Wily, the Lion King and so forth and get tear-eyed, but that's it, I never get genuinely angry. And people getting real life upset by OUAT makes about as much sense as me getting worked up over someone telling me unicorns and goblins aren't real. It's stupid.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Feelings?

      I only caught that she said Hook was a good..... well..... lover (lol), but that's it

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow wrote:
      Had this been "13 reasons why", I'd get the reaction, since it romanticied the act of suicide and misrepresented the situation of having suicidal thoughts as one in which other people are powerless to help whoever. This, however, don't even come close to cause this much damage, so I think the real issue is that people watch, not only a TV show about bloody fairy tale and Disney characters, but a TV show about bloody fairy tale and Disney characters with notoriously lazy and inconsistent writing and are for some reason takes it seriously

      One thing is being personally invested in a show, I mean - I can watch Free Wily, the Lion King and so forth and get tear-eyed, but that's it, I never get genuinely angry. And people getting real life upset by OUAT makes about as much sense as me getting worked up over someone telling me unicorns and goblins aren't real. It's stupid.

      Why shouldn't we take it seriously? This isn't the writers telling us Santa isn't real. It is them, again, using a very serious issue as a plot point. We know Hook isn't getting justice for what was done to him. Hell he might end up dating his rapist, or being thankful for it.

      It is treating rape as not that big an issue. Which will make people angry

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ThisIsTaboada wrote:

      I agree and salute Allison's response to this issue. 

      Part 1 - https://twitter.com/TVAlisonActress/status/932372291752570880

      Part 2 - https://twitter.com/TVAlisonActress/status/932375156063981569

      I only agree with Alison's first Tweet. However, she does not seem to understand, that Hook loving Alice unconditionally, is not the norm. Especially, given that she looks like Gothel. Many people in this scenario would blame, and hate the child. Similar to what happened with Rumplestilskin, when he was born.

      It also does not help, that Rogers is the ultimate tool in Hyperion Heights. Seriously, he is being manipulated be everyone. Especially, the people who hurt him most.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Aine1989 wrote:

      Why shouldn't we take it seriously? This isn't the writers telling us Santa isn't real. It is them, again, using a very serious issue as a plot point. We know Hook isn't getting justice for what was done to him. Hell he might end up dating his rapist, or being thankful for it.

      It is treating rape as not that big an issue. Which will make people angry

      Rape is forcing someone to have sex with you. Tricking someone to consent to have sex by pretending you are someomne else are ten shades of immoral, but it's not, in fact, rape.

      That aside. You're right, this is actually pretty big deal, I mean, just imagine: the writers actually telling us of two horny adults jumping in bed with each other without knowing much about each other, even if one is more in the the dark than the other, notwithstanding, this is the fictional Captain Hook from Peter Pan fathering Alice in Wonderland by having sex with the witch from Tangled, how on Earth are we supposed to not take it seriously? And not only is this Captain Hook fathering Alice in Wonderland, no, no, no, this is Captain Hook fathering Alice in Wonderland where the mother ended a nine month nine twelve month early and went through that whole process in one night :P

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      ThisIsTaboada wrote:

      I agree and salute Allison's response to this issue. 

      Part 1 - https://twitter.com/TVAlisonActress/status/932372291752570880

      Part 2 - https://twitter.com/TVAlisonActress/status/932375156063981569

      I only agree with Alison's first Tweet. However, she does not seem to understand, that Hook loving Alice unconditionally, is not the norm. Especially, given that she looks like Gothel. Many people in this scenario would blame, and hate the child. Similar to what happened with Rumplestilskin, when he was born.

      It also does not help, that Rogers is the ultimate tool in Hyperion Heights. Seriously, he is being manipulated be everyone. Especially, the people who hurt him most.


      So what? You'd prefer to see Hook completely abandoning Alice and refuse to even talk to her? Blaming the child who asked nothing? And then, people complained that OUAT is not a family show enough...

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

      Do we need to talk about it when it's everywhere? (Does that make sense? lol) Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.

      I get it, but (and I think Esk has pointed this out multiple times before) it isn't just these rapes that go unpunished, it is nearly everything, done by both heroes and villains. Regina, Zelena, Rumple, Hook, etc. have all killed multiple people, and have not had to pay for those crimes. Snow, Robin, etc. have stole things, again with no punishment. Snow and Charming kidnapped Mal's baby, and again nothing happened to them. The list can go on and on. So yes, rape goes unpunished on this show, but so does every other crime, including murder (which I consider the worst crime of all), and no one bats an eyelash.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow wrote:

      Aine1989 wrote:

      Why shouldn't we take it seriously? This isn't the writers telling us Santa isn't real. It is them, again, using a very serious issue as a plot point. We know Hook isn't getting justice for what was done to him. Hell he might end up dating his rapist, or being thankful for it.

      It is treating rape as not that big an issue. Which will make people angry

      Rape is forcing someone to have sex with you. Tricking someone to consent to have sex by pretending you are someomne else are ten shades of immoral, but it's not, in fact, rape.

      That aside. You're right, this is actually pretty big deal, I mean, just imagine: the writers actually telling us of two horny adults jumping in bed with each other without knowing much about each other, even if one is more in the the dark than the other, notwithstanding, this is the fictional Captain Hook from Peter Pan fathering Alice in Wonderland by having sex with the witch from Tangled, how on Earth are we supposed to not take it seriously? And not only is this Captain Hook fathering Alice in Wonderland, no, no, no, this is Captain Hook fathering Alice in Wonderland where the mother ended a twelve month pregnancy twelve month early and went through that whole process in one night :P

      It is rape, but a subcategory call rape by deception. Also, pregnancies for humans are nine months.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

      Do we need to talk about it when it's everywhere? (Does that make sense? lol) Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.
      I get it, but (and I think Esk has pointed this out multiple times before) it isn't just these rapes that go unpunished, it is nearly everything, done by both heroes and villains. Regina, Zelena, Rumple, Hook, etc. have all killed multiple people, and have not had to pay for those crimes. Snow, Robin, etc. have stole things, again with no punishment. Snow and Charming kidnapped Mal's baby, and again nothing happened to them. The list can go on and on. So yes, rape goes unpunished on this show, but so does every other crime, including murder (which I consider the worst crime of all), and no one bats an eyelash.

      Here's the thing. We as a society know murder is wrong. Murderers get punished. They aren't generally sympathised with. Yes there are exceptions especially racially motivated murders and domestic violeance) but generally, society condemns murder.

      Rape is different. Rape victims are asked about whether or not they were drunk, what they were wearing, if they were flirting. Think of Brock Turner and how he had a "bright future". Adults sleeping with minors is acceptable because "she's mature for her age". Catcalling is considered a compliment. Assault is just "boys being boys". Hell, the President of the United States of America is a rapist. Because society doesn't generally condemn rape.

      That is the issue. Rape going unpunished is reflective of our own society.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Aine1989 wrote: Think of Brock Turner and how he had a "bright future".

      The main issue in The People vs. Turner, was not the jury's verdict, but rather the judge's sentence. Six months in prison was far too light, for such a violent crime.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

      Do we need to talk about it when it's everywhere? (Does that make sense? lol) Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.
      I get it, but (and I think Esk has pointed this out multiple times before) it isn't just these rapes that go unpunished, it is nearly everything, done by both heroes and villains. Regina, Zelena, Rumple, Hook, etc. have all killed multiple people, and have not had to pay for those crimes. Snow, Robin, etc. have stole things, again with no punishment. Snow and Charming kidnapped Mal's baby, and again nothing happened to them. The list can go on and on. So yes, rape goes unpunished on this show, but so does every other crime, including murder (which I consider the worst crime of all), and no one bats an eyelash.

      What about Belle dying

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Zalvukalic wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

      Do we need to talk about it when it's everywhere? (Does that make sense? lol) Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.
      I get it, but (and I think Esk has pointed this out multiple times before) it isn't just these rapes that go unpunished, it is nearly everything, done by both heroes and villains. Regina, Zelena, Rumple, Hook, etc. have all killed multiple people, and have not had to pay for those crimes. Snow, Robin, etc. have stole things, again with no punishment. Snow and Charming kidnapped Mal's baby, and again nothing happened to them. The list can go on and on. So yes, rape goes unpunished on this show, but so does every other crime, including murder (which I consider the worst crime of all), and no one bats an eyelash.
      What about Belle dying

      What about it? She died of old age. That's not a crime.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Aine1989 wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      You may feel that way, but I didn't, as no one was talking about it at all, other than bringing up recent Hollywood things, but one of those was Spacey, so that was a man violating men issue, so again not connected to the amount of women who have issues with rape/assult/etc. I'm glad you agree that women are the major victims of sex crimes, because that was one of the main things I wanted to make sure was getting across.

      Do we need to talk about it when it's everywhere? (Does that make sense? lol) Part of what upsets people about this storyline, imo, is that male victims are so underreported. There's a huuuuuuge stigma there. As I and others have pointed out, it's a joke in our society. That's what upsets me about it. If a person rapes or assaults someone else, they should be punished. If a character rapes or assaults another, they should be punished. This show has a record of non-forcible rape going unpunished. And the fact that the victims are male highlights a less thought of problem in our society. Some of what you've said, CDA, seems to feed into that idea. It's all the same issue. and the show is playing into it.
      I get it, but (and I think Esk has pointed this out multiple times before) it isn't just these rapes that go unpunished, it is nearly everything, done by both heroes and villains. Regina, Zelena, Rumple, Hook, etc. have all killed multiple people, and have not had to pay for those crimes. Snow, Robin, etc. have stole things, again with no punishment. Snow and Charming kidnapped Mal's baby, and again nothing happened to them. The list can go on and on. So yes, rape goes unpunished on this show, but so does every other crime, including murder (which I consider the worst crime of all), and no one bats an eyelash.
      Here's the thing. We as a society know murder is wrong. Murderers get punished. They aren't generally sympathised with. Yes there are exceptions especially racially motivated murders and domestic violeance) but generally, society condemns murder.

      Rape is different. Rape victims are asked about whether or not they were drunk, what they were wearing, if they were flirting. Think of Brock Turner and how he had a "bright future". Adults sleeping with minors is acceptable because "she's mature for her age". Catcalling is considered a compliment. Assault is just "boys being boys". Hell, the President of the United States of America is a rapist. Because society doesn't generally condemn rape.

      That is the issue. Rape going unpunished is reflective of our own society.

      So rape can't be used in plot for fictional stories, because it isn't looked at by the society the same way murder is? I don't think that is fair to writers. The writers didn't decide how society as a whole was going to respond to rape. And half the reason rape goes unpunished is because it isn't reported. I'm not blaming the victims, as I know they are tramatized and scared to say something, but the justice system can't punish someone for a crime, when they don't know a crime is commited. And then when people do say something, the statue of limitations is up, meaning the person can't be punished for the crime, even if they admit they did it. And yes, many men will defend men over women, because of the "bros before hos" mentality, which is a seperate issue. Like I said before, rape as a whole is a complex issue, and many things have to change to solve it. But I don't think all that burden should be put on the writers of a fantasy tv show.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      I only agree with Alison's first Tweet. However, she does not seem to understand, that Hook loving Alice unconditionally, is not the norm. Especially, given that she looks like Gothel. Many people in this scenario would blame, and hate the child. Similar to what happened with Rumplestilskin, when he was born.

      It also does not help, that Rogers is the ultimate tool in Hyperion Heights. Seriously, he is being manipulated be everyone. Especially, the people who hurt him most.

      So what? You'd prefer to see Hook completely abandoning Alice and refuse to even talk to her? Blaming the child who asked nothing? And then, people complained that OUAT is not a family show enough...

      I think what they're trying to say is that just because Hook was totally down for raising the child, that doesn't/shouldn't take focus off of the act of rape that occurred. Like going through bad situations can make someone stronger but that doesn't mean it never affected them, is never talked about, and the victims should ultimately always be grateful it happened because it "changed" them for the better. This is kinda what Alison is talking about, right? But victims should be are allowed to be resentful and it should be shown because they went through something traumatic. 

      I have seen a bunch of people saying things along the lines of "Who cares how Alice was created? Hook has a daughter he loves!".....which isn't the point? And if the show only focuses on Gothel being evil and Hook loving Alice, that doesn't do anything to address the issues people are up in arms about.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • JennaMae wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      I only agree with Alison's first Tweet. However, she does not seem to understand, that Hook loving Alice unconditionally, is not the norm. Especially, given that she looks like Gothel. Many people in this scenario would blame, and hate the child. Similar to what happened with Rumplestilskin, when he was born.

      It also does not help, that Rogers is the ultimate tool in Hyperion Heights. Seriously, he is being manipulated be everyone. Especially, the people who hurt him most.

      So what? You'd prefer to see Hook completely abandoning Alice and refuse to even talk to her? Blaming the child who asked nothing? And then, people complained that OUAT is not a family show enough...
      I think what they're trying to say is that just because Hook was totally down for raising the child, that doesn't/shouldn't take focus off of the act of rape that occurred. Like going through bad situations can make someone stronger but that doesn't mean it never affected them, is never talked about, and the victims should ultimately always be grateful it happened because it "changed" them for the better. This is kinda what Alison is talking about, right? But victims should be are allowed to be resentful and it should be shown because they went through something traumatic. 

      I have seen a bunch of people saying things along the lines of "Who cares how Alice was created? Hook has a daughter he loves!".....which isn't the point? And if the show only focuses on Gothel being evil and Hook loving Alice, that doesn't do anything to address the issues people are up in arms about.


      I agree with your point. But I was more reacting to what Chocolate said rather than Alison's tweet ^^

      I just don't see what there should be a "norm" in this context. Like Hook loving Alice is a problem? How so?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • JennaMae wrote:

      I think what they're trying to say is that just because Hook was totally down for raising the child, that doesn't/shouldn't take focus off of the act of rape that occurred. Like going through bad situations can make someone stronger but that doesn't mean it never affected them, is never talked about, and the victims should ultimately always be grateful it happened because it "changed" them for the better. This is kinda what Alison is talking about, right? But victims should be are allowed to be resentful and it should be shown because they went through something traumatic. 

      I have seen a bunch of people saying things along the lines of "Who cares how Alice was created? Hook has a daughter he loves!".....which isn't the point? And if the show only focuses on Gothel being evil and Hook loving Alice, that doesn't do anything to address the issues people are up in arms about.

      This is exactly what I was referring to. Thank you for putting it into more eloquent words, Jenna. I feel like the "who cares" mentality, is exactly how the writers are approaching this. Do I fault Alison for her opinion? No, because she is still a child with a developing mind. However, adults should know better. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      JennaMae wrote:

      I think what they're trying to say is that just because Hook was totally down for raising the child, that doesn't/shouldn't take focus off of the act of rape that occurred. Like going through bad situations can make someone stronger but that doesn't mean it never affected them, is never talked about, and the victims should ultimately always be grateful it happened because it "changed" them for the better. This is kinda what Alison is talking about, right? But victims should be are allowed to be resentful and it should be shown because they went through something traumatic. 

      I have seen a bunch of people saying things along the lines of "Who cares how Alice was created? Hook has a daughter he loves!".....which isn't the point? And if the show only focuses on Gothel being evil and Hook loving Alice, that doesn't do anything to address the issues people are up in arms about.

      This is exactly what I was referring to. Thank you for putting it into more eloquent words, Jenna. I feel like the "who cares" mentality, is exactly how the writers are approaching this. Do I fault Alison for her opinion? No, because she is still a child with a developing mind. However, adults should know better. 

      At the same time WHook shouldn't take out how Alice was conceived on her, as that isn't her fault. And considering Gothel wants nothing to do with her, if WHook didn't step up Alice would have esentially been an orphan. Basically, you can't blame a child for the curcumstances of their conseption.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      It is rape, but a subcategory call rape by deception. Also, pregnancies for humans are nine months.

      My point about why one can't take it seriously regardless stands.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow wrote:

      My point about why one can't take it seriously regardless stands.

      I have to disagree, because that is where the issue lays. Just because the writers treat everything like a joke, does not mean the audience should too. Society is sick and tired of sexual abuse being used for entertainment purposes, without having any depth or commentary. The primary critique people have with OUaT, is that it romanticizes forms of abuse. Whether it was the psychological, domestic abuse between Rumplestilskin and Belle. Or be it the rape-by-deception of male characters, only for the storyline to care about redeeming the rapist. This was not the first time the OUaT writers pulled this stunt, and that is why people are taking it seriously. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.

      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.
      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.

      I was thinking Rogers x Eloise. At least this appears to be happening though others are pushing Rogers away.

      Alice and Robin may have similar stories, but Alice should be like 28 and Robin a teenager. (But that deserves its own thread.)

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.
      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.
      I was thinking Rogers x Eloise. At least this appears to be happening though others are pushing Rogers away.

      Alice and Robin may have similar stories, but Alice should be like 28 and Robin a teenager in highschool.

      Alice could be a bit younger, like 24, and Robin could be 18. That's not a terrible age difference, and besides LGBT people are more likely to have larger age varience between partners because they have a smaller dating pool than straight people.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.
      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.
      I was thinking Rogers x Eloise. At least this appears to be happening though others are pushing Rogers away.

      Alice and Robin may have similar stories, but Alice should be like 28 and Robin a teenager in highschool.


      It mainly depends how old is Alice. She might be "officially" 28 years old, but we don't know how old she is "biologically". Like if she stayed a long time in a place where times was frozen or anything else like that. Would not be a problem in that case.

      Otherwise, half of the show's couples are a problem ^^ I mean, Cinderella is married and got a child with a 16/17 years old guy, strictly speaking :P

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.

      The fact that the show barely touched how and why Robin was conceived, makes me doubt it will come up during this season. Heck, OUaT ignored it for the entirety of S6. Robin might only know that she is named after her father. While, Alice may know nothing of her mother's true identity. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.
      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.

      I was thinking Rogers x Eloise. At least this appears to be happening though others are pushing Rogers away.

      Alice and Robin may have similar stories, but Alice should be like 28 and Robin a teenager. (But that deserves its own thread.)

      Pretty Little Liars got away with that s*** for years, with multiple adults trying to date those high school girls.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • MyPretties wrote:

      Pretty Little Liars got away with that s*** for years, with multiple adults trying to date those high school girls.

      Pretty Little Liars was always meant to be a trashy show, with incredibly controversial story elements. It is part of the reason, ABC rebranded that sub-channel to FreeForm. I am certain my aunt would have been furious, had she known her daughter (who was 13 at the time) was watching it. Though, in my cousin's defence, she was mature enough to know just how problematic that show was.

      When it came to OUaT.... this cousin could never understand, why Belle would always return to Rumplestiltstkin. She hated when Zelena was given custody of her daughter, and that she named the baby after Robin Hood. She actually quit watching, because she knew the reboot would only get worse. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Made a thread about Alice and Romantic partner.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote: I have to admit, this being rape didn’t even cross my mind when I first watched the scene with Hook and Gothel. ChocolatEyes613’s outrage on the episode discussion page is what made me look back on it and realize that “OMG that was rape”. The people I feel are to blame are the writers of that particular episode, and both Adam and Eddy, for approving that script with that scene in it. In 2017 America, with everything that’s been going on, what the hell was going on in their heads that made them think this was ok?

      Can I tell you a little secret? It only hit me to just how bad the repeated "plot device" was, when I remembered which two characters are returning to the show. Especially, with how one of them will fit into the storyline. Not only did Adam and Eddy approve this problematic scene, but they also a potentially problematic romance.
      Are you talking about Alice and Robin for the romance? I don't think that is problematic, in fact, the fact that they have similar conception stories may be one of the reasons they get together.
      I was thinking Rogers x Eloise. At least this appears to be happening though others are pushing Rogers away.

      Alice and Robin may have similar stories, but Alice should be like 28 and Robin a teenager. (But that deserves its own thread.)


      Robin is in her twenties, confirmed by her casting call ^^ It is on her page :p

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:

      Robin is in her twenties, confirmed by her casting call ^^ It is on her page :p

      I keep having a disconnect between mystery 20s female character and Robin Jr. lol

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:

      Robin is in her twenties, confirmed by her casting call ^^ It is on her page :p

      I keep having a disconnect between mystery 20s female character and Robin Jr. lol


      Why? They literally aged up half of the characters at this point so why Robin is a problem?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:
      Eskaver wrote:
      Lady Junky wrote:

      Robin is in her twenties, confirmed by her casting call ^^ It is on her page :p

      I keep having a disconnect between mystery 20s female character and Robin Jr. lol

      Why? They literally aged up half of the characters at this point so why Robin is a problem?

      The news as distant and my first thought it--oh, yeah, Baby Robin (that's what I typed to differentiate the two). Of course, I use Robin Jr now because I can't be calling adult Robin a Baby, lol. I might end up just calling her RJ or something. XD

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      When it came to OUaT.... this cousin could never understand, why Belle would always return to Rumplestiltstkin. She hated when Zelena was given custody of her daughter, and that she named the baby after Robin Hood. She actually quit watching, because she knew the reboot would only get worse. 

      Well, the Belle and Rumple thing is pretty easy to understand when you look at the source material (Beauty and the Beast). The story is literally about a beautiful maiden falling in love with a man so terrible he was actually turned into a monster.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Lady Junky wrote:

      Robin is in her twenties, confirmed by her casting call ^^ It is on her page :p

      Due to child labor laws, it is very common for actors in their twenties to play teenagers. Just look at virtually every TheCW show ever.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote: Pretty Little Liars was always meant to be a trashy show, with incredibly controversial story elements. It is part of the reason, ABC rebranded that sub-channel to FreeForm.

      ^^This right. ABC likes to pretend to be a "family" channel, and Once a "family" show with strong females and good values. When trashy shows do trashy things, we're not bothered. But when a "good" show does a trashy thing repeatedly.... we get upset lol.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      ABC likes to pretend to be a "family" channel, and Once a "family" show with strong females and good values. 

      Lol.... who is ABC kidding? Everyone knows most of their shows, are just one step up from a soap opera. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Utter solitude wrote:

      ABC likes to pretend to be a "family" channel, and Once a "family" show with strong females and good values. 

      Lol.... who is ABC kidding? Everyone knows most of their shows, are just one step up from a soap opera. 

      All dramas, regardless of network, are one step up from a soap opera.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I (and Choc) beg to differ lol

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      I (and Choc) beg to differ lol

      Examples, please?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Are you asking me to make a list of "non soap opera-y" dramas? lol. That's like 2/3s of the shows on TV. If you can't tell the difference, my dear, you need to watch better shows XD

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      Are you asking me to make a list of "non soap opera-y" dramas? lol. That's like 2/3s of the shows on TV. If you can't tell the difference, my dear, you need to watch better shows XD

      All dramas contain similar plot themes and tropes, many of which originate from soap opera drama. Like the long lost sibling. Give any drama enough time, and that plot will show up. I don't care if the network is ABC or HBO, it will show up sooner or later.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I disagree. Aaaand we're straying from the topic anyway XD

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Utter solitude wrote:
      Are you asking me to make a list of "non soap opera-y" dramas? lol. That's like 2/3s of the shows on TV. If you can't tell the difference, my dear, you need to watch better shows XD

      All dramas contain similar plot themes and tropes, many of which originate from soap opera drama. Like the long lost sibling. Give any drama enough time, and that plot will show up. I don't care if the network is ABC or HBO, it will show up sooner or later.

      I think what they to say is that abc's quality is low, the only other network with lower quality shows is CW.

      HBO is not network.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Farerb wrote:

      I think what they to say is that abc's quality is low, the only other network with lower quality shows is CW.

      Pretty much. I wouldn't say every show on ABC, at least imo, but there definitely a few where every episode feels like something I've seen before.

      The CW is definitely full of soap opera trash, imo. DC made a poor choice putting their shows there :#

      Some of the plot points that happen on Once feel like they should be on the CW

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Yeah, it looks to be an argument about quality.

      Anyway, going forward, I think the pseudo-relationship between Elosie and Rogers should be dropped, or ended with less sympathy towards Eloise. (I sort of previously talked about oversight) It feels as though 7x08 has "Eloise" expressing feelings towards Rogers, despite Gothel pretty much not showing any nuanced expression. (Though it doesn't stop them from dropping plotlines like anchors, but) Oversight should have been used to make sure that Gothel was one continuous person. We can't have a deceptive witch who couldn't care less about her newborn or Hook in one episode and then one who actually does has feelings in the next. We don't even know if the cake gift was actually nefarious or not.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote:

      Pretty Little Liars got away with that s*** for years, with multiple adults trying to date those high school girls.

      Pretty Little Liars was always meant to be a trashy show, with incredibly controversial story elements. It is part of the reason, ABC rebranded that sub-channel to FreeForm. I am certain my aunt would have been furious, had she known her daughter (who was 13 at the time) was watching it. Though, in my cousin's defence, she was mature enough to know just how problematic that show was.

      When it came to OUaT.... this cousin could never understand, why Belle would always return to Rumplestiltstkin. She hated when Zelena was given custody of her daughter, and that she named the baby after Robin Hood. She actually quit watching, because she knew the reboot would only get worse. 

      I know that she didn’t write this episode, but this isn’t the first time Jane Espenson’s worked on a show where the characters just over look sexual assault. I remember on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Spike attempted to rape Buffy. However, the characters eventually started to overlook it, with Buffy even making that “oh he didn’t even have a soul at the time” excuse for him. Now, in the comic continuation they are a couple.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow
      Ninclow removed this reply because:
      cS
      08:06, November 24, 2017
      This reply has been removed
    • MyPretties wrote:

      I know that she didn’t write this episode, but this isn’t the first time Jane Espenson’s worked on a show where the characters just over look sexual assault. I remember on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Spike attempted to rape Buffy. However, the characters eventually started to overlook it, with Buffy even making that “oh he didn’t even have a soul at the time” excuse for him. Now, in the comic continuation they are a couple.

      If you look into the lore of the buffyverse, Spike not having a soul weren't an excuse, but an explonation as to why she would trust Spike with a soul after going through attempted rape. When a vampire sire a human to make another vampire, the human dies, their human souls goes on, and a demon take up residence in their body. So an ensouled Spike is as responsible for the actions of souless Spike as Buffy's postbox are responsible for sunny weather. The only reason it seem they are the same are because, as a consequence of inhabiting a human body, they retain most if not all memories of the "human" that once "owned" it. "What once were shape what we become", I believe Darla said. So... Angelus and Angel are not the same person, they just look and sound alike and share memories, and the same can be said for ensouled and soulless Spike.

      Also - I don't think the reboot is that bad?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow wrote:

      Also - I don't think the reboot is that bad?

      No, the reboot is not "that" bad ^^ On the contrary ^^

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • MyPretties wrote:

      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      MyPretties wrote:

      Pretty Little Liars got away with that s*** for years, with multiple adults trying to date those high school girls.

      Pretty Little Liars was always meant to be a trashy show, with incredibly controversial story elements. It is part of the reason, ABC rebranded that sub-channel to FreeForm. I am certain my aunt would have been furious, had she known her daughter (who was 13 at the time) was watching it. Though, in my cousin's defence, she was mature enough to know just how problematic that show was.

      When it came to OUaT.... this cousin could never understand, why Belle would always return to Rumplestiltstkin. She hated when Zelena was given custody of her daughter, and that she named the baby after Robin Hood. She actually quit watching, because she knew the reboot would only get worse. 

      I know that she didn’t write this episode, but this isn’t the first time Jane Espenson’s worked on a show where the characters just over look sexual assault. I remember on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Spike attempted to rape Buffy. However, the characters eventually started to overlook it, with Buffy even making that “oh he didn’t even have a soul at the time” excuse for him. Now, in the comic continuation they are a couple.

      Buffy abused Spike as much as he abused her. Their relationship was unhealthy and the show MADE SURE to show us that, unlike OUAT who romanticize unhealthy relationship.

      Another example I can give is Jenny Calendar's murder by Angel. Yes he was soulless, but how many times it was addressed by the narratives? Many times, even after Angel got his soul back, now compare it to how OUAT handled Merlin's murder by Hook. They just do bad things for the sake of drama and shock, but when it is time to address these, they just pretend it didn't happen or it wasn't a big deal, just because they are too lazy to do this. That's why the show lacks a sense of justice.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Farerb wrote:

      Another example I can give is Jenny Calendar's murder by Angel. Yes he was soulless, but how many times it was addressed by the narratives? Many times, even after Angel got his soul back, now compare it to how OUAT handled Merlin's murder by Hook. 

      I didn't. And we shouldn't. Hook going evil and human Spike being taken over by a demon using his body for evil and later regaining his soul, thus allowing the humanity that once occupied it to reclaim its home and supress the demon's influence over the same body is not even remotely the same thing.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      When it came to OUaT.... this cousin could never understand, why Belle would always return to Rumplestiltstkin. She hated when Zelena was given custody of her daughter, and that she named the baby after Robin Hood. She actually quit watching, because she knew the reboot would only get worse. 

      Well, the Belle and Rumple thing is pretty easy to understand when you look at the source material (Beauty and the Beast). The story is literally about a beautiful maiden falling in love with a man so terrible he was actually turned into a monster.

      Yes but the Beast in the movie redeems himself and Belle enters a relationship with him when she realises he is no longer a douche.

      Rumple continues to douche all over the place and Belle keeps going back to him

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I don't buy the source material as an excuse for abuse. Rise above and improve it.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      I don't buy the source material as an excuse for abuse. Rise above and improve it.

      What source material is it that you don't buy?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Well, the Belle and Rumple thing is pretty easy to understand when you look at the source material (Beauty and the Beast).

      This is a show that does its own interpretation of the source material. So pointing to that source as a reason why some terrible thing is occurring on the show just falls flat.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Interpretation of the source material and occasionally lack there of, if you ask me. :P

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Let’s try not to venture out and discuss every romance that Once has ever done. This should stay along the lines of Hook/Gothel and other deceptive encounters and how its implications.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • How about Guinevere still being roofied somewhere?!?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Farerb wrote:
      How about Guinevere still being roofied somewhere?!?

      Not much to it. Arthur is dead, Gwen has never said much else since that episode. And to be fair, the dust "fixed" their relationship, but I doubt it does much now.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      The CW is definitely full of soap opera trash, imo. DC made a poor choice putting their shows there :#

      Some of the plot points that happen on Once feel like they should be on the CW

      DC did not have much of a choice, since WB owns TheCW. Supergirl was even worse, while it was still on CBS. However, I completely agree that some of OUaT's plots, make that show feel like trash. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I cannot believe this conversation. Are we seriously going to equate a hot night of sex with a beautiful woman (even if it was a witch in disguise) with a violent rape? Even if it was "rape by deception" it is in no way close to the trauma and pain that comes with a violent sexual assault that is entirely non-consensual.

      Let's say someone had some technology to turn themselves into the most attractive actress or actor to you, say, Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie, just for one night. You think you've had an amazing night with Brad Pitt. It turns out later it wasn't actually Brad Pitt, but some other dude, who is still actually somewhat attractive if just a bad person. 

      OK, you might be creeped out, and ticked off, but you have in no way been violated or hurt in the same way as someone who was *forced* to have sex with some horrible, gross, smelly, scary person. 

      And if you try to equate the two and make them equal, I daresay you are being a drama queen at best, and a narcissistic at worst. You are minimizing the violence of the non-consensual rape. You are insulting real rape victims here.

      I can imagine that many people would gladly choose to have the night of hot sex with the illusion of Brad Pitt even if it they know it wasn't him. Or, even if they didn't know and were POed afterwards when they were told the truth, would in the end be glad for the experience...(as long as it was safe sex.)

      Don't *ever* try to compare that to a real rape!

      People who are violently raped are often beaten and hurt...some literally have their insides torn to pieces, and some end up in comas, literally. Little children are raped in Africa to cure AIDs and end up with a disease as well as fistulas (look that up).

      This same "rape" crap was put out on the Internet with the TV show Grimm, when the main guy had sex with a hot witch disguised as his wife...and a baby ensued. Some people freaked out about it, of course. Probably the same people who think words are literal violence, and freak out if someone says something unkind...equating it to the equivalent of literal torture.

      Either you haven't actually experienced real horror or pain in your life if you think Hook was really "raped" - or, you are so focused on your past trauma you project it onto *every* situation, even if it doesn't even come barely close.

      Sorry for the rant...but I was so annoyed reading this I literally created an account to comment. I actually find it offensive to victims of violent rape to even make the comparison to rape here. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ^ I think this conversation was more about the stigma associated with men coming out about their assault rather than the nature of the situation and how this story could demean male viewers who have experienced assault.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • You are demeaning male victims of *actual sexual assault* if you equate Hook's one-night stand with a rape of a vulnerable (and likely young) man. 

      Hook *chose* to get into bed with a strange woman he just met in a world full of magic. She is in an enchanted tower and he had to go get a magic flower for her. He should know by now that things aren't always what they seem in such a place. He took a chance when he slept with her. He knew the risks and slept with her anyway. That's on him...how old was he at that point? 100 or more? Please.

      That is *not* the same as, say, an innocent 14-year-old Anthony Rapp being groomed by an adult Kevin Spacey who tried to take advantage of the kid at an adult party. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:
      I cannot believe this conversation. Are we seriously going to equate a hot night of sex with a beautiful woman (even if it was a witch in disguise) with a violent rape? Even if it was "rape by deception" it is in no way close to the trauma and pain that comes with a violent sexual assault that is entirely non-consensual.

      Let's say someone had some technology to turn themselves into the most attractive actress or actor to you, say, Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie, just for one night. You think you've had an amazing night with Brad Pitt. It turns out later it wasn't actually Brad Pitt, but some other dude, who is still actually somewhat attractive if just a bad person. 

      OK, you might be creeped out, and ticked off, but you have in no way been violated or hurt in the same way as someone who was *forced* to have sex with some horrible, gross, smelly, scary person. 

      And if you try to equate the two and make them equal, I daresay you are being a drama queen at best, and a narcissistic at worst. You are minimizing the violence of the non-consensual rape. You are insulting real rape victims here.

      I can imagine that many people would gladly choose to have the night of hot sex with the illusion of Brad Pitt even if it they know it wasn't him. Or, even if they didn't know and were POed afterwards when they were told the truth, would in the end be glad for the experience...(as long as it was safe sex.)

      Don't *ever* try to compare that to a real rape!

      People who are violently raped are often beaten and hurt...some literally have their insides torn to pieces, and some end up in comas, literally. Little children are raped in Africa to cure AIDs and end up with a disease as well as fistulas (look that up).

      This same "rape" crap was put out on the Internet with the TV show Grimm, when the main guy had sex with a hot witch disguised as his wife...and a baby ensued. Some people freaked out about it, of course. Probably the same people who think words are literal violence, and freak out if someone says something unkind...equating it to the equivalent of literal torture.

      Either you haven't actually experienced real horror or pain in your life if you think Hook was really "raped" - or, you are so focused on your past trauma you project it onto *every* situation, even if it doesn't even come barely close.

      Sorry for the rant...but I was so annoyed reading this I literally created an account to comment. I actually find it offensive to victims of violent rape to even make the comparison to rape here. 

      I believe I made an arguement similar to this when the Robin and Zelena thing happened in Season 4. I think people forget that a rape by force would most likely be a lot more tramatic, both physically and mentally, than a rape by deception. That doesn't mean rape by deception isn't wrong, just that isn't the same as rape by force.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • OMG... Seriously?! Yes, rape by force is more terrible than rape by deception, but what you say is like saying "well at least rape by force is not murder".

      Both are terrible, manipulating someone into having sex with you is still RAPE! Please educate yourself.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Both of your statements pretty much exemplify the uphill battle men face when it comes to sexual assault and rape.

      "hot night of sex with a beautiful woman". -.-

      And if you think being deceived into sex wouldn't be traumatic... you might want to think more deeply about that.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Farerb wrote: OMG... Seriously?! Yes, rape by force is more terrible than rape by deception, but what you say is like saying "well at least rape by force is not murder".

      Both are terrible, manipulating someone into having sex with you is still RAPE! Please educate yourself.

      I agree. It still shouldn’t happen and it shouldn’t be ignored.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:
      You are demeaning male victims of *actual sexual assault* if you equate Hook's one-night stand with a rape of a vulnerable (and likely young) man. 

      Hook *chose* to get into bed with a strange woman he just met in a world full of magic. She is in an enchanted tower and he had to go get a magic flower for her. He should know by now that things aren't always what they seem in such a place. He took a chance when he slept with her. He knew the risks and slept with her anyway. That's on him...how old was he at that point? 100 or more? Please.

      That is *not* the same as, say, an innocent 14-year-old Anthony Rapp being groomed by an adult Kevin Spacey who tried to take advantage of the kid at an adult party. 

      Hook chose to get into bed with Rapunzel. He never once consented to having sex with Gothel. It is exactly what happened with Robin Hood during Season Four. He consented to having sex with Maid Marian, not Zelena. The same applies to the rape of Nick Burkhardt on Grimm. He only consented to having sex with his girlfriend, Juliette. He never once consented to having sex with Adalind.

      Rape is rape. Rape by deception is rape. Rape by force is rape. Rape by taking away someones means of saying no, is rape. Just because the rapist happens to be a pretty woman, doesn't make it any less of a rape. Remember, sex is about consent. And just because you consent to having sex with one person, doesn't mean you consent to everyone else.

      'Are we seriously going to equate a hot night of sex with a beautiful woman (even if it was a witch in disguise) with a violent rape?' Also, what you said here? This is one of the manys reason why men who are victims of sexual assault and/or rape don't come forward. Because their trauma is seen as a night of "hot sex" or just them getting "lucky".

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding here.

      Noone is equating Rape by force and Rape by Deception. No one was saying anything about Rape by Force in relation to it. To use a simplistic analogy, it's like saying "But murder by multiple stabbings is worse than murder by multiple gunshots, and that's offensive to those victims."

      Acknowledging a terrible crime has in no way degraded or affected another crime. It's like having a thread about thievery in the show and then randomly discussing that it somehow devalues the victims of emotional trauma. It is not one or the other. A crime is a crime is a crime. Devaluing Rape by deception is completely unnecessary and is polarizing an issue where there’s no need.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Farerb wrote:
      OMG... Seriously?! Yes, rape by force is more terrible than rape by deception, but what you say is like saying "well at least rape by force is not murder".

      Both are terrible, manipulating someone into having sex with you is still RAPE! Please educate yourself.

      No. They are both violations and both traumatic for the victim.

      Any kind of rape-statuatory, deception, force, drugging, pestering, is just as bad as each other. They are just bad in different ways

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:
      You are demeaning male victims of *actual sexual assault* if you equate Hook's one-night stand with a rape of a vulnerable (and likely young) man. 

      Hook *chose* to get into bed with a strange woman he just met in a world full of magic. She is in an enchanted tower and he had to go get a magic flower for her. He should know by now that things aren't always what they seem in such a place. He took a chance when he slept with her. He knew the risks and slept with her anyway. That's on him...how old was he at that point? 100 or more? Please.

      That is *not* the same as, say, an innocent 14-year-old Anthony Rapp being groomed by an adult Kevin Spacey who tried to take advantage of the kid at an adult party. 

      You're one of those people who looks at an unconsious girl and says "well she didn't say no" aren't you?

      Way to blame the victim.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:

      Hook *chose* to get into bed with a strange woman he just met in a world full of magic. She is in an enchanted tower and he had to go get a magic flower for her. He should know by now that things aren't always what they seem in such a place. He took a chance when he slept with her. He knew the risks and slept with her anyway. That's on him...how old was he at that point? 100 or more? Please.

      Right, because Hook obviously knew it was really Gothel.... way to blame the vitim. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • "manipulating someone into having sex with you is still RAPE!" NO, it is NOT rape if it is just "manipulation." Rape is FORCED sex. Manipulation is not force. It is persuasion, it is trickery, perhaps, but ultimately, Hook went for it. No-one forced him to do it.

      Hook CHOSE to have sex with a stranger in a land full of magic...and he knew darn well she could have been enchanted. You are basically all saying he's just some stupid naive person who wouldn't have thought about the dangers in what he was doing.

      He JUST met Rapunzel. She's got a ridiculously long braid and she's locked up in a magical tower. This is a man who had used magic to turn himself from a fat, decrepit old man into a handsome young man again. Wish Hook's real self is actually old and fat. So was he raping her by deception as well? Because according to the logic here, he was.

      Hook wasn't a victim because he CHOSE to take a risk and have sex with a complete and total stranger. 

      Please do NOT equate someone choosing to have a one-night stand with an unknown person in an enchanted tower and conflate that with someone who was FORCED to have sex. It is not even by a longshot the same thing.

      Never mind the fact that while he was having sex with "Gothel" she was effectively Rapunzel at the time physically and personality-wise. So you are saying Gothel's soul raped him. Ridiculous.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • "Any kind of rape-statuatory, deception, force, drugging, pestering, is just as bad as each other." 

      No, I'm sorry. If you chose to have a one-night stand with a guy who told you he was a prince of a foreign country, and later you found out he was lying, you were not raped. You chose to trust someone you didn't know very well. That's what Hook did - trust someone he just met when he KNOWS the rules of that land. He made a choice. Stop making him into a victim!

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • PS The only real "rape" that was going on in OUAT was in Season 1 with Regina, who controlled the Huntsman's heart and then killed him on the spot when he started falling for Emma. But there wasn't an outrage about that at the time because it wasn't trendy to handwring over "consent" like we have today with the news cycle.

      Then we have the main Hook who slaughtered Charming's dad just for the hell of it, but...hey CAPTAIN SWAN!

      Regina's a hero now, and so is Hook...but Wish Hook...a known pirate who probably killed a lot of people (like the other Hook), an obsessed guy bent on revenge, who tricked people to enchant himself into being a younger man...and who has just made a deal with the Evil Queen....OMG RAPED!!! CRISIS!!

      Please, people, get some damn perspective. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception

      Please read. It's disingenuous to ignore actual definitions of crimes for subjective reasoning. Whether you believe something is or is not is a personal decision; however, it can't be use to discredit actual definitions. There's a difference between a discussion and shouting words at one another. The Rant and Rave board is about a discussion that heavily critiques the show, not expressions of rage through aggressive outbursts or insults or whatever the case may be.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • "Rape by Deception" is not an actual crime here in the United States, and its main usage in the UK was over a transgender not fessing up to the gender switch...hmmm...I'll bet within a few years that will be thrown out as being "transphobic."

      The actual cases mentioned in the United States in that Wikipedia article don't even come close to what happened with Hook - they involved sleeping women in the dark who did not give their consent, by men who were posing as boyfriends...in one case having sex with her while she was sleeping, which I think would be a form of rape even if it were her boyfriend.  

      That is not the same thing whatsoever as Hook choosing to have sex with a woman he did not know who appeared to be blonde and pretty. The only modern equivalent I can think of would be someone putting on some sort of mask or amazing make-up to look like someone else, and then the next day, their partner finding out they didn't look like that at all. That would never be prosecuted as rape, ever. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:

      No, I'm sorry. If you chose to have a one-night stand with a guy who told you he was a prince of a foreign country, and later you found out he was lying, you were not raped. You chose to trust someone you didn't know very well. That's what Hook did - trust someone he just met when he KNOWS the rules of that land. He made a choice. Stop making him into a victim!

      Hook spent the entire episode actively avoiding being caught by the Witch. In no way, would he have ever consented, to sleeping with Gothel. Hook was horrified and disgusted, when he learned the truth. Gothel manipulated Hook into sleeping with her, so that she could conceive a child. Which is pretty much the definition of sexual abuse. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      Hook spent the entire episode actively avoiding being caught by the Witch. In no way, would he have ever consented, to sleeping with Gothel. Hook was horrified and disgusted, when he learned the truth. Gothel manipulated Hook into sleeping with her, so that she could conceive a child. Which is pretty much the definition of sexual abuse. 

      He didn't know who the witch was or anything about her. He took "Rapunzel's" word for it that she was bad. If he had gone and found the witch to be pretty and beautiful and nice, would he have been disgusted? You are acting like he knew Gothel beforehand and had some deep long connection with Rapunzel that was betrayed. He did not know either.

      So basically, you are saying that people should just go and sleep with strangers without being even slightly cautious and suspicious, and if it turns out that the person you slept with had some sort of mask or make-up on that made them look better than they did normally, then you were sexually abused for choosing the one-night stand?

      In your world, does Hook have to take ANY responsibility at all for what happened? Or should people just be encouraged to sleep with total strangers and trust them, because...well, otherwise we should throw anyone who takes advantage of that in jail because tricking people is evil. Right?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • PS If a man has unsafe sex and the woman he had sex with gets pregnant and chooses to keep the kid, is that also sexual abuse?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:

      In your world, does Hook have to take ANY responsibility at all for what happened? Or should people just be encouraged to sleep with total strangers and trust them, because...well, otherwise we should throw anyone who takes advantage of that in jail because tricking people is evil. Right?

      Seriously.... do you even hear yourself????

      Hook was the one who took responsibility, when he choose to raise the baby!!!! Gothel tricked him into sleeping with her, so she could conceive and abandon a child. Both Hook and Alice are victims of Gothel's deceit. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:

      He JUST met Rapunzel. She's got a ridiculously long braid and she's locked up in a magical tower. This is a man who had used magic to turn himself from a fat, decrepit old man into a handsome young man again. Wish Hook's real self is actually old and fat. So was he raping her by deception as well? Because according to the logic here, he was.

      Actually, this was a FB, so Hook was that young in the scene.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus does make one really good point, that all of you seem to be ignoring, WHook just met Rapunzel, so let's say Rapunzel was really the one in the tower, but she did the same thing Gothel did, use WHook to make a baby to free herself. Would that have been rape? It would really be Rapunzel, but she still slept with WHook under false pretenses. Like where do we draw the line? What if Gothel didn't physically glamour herself, but just lied and said she was Rapunzel? Is that rape? This is the important difference between what happened to Robin, and what happened to WHook. Robin was tricked into thinking he was sleeping with his wife. WHook was just tricked into thinking he was sleeping with a different woman he just met, than the one he did sleep with. So I do think we have to be really careful with how we interpet this, because we are going down a slippery slope, where almost every sexual encounter can be considered "rape".

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • It's not a slippery slope (imo). It's about consent. It's not much of a point at all.

      If Hook did not use protection and Rapunzel had the Instant baby, then it's just a weird moment for both and that's that. Unless Hook really doesn't know how babies are made... XD

      It's a tad disingenious to say that we (in this thread, not in society and random tumblr posts) are in anyway declaring every sexual encounter and act as a form of sexual assault. 

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

      This.... I 100% agree with all if this.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      It's not a slippery slope (imo). It's about consent. It's not much of a point at all.

      If Hook did not use protection and Rapunzel had the Instant baby, then it's just a weird moment for both and that's that. Unless Hook really doesn't know how babies are made... XD

      It's a tad disingenious to say that we (in this thread, not in society and random tumblr posts) are in anyway declaring every sexual encounter and act as a form of sexual assault. 

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

      So the problem lies soley with the glamour spell? If Rapunzel (and not Gothel) had simply had sex with WHook so she could have a magic escape baby, no one would have a problem with this plot? What if Gothel didn't glamour herself, but said she was Rapunzel?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      So the problem lies soley with the glamour spell? If Rapunzel (and not Gothel) had simply had sex with WHook so she could have a magic escape baby, no one would have a problem with this plot? What if Gothel didn't glamour herself, but said she was Rapunzel?

      With or without the glamour spell, it would still have been problematic. Gothel was lying about who she was, and what she wanted. Same goes if Rapunzel just wanted an escape baby.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:
      It's not a slippery slope (imo). It's about consent. It's not much of a point at all.

      If Hook did not use protection and Rapunzel had the Instant baby, then it's just a weird moment for both and that's that. Unless Hook really doesn't know how babies are made... XD

      It's a tad disingenious to say that we (in this thread, not in society and random tumblr posts) are in anyway declaring every sexual encounter and act as a form of sexual assault. 

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

      So the problem lies soley with the glamour spell? If Rapunzel (and not Gothel) had simply had sex with WHook so she could have a magic escape baby, no one would have a problem with this plot? What if Gothel didn't glamour herself, but said she was Rapunzel?

      Why entertain hypothetical scenarios? It’s like stretching to prove a point.

      All of its problematic. It simply changes classification. The idea that the glamor was the only thing people care about is a mischaracterization. It reopens old wounds even in the best case scenario.

      BCS: it reminds us about the poor way they handled similar plots before and points to a societal issue that they fail to address properly.

      But we aren’t discussing BCS and half of this discussion depends also on how the situation ends.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:
      It's not a slippery slope (imo). It's about consent. It's not much of a point at all.

      If Hook did not use protection and Rapunzel had the Instant baby, then it's just a weird moment for both and that's that. Unless Hook really doesn't know how babies are made... XD

      It's a tad disingenious to say that we (in this thread, not in society and random tumblr posts) are in anyway declaring every sexual encounter and act as a form of sexual assault. 

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

      So the problem lies soley with the glamour spell? If Rapunzel (and not Gothel) had simply had sex with WHook so she could have a magic escape baby, no one would have a problem with this plot? What if Gothel didn't glamour herself, but said she was Rapunzel?
      Why entertain hypothetical scenarios? It’s like stretching to prove a point.

      I mean the whole thing is hypothetical anyway. Unless you know a person in the real world who transformed themselves with magic and had a full term baby 12 hours after concieving. The whole situation is very much a fictional fantasy scenario.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:
      It's not a slippery slope (imo). It's about consent. It's not much of a point at all.

      If Hook did not use protection and Rapunzel had the Instant baby, then it's just a weird moment for both and that's that. Unless Hook really doesn't know how babies are made... XD

      It's a tad disingenious to say that we (in this thread, not in society and random tumblr posts) are in anyway declaring every sexual encounter and act as a form of sexual assault. 

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

      So the problem lies soley with the glamour spell? If Rapunzel (and not Gothel) had simply had sex with WHook so she could have a magic escape baby, no one would have a problem with this plot? What if Gothel didn't glamour herself, but said she was Rapunzel?
      Why entertain hypothetical scenarios? It’s like stretching to prove a point.

      I mean the whole thing is hypothetical anyway. Unless you know a person in the real world who transformed themselves with magic and had a full term baby 12 hours after concieving. The whole situation is very much a fictional fantasy scenario.

      Fictional, but not hypothetical. Key part there.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      I mean the whole thing is hypothetical anyway. Unless you know a person in the real world who transformed themselves with magic and had a full term baby 12 hours after concieving. The whole situation is very much a fictional fantasy scenario.

      So, we should just give these problematic storylines a pass, because OUaT is a work of fiction?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:


      Eskaver wrote:
      It's not a slippery slope (imo). It's about consent. It's not much of a point at all.

      If Hook did not use protection and Rapunzel had the Instant baby, then it's just a weird moment for both and that's that. Unless Hook really doesn't know how babies are made... XD

      It's a tad disingenious to say that we (in this thread, not in society and random tumblr posts) are in anyway declaring every sexual encounter and act as a form of sexual assault. 

      Plus, no one is defending Hook's poor decision-making. I wouldn't have randomly decided to sleep with a person I knew little about. Hook made a poor decision. Gothel committed deceptive sexual assault.

      So the problem lies soley with the glamour spell? If Rapunzel (and not Gothel) had simply had sex with WHook so she could have a magic escape baby, no one would have a problem with this plot? What if Gothel didn't glamour herself, but said she was Rapunzel?
      Why entertain hypothetical scenarios? It’s like stretching to prove a point.
      I mean the whole thing is hypothetical anyway. Unless you know a person in the real world who transformed themselves with magic and had a full term baby 12 hours after concieving. The whole situation is very much a fictional fantasy scenario.
      Fictional, but not hypothetical. Key part there.

      But people are applying real world logic to it, which is why I'm posing these questions. It's not as simple as people are making it out to be, because in our world, we don't have "rape by magical deception via glamour spell".

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote: But people are applying real world logic to it, which is why I'm posing these questions. It's not as simple as people are making it out to be, because in our world, we don't have "rape by magical deception via glamour spell".

      It’s close enough. We don’t have people ripping out Enchanted hearts but it doesn’t make it not-murder.

      Having an prominent issue and using it for “drama” and not addressing it in any meaningful way is distasteful.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      But people are applying real world logic to it, which is why I'm posing these questions. It's not as simple as people are making it out to be, because in our world, we don't have "rape by magical deception via glamour spell".

      Actually, it is even simpler than you think. Being that OUaT is a fantasy show, this storyline was used for entertainment purposes only. Which just makes it exploitation of victims of sexual abuse. Something everyone in Hollywood should be more sensitive towards, not that all the dirty little secrets are coming out.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I just think.......if you really did reverse the genders in this situation, people wouldn't even be debating if it was problematic or rape by deception. Most would immediately classify it as both. 

      An evil wizard purposely using a glamour spell to get help from a woman who comes upon his tower, subsequently seducing her, and then revealing the next day that he had planned on impregnating her the whole time? Yeah, that's not what people are consenting to when they decide to have a one night stand.

      And it shouldn't matter if Hook had sex with a random person. Like in real life, if someone lies about having used protection - that's not okay either and should also be considered a violation. Accidental pregnancies happen, but what happened to Wish Hook was on purpose and the whole thing hinged on him being deceived. They could've easily made Alice a child born out of a one night stand between two villains. But they didn't and wrote in the deception specifically for a dramatic reveal. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      But people are applying real world logic to it, which is why I'm posing these questions. It's not as simple as people are making it out to be, because in our world, we don't have "rape by magical deception via glamour spell".

      Actually, it is even simpler than you think. Being that OUaT is a fantasy show, this storyline was used for entertainment purposes only. Which just makes it exploitation of victims of sexual abuse. Something everyone in Hollywood should be more sensitive towards, not that all the dirty little secrets are coming out.

      I mean all dramas use terrible things for entertainment purposes. Grey's Anatomy has used every natural and human disaster you can think of, just to give plot and drama to the show. The point of fiction is to tell a story, not to explain why things are good or bad. That's what documentaries and news shows are for.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • There’s a misunderstanding then.

      Using an issue to help create a story...is fine. Then there’s an actual dialogue to re-introduce to society and it’s audience.

      Using an issue solely for entertainment value is not.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • JennaMae wrote:
      I just think.......if you really did reverse the genders in this situation, people wouldn't even be debating if it was problematic or rape by deception. Most would immediately classify it as both. 

      An evil wizard purposely using a glamour spell to get help from a woman who comes upon his tower, subsequently seducing her, and then revealing the next day that he had planned on impregnating her the whole time? Yeah, that's not what people are consenting to when they decide to have a one night stand.

      And it shouldn't matter if Hook had sex with a random person. Like in real life, if someone lies about having used protection - that's not okay either and should also be considered a violation. Accidental pregnancies happen, but what happened to Wish Hook was on purpose and the whole thing hinged on him being deceived. They could've easily made Alice a child born out of a one night stand between two villains. But they didn't and wrote in the deception specifically for a dramatic reveal. 

      What was shown was that Gothel is a terrible person who uses people to accomplish what she wants, there is no debate there. I'm not saying what she did was right or good, and neither are the writers. The problem is how upset people are getting over a not real event with a fictional character. Like I can't even imagine how some people on here act when actual things come out about real people being raped. Hopefully they are at least 10 times more passionate about it, than they are here, because that involves actual people, not literal storybook characters.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      The point of fiction is to tell a story, not to explain why things are good or bad. That's what documentaries and news shows are for.

      Well-told fictional stories are actually meant to raise questions about humanity's morality. However, what OUaT did was just plain distasteful. They would just exploiting sexual abuse for entertainment, and to create unnecessary drama.

      Since you keep bring up hypothetical scenarios.... would you still hold the same opinion, if the genders had been reversed? Or if the Fantastic Beasts film series, has Grindelwald be the mastermind behind the Holocaust? 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:
      There’s a misunderstanding then.

      Using an issue to help create a story...is fine. Then there’s an actual dialogue to re-introduce to society and it’s audience.

      Using an issue solely for entertainment value is not.

      I just don't get what people are expecting. This is a show about fairy tales, I certainly don't want to have a whole episode where we learn about all the terrible things that happen from being raped. That is not what this show is for. That being said, it certainly can use rape as a plot point, to show someone is a bad person, just like they use murder, stealing, etc. I think people are confusing showing what Gothel did to Hook as if the writers are saying it is okay, when they never did that. In fact, the whole point of the scene is to show Gothel is an awful person.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I can’t beleive we’re still having this argument. Hook did not consent to Gothel. The storyline is wrong because it can be a) offensive to viewers who have experienced similar situations b) instead of offering meaningful commentary on the subject, it is used to be considered entertainment c) instead of being able to come up with a new plotline, they rehash an old one when they knew it was controversial before.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:

      The point of fiction is to tell a story, not to explain why things are good or bad. That's what documentaries and news shows are for.

      Well-told fictional stories are actually meant to raise questions about humanity's morality. However, what OUaT did was just plain distasteful. They would just exploiting sexual abuse for entertainment, and to create unnecessary drama.

      Since you keep bring up hypothetical scenarios.... would you still hold the same opinion, if the genders had been reversed? Or if the Fantastic Beasts film series, has Grindelwald be the mastermind behind the Holocaust? 

      Yes, have a male character rape a female character, to show that he is bad, would also be valid. And sure Grindelwald could be controlling a muggle Hitler to kill other muggles, under the guise of genocide. That would actually be quite an interesting way to work in WWII. Again, to me, that is the point of fiction, to explore all the wildest stories, with as much nonsensicalness as you want. If I want to understand rape or Hitler's thought process, then I'm sure there are plenty of non-fiction materials I can find.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • TheRose123 wrote:
      I can’t beleive we’re still having this argument. Hook did not consent to Gothel. The storyline is wrong because it can be a) offensive to viewers who have experienced similar situations b) instead of offering meaningful commentary on the subject, it is used to be considered entertainment c) instead of being able to come up with a new plotline, they rehash an old one when they knew it was controversial before.

      It isn't the job of fiction to never make one uncomfortable, or have some elaborate commentary on real world issues. Recyling plot lines is a total seperate issue.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I have one final question: Why is everyone making it like the writers are condoning what Gothel did? They specifically did that to show how she is a terrible person. No one was upset when Cruella murdered her mother and then her mother's dogs, because the point was she was a terrible person. Many people actually love that episode. How come showing murder and cruelty to animals for entertainment is okay?

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:

      Eskaver wrote:
      There’s a misunderstanding then.

      Using an issue to help create a story...is fine. Then there’s an actual dialogue to re-introduce to society and it’s audience.

      Using an issue solely for entertainment value is not.

      I just don't get what people are expecting. This is a show about fairy tales, I certainly don't want to have a whole episode where we learn about all the terrible things that happen from being raped. That is not what this show is for. That being said, it certainly can use rape as a plot point, to show someone is a bad person, just like they use murder, stealing, etc. I think people are confusing showing what Gothel did to Hook as if the writers are saying it is okay, when they never did that. In fact, the whole point of the scene is to show Gothel is an awful person.

      I’m pretty fair.

      Think of it this way. If the writers don’t address the ramifications of this action in a satisfying way, then it was just exploitative. I (and I hope others) are going to wait and see before we denounce and reject them fully.

      Like any thing I have ever said on this wiki, Once needs to have good payoff with their plot points. I doubt you’re going to argue that Once had always had good payoff and that payoff isn’t important.

      If you want to go “writing” instead of “cultural”, then it’s also a matter of “Is this really necessary? Could I change it and not affect the plot in any meaningful way?” The answer is yes.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      Since you keep bring up hypothetical scenarios.... would you still hold the same opinion, if the genders had been reversed? Or if the Fantastic Beasts film series, has Grindelwald be the mastermind behind the Holocaust? 

      Yes, have a male character rape a female character, to show that he is bad, would also be valid. And sure Grindelwald could be controlling a muggle Hitler to kill other muggles, under the guise of genocide. That would actually be quite an interesting way to work in WWII. Again, to me, that is the point of fiction, to explore all the wildest stories, with as much nonsensicalness as you want. If I want to understand rape or Hitler's thought process, then I'm sure there are plenty of non-fiction materials I can find.

      Well, I would disagree with you on both scenarios. I would never try to impose my opinion onto another. However, your comment deeply saddens me. 

      OUaT would have never touched this storyline, had the genders been reversed. They know people would be up in arms, given the current climate in Hollywood.

      While, Grindelwald being the puppetmaster of WWII, would just whitewash the autrocities commited by Hitler and the Nazis. I am Jewish and lost 75% of my family, due to WWII and the Holocaust. To exploit what happened during that era, would be incredibily distasteful towards the survivors and victims. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote: I have one final question: Why is everyone making it like the writers are condoning what Gothel did? They specifically did that to show how she is a terrible person. No one was upset when Cruella murdered her mother and then her mother's dogs, because the point was she was a terrible person. Many people actually love that episode. How come showing murder and cruelty to animals for entertainment is okay?

      That is a fallacy: False equivalence. It doesn’t prove anything whatsoever.

      What Cruella did was terrible. She was an awful person. She was treated like an awful person. She died like the awful person that she was.

      No one is saying “Oh no, they showed a bad thing on TV!” It’s about the show’s history and handling.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote: I have one final question: Why is everyone making it like the writers are condoning what Gothel did? They specifically did that to show how she is a terrible person. No one was upset when Cruella murdered her mother and then her mother's dogs, because the point was she was a terrible person. Many people actually love that episode. How come showing murder and cruelty to animals for entertainment is okay?

      That is a fallacy: False equivalence. It doesn’t prove anything whatsoever.

      What Cruella did was terrible. She was an awful person. She was treated like an awful person. She died like the awful person that she was.

      No one is saying “Oh no, they showed a bad thing on TV!” It’s about the show’s history and handling.

      100% Agree.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • ChocolatEyes613 wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      ChocolatEyes613 wrote:

      Since you keep bring up hypothetical scenarios.... would you still hold the same opinion, if the genders had been reversed? Or if the Fantastic Beasts film series, has Grindelwald be the mastermind behind the Holocaust? 

      Yes, have a male character rape a female character, to show that he is bad, would also be valid. And sure Grindelwald could be controlling a muggle Hitler to kill other muggles, under the guise of genocide. That would actually be quite an interesting way to work in WWII. Again, to me, that is the point of fiction, to explore all the wildest stories, with as much nonsensicalness as you want. If I want to understand rape or Hitler's thought process, then I'm sure there are plenty of non-fiction materials I can find.
      Well, I would disagree with you on both scenarios. I would never try to impose my opinion onto another. However, your comment deeply saddens me. 

      OUaT would have never touched this storyline, had the genders been reversed. They know people would be up in arms, given the current climate in Hollywood.

      While, Grindelwald being the puppetmaster of WWII, would just whitewash the autrocities commited by Hitler and the Nazis. I am Jewish and lost 75% of my family, due to WWII and the Holocaust. To exploit what happened during that era, would be incredibily distasteful towards the survivors and victims. 

      Yes, regarding Grindelwald, I doubt they will do something like that, and personally, I'm not a fan of historical fiction, because it is playing with what actually happened, which can easily come off as distasteful or just weird. But people do write it, and people do read it, and I think history is fair game to base a story on (I mean even if you use a historical setting for a book, you are going to use the era, even if you don't use any real people). We can't not allow people to use rape in a plot, or the Holocaust for a story setting, just because it may bother someone, because I can guarentee for every plot point and every setting, I can find someone out there who is bothered by it, and so if we take all that away, we have no stories at all, and that is more dangerous than anything else. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Eskaver wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote: I have one final question: Why is everyone making it like the writers are condoning what Gothel did? They specifically did that to show how she is a terrible person. No one was upset when Cruella murdered her mother and then her mother's dogs, because the point was she was a terrible person. Many people actually love that episode. How come showing murder and cruelty to animals for entertainment is okay?

      That is a fallacy: False equivalence. It doesn’t prove anything whatsoever.

      What Cruella did was terrible. She was an awful person. She was treated like an awful person. She died like the awful person that she was.

      No one is saying “Oh no, they showed a bad thing on TV!” It’s about the show’s history and handling.

      But it comes off as "they showed rape by deception, how dare they, real people get raped". Yet real people get murdered and real people are cruel to animals, and no one got upset about those things. It says to me everyone is okay with murder being used as a plot device, but all of a sudden when it is rape, it's treated totally differently. And the acts themselves are not that different. One is saying the person doesn't have the right to consent, and the other is saying the person doesn't have the right to live. Both have to do with one person thinking they can control another person and what happens to them, against that person's will. As for your point regarding Cruella, how do we know Gothel won't be treated the exact same way? Clearly many of the heroes, along with anti-hero (?) Tremaine, greatly dislike Gothel. I don't see Gothel getting a happy ending on this show.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote: I have one final question: Why is everyone making it like the writers are condoning what Gothel did?

      Because they don't get punished for it. And you're okay with that. You are part of the problem.

      There was blacklash with Zelena and Robin. The writers didn't give a fig about it and have done the same thing again. THAT is the issue. (and is a big part of why I laugh to myself whenever someone implies or says that the writers did something to please fans) And this whole thing too many fans do, trying to justify it, is part of the issue too.

      "I certainly don't want to have a whole episode where we learn about all the terrible things that happen from being raped." but you're okay with men being raped and the women who rape them having zero consequences. TV show or not, that's messed up.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote: I have one final question: Why is everyone making it like the writers are condoning what Gothel did? They specifically did that to show how she is a terrible person. No one was upset when Cruella murdered her mother and then her mother's dogs, because the point was she was a terrible person. Many people actually love that episode. How come showing murder and cruelty to animals for entertainment is okay?

      Because they don't get punished for it. And you're okay with that. You are part of the problem.

      There was blacklash with Zelena and Robin. The writers didn't give a fig about it and have done the same thing again. THAT is the issue. And this whole thing too many fans do trying to justify it is part of the issue too.

      "I certainly don't want to have a whole episode where we learn about all the terrible things that happen from being raped. That is not what this show is for." but you're okay with men being raped and the women who rape them having zero consequences. TV show or not, that's messed up.

      No, I didn't say that I'm okay with men getting raped and women having no consequences. I just seperate fiction from reality. Gothel and WHook aren't real, so if the show decides Gothel doesn't get punished, that is the writers choice. It doesn't really effect anything. And the real world has enough problems for me to worry about, without me having to worry about fictional characters. Also, I think I figured out what the issue I'm having with everyone having an issue this time is: assuming Gothel won't get punished, get killed, etc. for her crimes. We have not seen how they will end Gothel's story arc, everyone is just assuming she's going to get a free pass. And yes, villains (and heroes) have gotten a lot of free passes on this show, but many have also been punished or killed for what they did. So why doesn't everyone wait for Gothel's arc to end, before we all say the writers aren't showing consequences for what Gothel did.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • You don't get to decide what I care about. The whole "there are more important things to worry about!" argument is classic deflection. As if people can only worry about one issue at time, you know? XD

      Further, what the show has going on is indicative of the real world, and a good way to gauge what real people think about real things. When we see rape on the show going unpunished, it shows us what at least some small part of Hollywood thinks of that situation. When we talk about it with our friends and associates, it shows us what they think of it too.

      For someone not okay with rape, you sure are trying to justify it a whole ton. I don't mean to berate you for you opinion, it's just frustrating to think that anyone would be okay with this situation happening repeatedly on a popular show. I'm going to bow out of this discussion. I think I've made myself clear.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      You don't get to decide what I care about. The whole "there are more important things to worry about!" argument is classic deflection. As if people can only worry about one issue at time, you know? XD

      As someone with anxiety, I CAN only worry about so many things, and still be a functioning human being. So unfortunatly, fictional character's problems are just something I can't worry about and still function. If others can worry about that, real world issues, and still function, I'm happy for them.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      Further, what the show has going on is indicative of the real world, and a good way to gauge what real people think about real things. When we see rape on the show going unpunished, it shows us what at least some small part of Hollywood thinks of that situation. When we talk about it with our friends and associates, it shows us what they think of it too.

      Utter, you hit it right on the nose.

      The OUaT creative team clearly falls into that category of Hollywood, of exploiting sexual abuse for pure entertainment. Which is why many of us here, and on other outlets, are so upset. Just because sex is monetary for producers, does not mean it is for the audience. We can hope they will treat this storyline with respect going forward. However, Robin Hood's rape was so poorly handled, that hope would be misplaced. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Gidgetus wrote:
      PS If a man has unsafe sex and the woman he had sex with gets pregnant and chooses to keep the kid, is that also sexual abuse?

      Depends. If the woman had sex as long as he used protection and he lies about using protection, then it is rape. Or if she only sleeps with him if he doesn't have any STIs and he lies about having an STI

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • "Rape by deception" is rape, okay, I admit I was wrong about that, but it's also just a legal term. It is immoral and someone's feelings and self-image might suffer, but to compare rape with deception with what most people think about when they hear the word 'rape' would be like comparing cutting your finger while cutting vegetables and having the same knife drive straight through your hand. A rough if not 100% accurate comparison, but my point still stands. Tricking someone into consenting to sex under false conditions is not as severe a transgression as using brute force to rape someone and damn the consequences or if the victim gets hurt or not.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 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.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 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, it 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: We're talking of fictional characters in a fictional universe.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow wrote:

      the devil-may-care, womanizing James Hook from the Wishverse, 

      Huh?

      Hook's name is Killian Jones, on OUaT.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:
      You don't get to decide what I care about. The whole "there are more important things to worry about!" argument is classic deflection. As if people can only worry about one issue at time, you know? XD

      Further, what the show has going on is indicative of the real world, and a good way to gauge what real people think about real things. When we see rape on the show going unpunished, it shows us what at least some small part of Hollywood thinks of that situation. When we talk about it with our friends and associates, it shows us what they think of it too.

      For someone not okay with rape, you sure are trying to justify it a whole ton. I don't mean to berate you for you opinion, it's just frustrating to think that anyone would be okay with this situation happening repeatedly on a popular show. I'm going to bow out of this discussion. I think I've made myself clear.

      I'm gonna cut a break to the writers here: they clearly, unambiguously framed Gothel's actions as bad. Let's not forget that this is the show where mass-murdering, abusive parent Cora apologises and goes to Heaven: punishment isn't exactly the point of the show. Even if Gothel went unpunished (for now), the writing was structured to paint her actions negatively, and that counts: the plot lets her get away with that, but the narration condemns her.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I didn't understand the whole "baby thing" right away as my mind wasn't thinkiing in naive mode since it's fairy tale show. Subconciousy, my mind wouldn't go there. i was somehow thinking that the baby came about magically, and that Wish Hook was only needed for some physical reason (i.e.  a piece of hair). Then, the flower sped up the process of the baby coming into existence, however that was. I understand that Mother said "It was a quite a night" two times, but, again, my mind didn't think of conception in a one-night stand in a show like this. And then I somehow believed that Wish Hook only "adopted" Alice because he couldn't abandon an abandoned baby.

      But I eventually came to my senses and realized that it was a conception out of deceit, and that Alice is most likely his Wish Hook's genetic daughter (we will find out more over time, of course).

      It was all just a bit too bizarre or me, considering it's a fairy tale show. We don't expect female characters to use male characters to get pregnant on purpose in a one-night stand.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Iceman338 wrote:
      I didn't understand the whole "baby thing" right away as my mind wasn't thinkiing in naive mode since it's fairy tale show. Subconciousy, my mind wouldn't go there. i was somehow thinking that the baby came about magically, and that Wish Hook was only needed for some physical reason (i.e.  a piece of hair). Then, the flower sped up the process of the baby coming into existence, however that was. I understand that Mother said "It was a quite a night" two times, but, again, my mind didn't think of conception in a one-night stand in a show like this. And then I somehow believed that Wish Hook only "adopted" Alice because he couldn't abandon an abandoned baby.

      But I eventually came to my senses and realized that it was a conception out of deceit, and that Alice is most likely his Wish Hook's genetic daughter (we will find out more over time, of course).

      It was all just a bit too bizarre or me, considering it's a fairy tale show. We don't expect female characters to use male characters to get pregnant on purpose in a one-night stand.

      Well, that would be true to the original fairy tale: there, Rapunzel and the prince do get busy, she does get pregnant (with twins, no less) and the witch finds out when Rapunzel starts to show. Drama ensues.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Okay, guys, I am not going to quote anyone or reply to any one spesific post directed at me, I am simply going to say this once and for all:

      I am NOT saying that it isn't  a big deal. And to be honest, I don't even know where the idea that I am trying to justify rape came from, as I find the idea of doing such a thing to be completely and utterly redicilous. The crime in question is horrible and disgusting and unforgivable, and when I read of it in the newspaper or hear about it in the media, of course I get as angry about it as the next bloke with the slightest shred of humanity and common sense and decency. But when it happens in fiction, and particularly fiction like Once Upon a Time, in universes with magic and dragons and that are so clearly detached from reality - then I have problems taking it seriously. Why? I don't know to be honest, but it's certainly not because I wouldn't care if I heard about something like this happen to someone outside the televition. Initially, even when I watched those episodes, the concept of rape didn't even cross my mind. I don't know why. Maybe it is the whole "fairy tale" theme, where everything that's supposed to be dramatic and brutal is replaced by puffs of multicolored smoke and balls of bad CGI flames from their hands. Maybe I'm just a bit dumb. In any case, I know that it had nothing to do with indifference to the concept of rape. 

      Maybe I just have a different association of the word than I should have. When I hear the word "rape", two consnting adults having sex only for one of them to turn out to be someone else by switching one actor/actress into another in a puff of purple or green mist isn't what pops into mind. Something far, far grotesque does. It might very well be that both examples should, that I ought to have been able to see the distinction, but I didn't. And had I known there were even the faintest chance of anyone getting upset over it, I'd have reconsidered my position long ago.

      So just to stop this potential conflict in its tracks before I really offend someone

      All I ever meant to say was that crimes seen in movies, such as someone being shot dead in an action movie or being raped, to use this example, don't upset me that much because I know that at the end of the day, it didn't really happen and that the actors were probably talking about the scene over coffee at some point or another both before and after the scene was shot. Do that mean I never get emotionally involved when I watch televition? Well, no. I cry every time Mufasa die. In this episode of Ghost Whisperer, Melinda, a woman who can see the dead, and there is this scene where this little five year old were playing on the train tracks just as the train could be heard in the distance. Horrified, she called for the boy to get out of there, and he does as he is told, walking up to her to find out what all the fuss is about. Upon being questioned about what he was doing there, the boy told her that he was waiting for his mom, who had told him that if he ever got lost, he was to stay where he was, and she would come and find him. As Melinda opened her mouth to answer, she noticed something hanging on the fence not far from where they stood and walked over to check it out; A small image of the boy nailed to the fence, surrounded by flowers. The boy was dead and didn't know. Again - I cried. Same thing with the end of Pay It Forward. I didn't find it particularly easy to watch Ramsy Bolton torture Reek in Game of Thrones either, to tell you the truth. I did care when Bellatrix Lestrange killed Sirius Black in the fifth book, and I didn't like that he wouldn't appear again in later books. But after I put the book down - Sirius Black was still not a real person, so I got over it.

      As for romanticising the crotesque.. I reacted more strongly about 13 Reasons Why, because the look and feel of the show was so much closer to that of the real world and the chances that teenagers and young adults who's already suicidal will be so much more likely to be influenced to act on those throughts than people are likely to start raping others because of watching OUAT. Especially since the former pretty much presented sudicidal thoughts as something other people in your life can't help you with. In truth - I had trouble seeing why people got as worked up over it as they did, considering the act taking place wasn't real, but came from a tv show with actors. The reactions I read here was almost as strong as people discussing rape in real life, and I didn't really get it at first. But that, I think, was only because I failed to consider all the potentially unstated implications of that opinion that came with how I presented it, and for that, I apologize.

      If anyone think I'm okay with the act of rape, or is indifferent to the suffering of its victims, I am not. If anyone got offended by what I wrote, I can do nothing but hope that you will accept my sincere apology. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Ninclow wrote:
      Okay, guys, I am not going to quote anyone or reply to any one spesific post directed at me, I am simply going to say this once and for all:

      I am NOT saying that it isn't  a big deal. And to be honest, I don't even know where the idea that I am trying to justify rape came from, as I find the idea of doing such a thing to be completely and utterly redicilous. The crime in question is horrible and disgusting and unforgivable, and when I read of it in the newspaper or hear about it in the media, of course I get as angry about it as the next bloke with the slightest shred of humanity and common sense and decency. But when it happens in fiction, and particularly fiction like Once Upon a Time, in universes with magic and dragons and that are so clearly detached from reality - then I have problems taking it seriously. Why? I don't know to be honest, but it's certainly not because I wouldn't care if I heard about something like this happen to someone outside the televition. Initially, even when I watched those episodes, the concept of rape didn't even cross my mind. I don't know why. Maybe it is the whole "fairy tale" theme, where everything that's supposed to be dramatic and brutal is replaced by puffs of multicolored smoke and balls of bad CGI flames from their hands. Maybe I'm just a bit dumb. In any case, I know that it had nothing to do with indifference to the concept of rape. 

      Maybe I just have a different association of the word than I should have. When I hear the word "rape", two consnting adults having sex only for one of them to turn out to be someone else by switching one actor/actress into another in a puff of purple or green mist isn't what pops into mind. Something far, far grotesque does. It might very well be that both examples should, that I ought to have been able to see the distinction, but I didn't. And had I known there were even the faintest chance of anyone getting upset over it, I'd have reconsidered my position long ago.

      So just to stop this potential conflict in its tracks before I really offend someone

      All I ever meant to say was that crimes seen in movies, such as someone being shot dead in an action movie or being raped, to use this example, don't upset me that much because I know that at the end of the day, it didn't really happen and that the actors were probably talking about the scene over coffee at some point or another both before and after the scene was shot. Do that mean I never get emotionally involved when I watch televition? Well, no. I cry every time Mufasa die. In this episode of Ghost Whisperer, Melinda, a woman who can see the dead, and there is this scene where this little five year old were playing on the train tracks just as the train could be heard in the distance. Horrified, she called for the boy to get out of there, and he does as he is told, walking up to her to find out what all the fuss is about. Upon being questioned about what he was doing there, the boy told her that he was waiting for his mom, who had told him that if he ever got lost, he was to stay where he was, and she would come and find him. As Melinda opened her mouth to answer, she noticed something hanging on the fence not far from where they stood and walked over to check it out; A small image of the boy nailed to the fence, surrounded by flowers. The boy was dead and didn't know. Again - I cried. Same thing with the end of Pay It Forward. I didn't find it particularly easy to watch Ramsy Bolton torture Reek in Game of Thrones either, to tell you the truth. I did care when Bellatrix Lestrange killed Sirius Black in the fifth book, and I didn't like that he wouldn't appear again in later books. But after I put the book down - Sirius Black was still not a real person, so I got over it.

      As for romanticising the crotesque.. I reacted more strongly about 13 Reasons Why, because the look and feel of the show was so much closer to that of the real world and the chances that teenagers and young adults who's already suicidal will be so much more likely to be influenced to act on those throughts than people are likely to start raping others because of watching OUAT. Especially since the former pretty much presented sudicidal thoughts as something other people in your life can't help you with. In truth - I had trouble seeing why people got as worked up over it as they did, considering the act taking place wasn't real, but came from a tv show with actors. The reactions I read here was almost as strong as people discussing rape in real life, and I didn't really get it at first. But that, I think, was only because I failed to consider all the potentially unstated implications of that opinion that came with how I presented it, and for that, I apologize.

      If anyone think I'm okay with the act of rape, or is indifferent to the suffering of its victims, I am not. If anyone got offended by what I wrote, I can do nothing but hope that you will accept my sincere apology. 

      Look some people or lets say few in this specific thread are just idiots and they misunderstood what you truly meant,i get you.I to dont understand why did A&E had to reuse "Magic-Rape by deception" as they did with Zelena and Robin in previous seasons i get that they thought it whould be intresting but it turns out it backfired on them,plus now we know that a Hook/Hook(WR) fans are pissed off in Twitter,like i know i have been saying this alot probably in other threads but are the Writters IDIOTS or what.And that is all from.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Kunica wrote:

      Look some people or lets say few in this specific thread are just idiots and they misunderstood what you truly meant,i get you.I to dont understand why did A&E had to reuse "Magic-Rape by deception" as they did with Zelena and Robin in previous seasons i get that they thought it whould be intresting but it turns out it backfired on them,plus now we know that a Hook/Hook(WR) fans are pissed off in Twitter,like i know i have been saying this alot probably in other threads but are the Writters IDIOTS or what.And that is all from.

      I wouldn't say idiots, but even if I had disagreed that it was reasonable of them to get upset, they still got upset, and is it something I don't like, it is to upset people. That being said... Thank you. :-)

      I don't know why, but when people rage about rape in OUAT, I can't help but think that for us to bring rape into the OUAT and rage over it makes about as much sense as people accusing The Lion King of incest because we only see two male lions in the pride. (Mufasa and Scar), instead of using their heads to figure out that it is a Disney movie and it would be wrong to bring logic based on the dynamics of real life lion prides into the mix.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I thought about this some more, if lying about who you are and sleeping with someone is rape by deception, than wasn't Cora raped by Jonathan, because he lied about being a prince? How come I've never heard anyone complain about how that plot was handled? He certainly wasn't punished, and even mocked Cora for throwing herself at him, even though he had tricked her by pretending to be royalty.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Kunica wrote: Look some people or lets say few in this specific thread are just idiots and they misunderstood what you truly meant,i get you.

      Keep the insults to yourself, it is never appropriate to insult other users, even in vague terms.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Despite my own shortcomings in this conversation, I agree. No need for name calling.

      And Utter solitude: Sorry for not expressing myself better earlier.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • There's no need to apologize, I've been pretty harsh myself in this conversation XD

      This is a hot-button topic that hits close to home for a lot of fans, and doesn't hit anywhere for others. I think it's important for all of us to discuss these things so we understand each other better.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      I thought about this some more, if lying about who you are and sleeping with someone is rape by deception, than wasn't Cora raped by Jonathan, because he lied about being a prince? How come I've never heard anyone complain about how that plot was handled? He certainly wasn't punished, and even mocked Cora for throwing herself at him, even though he had tricked her by pretending to be royalty.

      I think the point here is that Gothel is physically a different person from Rapunzel, whereas Jonathan was physically himself. Jonathan only lied about his social status, which he clearly did to get Cora's consent, but since her point was social climbing anyway I think the moral responsibility there is 50-50. The horrible implication there is that Jonathan is one of those d****bags who go around casually sleeping with people (not using protections IRL) and then fleeing when they knock them up.

      Conversely, here we'd be talking about consent based on physical attraction proper. But I do really think people are reading too much into this, because I can't quite figure a real life equivalent to finding out the person you consented to sleep with can shapeshift into a form you may or may not find attractive. The show didn't go there. Did Wish!Hook find Rapunzel specifically attractive and wanted to have sex with her? Did he just want to get laid to relieve the adrenaline and she was the closest breathing woman available, so who cares if she's truly Gothel? The show does not tell us, so the whole discussion kind of falls flat because a) the situation is ambiguous enough and b) let's repeat that, there are no comparable real life situations.

      Also, the comparison to Zelena and Robin is kind of pointless. That would need for Gothel to glamour herself as Milah – i.e.: someone Hook wants to sleep with because he has a strong emotional bond to her – which is not the case. What both cases share is a woman unilaterally forcing parenthood onto a man, which is an equally troubling problem (that the show CLEARLY addresses as very, very wrong), but a totally different one.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • GothicNarcissus wrote:

      Conversely, here we'd be talking about consent based on physical attraction proper. But I do really think people are reading too much into this, because I can't quite figure a real life equivalent to finding out the person you consented to sleep with can shapeshift into a form you may or may not find attractive. The show didn't go there. Did Wish!Hook find Rapunzel specifically attractive and wanted to have sex with her? Did he just want to get laid to relieve the adrenaline and she was the closest breathing woman available, so who cares if she's truly Gothel? The show does not tell us, so the whole discussion kind of falls flat because a) the situation is ambiguous enough and b) let's repeat that, there are no comparable real life situations.

      I think you make a lot of good points here. For me, I don't expect the show to act just like real life (there are enough shows out there that do just that), it's the lack of punishment for the offenders in this situation (which has happened before). We haven't seen what will happen with Gothel, ofc, but given past situations on the show, i doubt any actual negative consequences will occur.

      It touches on very real situations and how they're handled irl (or not handled) and how people react to it speaks to that too. I can't speak for everyone, but that's why I get up in arms about it personally.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • GothicNarcissus wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      I thought about this some more, if lying about who you are and sleeping with someone is rape by deception, than wasn't Cora raped by Jonathan, because he lied about being a prince? How come I've never heard anyone complain about how that plot was handled? He certainly wasn't punished, and even mocked Cora for throwing herself at him, even though he had tricked her by pretending to be royalty.
      I think the point here is that Gothel is physically a different person from Rapunzel, whereas Jonathan was physically himself. Jonathan only lied about his social status, which he clearly did to get Cora's consent, but since her point was social climbing anyway I think the moral responsibility there is 50-50. The horrible implication there is that Jonathan is one of those d****bags who go around casually sleeping with people (not using protections IRL) and then fleeing when they knock them up.

      Conversely, here we'd be talking about consent based on physical attraction proper. But I do really think people are reading too much into this, because I can't quite figure a real life equivalent to finding out the person you consented to sleep with can shapeshift into a form you may or may not find attractive. The show didn't go there. Did Wish!Hook find Rapunzel specifically attractive and wanted to have sex with her? Did he just want to get laid to relieve the adrenaline and she was the closest breathing woman available, so who cares if she's truly Gothel? The show does not tell us, so the whole discussion kind of falls flat because a) the situation is ambiguous enough and b) let's repeat that, there are no comparable real life situations.

      Also, the comparison to Zelena and Robin is kind of pointless. That would need for Gothel to glamour herself as Milah – i.e.: someone Hook wants to sleep with because he has a strong emotional bond to her – which is not the case. What both cases share is a woman unilaterally forcing parenthood onto a man, which is an equally troubling problem (that the show CLEARLY addresses as very, very wrong), but a totally different one.

      Good points here. And yeah, I agree it is hard to apply real world logic to this, when the woman in question actually shapeshifted to look like a different person.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Utter solitude wrote:

      GothicNarcissus wrote:

      Conversely, here we'd be talking about consent based on physical attraction proper. But I do really think people are reading too much into this, because I can't quite figure a real life equivalent to finding out the person you consented to sleep with can shapeshift into a form you may or may not find attractive. The show didn't go there. Did Wish!Hook find Rapunzel specifically attractive and wanted to have sex with her? Did he just want to get laid to relieve the adrenaline and she was the closest breathing woman available, so who cares if she's truly Gothel? The show does not tell us, so the whole discussion kind of falls flat because a) the situation is ambiguous enough and b) let's repeat that, there are no comparable real life situations.

      I think you make a lot of good points here. For me, I don't expect the show to act just like real life (there are enough shows out there that do just that), it's the lack of punishment for the offenders in this situation (which has happened before). We haven't seen what will happen with Gothel, ofc, but given past situations on the show, i doubt any actual negative consequences will occur.

      It touches on very real situations and how they're handled irl (or not handled) and how people react to it speaks to that too. I can't speak for everyone, but that's why I get up in arms about it personally.

      I get your point, but again, I think it's worth pointing out that the show has always been open in framing rape as a very negative action. Be it Regina and Graham, Zelena and Robin (which were more unanbiguous cases) or Gothel and Hook. Within the story, moral accountability is something the show has been very inconsistent about in pretty much all cases (including mass murder), but from a narrative standpoint it has always gone down the harsh judgement path.

      On the other hand, I agree that if you, writer, don't want to fully explore the fallout (both on the victim's and the perpetrator's side) of something so sensitive because other plot points have priority, you'd better not write it into your narrative at all. That bugs me too.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      I thought about this some more, if lying about who you are and sleeping with someone is rape by deception, than wasn't Cora raped by Jonathan, because he lied about being a prince? How come I've never heard anyone complain about how that plot was handled? He certainly wasn't punished, and even mocked Cora for throwing herself at him, even though he had tricked her by pretending to be royalty.

      I would actually say yes. I mean "I wouldn't have slept with you if you were a peasant" is shallow but JOnathan still decieved her in order to have sex with ehr

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Aine1989 wrote:

      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      I thought about this some more, if lying about who you are and sleeping with someone is rape by deception, than wasn't Cora raped by Jonathan, because he lied about being a prince? How come I've never heard anyone complain about how that plot was handled? He certainly wasn't punished, and even mocked Cora for throwing herself at him, even though he had tricked her by pretending to be royalty.

      I would actually say yes. I mean "I wouldn't have slept with you if you were a peasant" is shallow but JOnathan still decieved her in order to have sex with ehr

      It's certainly a gray area. While I think there's a lot of tit for tat arguing going on in this thread to detract from the larger points, I think we can all agree that deceiving someone to get them to sleep with you is wrong.

      Are some things worse than others? Sure, but it doesn't detract from a particular thing being wrong. When we try to assign black and white categories to things is when we get in trouble XD

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • CoolDudeAl wrote:
      GothicNarcissus wrote:
      CoolDudeAl wrote:
      I thought about this some more, if ...
      Conversely, here we'd be talking about consent based on physical attraction proper. But I do really think people are reading too much into this, because I can't quite figure a real life equivalent to finding out the person you consented to sleep with can shapeshift into a form you may or may not find attractive. 
      Good points here. And yeah, I agree it is hard to apply real world logic to this, when the woman in question actually shapeshifted to look like a different person.

      Edited for brevity, but It's less about the mechanics and more about the storytelling apsects some have (in addition to societal woes). 

      Writers use a large social issue. Then, the writers have to have good payoff. A lot of people might appear to be declaring the end unsatisfying due to the track record. Zelena and Robin were weirdly dealt with. It was clear that the writers showed it as evil and mentioned it in-show, but then they happened to kill off Robin when I think it was actually getting good. Then, there's things like the LGBT episode. We had a perfect setup with Mulan and Red...and we got a lesser developed Dorothy and a quick relationship and then they were booted offscreen. 

      So, in short, I don't think most are looking for them to address all these issues in this show, but they could handle things better. (Come on, they were asked about Graham every other season and each answer progressively weirder, instead of ignoring it. Take OUATIW in which they addressed it fine, then Eddy goes out proclaiming "Nobody watched it!" every few months.)

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • GothicNarcissus wrote: 
      Well, that would be true to the original fairy tale: there, Rapunzel and the prince do get busy, she does get pregnant (with twins, no less) and the witch finds out when Rapunzel starts to show. Drama ensues.


      Thanks for your comment. I didn't know that as I don't know much about the "real" fairy tales.

      Still, it was really bizarre to me. I would have eventually figured it out on my own, but sometimes our belief system about certain things makes us not see the forest for the trees right away. In this particular case: fairy tales don't talk about sex in this way.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Millerolsen
      Millerolsen removed this reply because:
      I just remembered the answer nvm
      15:42, March 14, 2018
      This reply has been removed
    • GothicNarcissus wrote:

      I get your point, but again, I think it's worth pointing out that the show has always been open in framing rape as a very negative action. Be it Regina and Graham, Zelena and Robin (which were more unanbiguous cases) or Gothel and Hook. Within the story, moral accountability is something the show has been very inconsistent about in pretty much all cases (including mass murder), but from a narrative standpoint it has always gone down the harsh judgement path.

      On the other hand, I agree that if you, writer, don't want to fully explore the fallout (both on the victim's and the perpetrator's side) of something so sensitive because other plot points have priority, you'd better not write it into your narrative at all. That bugs me too.

      Actually, the writers have defended Regina and claimed it was all consensual with Graham and basically told people if they don't like it, don't watch. Somehow they see being brainwashed and controlled as consensual. It explains a lot about how they can repeat these storylines over and over without seeing why they get backlash. People tend to think since males are physically stronger in most cases that they must have wanted it. That and the view that men only care about sex (it's a lie). The men might not be outwardly devastated by the rape, but there are a lot of things men keep bottled up. It doesn't mean it's okay.

      I totally agree though, that if they can't handle the fallout then they shouldn't put such controversial topics in. The scary thing is, they don't seem to view it as rape in the first place. Only Zelena's was treated that way at all, and I felt like Robin was traeted as a piece of meat between the sisters there for awhile. Regina seemed more upset for herself than for Robin. Zelena did it for revenge. They were both pretty disgusting and they both were treated more as victims than Robin. The writing is just in a way that makes you skim over the fact that a man has just lost his wife a second time (but yay! He has a girlfriend now! Whoo true love! /s) has to explain to his little boy his mother is dead and a wicked witch has been living with them and on top of all the abuse he's just faced, he is now a father to the witch's child and is being told he has no rights to it.

      People are free to have their opinions and all, but Adam and Eddy's opinions on this are clearly wrong. I'm not saying it's wrong to write these stories. It's wrong to deny it is a form of rape. ​​​​

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Hook wasn't raped, deceived though. Rape is forcing someone to have sex without their consent and Hook wanted to have sex.  He may not have known it was Gothel, but he wasn't raped.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • It is rape by deception. There are more than version of a crime, from murder to theft to even, here.

      With Adam and Eddy, magic walks the fence. You can’t count Cursed individuals because Regina essentially reality warped everything. It’s the flashback scenes with Graham where she literally has his heart and sexually assaults him, then has him sent to her bedchambers.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • It's just like Robin, he thought he has having sex with his wife. It's rape


      Also, I think Graham was also raped in SB because he didn't have his memories, while Regina did. The guy was brainwashed, and saw Regina using his heart to control him in SB in 2x17

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote:
      It's just like Robin, he thought he has having sex with his wife. It's rape

      Also, I think Graham was also raped in SB because he didn't have his memories, while Regina did. The guy was brainwashed, and saw Regina using his heart to control him in SB in 2x17

         I agree. If both Graham and Regina had been cursed and were having a fling, fine. But no, she was in a dark place and using him to fill her needs just like she did in the EF. ​​​​​​Yes, he agreed to it, but he didn't really have a choice, since as soon as he tries to leave her, she kills him. Also, being cursed as he was, it is almost the equivalent of taking advantage of a sleeping or drugged person. Sure, they didn't say no, but if you are manipulating them into saying yes...

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote: It's just like Robin, he thought he has having sex with his wife. It's rape


      Also, I think Graham was also raped in SB because he didn't have his memories, while Regina did. The guy was brainwashed, and saw Regina using his heart to control him in SB in 2x17

      With the SB stuff, it’s only seen that she uses his heart in drastic measures, so she could have made his cursed personality like her, or maybe he liked her without cursed provocation. There’s too much unknown. Example, Ivy kissed Henry in 7x04. I’m not going to say that’s assault. Reality warping makes everything complicated.

      That’s why there has to be a standard, otherwise, it looks like anything and everything would be cast into wacky situations. Like did Snow cheat on David with Whale? We say no.

      What isn’t ambiguous is when there isn’t any reality warping (which isn’t feasible) or memory warping, but working under deception and guises, we can say what’s what, and even coercion (like using job position and authority to coerce situations).

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • 8Rob wrote: It's just like Robin, he thought he has having sex with his wife. It's rape


      Also, I think Graham was also raped in SB because he didn't have his memories, while Regina did. The guy was brainwashed, and saw Regina using his heart to control him in SB in 2x17

      With the SB stuff, it’s only seen that she uses his heart in drastic measures, so she could have made his cursed personality like her, or maybe he liked her without cursed provocation. There’s too much unknown. Example, Ivy kissed Henry in 7x04. I’m not going to say that’s assault. Reality warping makes everything complicated.

      That’s why there has to be a standard, otherwise, it looks like anything and everything would be cast into wacky situations. Like did Snow cheat on David with Whale? We say no.

      What isn’t ambiguous is when there isn’t any reality warping (which isn’t feasible) or memory warping, but working under deception and guises, we can say what’s what, and even coercion (like using job position and authority to coerce situations).

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • What are you talking about? Snow and David we both cursed

      Regina and Ivy were clearly awake

      It's not the same. Not even close

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I would say that having your mind magically altered to consent to sex with another person is the magical equivalent of spiking someone's drink.

      And with Ivy and Henry, it's the equivalent of kissing someone who is too drunk to say no, knowing that they would not want it if they were sober.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I don't know....love spells and curses where you don't say no because you can't say no are still a form of coercion. Maybe even more so than a position of authority. If a boss at work says: "Sleep with me or you're fired!" someone still has the ability to walk away, no matter how rotten that is. If a witch curses you to be unable to say no...that's some messed up stuff. I would equate it closer to being drugged or intoxicated to the point your mind is altered.

      Again, I don't have a problem with these plots being shown, I have a problem with the writers saying it's consensual. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Aine1989 wrote: I would say that having your mind magically altered to consent to sex with another person is the magical equivalent of spiking someone's drink.

      And with Ivy and Henry, it's the equivalent of kissing someone who is too drunk to say no, knowing that they would not want it if they were sober.

      I agree (ignoring what I wrote earlier). My point was that from a perspective (not mine), if Tom wished for a Happy Ending and now he and Lucy (a girl he likes) were in a castle, married in a kid’s movie, noone’s going to outright think...he’s a sexual assaulting criminal because Lucy’s not aware of the reality warp or consent.

      I think that’s where the writers are coming from with Regina and Graham. It’s the “let’s not look to deep” view which often leads to deeper, darker ramifications from kid movies to adult dramas.

      I think they’d ease away if they didn’t delve deep as they always do and show us the complete opposite of their explanations.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • To add on to my post, I think it even stretches back to this sort of “if it was in a kid’s movie..”

      We see rampant mass murder without consequence.

      “Oh no, how could (insert name) do that!”

      We see deceptive assault.

      “Ew, how dare that witch!”

      I don’t think it is thought past surface level or a kid’s cartoon. I mean The Prince assaults Snow White, but it’s not suppose to be thought past surface level and that’s what the writers were probably intending. (Their explanations though doesn’t show any real deep thought into those dynamics at play.)

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I don’t think it is thought past surface level or a kid’s cartoon. I mean The Prince assaults Snow White, but it’s not suppose to be thought past surface level and that’s what the writers were probably intending. (Their explanations though doesn’t show any real deep thought into those dynamics at play.)

         I kind of disagree with your first part but agree with the second part. I don't see the Prince in the Disney movie Snow White as assaulting her. (Definitely not in the Once version). In the Disney film, Snow White was believed to be dead and he was saying goodbye, judging by his shock. (We could go into the sanity of kissing the corpse of someone you met once on the mouth but I'd rather not!) In Once he knew about True Love's Kiss. Either way, there was no rape or coercion involved.

      In some versions of Sleeping Beauty, however this is not true. Oddly enough it's the Grimm's who use a kiss to wake up her while older versions have the prince take advantage of her as she sleeps (while he is married to another princess, no less) and one of her babies wake her up nine months later.

      I do agree that the writer's do not want us to, nor do they themselves, probably look past the surface of what is going on. But of course we will because they are handling some pretty adult topics.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Yeah, that was my major proponent since the revival of this topic. Surface level thought and connections. Don’t get me started on 4B’s potential for darkness, no, actual darkness, not really darkness stuff. Think through that or Wish Realm And you’re bound to end up in the loony bin.

      I’m guessing part also has to deal with transition and execution. The later seasons (depending on which one) feel more kid-friendly than others. I mean, a couple of mass murderers and a violent psychopath come together to...play chicken on the tracks.

      So, Gothel was continually following the thread of very deep issues and thought puzzles that weren’t actually meant to be be anything more. Not excusing the writers, but themes and tones should have been thought about properly before introducing them to certain audiences.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • I really wish they had stayed with the vibe season 1 and most of season 2 had. It was so fun and dark but also had a more powerful feeling of hope and redemption to me.  After that, as much as I love the show, it often had a cartoony feeling and the plots never followed through with what they hinted at or even promised. The show still touches on that stuff, and season 7 seems to have come closest at times with some of the mystery season 1 had.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Oops, opening old wounds.

      A big problem with this is that the writers made Alice's conception very very problematic, and considering how prominent she is...

      Plus, it really doesn't help season seven in any way. I'm still incredibly frustrated at why and how anyone thought this was even close to a good idea. 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • Leroiblanc wrote: Oops, opening old wounds.

      A big problem with this is that the writers made Alice's conception very very problematic, and considering how prominent she is...

      Plus, it really doesn't help season seven in any way. I'm still incredibly frustrated at why and how anyone thought this was even close to a good idea. 

      The writers should’ve learned from the first time.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • TheRose123 wrote:

      Leroiblanc wrote: Oops, opening old wounds.

      A big problem with this is that the writers made Alice's conception very very problematic, and considering how prominent she is...

      Plus, it really doesn't help season seven in any way. I'm still incredibly frustrated at why and how anyone thought this was even close to a good idea. 

      The writers should’ve learned from the first time.

      They didn’t though. This is the fourth time they’ve done a storyline where consent was just thrown out the window. First we had Regina and the Huntsman/Graham, where Regina had his heart under her control. Then we had Zelena and Robin, where Zelena had disguised herself as Marian, while being with Robin. Then we had King Arthur and Guinevere, with Arthur using the magic sand on her, to keep her completely under his control. This fourth time, Hook and Gothel, where Gothel disguised herself as Rapunzel, and tricked Hook into impregnating her. They could have shown how bad these villains were without all the rape storylines, but they chose not to.

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • MyPretties wrote:

      TheRose123 wrote:

      Leroiblanc wrote: Oops, opening old wounds.

      A big problem with this is that the writers made Alice's conception very very problematic, and considering how prominent she is...

      Plus, it really doesn't help season seven in any way. I'm still incredibly frustrated at why and how anyone thought this was even close to a good idea. 

      The writers should’ve learned from the first time.

      They didn’t though. This is the fourth time they’ve done a storyline where consent was just thrown out the window. First we had Regina and the Huntsman/Graham, where Regina had his heart under her control. Then we had Zelena and Robin, where Zelena had disguised herself as Marian, while being with Robin. Then we had King Arthur and Guinevere, with Arthur using the magic sand on her, to keep her completely under his control. This fourth time, Hook and Gothel, where Gothel disguised herself as Rapunzel, and tricked Hook into impregnating her. They could have shown how bad these villains were without all the rape storylines, but they chose not to.

      Gothel especially frustrates me because she's more than evil enough with all her...evil doings in literally every other episode. Knightfall alone is enough to tell me, "hey, she's evil". 

        Preparing Editor Spell
    • A Spy in the Mirror
        Preparing Editor Spell
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.