Comment by Mari on BeautyIsPain

@BeautyIsPain You are so mind-numbingly stupid it's honestly terrifying. Jo raped an unconscious person. He used Ian's body after the man had passed out, and then came on his face without consent. That's not dubious consent, that's not "common in s3x", that's straight-up assault. The fact that you're bending over backwards to justify it is disturbing.

Yes, David Kim drugged Ian and raped him multiple times. And guess what? Jo also used Ian's unconscious body for his own pleasure. The difference in method doesn't erase the violation. Both situations involve someone being taken advantage of while incapable of giving or withdrawing consent. That is ra**. Period.

And the part where you said that if Ian were a real person, he'd consider it consensual? That's beyond disgusting — that's you putting words in the mouth of a fictional victim to excuse assault. You're not just wrong, you're dangerously ignorant. And no, I wouldn't give TJ a pass if he had done the same.

You can wrap it in whatever faux-intellectual nuance you want, but at the end of the day, you're defending a guy who got off on a person who was unconscious. That's not complex. That's not grey area. That's just ra**.

2 Replies

BeautyIsPainMember·1 year ago

@Mari resorting to name calling now, are we? Comical. You obviously have no experience with s** or relationships, or an understanding of the law. Let this stupid person break down your argument and tell you where you're wrong. Again.

Jo did not ra** an unconscious person. Ian was fully conscious and consenting from beginning to end. Wording it the way you did implies that Ian never had a choice and never gave consent, and that is false. But I like how you use language to twist the events of the story to fit your narrative. Cute.

You said David Kim and Jo both put Ian in a situation where he was incapable of giving or withdrawing consent, and that is so factually incorrect that I want to rip my skin off. Ian wanted to have s** Jo during the camping trip. In what scene did he not give consent? In what scene did he withdraw it? I'll wait. Again, you likening that event to what happened with David Kim is purely disgusting. And the fact that you doubled down on it with an incorrect application of the correct definition of consent is even more diabolical. You seriously need help.

I stand by what I said. Ian likely would not consider it ra** because he knows what actual ra** is. He willingly had s** with Jo with full consent. Jo's actions after Ian passed out were morally wrong, but they did not constitute ra**. YOU are calling Ian a victim in this situation because that's what YOU want him to be. If you took your argument to a court of law, given these circumstances, the case would be thrown out. Why? Because the s** was consensual. (Continued below)

BeautyIsPainMember·1 year ago

@Mari The law isn't "faux-intellectual." It does have precedents for these situations because they are nuanced. Was Jo wrong? Yes. Did he ra** his partner? No. Life isn't black and white. And that is the whole point of the story.

Stop projecting your narrow-minded views onto these characters and manipulating the events of the story to fit your false narrative. And stop trying to badger me for calling you out on your bullsh!t. You're wrong. Stfu.

Back to BeautyIsPain