Magick Chicks 26-08-14 What about the prisoner

[Gotoh]

Seriously, attraction does not negate the possibility of sexual harassment, so unless that's part of some other argument, leave it out. That part alone is used to shame victims all the time and the idea that it's okay needs to stop.

What are you on about? No one's said anything about sexual harassment; including Tiffany. She has never accused of Faith of that.

So, "Which was one instance, compared to how many where Tiffany was consenting?" is not a valid way out of consent that one time mattering, even assuming the other times were consented to.

*same response as in the preceding section*

Tiffany doesn't consent to most of the interactions, aside from the date. The conversation over her brother had the fate of her brother hanging over her head. That's a good case for coercion. A reasonable person would assume that there was a reason for the communication at that moment and relate it to what was happening and not expect it to be another attempt to ask her out.

No it isn't, because that completely ignores intent. If Faith planned to coerce Tiffany in any way, she would've made demands in return for Tiffany's affections. Except she didn't. She waived school protocol and let both of them go. That's hardly coercion.

She was visibly upset about the conversation when Faith was in bed with a girl, and never said she wanted to be receiving all of those images.

I doubt Tiffany saw what was going on, since it's been said Faith can only leave a message, not plant images. And Tiffany didn't become upset 'til after Faith 'hung up'.

Being hit on frequently by the same person in general is pretty creepy and there's no invitation to keep asking when the answer is always a no.

In general, no it isn't because that's subjective. Some works portray it that way, others don't. Just as some readers will perceive Faith's actions as sexual harassment, while others will only see it as flirting.

What ultimately matters, is how Tiffany sees it. While it's true that she doesn't always welcome Faith's come ons, if we're being objective, we have to ask ourselves: is it because she genuinely doesn't consent during those instances, or is it denial (which has been apparent for sometime and we now have evidence of)?

If she truly sought consent in such conversations they'd start with some variation of "Can we talk?"

The mind sexting is obviously invasive.

Fair point. And Tiffany did tell Faith to stop mind-sexting her... after she had already 'hung up'. So Faith didn't get that message. But there was nothing stopping her from sending her a text message (assuming she even has Faith's number), or delivering the message in person.

It would be like you talking to a friend and then they decide they can get naked in your room with someone else and try to hit on you. The being naked alone could be considered sexual harassment unless Tiffany was okay with the conversation on those terms.

You're embellishing here, 'cuz that never happened. Tiffany could not actually see her in bed with the other girl. She only realized there was another girl present when she called Faith back to bed. Any mental images Tiffany saw were thoughts she conjoured on her own.

If a friend called you up and you heard a party going on their end of the line, they're not making you imagine that party. You picture that yourself.

Defining any of this as harassment relies on whether Tiffany wanted it. There are indications that she didn't want at least parts of it. Responding to a conversation carries an implicit agreement, but doesn't mean consent for any further activity is given.

This is sort of a grey area, 'cuz while I agree for the most part, we have to consider how often she did or didn't consent, whether Tiff ever actually wanted her to stop, or was it her denial talking - because it's a factor.

[Zippy]

What are you on about?

You said, and I quote "Which was one instance, compared to how many where Tiffany was consenting?"

That's an argument that it is impossible to withdraw consent, or to not consent if you've consented a number of times before.

That is BS. It usually comes up in a sex/rape context, made by company I'm sure you wouldn't want to keep and the reason mikbuster is saying what he is, but even in other contexts...

[Not even considering, in your standard defences of Faith, you typically treat behaviour that is at best meant to be ethically dubious as justifiable...]

[Gotoh]

What are you on about?

That's an argument that it is impossible to withdraw consent, or to not consent if you've consented a number of times before.

I've neither said that, or even implied it. The fact that I raised the question acknowledges that she hasn't always consented. So I'm not sure how you arrived at that.

Not even considering, in your standard defences of Faith, you typically treat behaviour that is at best meant to be ethically dubious as justifiable...

No, I have not. I've said several times now that she isn't a saint and is morally grey. It'd be pointless for me to argue otherwise, considering the character herself acknowledged her own shortcomings, and the editor has discussed on the same subject at length.

[Artemisia]

Rain is about to do something colossally stupid and we're arguing over if Faith was right or not? Rain is thinking with his gonads and you're all arguing over a character who, for all we know, is brule avec prejudice?

[Gotoh]

Initially, the conversation was about whether they'll shut down Artemis at the end of the current arc. Then somehow, it segued onto the current topic (not my fault this time).

Anyhoo, I don't speak French, but I'm guessing that last bit translates as: broiled with extreme prejudice?

[Artemisia]

Burned with prejudice

[Gotoh]

Artemisia: I figured it was something like that. Thanks.

[Don Alexander]

Rain is about to do something colossally stupid and we're arguing over if Faith was right or not? Rain is thinking with his gonads and you're all arguing over a character who, for all we know, is brule avec prejudice?

Maybe we should call it "Gotoh's Law": Any thread in the *Cniverse inevitably degrades to a pro Faith vs. contra Faith debate if it goes on long enough.

[CFT]

I like the sound of "Gotoh's Law"!
Also, if that's any "consolation" (lol), at least Faith is still very far from generating the amount of controversy that Miko (from the Order of the Stick webcomic) does whenever she's mentioned on a discussion over there. (we're talking about guaranteed 40+ pages of heated arguments about "moral justifications" at the mere mention of her name! ;) )

So after all this, does the school get shut down?
Massive bullies. Telepathy used to make others attracted to you seems to imply rape. Lots of mass killing (or attempted). Girl left tied up in almost nothing. Lack of adults doing anything.
Magic Chicks moves out of Artemis and the all boys school stops being an all boys school?

Finally ... I think I'll also throw in my 2 cents on the issue:
- First (to get this out of the way), the post (quoted above) that started this particular debate felt to me as skirting the realm of "flamebaiting". Note: I DO NOT make any assertions AT ALL that JoybuzzerX's intentions were to flamebait (I DON'T know his intentions, and can't assume what they are. He probably has legitimate grievances about these short of issues and does not want them depicted in web comics without direct condemnation, for example, which is fine). However, the way this post is written was pure ... "Gotoh-bait". ;) And by that, I mean that it invited a reaction by anyone who thinks that accusations of rape in this universe are rather "extreme". I'm probably one of the people in that last category. Though I may not agree with all of Gotoh's views, my position is closer to his. Allow me to elaborate why below:

- I believe that human interaction (and relationships) are ridiculously complicated and diverse things, cannot fit in nicely separated boxes and cannot be painted in black and white. Instead, there's a whole spectrum that covers every subtle nuisance and every relationship (and interaction) should be viewed on a case-by-case basis. In my life I've seen interactions that I would consider very rude (or harassing), but I've been assured by all the participants that they aren't. I've seen things that I considered innocuous but those affected by them found very inconvenient. I'm not saying that there is no objectivity to be found (that's another extreme, too), but that everyone's perceptions (and what behaviors they find intolerable) do not necessary align. The same applies here: probably due to bias from their own life experiences, some find Faith as a charming annoyance, while others think of her as a despicable bully. I think she's simply a person with important "flaws" (like everyone else), who's made indeed serious mistakes, but also honestly tries to become a better person. People easily resort to condemning others, without ever considering how easy it is to fall in such pitfalls, especially if you find yourself in such a "position" as Faith (gifted with "power", showered with "love" and adoration, but also burdened with very serious responsibilities, and all that at such a young age). Or even others among the cast (I still claim that Cerise isn't an irredeemable monster, but instead someone in dire need of "help", again mostly because she's so damn young, I can't attribute evilness to her).

- Now, what complicates things even more is that this is a fantasy setting, where supernatural stuff happen, where monsters, deities (and an afterlife) exist, where people's minds can be invaded, altered, moved between bodies, etc. This results in many situations that cannot be "judged" by our normal morality, except by drawing parallels to similar situations (except that this similarity is heavily "debatable"). Is a subtle mental suggestion the equivalent of getting someone drunk? You could say yes but you could say no as well. Is projecting images into another brain some kind of harassment? The same dilemma. The fact is, we don't *really* know. We don't know how it would actually feel, what such a society would consider "normal" and what not. The best we can do is observer how the characters *in* the story react, and refrain from projecting our own ideas (and experiences) onto what we read, as much as that is possible. In Faith's case, we saw that revelation of what her "effect" on the students was, shocked her deeply. So, it's not "ok" what she did. On the other hand, though, again judging from in-comic reactions, we can't paint her as "taking advantage" of the people around her, their behavior is *not* that of people that have been abused.

(Darn, this is getting too long and I blubber like and idiot, you probably got bored already reading this, I'll finish shortly).

tl;dr Direct mental influence in fantasy works tends to be "demonized" very easily, when people forget that indirect mental influences happen ALL THE TIME and are widely accepted in our world (examples of the "sexual" kind, as mentioned in other posts of me before, include: wearing make-up, perfume, attractive clothing, doing cosmetic surgery, adopting behaviors (smoking, dangerous sports) etc. to appear more attractive, cool, desirable, etc.

tl;dr2 As for the whole "dangerous" stuff happening in a school (thus it should be shut down), that is such a common trope in all teenage fantasy stories (the kids get into in unacceptably dangerous situations all the time) that it shouldn't raise eyebrows any longer (or Hogwarts should have closed down decades ago, lol).

[Gotoh]

Maybe we should call it "Gotoh's Law": Any thread in the *Cniverse inevitably degrades to a pro Faith vs. contra Faith debate if it goes on long enough.

Even though I wasn't the one responsible this time? Or even half the time, if we're being honest, since I'm usually not the one who brings her up.