It's not "self-defense" to the degree of defending against grievous harm or trauma, but to the degree normal to childish horseplay. If someone tickles you, you're going to slap their hands away. If someone mischievously tries taking something away from you, a friendly wrestling match will probably result.Gil Hamilton wrote:If violence in self-defense is justified, and no one is contesting that, then clearly something wrong is happening, wouldn't you think?
It seems that we're talking past each other. You're arguing from an almost purely legal standpoint, and I'm not arguing the legalities at all, as IANAL. Maybe this is technically assault in the eyes of the law, maybe not. The legal technicalities are irrelevant unless Gary reports it, which he's not going to do if he's a typical male as he wouldn't see this as unwanted sexual contact. That's why people are coming out in defense of this: calling this "sexual assault" is over-reacting unless the victim finds it traumatic.Gil Hamilton wrote:He probably isn't OK with it, but he's probably not going to press the issue. It is clearly unwanted physical contact of a sexual nature. What I'm arguing is that if the issue was pressed, it would certainly be deemed sexual harassment AT MINIMUM legally. That's why all the people flipping out and saying "It's not sexual assault! It's comedy!" probably should cork themselves, because they don't have a leg to stand on. People like the comic, so they automatically come to its defense, even when the criticism against it is factually correct.
In my opinion, it should be framed within the context of a comic, and while Zii is clearly an obnoxious human being and Dillon probably could stand to be slugged, physical comedy is what it is. However, people who would say "that's sexual assault!" aren't wrong and those coming out of the wood work to piss and moan at them for being buzzkills can't really talk.
I don't see any greater degree of sexuality in this than in a tickle fight or similar horseplay. That it involves removing clothing doesn't make a difference as it's clothing that covers a non-sexualized area. Wrestling off a friend's shoe wouldn't be sexual assault, why should wrestling off a man's shirt?
