YOU GET IT YES!!!! oh my god, some actual sanity here, i could cry. i keep seeing responses like “its just fiction” or “why are you reading it if you hate it” but no one is actually addressing the point lmao. its not about the fact that it has noncon or abuse, dark fiction has and always will exist, and thats fine. its the fact that people seem to want to pretend like something horrible wasn’t actually that bad and WE’RE the crazy ones for being like “oh that’s fucked up”. i personally have much more respect for people who just straight up admit they like messed up fiction, instead of those reaching for the stars for an excuse for liking it.
also the people acting like Dan was never raped and its his fault for signing a contract… is actually pretty concerning. but i know it would be exhausting trying to argue with them all so, i just hope for a better mindset for them.
Im not agreeing nor disagreeing (I myself am still unsure of where I stand on the question Im about to ask you, there are many differing opinions online), but this brings up a question.
Most would consider rape sexual coercion via threats, violence, substance use, or withholding things. Jaekung has laid out the terms clearly, and though in a tight position, Dan in no way HAS to say yes. (In fact I dont think I could ever imagine myself saying yes to exchange sex for money… I dont think my family would want that for me either.) Jaekung is a stranger who has the right to decide what he does with his money. Yes, it would be extremely tragic if Dan’s grandma does not receive the proper treatment for her illness. But unfortunately it is not something he’s owed by Jaekung or anyone else. In fact, most people would refuse the offer and find a way to deal with the loss. Dan is in no way FORCED to say yes. Jaekung is inflicting none of Dans financial struggles onto him. It is exchanging money for sex under Jaekung’s stipulations (though does get non/dubcon as he introduces toys). It at its core is prostitution. So this is the question, do you consider prostitution rape? Because they are exchanging their “consent” for money, do you consider it technically non-consensual?
(Im not trying to upset you, or say that you’re wrong for believing thats what it is! Id really just like to have a proper exchange of opinions snd ideas!!!)
Honestly I came to read this Webtoon because a video popped up on my recommended feed talking about how it romanticizes abuse. After hearing the premise I became suspicious of what the video might talk about/how it might talk about it because considering the sheer power differential, this type of relationship NOT becoming abusive would be more unrealistic. I wanted to see for myself what the problem really was—whether it was really romanticization, or if this person just didn't like fiction depicting dark topics period, or if maybe this particular Webtoon was leaving much to be desired, or if it was an issue with how the audience is receiving it...
Reading the first few chapters I was like no, actually, nothing is romanticized thus far—the topic of eroticized rape is a different discussion altogether but the Webtoon itself never really makes light of the situation, except for Jaekyung and Dan themselves. And even then it makes sense for their characters. Of course Jaekyung is the freak doing the abusing so LMAO, but we know that Dan has poor self-esteem and is a bit of a pushover. Of course he feels everything is his fault. Of course he feels indebted to Jaekyung despite the awful treatment. And even despite all that he did, at the beginning at least, acknowledge how awful his situation was.
So does the Webtoon depict abuse? Yes, absolutely. Acting like it doesn't is cope at best and deeply fucking concerning at worse. Does it romanticize it? No, at least not at first. Personally I'd even say it did great with portraying how these situations can come to be and how they play out for a time there. So I can somewhat understand people who might be upset with others portraying as purely a romanticized rape comic. Both its good parts and bad parts are complex and nuanced and it should be treated as such. But on the issue of rape like. No.
To me I would say in all technicality yes it's like. Very complicated. As sexual coercion often is, right. Hoo boy there's like a lot of threads here to unwind, I feel my brain knotting up just trying to think about this HAHA.
To get my answer out of the way first I would say that...consent under capitalism is a shaky thing. To use the simplest example—no, I don't HAVE to go to work to make money for myself. But if I don't work then, put simply it would be very hard if not impossible for me to have my basic needs for living met. I wouldn't be able to afford food, clean water, shelter, and healthcare. I can either work, or I can pretty much just die. Under those circumstances, can it really be said that I have the "choice" to work? Some would say yes, others would say no. I would say no, that's not a meaningful choice that I made truly of my own volition. It's not the same as me choosing whether or not I want to have vanilla or chocolate ice cream, which comes with no heavy consequences no matter what I choose. Or even a more serious decision like what career path I want to pursue. In my particular circumstances, choosing the "wrong job" might fuck me over for a little bit but I wouldn't be damned.
So that's kind of how I see Dan's situation. He may not have been out on the streets YET but he was on the brink. We saw where he was living. We saw that it was about to be demolished. We know his grandma was terminally ill and we know how important she is to him (and as a note, honestly I couldn't see myself doing something like that either but, also, as someone who has lost their grandma only two years ago, who, similar to Dan, had that person as an integral part of my life for so long...who's to really say what I would or wouldn't have done to prolong her life if I had the opportunity?). We know also that Dan had been unable to make any good money because his previous boss basically fucked up his job prospects. So just from that alone, while, yes, Dan didn't have to agree to Jaekyung's terms, you can see how, from Dan's perspective, he would feel he had/has no real choice in the matter, right? To give up such a genuinely life-changing amount of money. Like with no other real viable options, you tell me, would you tell Dan to just say no? And we KNOW Jaekyung knows it's a life-changing amount because of course the first thing that he does when Dan says no at first is to say oh well. Then you don't get to have it. Withholding things, as you said. Yes, it's not something Dan had owned already, but.
To add to the unfairness of it all, Jaekyung is someone with status and also a fucking MMA fighter. There is no reason why Dan wouldn't further feel that he has to comply with his wishes, no matter what they are—he has already experienced someone at a higher status than him (his former boss) fucking over his job prospects and reputation because they have status. HE was the one punished for being assaulted, not his boss. And then with Jaekyung's temper and strength, Dan has every reason to believe that if he doesn't comply he will get his shit rocked (and like, he does! Jaekyung does so repeatedly!).
All this to say me personally, I think it is non-consensual. Dan can't really make any meaningful/reasonable choice here considering his circumstances. On top of that, Jaekyung fully knows this and uses it to his advantage, to cement further ownership over Dan. Even if you don't believe it's rape, there's no question that Jaekyung's behavior is RIDICULOUSLY underhanded and in terrible taste.
Your comment raises important points about power dynamics, consent, and the portrayal of toxic relationships in "Jinx." However, it also includes several strawman arguments and ad hominem attacks that undermine the validity of your argument.
Firstly, acknowledging the unhealthy and abusive dynamics in "Jinx" does not equate to endorsing them. Readers can critically engage with the content without necessarily agreeing with the behaviors depicted.
You mention that Jaekyung's actions constitute rape due to the gross abuse of power and coercion. It is essential to distinguish between different forms of sexual misconduct accurately. Jaekyung's actions involve sexual coercion and manipulation, which are indeed severe and reprehensible. However, legal definitions matter, and it is important to use precise terms to discuss these issues. What you are describing is sexual coercion which is a form of sexual assault. Jinx does not fit the criteria form the legal definition of rape.
Your implication that anyone who doesn't see this as rape is uneducated or lacks understanding is a form of ad hominem attack. It dismisses differing perspectives without addressing the substance of those viewpoints. Constructive dialogue requires respecting differing opinions and engaging with them based on their merits.
It's also worth noting that different readers may interpret the story's themes and dynamics in various ways. These interpretations can be influenced by personal experiences, cultural backgrounds, and levels of education. Dismissing these perspectives outright doesn't contribute to a productive discussion.
If we are to have a meaningful conversation about the issues in "Jinx," let's focus on the specific behaviors depicted and their implications rather than resorting to personal attacks. We can agree that the story involves complex and problematic dynamics without misrepresenting the facts or belittling others' views.
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these important issues and hope we can continue to do so respectfully.
Are you a bot?
And don't answer me with any logical fallacy shit, I just want to know whether or not to waste my time responding to you.
Your comment contains several strawman arguments and misrepresentations.
Firstly, the phrase "it's just fiction" is often used to highlight that discussing fictional content allows for exploring themes and dynamics that we wouldn't endorse in real life. Engaging with dark fiction can provide a space for readers to confront and process complex emotions and situations safely. Many times it is said because the other person is trying to make it real or equal to real. They trying to make the person wrong for liking this as if it says they support it is real life. It doesn’t.
Secondly, the argument "why are you reading it if you hate it" is about personal choice and recognizing that different readers have different thresholds for what they find acceptable or engaging in fiction. It's not about dismissing valid criticisms but understanding that personal preferences play a significant role in how we engage with media. That person is only harming themselves when they can go and enjoy their lives instead of letting hate control their lives.
The concern about people pretending something horrible isn’t bad and labeling those who call it out as "crazy" is a misrepresentation. Acknowledging different perspectives on the same content does not equate to downplaying serious issues. It’s possible to understand and critically engage with the problematic aspects of a story without agreeing with them.
Regarding the point about Dan and the contract, the story depicts complex power dynamics and coercion. Saying that people are dismissing rape is another strawman argument. Many recognize that Dan's situation involves severe manipulation and abuse. The discussion is about accurately defining these terms, as they have specific legal and social implications. There are people here that don’t use that contract as a point as you are claiming.
It’s important to engage in these discussions honestly and accurately, without misrepresenting the views of others. Constructive dialogue requires us to respect different perspectives and address the substance of arguments rather than resorting to personal attacks or mischaracterizations.
If we are to have a meaningful conversation about "Jinx" and its themes, let's focus on the specific behaviors depicted and their implications, and avoid distorting the viewpoints of those we disagree with.
No, I'm not a bot. I'm here to engage in a meaningful discussion about this topic. If you have specific points or arguments you'd like to address, I'm open to hearing them. Let's focus on the substance of the conversation rather than resorting to personal attacks or deflecting from the main issues at.
If I mentioned logical fallacies, it's because I'm committed to a rational and respectful discussion. Instead of deflecting by suggesting I'm a bot, let's engage with the points I've made. Avoiding logical fallacies is the best way to ensure a constructive conversation.
Also, I do believe that shows you read my other comments as I didn’t use logical fallacy here in this topic until this comment.
I think this is framed to be negative with some misrepresentations.
Jinx is non-consensual.
I understand that "Jinx" features non-consensual elements, but it's important to recognize that non-consensual acts can encompass a range of behaviors, not just rape. For example, non-consensual can include scenarios like prostitution under coercion, which, while problematic, are distinct from rape unless they meet specific criteria.
Addressing the nuances of these terms helps us have a more accurate and meaningful discussion. Misrepresenting the story can lead to misunderstandings and unproductive arguments. Let’s focus on the specific issues at hand rather than generalizing or misinterpreting the content.
I see you leaving out many important details.
Your replies are robotic and lack humanity, so I had to check. Because it's very weird to reply to some of the things I and others have been bring up with an "erm, acksually, you're committing xyz logical fallacy
God fucking dammit, it deleted the rest of my comment. Give me a moment.
To be honest I have no seen someone saying there is no abuse.
For what I know, I don’t know if you are misunderstanding or using a strawman argument.
I wanted to clarify that acknowledging "Jinx is not rape" does not equate to denying the abuse depicted in the story. Many of us recognize the abusive dynamics present in "Jinx," but we also believe it's crucial to accurately describe the nature of that abuse.
Saying Jinx isn’t rape does not change the abuse Dan endured. It is just labeling the abuse correctly.
Non-consensual acts can encompass a wide range of behaviors, including coercion, manipulation, and other forms of abuse that may not meet the legal or conventional definitions of rape. For instance, prostitution under coercive circumstances can be non-consensual without being classified as rape.
Critiquing the story for its portrayal of toxic relationships is valid, and we agree that such dynamics should not be romanticized. However, misrepresenting the specific nature of the abuse can lead to misunderstandings and unproductive discussions. Let's strive for accuracy and honesty in our discussions to ensure a constructive dialogue.
You could ask me why instead of assuming I am bot. No bot would behave like this. I am actually giving you replies not something off the wall.
It is not weird to call out people or saying they are using logical fallacies when they are using them.
I will address some of your other arguments later but I have to get across how psychopathic you sound when you argue this way. You're not making yourself look good, you're not making your arguments look good, and you're not making other fans of this Webtoon look good. And if you think it's fallacious for people to care about how an argument is presented—yes, it is. Sorry. That's how humans work. That's why we have Pathos, Logos, and Ethos.
You aren't even bringing up any real counterarguments, for one, just saying that I'm wrong and that I should focus on specific issues at hand. What specific issues, then? What the hell are you even concerned about here, then? Besides making sure that the Webtoon is accurately represented? I don't see you arguing about the things the Webtoon handles well OR poorly, you're just calling other people illogical and irrational for their dislike of it.
Like you keep bringing up this whole thing with the legal definition of rape. Why actually are you doing this? Tell me, if I wanted to recommend or talk about this Webtoon to someone, do you think it would make much of a difference if I said, "This Webtoon features rape" vs. "This Webtoon features sexual assault?" Or even more specifically, since that's the name of the game for you, "This Webtoon features sexual coercion and a wildly imbalanced power dynamic between characters, resulting in a toxic and abusive relationship"? Are these serious enough differences/misinterpretations to you? Tell me, if someone close to you, a friend or a family member, told you that someone touched their genitals without their consent, but nothing else really happened, and they expressed their discomfort and feeling of violation—would you go out of your way to split hairs about whether or not they were sexually assault or raped by the legal definition? Or would you do your best to acknowledge their feelings and comfort them and proceed from there?
Even you agree that at the end of the day, what Jaekyung is doing to Dan is, by your own words, "severe and reprehensible." So in this situation where rape/sexual assault/sexual coercion/sexual abuse are synonymous, interchangeable, what REALLY is your purpose in distinguishing between how people are referring to what's happening? Is it to make a point about severity? Because no one here is talking about the law. And even if we were—what law? WHOSE law? American law? Korean law? What do you call it when someone penetrates and ejaculates inside of you without your consent? Because even with the strictest laws defining rape in America, that would fall under it. Of course you factor in Dan's "choice" in the matter and the fact that they're two men and things get shaky but like, seriously. What is your actual point.
My point in saying all of this is that on the "legal definition of rape" thing in particular (but, to be clear, some of your other arguments come across this way, too) it looks and feels as if you ARE in fact trying to downplay the severity of what is going on in the Webtoon, or else the legal definition would not even be a topic of discussion you bring up, because it ISN'T and WASN'T EVER a topic that I nor anyone else (as I've seen so far) has brought up. That taken in with the broader context of other people just plain stating, with no explanation as to why they think this is the case, or with a very SHODDY explanation as to why they think this is the case, that there's no rape in the Webtoon makes you and your argument look downright AWFUL. That taken in with the examples I've provided above, of the real life fucking implications of what you're doing here, makes you look psychopathic. Yes, it's fallacious! Fine! Then don't bring up irrelevant arguments! I don't know what fallacy that one's called but it sure is a fallacy! Christ.
I read your first two paragraphs. I am not arguing. I am sharing information with you and trying to have a conversation. I don’t came across the way you framed it.
I have brought up many counters but you just want to discredit others. You assume I am a fan to attack other people.
Your criticism of me isn’t accurate. Genuinely people would not do what you just did. That is not a conversation. That shows you know you are wrong and trying to discredit me when you claim there is nothing there….
1: Never said that acknowledge the dynamics means an explicit endorsement. I even prefaced my statements saying that it's okay if you're into this shit + enjoy it as long as you understand what it is you're engaging with, and that I myself enjoy this shit.
2: Fuck off with the semantic game, you know what I mean, everyone knows what I mean, we're not talking about the law, we're talking about what's being depicted and how it is being received. Personally I'd prefer people to have an "inaccurate" understanding of what's happening here than no understanding at all (saying it isn't rape/it isn't violent).
3: Granted, I haven't gotten far into the comments here, but so far I haven't seen anyone present any real or substantive explanation as to why they believe that what Jaekyung is doing to Dan doesn't constitute rape. I'm not dismissing differing perspectives because I have not actually seen any real ones. Furthermore I came to the conclusion that people who aren't viewing this as rape may just have not been taught about the way coercion can figure into (non-)consent, because I am an American citizen, and I know that sex ed here is shit, and I know what the dominant and prevailing attitudes about rape are/tend to be. It was an assumption on my part, one that I don't believe it be unfounded, and it was not made necessarily to attack people personally, but to attack the systems that be that allow for people to come to the conclusion that any "yes" in any scenario means consent. My fucking bad about not being abundantly clear about that.
4: I know different people are interpreting the story and its themes differently. See the above.
I skimmed this one. It is illogical to think using c
My comments are objective reporting. There is no opinion.There are no “arguments”
While toxic, abusive, and problematic, Jinx does not meet the criteria for rape if all details and facts are considered.
Saying Jinx is not rape doesn’t minimize any abuse Kim Dan has endured. Jaekyung's actions are deeply problematic and morally reprehensible. My focus on differentiating between sexual assault and rape is based on legal definitions, not an attempt to downplay the severity of the abuse. That is a strawman argument saying that does downplay the severity of what is happening. That is your opinion because you believe it is rape. You can believe that but legally it is not rape. Saying something is or isn’t does change the abuse.
Why do you think “Jinx has no rape” removes the abuse Dan endured. It doesn’t.
To me you are claiming Jinx has incest and I am saying it is not. Then you say that removed all the abuse????? You represent a logical fallacy. Saying it is sexual assault, sexual coercion but not rape doesn’t change the abuse he endured. This is an argument made by a hate group that only wants to fight and argue to where they are degrading people who are not like them. I am not interested in this situation and that is presented in your comments to me. You are changing my words to attack.
Nothing to add for now, the time, space, and energy I would need to detail all of my thoughts on all this exceeds every limit presented to me here. I need to see the story to completion before I make any final judgements. It did some things that I thought were genuinely interesting and praiseworthy at first and then began to fumble the bag with stupid plot devices and, well, mishandling the things it’d been doing well at first.
Look. If you’re into rape/non-con that’s fine. If you’re into the toxic shit that’s fine, so long as you understand that that is, in fact, what you’re reading. I’ll self-disclose and say I, too, enjoy those things (in a purely fictional context). But the fact that I am seeing several people in these comments trying to argue that what Jaekyung is/has been doing throughout this Webtoon WASN’T rape is deeply, deeply concerning to me. Usually I would blame the author for framing things in such a way as to make things ambiguous for reasons that have little to do with the story. But it is not the case here. Jaekyang is a wealthy man with status and power, physical and otherwise. He used those qualities from the get go and all throughout the Webtoon in order to get Dan, someone in a ridiculously desperate financial situation and with no leverage of his own to have sex with him. That is the gross abuse of power being used to coerce someone otherwise completely unwilling to have sex with you—that is rape. And it is a real and horrific thing that happens ALL the time in reality.
So don’t come at me with “technicalities” about this shit just because it’s fiction or whatever the fuck, because some of y’all aren’t talking about this as if it is, some of y’all aren’t applying nuance to this for the sake of having a worthwhile conversation. It’s genuinely scary to me that some of you seem to be unaware of the precise nature of what is going on here. Not that you’re reading the Webtoon, but that you don’t seem to be understanding it. It’s emblematic of many cultures’ poor sex ed and poor attitudes towards sex and consent. Because I don’t think anyone who has been educated enough should be able to walk away from this being unable to distinguish between rape and actual, consensual sex, especially when it is as clear-cut as it is here. I DO have to worry about how you guys would react to hearing someone in your real life in this kind of situation, or, and I hope it is never, ever the case, YOU being in this situation. Would you excuse it? Because you “agreed” to it? Would you relentlessly blame yourself like Dan does? Would you really be able to articulate your experience to get the help you need? Would you be able to respond well to someone else in this situation?