wait but there wasnt any rape?
Ch. 2, page 33. Hasegawa clearly screams out “NOOO!!”
but isn't the context of it debatable?
No, he’s clearly drugged or intoxicated, crying and repeatedly screams out “NO!”. Later he even laments how Anna has “stolen everything”from him. How could Anna “steal” anything if consent was given?
It’s textbook rape, the author just handwaves it away as not serious and then moves right along with the next plot point.
aight
I agree that this would be debatable. I definitely wouldn’t call it rape but I also wouldn’t say what he pulled was consensual, but Mitsuru was briefed on what to expect and knew that this would turn sexual, the context for “No” could have been meant for the fact most people are shocked when given surprise fellatio, or the fact the sensation was something he misgaged with the aphrodisiac effect, but to say he was intoxicated when he was forewarned prior to and consented then is actually consent in itself. So once again, we can’t call this rape as he was aware and willing, but it wasn’t consensual, since he didn’t feel ready at the time and Anna did push his own agenda onto Mitsuru, so it’s like an inbetween which is also a bit unsatisfying. Like, why are all these characters scared of being blunt and straight forward? Especially in this story, they’re childhood friends, Anna can easily talk to Mitsuru and just freakin tell him that he’s interested in him and even if he’s turned down, they’d be close enough to freaking get passed it just fine.
Oh, and when he mentioned that Anna had stolen everything from him, it wasn’t said in a spiteful way, just that of an acknowledgement that they went all the way and that he experienced most of his firsts with Anna.
true, so like dub-con? (dubious consent)
Yeah. I’d say Dub-Con is best used to describe what happened here. Plus we all know they both gonna start thirsting for one another real fast.
The last parts are definitely more of a cultural thing. The comedy aspect (that it was supposed to be)/the way they presented it is definitely more understandable (understandable as in you can see the POV/intention of the author) if you are used to Japanese culture and read a lot of romance manga. It makes sense people get pissed off seeing these moments and think of them as authors brushing them off.
What your saying is a logical contradiction, Mitsubishi either consented to the act or he didn’t, and we know he did not consent to having sex while drugged.
The crying, the pleading (“wait”, “no”, “stop”) and the “stolen” comment all confirmed this.
Also, to say that it wasn’t rape because consent was IMPLIED at a previous stage is irrelevant when, as soon as they actually get down to it, he clearly pleads with Anna to stop. If I start having sex with someone, and they start pleading with me to stop because of a change of heart, I cannot justify continuing simply because they agreed to it long before they actually realized what they got themselves into at an earlier stage.
What transpired was clearly rape, but Mitsubishi tries to rationalize it later as something beneficial. It was rape, but felt good, so it was a good rape.
THIS RIGHT HERE, wish I could pin this comment
no, but he gave his very clear consent before? anna even double hecked before he did and he still agreed?
ah but ur right, but i still dont think i would call it rape because they talked abt how anna biting him would drug/ give aphrodaiscs to him so he literally Knew what was going on and agreed. just because him assuming that it was gonna be light was more on him?
To say that it wasn’t rape because consent was IMPLIED at a previous stage is irrelevant when, as soon as they actually get down to it, he clearly pleads with Anna to stop. If I start having sex with someone, and they start screaming and pleading with me to stop because of a change of heart, I cannot justify continuing simply because they agreed to it at an earlier stage, long before they actually realized what they got themselves into.
People are allowed to change they're minds.
no i get it ur right but it just feels extreme to call it rape? the consent was messed up but calling it rape doesnt sit w me?? im prob just being picky dont mind me
Alright this is why I take issue with your comment. Firstly to say something either is or isn’t like there are only two options, black or white, is ludicrous. Dubious Consent does exist, it’s not just a theory or whatever you wanna consider it, and in this case, I mentioned that opinionly I’d classify this situation as such rather than just slapping the rape title on it and calling it a day.
FYI, rape as described on Dictionary.com is the forceful act of penetration to any body part without consent, which as he’s screams “No” which has no other context and is only portrayed in one scene properly during foreplay, he’s not being penetrated and thus, I’d prefer personally to say it was dubious consent since they pretty much skip the sex scene and I don’t fucking know what happened during the scene, maybe it should be implied but all in all take what you want and translate it as you see fit. I never said what he did was morally just, I never said dubious consent made it alright to continue, I just wouldn’t slap a label as extreme as rape is when another phrase or word fits better in my translation of what transpired while reading. Anna asked twice, he also forwarned about the aphrodisiac effect ahead of time, and it was even confirmed to the reader that sex was expected from them both as they entered the room. That’s all I have to say and if you feel I’m wrong, that’s fine to each their own.
Of course, dubcon exists, I never suggested otherwise. I issue is whether this crosses the line into rape. I argued, with evidence and logic, that it does.
So no, I didn't "just" slap a rape label on it and called it a day.
You can express an opinion all you like, but the moment you want to argue, you need to actually back up your statements with fact. I did.
As to your dictionary definition, are you aware of the term "rape by envelopment"? The reason this term came into use in studies of rape is because most women do not rape men by penetrating them, but by being penetrated by them. Under the definition you cited, it would be logically impossible for a women (or man) to rape a man if the only thing they did was drug or otherwise incapacitate them and then proceed to have sex with their bodies by inserting the victim's penis into their anus/vagina/mouth. This is also why most people don't treat men being raped seriously, since after all, they didn't get penetrated with anything, right?
This is why even the fellatio is still clearly rape, even if at that stage Hasegawa wasn't being penetrated yet.
As the consent being implied at a previous stage, I'll simply copy what I already wrote, since it's STILL valid:
To say that it wasn’t rape because consent was IMPLIED at a previous stage is irrelevant when, as soon as they actually get down to it, he clearly pleads with Anna to stop. If I start having sex with someone, and they start screaming and pleading with me to stop because of a change of heart, I cannot justify continuing simply because they agreed to it at an earlier stage, long before they actually realized what they got themselves into.
People are allowed to change their minds.
And if we really want to be pedantic, Hasegawa never consented to sex officially. What he consented to was Anna sucking his blood. This is why he's still slightly surprised when he finds out Anna booked a hotel bedroom, and Anna never once bother's asking whether it was ok to proceed with sex, despite Hasegawa's cries and pleas during the act.
I think it was my mistake for using the word rape. I think the word I meant to use but couldn't remember was dubious consent. Sorry guys I didn't realize I'd start a whole argument!
period, go off queen
I’m really done entertaining you. I never started beef, I came here to debate peacefully on a matter in which we both apparently considered important and debatable based off of our own views and opinions. Trying to shove your views down my throat just because I interpret a situation differently to you, and then blaming me that I’m the one doing so when I use words like opinion, etc to create a viewpoint introspectively that’s open to interpretation. I did back up my view with facts as well but you dismissed those too, so there isn’t a point in furthering a discussion that’s no longer a discussion in my book. Anyone who needs to understand the basics of our discussion, the end result is that we both think what happened is screwed up royally and should never ever be pursued in a real life situation. They just called it rape, but I would classify this as dub-con personally based off of the events that transpired and the way in which the story foretold the events. Everyone is free to decide for themselves and if you feel the need to clarify for yourself, you are welcomed to read both our arguments, but when someone starts contradicting themselves and push a debate passed it’s point, that’s when I step away and so I’m doing so.
At first the story was going sooo well and then chapter 2 happens like why do they always ruin really good storylines with rape like ahhhhh