VN Ren'Py Completed A Promise Best Left Unkept [Bonus S2 Ep 9-11] [Hangover Cat]

[AverageHalfwit]

Two questions:
1.Why are people calling Harry as being weak ? From both an outsider's perspective and from his perspective, he is part of a relationship; he respects the boundaries of that relationship and is trusting his partner's actions and words; he tries to speak with Laura when things seem off, he tries to get a better understanding of her realtionship with her family etc. Is he weak for not being paranoid or a control freak ? Isn't a healthy relationship based on trust and communication ? For all apearances, he is in a healthy relationship and he works towards it accordingly. Does that make him weak ?
2.Why are people calling Laura's first sexual encounter with Luca as rape? She got there through a series of conscious decisions made by a full-grown adult. She had a problem in her relationship (the partner possibly losing his job) and she chose to solve that issue not inside the relationship (by speaking with Harry), but outside of it (by having consenting sex with Luca; consenting as in the result of a series of conscious decisions). And in doing that she exposed her partner to emotional trauma (PISD, the equivalent to PTSD, but coming from infidelity), physical trauma (STDs, which with Luca are inevitable: the multiple partners, the lack of protection, and that kink of his to have Harry unknowingly drink his cum doesn't suggest a person who takes hygiene seriously) and potentially financial risks (Luca being an admited member of some sort of Mafia; generally, Mafia deals in extorsion and racketeering). Isn't that just plain old cheating because she wanted to ?

 

[mzer0]

2.Why are people calling Laura's first sexual encounter with Luca as rape? She got there through a series of conscious decisions made by a full-grown adult. She had a problem in her relationship (the partner possibly losing his job) and she chose to solve that issue not inside the relationship (by speaking with Harry), but outside of it (by having consenting sex with Luca; consenting as in the result of a series of conscious decisions). And in doing that she exposed her partner to emotional trauma (PISD, the equivalent to PTSD, but coming from infidelity), physical trauma (STDs, which with Luca are inevitable: the multiple partners, the lack of protection, and that kink of his to have Harry unknowingly drink his cum doesn't suggest a person who takes hygiene seriously) and potentially financial risks (Luca being an admited member of some sort of Mafia; generally, Mafia deals in extorsion and racketeering). Isn't that just plain old cheating because she wanted to ?

To your second question, people are calling Laura's first sexual encounter with Luca rape because it was... rape. Yes, he gave her a choice, and yes, she ultimately chose to have sex with him. But that doesn't change the fact that she was doing it under duress.

She got there through a series of conscious decisions made by a full-grown adult.

She got there through being threatened. She made a bad decision in response to being threatened, but that doesn't change the fact that she was threatened. Not seduced. Threatened.

She literally started crying the first time she had sex with him. Did that look like a woman who wanted to have sex?

 

[GiGiGus ニクヤセベ!]

Well, rape and blackmailing are completely different things and are being considered so in most of countries' criminal codes. So yes, she did it willingly, whatever the reason. She could call out Harry for being naive and say that she's now being blackmailed. But, sHe iS sTrOnK woman, so she floored whore pedal to the metal.

 

[AverageHalfwit]

To your second question, people are calling Laura's first sexual encounter with Luca rape because it was... rape. Yes, he gave her a choice, and yes, she ultimately chose to have sex with him. But that doesn't change the fact that she was doing it under duress.

Sorry if I am misinterpreting things: duress that has a readily and easy alternative to not be duress - isn't actually not duress ?
Either if she wanted the d., or if she actually didn't, she sure as hell jumped on it by her own decision. And I feel I have to repeat the words "own decision", meaning that a threat that is not backed up by a proportionate applicability of the threat is kind of empty. And the threat wasn't even on her; she took it on her willingly, even when the options of talking with Harry, with HR, with the police or even calling it a bluff were there for her.
Also crying doesn't necessarily happen because of pain or remorse or fear (see hysterical bonding for example).
I get it that taking rape out of that first sexual interaction with Luca and seeing it as consensual sex takes away the corruption that so many people want to see, but hey, real people are/can be like that, shitty entitled nose-divers for the sake of it - and that's how I see her character and her circumstances.

 

[Terix3]

Yikes, some people think that rape is only through physical dominance?
In most civilized places forcing someone to sexual intercourse whatever through physical dominance, drugs or coercion is judged in same way aka as rape.

Well, rape and blackmailing are completely different things and are being considered so in most of countries' criminal codes.

Because blackmail isn't tied to sex. But blackmail is a form of coercion, you will get prosecuted for both rape and blackmail. It kinda like if you go with illegal gun to rob a store. You will get prosecuted for both having the gun and robbery.

And I feel I have to repeat the words "own decision"

She didn't make the decision of her own will. She was forced to chose between bad and bad. In all imaginable situations that is not a consensual intercourse and non-consensual sex we call rape.

 

[mzer0]

Sorry if I am misinterpreting things: duress that has a readily and easy alternative to not be duress - isn't actually not duress ?

Duress is subjective. It doesn't matter if the thing causing the duress is credible or not. All that matters is that the victim believes it to be credible.

And I feel I have to repeat the words "own decision"

Yes, but the only reason she made that decision was because she was...wait for it... under duress. Without Luca's threat, Laura never would have 'made the decision' to have sex with him. She only did it because she felt threatened. Fear is the polar opposite of consent, therefore she was raped.

Also crying doesn't necessarily happen because of pain or remorse or fear (see hysterical bonding for example).

And here's where I stop taking you seriously, friend. If you read that scene and somehow managed to interpret Laura's tears to be anything other than strongly negative, specifically because she's cheating on Harry, then you have some severe reading comprehension issues.

 

[GiGiGus ニクヤセベ!]

Because blackmail isn't tied to sex. But blackmail is a form of coercion, you will get prosecuted for both rape and blackmail. It kinda like if you go with illegal gun to rob a store. You will get prosecuted for both having the gun and robbery.

The threat wasn't imminent. She had time to inform whoever she thinks is appropriate to do so. HR, police and Harry. If it was stated as "Either now we are having sexual intercourse, or your boyfriend will be fired for corporate leakage" then yes, it is a rape, she had no space and time for a maneuvor. But, this wasn't a case. Is she had being pinned to the wall? Yes, and that's blackmailing. Is he had forced her to do it at the time of blackmailing? No. So, it's not a rape by it's definition. It looks like I'm playing mental gymnastic, because I disagree with calling it a rape, so, let's go through some points. (though, before that I have to state that I strongly against any kind of duress, sexual or not, done by whoever to whoever).Well then, my two general points:
1. She had time to think. Yes, it is a duress, but she was not physically or imminently-time restrained.
2. She has more authority and a valuable specialist, as well as Harry. This whole situation could've been resolved with whatever proccesses they use at their company, join a commission or whatever.
But I think I we really want to get an argumented anwser, we should ask some lawer.

 

[Terix3]

The threat wasn't imminent. She had time to inform whoever she thinks is appropriate to do so. HR, police and Harry. If it was stated as "Either now we are having sexual intercourse, or your boyfriend will be fired for corporate leakage" then yes, it is a rape, she had no space and time for a maneuvor. But, this wasn't a case. Is she had being pinned to the wall? Yes, and that's blackmailing. Is he had forced her to do it at the time of blackmailing? No. So, it's not a rape by it's definition. It looks like I'm playing mental gymnastic, because I disagree with calling it a rape, so, let's go through some points. (though, before that I have to state that I strongly against any kind of duress, sexual or not, done by whoever to whoever).Well then, my two general points:
1. She had time to think. Yes, it is a duress, but she was not physically or imminently-time restrained.
2. She has more authority and a valuable specialist, as well as Harry. This whole situation could've been resolved with whatever proccesses they use at their company, join a commission or whatever.
But I think I we really want to get an argumented anwser, we should ask some lawer.

Do you understand what is consent?

Whatever threat is imminent or whatever the victim does have ways of avoiding rape doesn't stop it from being a rape.
If you tell someone "I'm gonna fuck you in a week whatever you like it or not" and that person have now week of time to think, report you or run away does not in whatever shape or form stop the act that you will perform from being a rape.

 

[AverageHalfwit]

Duress is subjective. It doesn't matter if the thing causing the duress is credible or not. All that matters is that the victim believes it to be credible.
Yes, but the only reason she made that decision was because she was...wait for it... under duress. Without Luca's threat, Laura never would have 'made the decision' to have sex with him. She only did it because she felt threatened. Fear is the polar opposite of consent, therefore she was raped.

Let's take a hypothetical: an attractive woman walks by a construction site and a big, burly, sweaty worker whistles in her direction (just whistles because he doesn't use articulate language). She sees this as (unwanted) sexual advances/sexual harassment and because the dude is big, she subjectively feels threatened and under duress so she goes home, has a shower and a sleep and the next day goes to the worker and sucks him off. Afterwards we (apparently) call the whole interaction rape: she subjectively felt under duress, she wouldn't have gone towards him without the whistle and so on. Is that rape or an excuse to be slutty ? Aren't we taking away from the true impact of real threat, real duress and real rape when applying it to a situation when the "victim" was actually a willing part who just had to keep up the appearances (for us -that she's pure and demure, for herself - that she is actually not slutty, hence the crying) ? Isn't that just mental gymnastics to justify shitty behavior ?

 

[AverageHalfwit]

Do you understand what is consent?

Funny you mention the word "consent".
Did Harry gave consent to be part of an open relationship? Did Harry gave consent to be exposed to STDs ? After all, he was the one who the blackmail would have impacted.
I's say not: Laura took the consent from Harry and gave it to Luca. The rest is just mental gymnastics.

 

[GiGiGus ニクヤセベ!]

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Well, that's kinda far fetched, but yeah. She was blackmailed and had a choice. Most real rape victims did not have it. On top of that, she's really, how to put it, egoistic? And that somewhat adds to whole picture. "The resolution of whole situation revolves around me". "I'm strong for Harry, but fuck him". Because, actually, let's not forget that it was threat to Harry, not to her. It's was not even a duress. She was not threatened. Why would I even argue on that topic.

 

[Terix3]

Let's take a hypothetical: an attractive woman walks by a construction site and a big, burly, sweaty worker whistles in her direction (just whistles because he doesn't use articulate language). She sees this as (unwanted) sexual advances/sexual harassment and because the dude is big, she subjectively feels threatened and under duress so she goes to him and sucks him off. Afterwards we (apparently) call the whole interaction rape: she subjectively felt under duress, she wouldn't have gone towards him without the whistle and so on. Is that rape or an excuse to be slutty ? Aren't we taking away from the true impact of real threat, real duress and real rape when applying it to a situation when the "victim" was actually a willing part who just had to keep up the appearances ? Isn't that just mental gymnastics to justify shitty behavior ?

Your example fails because there is no request or situation where the victim would be required for sexual service.
He only whistles, so we are asking ourselves a question : does a sane person in such situation would consider whistling a request for sexual service. As the answer is no there would be no rape.

But how does the example even remotely is similar to the one in the game?

Funny you mention the word "consent".
Did Harry gave consent to be part of an open relationship? Did Harry gave consent to be exposed to STDs ? After all, he was the one who the blackmail would have impacted.
I's say not: Laura took the consent from Harry and gave it to Luca. The rest is just mental gymnastics.

... What ? She does have her own share of blame in the story but that does not change the fact that Luca raped her.

 

[mzer0]

It's was not even a duress. She was not threatened. Why would I even argue on that topic.

...So let me get this straight.

If I tell you that I'm going to hurt someone you care about unless you do something for me, you're saying that I'm not threatening you?

 

[mzer0]

Let's take a hypothetical: an attractive woman walks by a construction site and a big, burly, sweaty worker whistles in her direction (just whistles because he doesn't use articulate language). She sees this as (unwanted) sexual advances/sexual harassment and because the dude is big, she subjectively feels threatened and under duress so she goes home, has a shower and a sleep and the next day goes to the worker and sucks him off. Afterwards we (apparently) call the whole interaction rape: she subjectively felt under duress, she wouldn't have gone towards him without the whistle and so on. Is that rape or an excuse to be slutty ? Aren't we taking away from the true impact of real threat, real duress and real rape when applying it to a situation when the "victim" was actually a willing part who just had to keep up the appearances (for us -that she's pure and demure, for herself - that she is actually not slutty, hence the crying) ? Isn't that just mental gymnastics to justify shitty behavior ?

Sure, she's under duress if she really believed the whistling was a threat to her...But she's also clearly insane for believing the whistling was a threat to her.

Being afraid of whistles is unrealistic. Laura's fears, by comparison, are a much more realistic example of being under duress.

 

[GiGiGus ニクヤセベ!]

...So let me get this straight.

If I tell you that I'm going to hurt someone you care about unless you do something for me, you're saying that I'm not threatening you?

And that's is a completely different topic. That's an another case and actually a whole another article of criminal code. It's now not a blackmail, but a threat of violence/death. Surely you can diffirentiate threat by violence and threat to tell someone that your boyfriend is a jerk, right?

 

[NewTricks]

Folks like to counter rape by coercion and rape by deception with slippery slope arguments that normally fall into a pit of argumentum ad absurdum but the fact remains that consent as a concept is distinct from mere acquiescence. Because someone acquiesces to sex they have not consented. Consent must be an affirmation of willingness, not an ability to comply. Laura doesn't even fully acquiesce, merely cooperates under protest. Just because Luca expresses incredulity when Laura enjoys sex doesn't mean that we must agree with him. The person who is raped by coercion's enjoyment of sexual intercourse is irrelevant to consent, which cannot be given ex post facto. Oh, and only Laura gets to decide whether what happens to her body is consensual or not and her relationship status is also an irrelevance. If we are to agree with Luca that Laura wasn't raped when she clearly stated she was (would not consent and feels that she is given no other viable option but to cooperate) means that we are adopting a deeply depraved point of view when it comes to the very concept of human agency and bodily autonomy.

I do say all this with the firm opinion that Laura had dozens of better options than to give in to Luca's blackmail. The most viable being living with the consequences of letting him do what he was threatening to do. The "Go ahead, make my day" school of conflict resolution. But then the game wouldn't happen.

 

[mzer0]

And that's is a completely different topic. That's an another case and actually a whole another article of criminal code. It's now not a blackmail, but a threat of violence/death. Surely you can diffirentiate threat by violence and threat to tell someone that your boyfriend is a jerk, right?

Maybe I shouldn't have used the word 'hurt' because seem to have latched on to it in the most literal sense possible. Allow me to rephrase:

If I tell you that I'm going to DO HARM someone you care about unless you do something for me, you're saying that I'm not threatening you?

Because that is exactly what Luca was doing to Laura. He was threatening to do harm to Harry (frame him and possibly send him to prison). He was threatening her.

Folks like to counter rape by coercion and rape by deception with slippery slope arguments that normally fall into a pit of argumentum ad absurdum but the fact remains that consent as a concept is distinct from mere acquiescence. Because someone acquiesces to sex they have not consented. Consent must be an affirmation of willingness, not an ability to comply. Laura doesn't even fully acquiesce, merely cooperates under protest. Just because Luca expresses incredulity when Laura enjoys sex doesn't mean that we must agree with him. The person who is raped by coercion's enjoyment of sexual intercourse is irrelevant to consent, which cannot be given ex post facto. Oh, and only Laura gets to decide whether what happens to her body is consensual or not and her relationship status is also an irrelevance. If we are to agree with Luca that Laura wasn't raped when she clearly stated she was (would not consent and feels that she is given no other viable option but to cooperate) means that we are adopting a deeply depraved point of view when it comes to the very concept of human agency and bodily autonomy.

I do say all this with the firm opinion that Laura had dozens of better options than to give in to Luca's blackmail. The most viable being living with the consequences of letting him do what he was threatening to do. The "Go ahead, make my day" school of conflict resolution. But then the game wouldn't happen.

And here I thought you were only capable of shitposts.
Well said.

 

[NewTricks]

And here I thought you were only capable of shitposts.
Well said.

Oh, it is my partner that does the shitposts and he swelled up with pride when you said that. I usually provide the examples of thoughtful analysis although it usually represents both our points of view on the subject. We take very different approaches to the enjoyment of our mutual hobby.

 

[GiGiGus ニクヤセベ!]

Because that is exactly what Luca was doing to Laura. He was threatening to do harm to Harry (frame him and possibly send him to prison). He was threatening her.

"To frame him". She has a boss, she can talk about whole situation. In this case, she has upper hand, she has authority. The whole "send him to prison" is such a bullshit case, really. Prison sentence for corporate secrets are extreme cases. Laura, as a leader of some department, should be well infromed about that, until stated otherwise. About your question. It's very vague and broad. We're discussing this particular case of Laura.

I do say all this with the firm opinion that Laura had dozens of better options than to give in to Luca's blackmail. The most viable being living with the consequences of letting him do what he was threatening to do. The "Go ahead, make my day" school of conflict resolution. But then the game wouldn't happen.

And that's why I think it's not a rape. Well, if you want, you can consider it as a duress to sexual actions. Sure. But. Rape suggests that a threatened person did not has a free will or was physically restrained. That case was neither of this. She could walk away any moment. And that's my claim/pretension. But for some reason you're trying to bleach her reputation like she's some kind of a martyr. Well, it seems that the author himself claims (by tags) that this is a case of a rape. Then, whatever. Luca is sure an evil for a sake of it, but then again, Laura is not an angel either.

 

[drowsy]

Yikes, some people think that rape is only through physical dominance?

It's just a conceptual question, no need to get yikesy and cringe about it. A community can decide that the word 'rape' is only to be used about physical coercion (which is historically consistent) but still take blackmail and similar situations seriously from a legal and ethical perspective. There's no factual answer to conceptual decisions like that, it's just a matter of how language is used.