Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nilik]

Did anyone put Marion first? I was going to go JMRS but then went MJRS at the last minute, my reasoning being as follows:

Marion does the wrong thing for the right reasons; she's degrading herself in order to secure the release Robin and John. She is however the only one in this scenario who isn't thinking about number one; her actions are purely altruistic as they benefit everyone but herself.

John is largely passive. He defends Marion, but then he was never her love interest in the first place, so the fact that she "cheated" means nothing to him anyway. Best-case he's being chivalrous, worst-case he just wants Marion for himself. I find that the truth tends to lie between the two possible extremes, so I'm going to say he's alright.

Robin does the wrong thing, but at least has a mitigating factor going for him; he's hurt that Marion has betrayed him by sleeping with his worst enemy. He's bad, but acting more out of grief than malice; he's still pretty much just concerned with himself and doesn't stop to consider Marion's feelings.

The Sheriff is the worst. He just abuses his power for no reason other than he can. No mitigating factors here, he's just a douche.

[LordBucket]

a simple question: If a man/woman guilts another man/woman into sex they do not want,
is that rape? I'd say it's. If consent is coerced, it is invalid.

I would say no. Guilt is not coercion. It might be manipulation, but it is not coercion. I would say you're encroaching on extremely dangerous ground. For example, imagine a couple dating without sex for six months and the guy says "We've been boyfriend and girlfriend for 6 months, and if we don't start having sex I'm breaking up with you."

If she agrees, would you call that rape? Where do you draw the line?

I think rape is an emotionally charged thing for some people to the point of silliness. It being traumatic doesn't make it make sense to start calling things that aren't rape, rape. Let's look at something else that ironically has less emotional charge attached to it: murder.

Is "killing someone" murder? Well, obviously no. If you kill someone in self defense, is that murder? Of course not. If you kill someone purely an accident, say...if your car loses traction in the rain and you collide with them, is that murder? No. If you're a designated caregiver for someone and you carelessly give them the wrong medication, is that murder? Again, no. "Murder" is not simply act the of causing someone to die. Its a very specific type of killing that involves pre-meditation and intent.

Similarly, "rape" is not just any instance of sex in which one party feels uncomfortable about it. There are many shades of gray here, and calling everything rape is just as silly as calling everything murder.

[LordBucket]

Marion does the wrong thing for the right reasons; she's degrading herself in order to secure the release Robin and John. She is however the only one in this scenario who isn't thinking about number one; her actions are purely altruistic as they benefit everyone but herself.

I wouldn't call her actions "purely altruistic." I don't imagine that she'd be giving herself to the Sheriff to release any other prisoners. Only the one that she has a vested interest in.

John is largely passive. He defends Marion, but then he was never her love interest in the first place, so the fact that she "cheated" means nothing to him anyway. Best-case he's being chivalrous, worst-case he just wants Marion for himself. I find that the truth tends to lie between the two possible extremes, so I'm going to say he's alright.

...wait.

Why is it that Marion can take action to get her boyfriend back and she's "purely altruistic" but John takes action to get a girlfriend and he's just "alright" becuse he wants Marion for himself?

Isn't this a bit of a double standard?

The Sheriff is the worst. He just abuses his power for no reason other than he can.

I don't think that's true. He's abusing his power to get something he wants. I agree that he is abusing his position. However, if his motivation is simply that he wants sex with Marion, I would put that on higher moral ground than if his motivation is to cause devastation and ruin to her relationship with Robin. From Robin or Marion's point of view it might not matter. But as a third party observer I would take intent into consideration in my evaluation.

[MorleyDev]

Rape is sex without consent, if there is coercion there cannot be true consent. Therefore it is rape, and the emotional devastation is still more than any human should have to experience.

[Max White]

You can actually take the test here.

Results:
You are the slightly romantic realist. You respect truth, and are broadminded and flexible. Whether you are a man or a woman you are probably a happy person. You like people and they can readily make friends with you. You are not very adventurous, but this does not bother you.

Li'l Jonny > Made the Marathon > Lord Sherrifton > Da Hood.

Little John is a great guy who is intolerant to immorality. He spoke up against Robin Hood, A+ effort.

Maid Marion is a good woman who is too tolerant of immorality, choosing to let the Sheriff have his way. This promotes the idea that the Sheriff can do what ever he likes and other people need to pay his toll to survive.

The Sheriff isn't that great, but lets face it, he has a job to do. Locking RH + LJ up was is responsibility. As far as he sees, they are outlaws, and if you can't tell a man not to punish crime when it is his job. He is, however, willing to compromise his position to get a girl to sleep with him. Although he did let them out in the end, showing at least he is a man of his word...

Robin Hood is an ungrateful bitch who can stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

So please, I ask you: Do not think I do not understand the severity when I use the word rape. Don't you dare.

Very powerful ethos here, but no actual logos. If you want to start appealing to peoples character, you are going down a very messy track.

[anzki4]

I'm curious how the following changes (underlined) would affect your order, obviously now instead of rating sheriff, you rate the shady guy. Especially I'm curious whether people who think the sheriff was a rapist think so about the shady guy too.

The Sheriff of Nottingham captured Little John and Robin Hood and imprisoned them in his maximum-security dungeon. Maid Marion begged the Sheriff for their release, pleading her love for Robin. The Sheriff disagreed. However a shady guy who had overhead the discussion agreed to help Marion to break the prisoners out if Maid Marion spent the night with him. To this she agreed. The next morning the shady guy helped Marion to break out the prisoners. Robin at once demanded that Marion tell him how she persuaded the shady guy to help her. Marion confessed the truth, and was bewildered when Robin abused her, called her a slut, and said that he never wanted to see her again. At this Little John defended her, inviting her to leave Sherwood with him and promising lifelong devotion. She accepted and they rode away together.

[Max White]

It isn't rape either way.
Marion had every chance to turn down both The Sheriff and Slim Shady. Nobody was being threatened, and nobody forced herself upon her. The assumption that it was rape takes away Marions responsibility over her own choices, as if she isn't fit to decide for herself who she will sleep with and why. If we are treating Marion as an adult who is in her right state of mind and able to give consent, she gave consent in exchange for a personal favor.

[Catsup]

Slim Shady.

lol slim shady...

i agree the order would not be changed if another guy replaced the sheriff, and the sheriff would just end up a moral character for not faltering in the line of duty.


i think we should make a poll at the start of this topic that asks:

Did the sheriff rape maid Marion?

with the answers being:

Yes, she cannot truly agree with that degree of coercion involved
No, she agreed to it so it is not rape.
Yes, other reason
No, other reason

I would say no. Guilt is not coercion. It might be manipulation, but it is not coercion. I would say you're encroaching on extremely dangerous ground. For example, imagine a couple dating without sex for six months and the guy says "We've been boyfriend and girlfriend for 6 months, and if we don't start having sex I'm breaking up with you."

it seems you are trying very hard to deescalate the amount of coercion involved to prove a point but it does not work like that. Loss of a 6 month relationship is unfortunate but its nothing you cant live with. Marion loses her soulmate if she refuses, the bound between her and robin is Devotion, and she would do anything to be reunited with him. I would say it is "using guilt to manipulate" if there is a chance the other party would refuse. Under Marion's circumstance, she cannot refuse.

  The assumption that it was rape takes away Marions responsibility over her own choices, as if she isn't fit to decide for herself who she will sleep with and why.

If we are treating Marion as an adult who is in her right state of mind and able to give consent, she gave consent in exchange for a personal favor.

and just what is "an adult who is in her right state of mind?" this is where i start disagreeing with the law, i believe some children can be calculative enough to be able to think rationally and give valid consent. While some "adults" are still blinded by their feelings and emotions to be able to think rationally. The law states the difference of adults and children as just a number, it doesnt really work like that but there is no other practical way to determine the difference.

she had a obvious choice and she made the wrong one because she had a deficit in morality. I explained why it wasnt much of a "choice" in my reply to LordBucket above yours.

  The assumption that it was rape takes away Marions responsibility over her own choices, as if she isn't fit to decide for herself who she will sleep with and why.

lets just take a step back and say it doesnt matter if it was rape or not. The result was still emotional trauma for her boyfriend and any "rational adult able to give consent" would realize that this was not the right choice to make.

[MorleyDev]

The threat is pretty clear, let me stick my penis in you or the person you love rots in jail forever. I'd say that is a pretty clear act of coercion, and since consent cannot be given under coercion any consent given is invalid. No consent, therefore...

If you somehow don't consider it rape, to feel you have an unwanted act of sex forced upon you is still so traumatic an experience that the practical difference is non-existent, the person is still violated on a fundamental level with all the guilt and shame that goes with it.

Likewise, I'd also consider a woman telling her boyfriend "Stick your penis in me or I leave you forever", when the boyfriend doesn't want to stick his penis in her, an attempt at rape and domestic abuse. And if the emotionally manipulated and abused boyfriend goes through with it, then...well, no matter how you swap the genders I just described a good chunk of the rapes in a domestic abuse situation, where the majority of rapes happen.

[sjm9876]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

In a fit of controversy and orange-purple morality:
MSRJ

My logic being Marion was prepared to make a huge sacrifice for the man she loved, and is truthful about it.
The sheriff was seeking to exploit the situation for his own gain, which is only human. he also makes no attempts to hide this.
Robin and john are ~equal in my opinion.
Robin effectively dismisses Marion because of her attempts to save him, which is pretty abhorrent to me.
John is in the right for defending Marion, but the fact he then runs off with her, betraying his best friend without a word of apology to him or attempt to explain it to Robin is the worst in my opinion.

[GlyphGryph]

I'm still not sure how this is coercion. I honestly 100% cannot follow your logic without arriving at the conclusion that any form of prostitution or trading of favours is rape. And personally, I find that viewpoint atrocious, turning women into mere objects or animals controlled by circumstances beyond their own control and unable to make decisions like real people.

I don't see the immorality in someone having something you want, and naming a price when they tell you they want it. Yes, the Sheriff is immoral for offering the price, but that's for reasons completely separate to whether or not there is sex involved.

Again, if he had requested money instead, would that be theft? If he'd told her to go get the key, would that be forced labour? If he'd asked her to play him for their release in a game of chess, would he still be violating her?

[MorleyDev]

turning women into mere objects or animals controlled by circumstances beyond their own control and unable to make decisions like real people.

Gender doesn't matter. I'd also consider it rape if it were a man being given this "offer" by a woman, or any other gender combination imaginable. Gender doesn't matter, simply there is an act of coercion invalidating the consent.

[GlyphGryph]

Then replace women with people in that example. You're turning people into objects and animals. It's... dehumanizing.

[MorleyDev]

Put a person into a situation where they feel like they have no other choice due to emotional vulnerability, and even if they do have other choice...look, this scenario presented doesn't give enough information so I'm having to go off the nearest real situation I know of and use that as the basis for my evaluations. As I said way back, it may be colouring my interpretations but...well, how can it not? So please, I ask you: Do not think I do not understand the severity when I use the word rape. Don't you dare.

And if he asked for money, it'd be extortion of money. This is extortion of sex, and is "sex by extortion" rape? In my opinion, yes.

[Max White]

  The assumption that it was rape takes away Marions responsibility over her own choices, as if she isn't fit to decide for herself who she will sleep with and why.

lets just take a step back and say it doesnt matter if it was rape or not. The result was still emotional trauma for her boyfriend and any "rational adult able to give consent" would realize that this was not the right choice to make.

Now that is hardly fair to either M or S.
It isn't their fault if R is a jerk. They aren't responsible for his actions. Robin is the only one ere who should be fully accountable for his own choice.

If we are analyzing the relationship between Marion and The Sheriff, is doesn't matter what robin will do in the future. It is very easy to claim somebody made the wrong choice when you have the luxuary of hindsight, but that isn't how morality works. Robins actions do not affect the morality of Marions choices.

So please, I ask you: Do not think I do not understand the severity when I use the word rape. Don't you dare.

Very powerful ethos here, but no actual logos. If you want to start appealing to peoples character, you are going down a very messy track.