Syril/Dedra is Non Con. Period.

Let’s break this down a bit, because I’m seeing a lot of people amused at this ship, and I think we need a pretty frank discussion about what is actually going on. And before we begin, yes they are both awful people. Yes, she deserves to be put on trial at the Hague. I’m not arguing against any of that. But we absolutely need to divorce it for a moment from the concept of consent because the general acceptance or ‘hilarity’ of this ship is doing real mental damage to people (esp women and female presenting folx) and we NEED to acknowledge this.  At the end of ep 12, Dedra is concussed. She’s been hit in the head by a thrown rock the size of someone’s fist, trampled, kicked, and taken prisoner. Does she deserve all that? Sure! She’s a willing participant in a battle. She’s there in a uniform on a side. She’s a combatant. When going into battle, you accept that you could be wounded or killed. She knew that, she’s trained for that. So far, we’re ok. She’s even rescued by an obviously Imperial character who’s *essentially* undercover on their own (albeit non sanctioned) mission. Well, she’s ISB and understands the world of espionage. Still kinda ok. 

HOWEVER. Now that the combat situation is removed, we get into far murkier waters. This is a man that she’s told repeatedly to leave her alone. She’s given him warnings, she’s even given him leniency. She’s given him far more chances to stay away from her than others might have gotten. He’s stalked her. He’s GRABBED her outside of her workplace as she tried to get away. Outside of physical action, there’s literally nothing else she could have done to tell him “I’m not interested - go away.” 

But he doesn’t. He’s OBSESSED with her. In fact he’s so obsessed with her that upon seeing her, he abandons his mission, abandons his friend (who probably thinks he’s been killed in the battle), and makes her his new objective. (Seriously, Syril, can’t even call your buddy to let him know you’re still breathing? Poor man’s just drinking in the street at the end afterward). 

And what about Dedra’s state of mind in this moment? 

My husband is a firefighter and says that there are three main categories for when people cannot give legal consent. In these three cases, he is allowed to take lifesaving actions against their stated will because they are considered not of sound mind. 1) Inebriation (drunk, high, or otherwise). 2) Grievously wounded. And 3) Concussed.  Dedra’s obviously suffered an awful concussion. She’s shaking, she’s unable to speak clearly, she’s not in control in any way. And the man she viscerally *hates* and she’s told numerous times to leave her alone just saved her life. For all she knows, she may be hallucinating him. 

And yet here. RIGHT HERE in this moment is when so many people cry out on tumblr and AO3 going “AHA! THEY’RE A COUPLE!”. 

Guys. This is non-con. 

Dedra is not in a sound state of mind. Every interaction she’s had with him while she was coherent makes her wishes toward this man *very* clear. She might not even return to a sound state of mind for days. Weeks even! 

Concussion aftereffects can be *nasty*. I have a friend who still gets dizzy states and bouts of confusion ONE YEAR LATER from their own concussion. They have to wear special tinted glasses. It’s awful. Thankfully, they have a support system. 

We know *nothing* about Dedra’s home support system. Does she have friends who can step in and be like “hold on, she hates you. Go away.”? Does she have any protection against this entitled, possessive, and obsessed incel? Anyone to stand up to him and say “no, she’s made her feelings toward you clear, you need to stop”? 

And when a fic is written about just how *grateful* she is that he saved her life … is the author considering how many people may also have found themselves at one time or another stuck in this exact same position, unable to tell their obsessive abuser that “no, I hate you, go away”? 

And when someone in your orbit tells you “hey, this is really messed up and makes me uncomfortable” did you laugh it off and tell them to relax, it’s ok because she’s evil anyway and deserves it?

Because that’s what this is, guys. Dedra did not give consent. 

It doesn’t matter if the ship is “warm and fuzzy because he saved her and look how much he cares for her”. She did not give consent. She’s made her feeling toward him perfectly clear in all of her past actions. She’s given him CLEAR BOUNDRIES, but he zips right past them because he doesn’t respect them at all. Boundaries mean nothing to him. 

Yes, she should be tried at the Hague for war crimes. But she doesn’t deserve this. 

It really is wild how people who don't understand what consent is really do not understand what consent is. The idea that they're supposed to know how someone wants to be treated, and err to the side of caution or even ask if they aren't sure is absurd when you genuinely do not understand the concept.

"What, you need consent for everything these days?" Literally yes. And not just these days, but always have and always will.

"Do I need consent to kiss my wife in the morning? Do I need consent to shake someone's hand after a business meeting? Do I need CoNsEnT to braid my daughter's hair?"

Yes, yes and yes. A neurotypical person of reasonably passable social skill should have the ability to either instinctively understand when their touch is welcome, or logically conclude when their touch is socially expected. If you truly, literally, genuinely cannot tell whether your own child delights in you playing with her hair or merely endures it, then yeah, maybe you shouldn't touch anyone at all, ever, before you learn how to do that.

"Do I need consent to make eye contact with strangers on the street? Do I need consent from everyone on board before I get on the bus?"

Okay now you're just throwing a tantrum because someone told you 'no'.

Even those last two questions are hilarious because guess what - even if accidental, eye contact is mutual. If someone looks away, that is them no longer consenting to eye contact, and if you grab their head and force them to look into your eyes that would in fact be a violation of consent! Multiple, actually! And by riding a bus, you are in fact implictly consenting to ride with other people, who are doing the same with you, so you already HAVE their consent. In fact, if you are disruptive or violent, the bus driver can REVOKE consent by kicking you off and/or other passengers can revoke consent by disembarking.

So yes, in fact, everything involving other people requires their consent in some way, shape, or form. That's what forms social mores and folkways! This is the very basis of society! A mix of explicit and implicit consent.

So yeah, they're throwing a tantrum from being told no, and also ignoring sociology 101 while doing so.

It really is wild how people who don't understand what consent is really do not understand what consent is. The idea that they're supposed to know how someone wants to be treated, and err to the side of caution or even ask if they aren't sure is absurd when you genuinely do not understand the concept.

"What, you need consent for everything these days?" Literally yes. And not just these days, but always have and always will.

"Do I need consent to kiss my wife in the morning? Do I need consent to shake someone's hand after a business meeting? Do I need CoNsEnT to braid my daughter's hair?"

Yes, yes and yes. A neurotypical person of reasonably passable social skill should have the ability to either instinctively understand when their touch is welcome, or logically conclude when their touch is socially expected. If you truly, literally, genuinely cannot tell whether your own child delights in you playing with her hair or merely endures it, then yeah, maybe you shouldn't touch anyone at all, ever, before you learn how to do that.

"Do I need consent to make eye contact with strangers on the street? Do I need consent from everyone on board before I get on the bus?"

Okay now you're just throwing a tantrum because someone told you 'no'.

Even those last two questions are hilarious because guess what - even if accidental, eye contact is mutual. If someone looks away, that is them no longer consenting to eye contact, and if you grab their head and force them to look into your eyes that would in fact be a violation of consent! Multiple, actually! And by riding a bus, you are in fact implictly consenting to ride with other people, who are doing the same with you, so you already HAVE their consent. In fact, if you are disruptive or violent, the bus driver can REVOKE consent by kicking you off and/or other passengers can revoke consent by disembarking.

So yes, in fact, everything involving other people requires their consent in some way, shape, or form. That's what forms social mores and folkways! This is the very basis of society! A mix of explicit and implicit consent.

So yeah, they're throwing a tantrum from being told no, and also ignoring sociology 101 while doing so.

/standing ovation

This is why I get so angry. The things we warn for, the content that triggers huge groups of people, these are things we can push back against and fight. We can try to reduce abuse and poverty.

But for the people who get up in arms about Problematique Media, its easier to get mad at a piece of art than it is to work on the actual problems, and thus shifts the focus and blame off the problems and onto art that depicts it.

INCREDIBLE read.

Another excellent quote:

( I just also wanted to clarify, because out of context it might seem like it’s potentially belittling an actual problem - this guy’s claim that it’s “hostile to aro/ace people” isn’t because of any in-game or creator aphobia; it’s just… the fact that it’s a sexually suggestive dating sim. It’s the fact that it is in that genre and it exists. Which is clearly a bad-faith argument made by someone who knew “this personally upset me” wasn’t actually a good enough excuse to convince everyone that this thing was irredeemably terrible, rather than actually about caring about aroaces.)

holy shit, it's FFN and the NC-17 rating all over again. okay, so. I'm ace, and I backed Boyfriend Dungeon. While it would be nice if there were ace/aro representations (I haven't played it yet), I don't expect there to be. One, because yeah I'm used to there not being any, but TWO, it's a DATING SIM. I don't usually play dating sims, but this one sounded FUN, so I backed it. But like, yeah, I'm expecting flirting and whatnot when I play cause that's what dating sims DO!!!

Content note: Brief reference to sexual assault (as a specific thing you should trigger-warn about) in the last section.

~

I love this post, because it has the script for how to make sure that it’s okay to talk about something that may be upsetting. I struggle with that part sometimes. And I like that you emphasise that just because it’s a bad idea in one situation, doesn’t mean it’s always a bad idea. It’s good to ask!

Anon said:

… and I wanted to sort of try to answer the question “what makes a boundary a boundary, as opposed to just a guideline?”

I think of boundaries as a statement of existing need, often combined with a consequence. Some examples of boundaries might be:

It’s like, on one side of the line things are okay, but on the other side of the line things are Not Okay. If you stop asking about [subject], things are gonna be fine and everyone will be happy. If you ask again, things are gonna be Not Good for the person who set the boundary.

Boundaries often have consequences, which may or may not be explicitly stated.

The boundaries and consequences come from a place of needing to take care of oneself, not to control.

The consequences aren’t punishments; they’re actions that people need to do to take care of themselves.

A guideline is more vague. It’s not necessarily in response to a need, but it will serve the function of keeping the space more pleasant to be in. Ignoring a guideline may have less extreme consequences. Where a boundary is more like a rule, a guideline is more like advice.

~

I feel like the clue is in the words.

A guide (as in guideline) keeps you on the right track, heading in the right direction. If you stray tooooo far that’s not too bad, but the further you get from it the worse it’s gonna be - for you or for someone else.

If someone gives you advice on how to make things better for other people, that’s a guideline. Things are pretty much fine if you don’t do the thing, but if you do that’s awesome.

A boundary is a line around a space that you are not meant to cross. It’s generally a binary state, you’re either on one side of the line/boundary or the other. Either you’ve not done the bad thing and everything is great, or you’ve done the bad thing and someone is experiencing some badness as a result.

So if someone names a specific action they’d rather you didn’t do, that’s a boundary - because you either do it or you don’t. If someone says “I need”, that’s a boundary - because you either meet that need or you don’t/can’t/won’t. 

Anon, your original example is definitely a boundary, followed by a helpful explanation.

~

No, but we also have no way of knowing for sure that no one has that trigger - and there are some triggers that are very common.

It’s likely that someone out there is triggered by surprising discussion of cats, for example, but that’s uncommon. Unless you know for sure that someone is triggered by discussion of cats you probably don’t need to content-warn for that.

But a high proportion of cis and trans women have been sexually assaulted, and they don’t necessarily tell you that for various good reasons. What’s more, the harmful effects of being triggered with serious boundary violations like sexual assault are pretty bad - flashbacks, depression, dissociation, etc. If you’re in an online group/space where there are women, providing a content warning for sexual assault is a good idea. If you’re talking to someone one-on-one or you’re talking with a group of people AFK, it’s a good idea to use @par-la-fenetre‘s script in the post above.

It’s wise, sensitive and thoughtful to content-warn for subjects that are commonly triggering, unless somehow you can know for sure that no one who’ll see the message will be upset.

~

This has been A Ramble.

Two graphics that explain active consent

20 Reasons We Need To Support Comprehensive Sex Ed

Sex ed in the U.S. is

far from educational

– and it looks like we could learn a thing or two from Canada.

Writing About Writing (And Occasionally Some Writing): Changing The Creepy Guy Narrative (via veruca-assault)

instant reblog

(via koi-ms) Holy shit. I cant believe I almost scrolled past this.

(via wonderboygirlsadventures)

this post is gold

(via crimsdunonchalance)

Think about it like this: NT kids go into school knowing they’re allowed to say no in a way that most autistic kids don’t, for a lot of reasons. So when you tell them to do something, they’re obeying in the unconscious knowledge that they COULD say no. There would be consequences, but they could say no and deal with it if they really wanted to.

Autistic kids don’t know that. We don’t automatically know we can do that, or what the consequences will be if we do. We need extra empowerment to say no to bring us up to the level of autonomy that NT kids are socialized to have. Might this result in some autistic kids saying no in therapy or at times when it’s counterproductive or inconvenient? Probably, but if that happens you compromise with them, like Rose said, or deal with it by reasonably disciplining them, the way you would with NT kids. They have the right to say no, regardless of whether they use that right in a way you’d rather they didn’t.

This. Yes.

I had no idea I could say no when I was a child, and it’s still hard for me not to default to “Other people can say no, but I can’t”.

Imagine living like this as a woman.

Yeah … I never even had ABA and I still have this problem with saying no.

I do have this problem, too. I am 33 years old and it sometimes doesn’t occur to me that I’m allowed to say no.  I went for a year and a few months at work not realizing that I was working more than 40 hours a week because I kept getting called into work when I didn’t have to because I didn’t know that I could say no when they asked.  

That sounds silly and ridiculous but yeah, I still have problems with this.

And we wont’ even talk about the implications when it comes to romantic partners, and my first few encounters were not so great because I didn’t realize that I didn’t have to do some things.  Yup.

Starting a series. It’s not radical to expect your boundaries to be respected, or safety on the streets. It’s not radical to want a good, clear, standard for consent. It’s not radical to want to stop victim blaming. It’s not radical to want to destroy rape culture.

there was this little boy in my class yesterday who was playing all alone at his table so i went over to him and i was like “hi friend!” and he was like “hi” and i was like “can i play with you?” and he was like “NO” and i was like “no, let’s try that again. Hi friend!” and he was like “hi” and i…

Or maybe, you should have listened to his no the first time. Now what you’ve done is taught him that his consent doesn’t matter, even when it’s concerned with play.

yeah, that was a bad idea.  Cause think about it, not only taught him that HIS consent didn’t matter, but possibly OTHER people’s consent doesn’t matter, if persistent enough.  

No means NO

respect that, at any age

L M F A O are you gona tell me the flow of my classroom??? you dont know this kid and the classroom we are in and nothing else. he has behavior problems that need to be fixed. he can NOT be alone by law, he HAS to be with someone and all i did was went over to his table and sat with him to keep him company and NOT let him be alone as his friends are all occupied by other things and one of the things we are working on with him besides his learning abilities is his attitude lmao are yall srs now

he has a "problem behavior" of what? not wanting to play? 

Read the tags, I'm Autistic. Yes, , I'm FUCKING SERIOUS. Just because he can't be alone, doesn't mean he HAS to play with you or that he HAS to agree with you

Maybe he WANTS to be alone

Either way, CONSENT IS CONSENT

if it were you, you'd want your consent to be respected, so how is this so hard for you to understand?  

his "attitude" is a problem?  yeah, cause I'd totally be fine with being told I have to play with someone I don't want to.  You're just telling him that his feelings and consent doesn't matter.  

there was this little boy in my class yesterday who was playing all alone at his table so i went over to him and i was like “hi friend!” and he was like “hi” and i was like “can i play with you?” and he was like “NO” and i was like “no, let’s try that again. Hi friend!” and he was like “hi” and i…

Or maybe, you should have listened to his no the first time. Now what you’ve done is taught him that his consent doesn’t matter, even when it’s concerned with play.

yeah, that was a bad idea.  Cause think about it, not only taught him that HIS consent didn't matter, but possibly OTHER people's consent doesn't matter, if persistent enough.  

No means NO

respect that, at any age