dllmzca

This episode didn't grab me. I'll try again with the next pairing.

You're right. I've stopped caring. Check yourself in the mirror. You might find that you're the one wearing the outfit, minus the PC crown and with a "Miss Self-Apponited Defender of the Edgy Arts" sash, instead.

Please don't mistake me. My sister-in-law is from Seoul and we have had conversations about the nature of Knet culture in the past. One doesn't read about it as much but there are people in Korea who feel that the netizens live in a sealed chamber and have hair-trigger reflexes. One doesn't hear much about that perspective out of Korea because they aren't online talking about it. While I'm not an big Kdrama viewer, per se, I am very interested in aspects of culture worldwide.

The passage was shared as the person I posted it to and I are actually maintaining a CIVIL conversation about the matter and I was supplying him with contextual references about the nature of the law in Canada and how it does state that consent must be given in a positive verbal affirmation to be indisputible.

That stands in contrast to the way you've been behaving over the subject, screaming like a banshee with your own version of self-righteous indignation or being snide at every post you see. That's why I posted at one point that I expected better from you, because I know that you can be more constructive in the way you post but that's clearly gone out the window...

I just finished this and I enjoyed it. I did deduct points because the mix of comedy and drama didn't work all that well for me and I found that it killed my appreciation of some moments in the series. The younger police MC was also unbelievably naive, to me. Last bit of point drop came from the feeling that I'm actually ok with seeing this just the once.

Hi. I haven't rewatched the scene yet (and I'm about to head to bed) but I'll just say a couple of quick things.

Our (Canadian) laws are structured as they are to make people mindful of what they do. I can't be quoted exactly because the different provinces (states) have their own timetables but I believe that sexual health education begins at Grade 4 (9 yrs old) starting with definitions and anatomy and consent starts being discussed in Grade 6 (11 yrs old.)

Consent is often conveyed non-verbally but stating that it is only TRULY given by a verbal affirmation in the eyes of the law stands as a warning that initiators have little to no way to evade responsibility should they be charged.

The following is from a website, teachingsexualth.ca :

"Important Points about Sexual Consent

When it comes to sexual consent, there are some important ideas to understand and talk with your child about.

Consent is freely given. Agreeing to do something is consent only if it’s voluntary. If a person feels forced or bullied, or there’s something to lose by saying ‘no’ (e.g., safety or a relationship), it’s not consent.
‘No’ always means ‘no’ whether given verbally or non-verbally. A lack of affirmative positive, freely given ‘yes’ is also a ‘no’.
A ‘yes’ isn’t consent if someone is coerced. Examples of coercion are if the person pressures, pesters, threatens, guilt trips, blackmails, intimidates, bullies, or harasses someone.
Both partners agree to consent and both have a clear understanding of what they’re agreeing to. A consent conversation includes asking, answering and negotiating.
Consent is a positive, voluntary, active and conscious agreement to engage in sexual activity. When someone’s consenting, they agree and are confident in their decision to consent. Body language and verbal language should both give the same positive message.
Both people feel safe and comfortable. Safety and comfort (with themselves, their body, their partner and the situation) creates an environment where each person can freely take part in the consent conversation.
For consent to happen, a person needs to have the chance to communicate ‘no’.
Consent is ongoing. One person asks permission for an activity and another person gives it. This conversation continues as the activity continues or changes. The person who starts the sexual contact or who wants to move to the next level of intimacy is the one who must ask for and clearly get consent before continuing with the sexual contact.

Consent can be taken away at any time. At any point, someone can change their mind and withdraw consent. Consent given before doesn’t apply to any activities that happen later.

You can’t assume consent because people are in a relationship. You can’t assume consent just because it was given for the same activity before. Permission must be asked for and given each time an activity begins, changes, or continues.
Consent can’t be assumed or implied. Flirting, clothing, sexual texts or social media communication is not consent.

Communication that’s not clear or is confusing isn’t consent. If there’s any uncertainty that someone is agreeing to do something, the person starting the activity must ask permission, then wait until permission is clearly given before starting anything.

‘No’ always means ‘no’, whether given verbally or non-verbally: A ‘yes’ that’s not positive or freely given is also a ‘no’.
A ‘yes’ is not consent if someone feels pressured, forced, threatened, guilty, blackmailed, intimidated, bullied or harassed.
Silence, not answering, or not resisting physically is not consent.
People who are drunk, high, sleeping or unconscious can’t give consent, either legally or practically. To have clear communication about consent, both people should be sober and alert.

Consent is necessary for sexting.

If you decide to send a sext, it should always be your choice.
Sending a sext one time doesn’t mean you have to do it again.
Sending a private sext to someone doesn’t give that person permission to share it with other people."

Just thought I'd share that before I crash. This might be a part of how you and I view aspects of the matter differently, but I'm too tired to reason through it, just now. G'night.

PS: In Canada, our Criminal Code doesn't actually use the word 'rape.,' anymore.Here, it's sexual assault:

"Sexual assault level 1 (s. 271):
An assault committed in circumstances of a sexual nature such that the sexual integrity of the victim is violated. Level 1 involves minor physical injuries or no injuries to the victim.

Sexual assault level 2 (s. 272):
Sexual assault with a weapon, threats, or causing bodily harm.

Aggravated sexual assault (level 3):
Sexual assault that results in wounding, maiming, disfiguring or endangering the life of the victim.

By the definition in the Canadian Criminal Code then, what would be defined as rape in other countries (and what used to be defined as rape in Canada) could fall under the Criminal Code’s sexual assault level 1, sexual assault level 2, or sexual assault level 3, depending on the severity of the assault. As stated in Johnson (2012),"

I brought this up becasue the word might imply different things to different people depending on their jurisdiction (?)

I didn't think your response was typed in anger at all. Neither is what I type meant in an angry way. I appreciate that we have differing views on the issue, and you've never employed provocative language or indirectly impinged on my character as I hope I do not do to you.

I'll just touch on a few of things you raised. First:

"This was a devious, manipulative, incredibly long-term planned seduction. He has horrendously betrayed XS's trust, and his behavior to me indicates he's mentally disturbed with an impared understanding of right and wrong."

I will continue to watch the series for a bit to see if they actually do something meaningful with this. I say that because they've pushed it to a point where I really do think it would be a gross failure in the narrative if it isn't directly addressed.

I'll go over a couple of the points you made about impairment and intoxication:

"Inability to respond or communicate coherently: No"
"Slurred speech: No."

If I recall correctly, XS' responses were limited and slurred. That said, I'll rewatch the scene and if I see that's not the case, I'll come back and say so.

"Loss of motor functions - unknown, but I'll say yes. It doesn't have to be loss of all motor functions."
"Gross motor skill impairment: No (grabbed YJ around the neck and pulled him in for a kiss)."

I'd say yes, as well, because he required assistance to walk. Grasping YJs neck and pulling him down would be considered a fine motor skill. (Again, I'll rewatch to check for clarity.)

"The entire premise of YJ's plan and - his premise is 100% correct, which we can acknowledge without approving of where he took it - was that XS wants him to but will not act upon it, so he needed to lower his inhbitions so that XS WOULD do something he WANTED to do but felt he SHOULD not."

I agree that XS has feelings for his brother, hence his initial reactions. That said, I also agree that XS would not, indeed, act on it of his own accord. In other words, HE WOULD NOT EVEN GIVE CONSENT TO HIMSELF. (As with you, caps in place of italics.)

YJs plan disregarded that and actively manufactured consent from XS by intentionally lowering his inhibitions. Whether or not XS has romantic feelings for YJ or not, that's wasn't YJs call to make.

QUOTE: "In Canada, there is what’s called an “affirmative consent” standard, meaning a person must indicate that they want to engage in sexual activity.

According to this standard, a person who is “incapable of consenting” cannot agree to sexual activity. What constitutes incapacity isn’t spelled out in the Criminal Code, but case law has found that a complainant must be able to understand the “risks and consequences” of the sexual activity."

I don't feel that, at the time XS was capable of fully understanding the risks and consequences. That's higlighted by his great distress at what occurred, the next day. IMO, XS would not have had sex with XJ if he faculties had been intact.

Again, I'll rewatch the scene and if I've recalled something in error, I'll come back to say so. (Probaly not until tomorrow, though) Thanks for maintaining civility as we express our differing views.

I do agree with one of the statements you made.

Well, then, I suppose I count as one of the people you refer to as a vocal, tender soul. I have no problem with that. I also have no problem with disliking the use of dub/non con in the genre without it being addressed in a more realistic fashion.

They'd already built up YJ into a troubled character and I felt that his storyline was interesting enough. The sex scene, IMO, was overkill; heavy-handed overkill.

The teaser for the next episode might take matters in interesting directions. We'll see.

I'm glad I watched them as they were released. Taking them all on in one shot would be gruelling for me. You are in for a ride: hold on tight!

Perhaps I posted poorly at first. I would indeed listen to them. What they want to do would be wholly up to them and I would offer to support their decision. If they were to ask me, I would provide them with all the options I thought they had in the matter, and also play devil's advocate in the event they did seem to see some of the options they might have, in that moment. Something like that can only be their decision, ultimately.

Maybe you don't understand what I'm talking about. I have no problem with you disliking the series. However, your criticism of the series also includes passive-agressive wipes at people who like it. Too bad for you if you don't like being called on it.

I thought it had promise and decided to give it a go. I wanted to like it but if just felt flat,to me.

Believe me, as a retired nurse, I get what you're saying. I'm just saying that dramas, as a whole, rarely address the matter realistically.

As for possible replacement phrases for the Four Pillars (if they don't simply go with Five Pillars) how about "The Grand Ships of the Fleet" or "The Noble Houses?"

2,000,323! :D :D :D

1,999,850!

I love it. I'm so glad that Earth was so eager to do it!

I understand your personal position for your own instance and support that. However, if I was in Li Cheng's or Mu Ren's shoes and I saw the distress it caused XS, I would advocate to them that it was a wholly viable option for them...

Thanks, Andaman, I understand netter, now. As I thought, I really only know of TayNew because I didn't like SOTUS and dropped it after only one episode, and I haven't wached the series with OffGun or BrightWin at all because I didn't find the storylines appealing based on what I'd read about the series...

I think that EarthMix certainly belong to to this tier of performers, thanks to this series.